Spells: Errata, etcetera


General Discussion (Prerelease)


Until they open an offcial spells forum....

Tables for Aura strength definition should be located near the Detect spells.

Silver Crusade

Something that's bugged me with 3.0 and 3.5 and now pathfinder

Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser
An immobile, faintly shimmering magical sphere surrounds you and excludes all spell effects of 3rd level or lower. The area or effect of any such spells does not include the area of the lesser globe of invulnerability. Such spells fail to affect any target located within the globe. Excluded effects include spell-like abilities and spells or spell-like effects from items. Any type of spell, however, can be cast through or out of the magical globe. Spells of 4th level and higher are not affected by the globe, nor are spells already in effect when the globe is cast. The globe can be brought down by a targeted dispel magic spell, but not by an area dispel magic. You can leave and return to the globe without penalty. Note that spell effects are not disrupted unless their effects enter the globe, and even then they are merely suppressed, not dispelled.
If a given spell has more than one level depending on which character class is casting it, use the level appropriate to the caster to determine whether lesser globe of invulnerability stops it.

As my gaming group is reading this (much to the annoyance of one player) the second excluded section gives an example what is prohibited. The player (with the saint template so he has a mobile 20' aura of this) is constantly wanting to use this aura but the rest of the group wants to be able to cast healing or other benificial 3rd level or lower spells. His point is that the second exlcuded section is a double negative so spellike abilities, or spells from items are excluded from the effect of the spell (although using that logic a wand of fireball totally negates the spell).

The Exchange

Tamec wrote:

Something that's bugged me with 3.0 and 3.5 and now pathfinder

Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser
An immobile, faintly shimmering magical sphere surrounds you and excludes all spell effects of 3rd level or lower. The area or effect of any such spells does not include the area of the lesser globe of invulnerability. Such spells fail to affect any target located within the globe. Excluded effects include spell-like abilities and spells or spell-like effects from items.

As my gaming group is reading this (much to the annoyance of one player) the second excluded section gives an example what is prohibited. The player (with the saint template so he has a mobile 20' aura of this) is constantly wanting to use this aura but the rest of the group wants to be able to cast healing or other benificial 3rd level or lower spells. His point is that the second exlcuded section is a double negative so spellike abilities, or spells from items are excluded from the effect of the spell (although using that logic a wand of fireball totally negates the spell).

* puts on logician hat

Since the second clause mentions "spell effects from items" and the first says "all spell effects" rather than "some spell effects", the second clause can't be read as a list of exceptions to the exclusions.

The author is using 'excluded effects' to reference effects that are 'excluded'.

Also, it states that "spell effects" are excluded, not spells. Both spells and spell-like abilities create spell-effects. If the second clause was intended to remove spell-like abilities then 'spells' could have been used and the description shortened.

* takes it off again

I'd suggest using some percussive behavior modification upon your players to dissuade them from such rules lawyering. The Spell Compendium is (ironically) sufficiently hefty for effective kinetic therapy.

Silver Crusade

brock wrote:

The author is using 'excluded effects' to reference effects that are 'excluded'.

Also, it states that "spell effects" are excluded, not spells. Both spells and spell-like abilities create spell-effects. If the second clause was intended to remove spell-like abilities then 'spells' could have been used and the description shortened.

Pretty much we told him not to use it unless we are facing an army of wizards since he nullifies me (5th level druid) the cleric (5th level cleric) and the warlock (hmmm everything in the aura is immune to his blast...plus it suppresses spell effects like the warlock's flight ability....splat!!)

The Exchange

Tamec wrote:
brock wrote:

The author is using 'excluded effects' to reference effects that are 'excluded'.

Also, it states that "spell effects" are excluded, not spells. Both spells and spell-like abilities create spell-effects. If the second clause was intended to remove spell-like abilities then 'spells' could have been used and the description shortened.

Pretty much we told him not to use it unless we are facing an army of wizards since he nullifies me (5th level druid) the cleric (5th level cleric) and the warlock (hmmm everything in the aura is immune to his blast...plus it suppresses spell effects like the warlock's flight ability....splat!!)

A far better resolution than trying to subvert the wording of the spell.


The Summon Monster family should have the duration changed to 5 rounds + 1 round/2 levels, so that Summon Monster 1 is useful.

(Using it at 10th level to set off traps is a creative secondary usage. It doesn't replace the need for a core usage.)

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / General Discussion (Prerelease) / Spells: Errata, etcetera All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion (Prerelease)
Druid / Monk?