Can a Druid use plant(s) in a pot as a base for Entangle?


Rules Questions

101 to 145 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge

Flag and move on.

Keep the thread on topic.

Stop bickering.


Didn't read the whole thread, didn't feel like wading through the sniping (thanks Sara Marie).

Anyway, I actually encountered this in a game, and didn't see anything wrong with it.

Granted, the GM who did it to me had one flower pot per square, filling an abandoned church's congregation area. So, 100 feet wide and 200 feet long (10x20 grid) so 200 potted rose bushes. :)


Gilfalas wrote:
Your potted plant is worth garbage with the spell. MAYBE if a GM was generous/stupid he would allow the plant to root in the square it fell in and affect that 5 foot square.

Why? The spell says that the creature gains the entangled condition. A potted plant, while unable to expand to the full range of the spell, could still entangle a person standing in its same square.

"Entangled: The character is ensnared. Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force. An entangled creature moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and a –4 penalty to Dexterity. An entangled character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 15 + spell level) or lose the spell."

It's the druid equivalent to tying someone's shoelaces together. At range. It doesn't tether them to the ground, but it does impede movement.


mdt wrote:

Didn't read the whole thread, didn't feel like wading through the sniping (thanks Sara Marie).

Anyway, I actually encountered this in a game, and didn't see anything wrong with it.

Granted, the GM who did it to me had one flower pot per square, filling an abandoned church's congregation area. So, 100 feet wide and 200 feet long (10x20 grid) so 200 potted rose bushes. :)

...and this is why what your DM did was legal. If there was one potted plant (size Tiny) in the entire church entangling the entire 40' radius which is what ImperitorK proposes, as opposed to a rose bush (size Small or Medium I would imagine) per 5' square, I imagine your DM would not have ruled it to work and if he had, you would have been less than happy about such blatant rules abuse.


what if you scatter a handful of seeds across a large area and then cast entangle ?


Phasics wrote:
what if you scatter a handful of seeds across a large area and then cast entangle ?

The spell does not cause plants to grow, so they would remain seeds. Maybe they'd start jumping or something, but they would be completely ineffective at the task of entangling foes in the effected area.

Silver Crusade

Phasics wrote:
what if you scatter a handful of seeds across a large area and then cast entangle ?

Nothing. It's Entangle, not Plant Growth.


You could do both. Or you could make a 'plant bomb': seeds charged with plant grown and entangle that burst over a wide area when thrown.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread has crushed everything I have ever known about this game.

When I started playing D&D, Entangle was the druid's Color Spray or Sleep. Our group always just accepted that a 5024 square foot mass of plant-like tendrils sprang from anywhere (barring solid stone/metal) and started lashing around ankles and limbs.

Seriously. We actually do that in our games. It never occurred to us that this interpretation existed.

Think what you like, but it hasn't broken our fun, so I don't think I will be changing it unless my players complain.

Holy crap. Wanders off to learn to cope with this new world.

Sovereign Court

Foghammer: the druid is a bit hit-or-miss with his spells. Amazing in the forest, not nearly as powerful in a barren wasteland.

The funny thing is that the restrictions on entangle really CAN enable creativity. Normally the area is homogenous plant aggression, so melee PCs can't move into it to engage entangled PCs. But if you have only patches of plants, you can sculpt quite a lot of the battlefield.

Personally I rather like spells like these, that encourage you to pick a place to make a stand, rather than working equally good all the time. I like that if you have to face a druid, you really don't want to do it in the forest.


Ascalaphus wrote:
Normally the area is homogenous plant aggression, so melee PCs can't move into it to engage entangled PCs.

Actually not true: the entangling plants only attack foes of the spell's caster; The party's front-line fighters still have to cross difficult terrain, but the plants won't attempt to entangle them if they venture into the spells area of effect.


Your interpretation of the spell is wrong on a lot of levels already discussed. . .

That being said, if this is what you want for your homegame? As long as everyone understands this is where it stands? Have a blast, but don't complain about "powergaming" and "overpowered".

Sczarni

Foghammer wrote:

This thread has crushed everything I have ever known about this game.

When I started playing D&D, Entangle was the druid's Color Spray or Sleep. Our group always just accepted that a 5024 square foot mass of plant-like tendrils sprang from anywhere (barring solid stone/metal) and started lashing around ankles and limbs.

Seriously. We actually do that in our games. It never occurred to us that this interpretation existed.

Think what you like, but it hasn't broken our fun, so I don't think I will be changing it unless my players complain.

