|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata. |
School conjuration (creation) [water]; Level druid 3, sorcerer/wizard 3, summoner 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a drop of water and a glass bead)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect 10-ft.-diameter sphere
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Reflex negates; Spell Resistance no
You create a rolling sphere of churning water that can
engulf those it strikes. The aqueous orb can move up to 30
feet per round, rolling over barriers less than 10 feet tall. It
automatically quenches any nonmagical fires and functions
as dispel magic against magical fires as long as those fires are
size Large or less.
Any creature in the path of the aqueous orb takes 2d6 points of
nonlethal damage. A successful Reflex save negates this damage,
but a Medium or smaller creature that fails its save must make a
second save or be engulfed by the aqueous orb and carried along
with it. Engulfed creatures are immersed in water and must hold
their breath unless capable of breathing water. They gain cover
against attacks from outside the aqueous orb but are considered
entangled by its churning currents, takes 2d6 points of nonlethal
damage at the beginning of their turn each round they remain
trapped. Creatures within the orb may attempt a new Reflex
save each round to escape into a random square adjacent to the
aqueous orb. The orb may hold one Large creature, 4 Medium, or
16 Small or smaller creatures within it.
The sphere moves as long as you actively direct it (a move
action for you); otherwise, it merely stays at rest and churns in
place. An aqueous orb stops if it moves outside the spell’s range.
The second part that I bolded mentions Large creatures, but how would the orb hold a Large creature if it can only engulf a Medium or smaller creature?
|
I came back from playing Pathfinder Society at Gen Con with the exact same question as it came up in a fight against large critters.
After a 30 minute conversation during the car ride home we're wondering if it's not there to clarify situations such as enlarging the engulfed creature, in which case they still would be stuck in the sphere and would not be ejected.
|
|
I came back from playing Pathfinder Society at Gen Con with the exact same question as it came up in a fight against large critters.
After a 30 minute conversation during the car ride home we're wondering if it's not there to clarify situations such as enlarging the engulfed creature, in which case they still would be stuck in the sphere and would not be ejected.
Hmmm...yeah, I suppose it could be there to clarity situations like that.
So how did your DM rule when you or someone in your group cast the spell?
Me, I would rule it as affecting creatures large size or smaller. Assuming they put in the bit about large creatures just to cover the corner case of Enlarge Person seems a little thin; I don't see very many examples (I can't think of any, actually) where the authors were so thorough as to povide such corner-case depth of coverage anywhere else.
So my assumption is that there is a mistake in the spell description. And since they took the time to specify clearly how many creatures of each size can be held, I think the mistake was in the other paragraph where it describes the engulfing - that paragraph should allow large creatures to be engulfed.
By comparison, a Gelatinous Cube is the same size (cube vs. sphere, but both are 10' across) and the Cube can engulf large creatures.
And finally, this is really weak as a 3rd level spell that does a pathetically small amount of subdual damage to anything bigger than a human. At 3rd level, I wouldn't prepare this spell unless I knew with a great deal of certainty that I wouldn't fight large enemies. If I'm raiding an orc camp, or a thieve's guild in a human city, maybe I'd think about this spell and hope those enemies don't have ogres in their ranks, or easy access to Enlarge Person. Otherwise, for general adventuring where we don't really know what's around the next corner, I wouldn't have this limited spell prepared - unless I knew that it worked on pretty much everything exect the really really big stuff.
So, for all those reasons, I'd say let this spell affect Large creatures.
|
|
And finally, this is really weak as a 3rd level spell that does a pathetically small amount of subdual damage to anything bigger than a human. At 3rd level, I wouldn't prepare this spell unless I knew with a great deal of certainty that I wouldn't fight large enemies. If I'm raiding an orc camp, or a thieve's guild in a human city, maybe I'd think about this spell and hope those enemies don't have ogres in their ranks, or easy access to Enlarge Person. Otherwise, for general adventuring where we don't really know what's around the next corner, I wouldn't have this limited spell prepared - unless I knew that it worked on pretty much everything exect the really really big stuff.
It's fun to drive over things and run them into your newly created spiked pit though!
|
|
And finally, this is really weak as a 3rd level spell that does a pathetically small amount of subdual damage to anything bigger than a human. At 3rd level, I wouldn't prepare this spell unless I knew with a great deal of certainty that I wouldn't fight large enemies. If I'm raiding an orc camp, or a thieve's guild in a human city, maybe I'd think about this spell and hope those enemies don't have ogres in their ranks, or easy access to Enlarge Person. Otherwise, for general adventuring where we don't really know what's around the next corner, I wouldn't have this limited spell prepared - unless I knew that it worked on pretty much everything exect the really really big stuff.It's fun to drive over things and run them into your newly created spiked pit though!
That is a great idea! My PFS wizard just hit 6th level. I was going to take Spiked Pit for one of my spells. I might just add Aqueous Orb for the other. :)
|
|
Me, I would rule it as affecting creatures large size or smaller. Assuming they put in the bit about large creatures just to cover the corner case of Enlarge Person seems a little thin; I don't see very many examples (I can't think of any, actually) where the authors were so thorough as to povide such corner-case depth of coverage anywhere else.
So my assumption is that there is a mistake in the spell description. And since they took the time to specify clearly how many creatures of each size can be held, I think the mistake was in the other paragraph where it describes the engulfing - that paragraph should allow large creatures to be engulfed.
By comparison, a Gelatinous Cube is the same size (cube vs. sphere, but both are 10' across) and the Cube can engulf large creatures.
And finally, this is really weak as a 3rd level spell that does a pathetically small amount of subdual damage to anything bigger than a human. At 3rd level, I wouldn't prepare this spell unless I knew with a great deal of certainty that I wouldn't fight large enemies. If I'm raiding an orc camp, or a thieve's guild in a human city, maybe I'd think about this spell and hope those enemies don't have ogres in their ranks, or easy access to Enlarge Person. Otherwise, for general adventuring where we don't really know what's around the next corner, I wouldn't have this limited spell prepared - unless I knew that it worked on pretty much everything exect the really really big stuff.
So, for all those reasons, I'd say let this spell affect Large creatures.
Thanks DM_Blake. I think Gelatinous Cube is a great comparison to the spell mechanics.
I'd say it should engulf Large creatures. Ridiculous design be damned.
And it should do at least 4d6 damage. Flaming Sphere is second level and does 3d6 LETHAL damage. This thing can only hope to drown Large/Medium or smaller targets. Anything than that and it just makes them weak at the knees slower than a Flaming Sphere can kill them. The only use I can see for this is tossing creatures off cliffs.
|
I agree, it should be able to engulf a large creature. The spell is poorly worded and will likely be included for errata.
That being said, I don't understand the grief in terms of "this spell is useless" category. Spellcasters are (IMO) best played as the battlefield control guy, not the nuker. This spell offers huge opportunities to control enemies, block off access to certain areas in combat and the like, not to mention sweeping up multiple enemies and moving them around.
That being said, I don't understand the grief in terms of "this spell is useless" category. Spellcasters are (IMO) best played as the battlefield control guy, not the nuker. This spell offers huge opportunities to control enemies, block off access to certain areas in combat and the like, not to mention sweeping up multiple enemies and moving them around.
Who said "useless" besides you?
I said the damage is pathetic for a 3rd level spell. The engulfing is what makes this spell plausible. But if it can only engulf medium creatures, then you will find an awful lot of combats in which you couldn't use this spell.
Me, I won't prepare a spell when I know, in advance, that there is a reasonable chance I could go into battle wishing I had prepared something else. Heck, my wizard doesn't even prepare Fireball in a 3rd level slot for the same reason - too many battles where I am unable or unwilling to use it. So I prepare other things that I can use in every battle.
This spell, if unable to engulf large creatures, becomes so situational that I wouldn't prepare it, and therefore my sorcerers won't waste the limited resources to learn it and my wizards won't spend their gold to scribe it.
If it can engulf large creatures, it becomes much more versatile, and knowing that I can use it in almost every battle I enter would make me much more likely to prepare it. I probably still won't learn it on a sorcerer, but it becomes viable for a wizard to play with from time to time, especially for "mopping up" a corridor full of kobolds. And that way, when the corridor turns out to have ogres in it instead, I can still put the spell to use.