Holy crap. Wanders off to learn to cope with this new world.

You are thinking of this 4th level spell

Heaven's Agent wrote:
Actually not true: the entangling plants only attack foes of the spell's caster; The party's front-line fighters still have to cross difficult terrain, but the plants won't attempt to entangle them if they venture into the spells area of effect.

I have to disagree with this...the spell just says "creatures" which is a vague statement used to include anyone in the Area of Effect.

Edit: Also read the bottom of the SRD...it says ANY not all enemies or any other variant...its meant to be ANYONE caught in the area friend or foe gets Entangled.

Clicky


ossian666 wrote:

I have to disagree with this...the spell just says "creatures" which is a vague statement used to include anyone in the Area of Effect.

Edit: Also read the bottom of the SRD...it says ANY not all enemies or any other variant...its meant to be ANYONE caught in the area friend or foe gets Entangled.

Clicky

So it does; they changed it at some point. The spell used to specify "foes," instead of "creatures." I just checked my Core Rulebook to be sure.

Sovereign Court

Heaven's Agent wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Normally the area is homogenous plant aggression, so melee PCs can't move into it to engage entangled PCs.
Actually not true: the entangling plants only attack foes of the spell's caster; The party's front-line fighters still have to cross difficult terrain, but the plants won't attempt to entangle them if they venture into the spells area of effect.

That's been errataed somewhere after the second printing of the CRB. It was "all creatures" in 2nd ed and 3.x too.

Sczarni

Yea I thought so...because even Black Tentacles attacks indiscriminately.


ossian666 wrote:


You are thinking of this 4th level spell

Heaven's Agent wrote:
Actually not true: the entangling plants only attack foes of the spell's caster; The party's front-line fighters still have to cross difficult terrain, but the plants won't attempt to entangle them if they venture into the spells area of effect.
I have to disagree with this...the spell just says "creatures" which is a vague statement used to include anyone in the Area of Effect.

No, I'm aware of black tentacles; I've used it as a DM to spectacular effect without wrecking my players morale and characters, but only recently. We never really played far enough to get into black tentacles territory until I started DMing.

But unlike Heaven's Agent, our entangle affects all creatures who wander into it, not just foes, to the full effect. Honestly, it mostly serves to slow down combat the way we run it. That's how we use it; things are getting too ugly too fast? Entangle. Enemies are trying to escape? Entangle.

In my experience it's 50/50 whether the baddies make their save and get out of it quickly or not. It's a speed bump most of the time. It is only rarely used to what I would call devastating effect, and it gets used A LOT.


Foghammer wrote:
When I started playing D&D, Entangle was the druid's Color Spray or Sleep. Our group always just accepted that a 5024 square foot mass of plant-like tendrils sprang from anywhere (barring solid stone/metal) and started lashing around ankles and limbs.

If you think about it, both color spray and sleep are very limited in certain ways, so why wouldn't entangle with a much larger area of effect be similarly limited in some other way?

Foghammer wrote:
Seriously. We actually do that in our games. It never occurred to us that this interpretation existed.

This "interpretation" has been RAW since 3.0, and was implicit in 1st ed AD&D - except that in that version I think plant life could grow, so a mowed lawn would become a thicket. Other than that, entangle has always been limited to the vegetation that already exists in an area.

Heaven's Agent wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Normally the area is homogenous plant aggression, so melee PCs can't move into it to engage entangled PCs.
Actually not true: the entangling plants only attack foes of the spell's caster; The party's front-line fighters still have to cross difficult terrain, but the plants won't attempt to entangle them if they venture into the spells area of effect.

Nope, it effects all creatures, so the area is walled off to friendly allies and stabby enemies alike.


Foghammer wrote:

This thread has crushed everything I have ever known about this game.

You must have known at least one or two other things about the game!

j/k

Seriously though, I've heard of people doing it the way you say your group does. If you guys like it that way, no harm no foul, right?

Sczarni

Grimmy wrote:
Foghammer wrote:

This thread has crushed everything I have ever known about this game.

You must have known at least one or two other things about the game!

j/k

Seriously though, I've heard of people doing it the way you say your group does. If you guys like it that way, no harm no foul, right?

Yea its your game and your GMs world so if you want to Houserule it that way then cool, but this question came from a "powergamer" help thread where the guy abused and warped the rules in inproper ways. I pointed out that it was DM enabling because the spell doesn't work that way, and here we are.