So, on a side note, what happens when you use this spell to engulf a gelatinous cube?
|
|
Who said "useless" besides you?I said the damage is pathetic for a 3rd level spell. The engulfing is what makes this spell plausible. But if it can only engulf medium creatures, then you will find an awful lot of combats in which you couldn't use this spell.
Not every spell NEEDS to do damage, especially ones that are fixedly designed as a control spell. Yes it is the same level you would get fireball and lightning bolt but for those reasons I like the fact that this isn't just another "DPS" spell, at that point you have PLENTY of other options available to you. The damage is like sprinkles on the cake, it isn't supposed to be the reason you bought the thing.
And I fail to see how you think the control aspect is "weak." Over 3/4 of the enemies a party is likely to fight are going to be medium creatures and this lets you take 4 of those exact creatures out of the battle. Even more if they are smaller creatures.
Who said "useless" besides you?I said the damage is pathetic for a 3rd level spell. The engulfing is what makes this spell plausible. But if it can only engulf medium creatures, then you will find an awful lot of combats in which you couldn't use this spell.
Not every spell NEEDS to do damage, especially ones that are fixedly designed as a control spell. Yes it is the same level you would get fireball and lightning bolt but for those reasons I like the fact that this isn't just another "DPS" spell, at that point you have PLENTY of other options available to you. The damage is like sprinkles on the cake, it isn't supposed to be the reason you bought the thing.
And I fail to see how you think the control aspect is "weak." Over 3/4 of the enemies a party is likely to fight are going to be medium creatures and this lets you take 4 of those exact creatures out of the battle. Even more if they are smaller creatures.
Unless it did 20d6 damage, no one is going to pick this spell for damage since all it does is NONLETHAL damage. That fact makes the "damage" it does do a pitiful joke. It does less NONLETHAL damage than its obvious doppleganger, Flaming Sphere. And Flaming Sphere is a level lower and does lethal damage.
Though this harkens back to 3.5 as well where the Beguiler got the Whelm spell that topped out at an unimpressive 5d6 NONLETHAL damage. At what point and who decided nonlethal damage was the scarier of the two types?
The second part that I bolded mentions Large creatures, but how would the orb hold a Large creature if it can only engulf a Medium or smaller creature?
An engulfed creature enlarges... what happens to it?
Answer: if there's room it remains, otherwise its expelled.
Seems reasonable, though it does seem FAQ-worthy.
Also reasonable would be to expand the spell to allow it to engulf a large creature directly.
-James
Yeah, no. The likelihood they covered a unique case of a creature in it being enlarged is about 1/10th of the likelihood they blindly copied the size rules from somewhere else.
|
|
So, on a side note, what happens when you use this spell to engulf a gelatinous cube?
As a GM I would adjudicate that since the orb has engulfed something with the engulf power, then the cube could engulf something else. So as the caster, you'd get to engulf a second creature and use the cube's damage and abilities.
That's just me though.
Who said "useless" besides you?I said the damage is pathetic for a 3rd level spell. The engulfing is what makes this spell plausible. But if it can only engulf medium creatures, then you will find an awful lot of combats in which you couldn't use this spell.
Not every spell NEEDS to do damage, especially ones that are fixedly designed as a control spell. Yes it is the same level you would get fireball and lightning bolt but for those reasons I like the fact that this isn't just another "DPS" spell, at that point you have PLENTY of other options available to you. The damage is like sprinkles on the cake, it isn't supposed to be the reason you bought the thing.
And I fail to see how you think the control aspect is "weak." Over 3/4 of the enemies a party is likely to fight are going to be medium creatures and this lets you take 4 of those exact creatures out of the battle. Even more if they are smaller creatures.
That's exactly the point I was trying to make.
I wasn't berating the spell for its battlefield control; I was berating for its lack of battlefield control against large creatures, leaving it with only its pathetic damage in those encounters.
Against large creatures, the only thing it does is pathetic damage. Against medium and smaller creatures, it has the very interesting engulf aspect which makes it worthwhile.
But, since a great many encounters are against large creatures, you would have this spell prepared and find yourself, when facing large enemies, with a pathetic spell choice.
Therefore, I wouldn't prepare this spell at all, unless I was sure that I would face medium or smaller enemies today. And I mean sure. Not a case of "well, maybe, the chances are good that some encounter will be medium creatures" - I mean I would need to be certain of it.
Because I am certain I can use Haste in every encounter. I am certain I can use Slow in almost every encounter (maybe not on Iron Golems, for example, but on nearly everything I might face).
This spell? Effective maybe half the time, more or less? Not even worth preparing.
Then again, going with my first assumption that it is intended to engulf large creatures, suddenly it becomes effective in something like 90% of my encounters - far more worthy of preparation.
|
|
Then again, going with my first assumption that it is intended to engulf large creatures, suddenly it becomes effective in something like 90% of my encounters - far more worthy of preparation.
Ahh, here I was thinking you interpreted it as having a typo like I did. Apologies for sounding argumentative.
I really can't wait to throw this against my players to see how they react :D
Yeah, no. The likelihood they covered a unique case of a creature in it being enlarged is about 1/10th of the likelihood they blindly copied the size rules from somewhere else.The second part that I bolded mentions Large creatures, but how would the orb hold a Large creature if it can only engulf a Medium or smaller creature?
An engulfed creature enlarges... what happens to it?
Answer: if there's room it remains, otherwise its expelled.
Seems reasonable, though it does seem FAQ-worthy.
Also reasonable would be to expand the spell to allow it to engulf a large creature directly.
-James
Maybe Svirfneblin use this against Duergar a lot :)
Noted for APG errata.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a number of substantial differences between the aqueous orb and the spell to which a lot of folks seem to be comparing it, flaming sphere.
1. The obvious: FS is a 5-foot sphere. AQ is a 10-foot sphere. For use as a mobile blocking device, AQ us a much larger barrier. With FS, you can easily enough attack over it with reach or ranged attacks if you're on one side of it and someone else is on the other, or 5-foot step diagonally around it unless you're in a narrow hallways.
AO provides a liquid surface with a 10-foot deep water mass, which provides essentially total blockage against non-magical missiles, total cover against fire and gas/vapor, and cover or improved cover against melee attacks that try to get through it (and those would need big-time reach to get 15 feet through it or around it or over it).
2. Apparently less obvious, as it seems to have been missed: Flaming sphere stops when it hits a creature; i.e., it only affects ONE creature per round, the first one it hits.
AO does not. It rolls up to 30 feet per round in a path you designate, which means that every round that you move it, it affects a LINE 10 feet wide and up to 30 feet long. If they were lined up, you could affect up to twelve Medium-sized creatures with it per round.
3. As a corollary to #2, with FS you get one target. If it saves, the spell does nothing that round other than make a small fire-block.
With AO, because you can hit multiple targets per round, you aren't boned on the basis of one made saving throw.
4. For people who get stuck inside an AO, not only is there the chance of drowning, but they keep taking damage every round and suffer the entangled condition. They also most likely cannot breathe (must hold breath, which means they cannot SPEAK (i.e., no verbal spellcasting or command words) unless they feel like drowning), and even if they can manage spellcasting (e.g., Silent Spell) will probably need to make between one and three Concentration checks, depending on how mean your DM is (one for continuous damage, one for entangled, one for either non-damaging spell effect or some flavor of "vigorous motion" from getting rolled around by the orb).
With FS, they can step right out of it and never worry about it again, move freely, cast freely, and aren't considered to be taking continuous damage. You'd have to specifically re-target that creature to damage it again.
5. Even if it can't sweep away large creatures, it can damage multiple of them every round and gives you a roving area-effect damage bot as a move action, which also has the handy side effect of being a useful barrier (a slightly better but smaller portable wind wall) during which time you can be casting other spells.
6. If your DM was really mean he/she would enforce the aquatic combat rules on any creature stuck inside the orb, which means they are taking attack and damage penalties and may even lose their Dex bonus. The spell doesn't stipulate these, though, so it's ambiguous as to whether they should apply.