Foghammer wrote:
But unlike Heaven's Agent, our entangle affects all creatures who wander into it, not just foes, to the full effect. Honestly, it mostly serves to slow down combat the way we run it. That's how we use it; things are getting too ugly too fast? Entangle. Enemies are trying to escape? Entangle.

My interpretation was from the initial printing of the Core Rulebook. I don't know when it was changed.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

So I read the original question as "Can a Druid use a pot plant to Entangle?"

And I was like, of course. Why shouldn't pot entangle just like any other kind of plant? Of course, then you'd need to make a Fort save vs the munchies or take starvation damage.


Oh you were definitely in the right to point that out ossian666. At the end of the day though I'm not sure this one really needed an FAQ. I think we might have got trolled pretty hard. The fact that imperatork was switching to his "Creative Munchkin" alias was a red flag to me.

I didn't hit FAQ because I'm sure the devs have better things to worry about. We should ask for clarification when the rules aren't clear. In this case they are.


I'm just saying dude. Our original DM came from an AD&D background, taught to play by his dad who had also played 1st edition. He was a harsh DM, and watched everything we did like a hawk. How this slipped past him when he was DMing 3.5 for us escapes me.

Someone mentioned that it's a transmutation spell having something to do with there not being growth, but that never occurred to us either because enlarge person is a transmutation spell.

I'm not fighting for anything to change about it. I'm just balking at the fact that it is so different from what we actually do with it. It's practically useless by comparison, which I understand isn't saying much.

Sczarni

Foghammer wrote:

I'm just saying dude. Our original DM came from an AD&D background, taught to play by his dad who had also played 1st edition. He was a harsh DM, and watched everything we did like a hawk. How this slipped past him when he was DMing 3.5 for us escapes me.

Someone mentioned that it's a transmutation spell having something to do with there not being growth, but that never occurred to us either because enlarge person is a transmutation spell.

I'm not fighting for anything to change about it. I'm just balking at the fact that it is so different from what we actually do with it. It's practically useless by comparison, which I understand isn't saying much.

Thats the thing...its a level 1 spell. It has to have the limitations set forth because there are higher level spells that present the functions you REALLY desire (Black Tentacles, Plant Growth, etc.) and having a level 1 spell do what the higher level spells do makes the higher levels silly to take.


This thread got me thinking a bit more about the spell and what I'd do.

I originally posted that if I were GM'ing it that I'd have the druid toss the plant (rolling to hit AC 5 of a square) and then cast the entangle which would work in that 5 ft square alone.

The other thing that I thought up after thinking about it was that I would be very tempted to rule it like the Tanglefoot Bag, ignoring the underwater part, but taking the other effects.

Tanglefoot Bag says:

When you throw a tanglefoot bag at a creature (as a ranged touch attack with a range increment of 10 feet), the bag comes apart and the goo bursts out, entangling the target and then becoming tough and resilient upon exposure to air. An entangled creature takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls and a -4 penalty to Dexterity and must make a DC 15 Reflex save or be glued to the floor, unable to move. Even on a successful save, it can move only at half speed. Huge or larger creatures are unaffected by a tanglefoot bag. A flying creature is not stuck to the floor, but it must make a DC 15 Reflex save or be unable to fly (assuming it uses its wings to fly) and fall to the ground. A tanglefoot bag does not function underwater.

A creature that is glued to the floor (or unable to fly) can break free by making a DC 17 Strength check or by dealing 15 points of damage to the goo with a slashing weapon. A creature trying to scrape goo off itself, or another creature assisting, does not need to make an attack roll; hitting the goo is automatic, after which the creature that hit makes a damage roll to see how much of the goo was scraped off. Once free, the creature can move (including flying) at half speed. A character capable of spellcasting who is bound by the goo must make a DC 15 Concentration check to cast a spell. The goo becomes brittle and fragile after 2d4 rounds, cracking apart and losing its effectiveness. An application of universal solvent to a stuck creature dissolves the alchemical goo immediately.

Thoughts?


I can see a hearty enough potted plant, maybe a vine or something, accomplishing what a tanglefoot bag does, sans the gluing to the floor portion. But at that point why not just use a tanglefoot bag? Save 50 gp I guess but you have to walk around with a potted plant.


Grimmy wrote:
I can see a hearty enough potted plant, maybe a vine or something, accomplishing what a tanglefoot bag does, sans the gluing to the floor portion. But at that point why not just use a tanglefoot bag? Save 50 gp I guess but you have to walk around with a potted plant.

Yeah, sans glue and all the stuff in the description mentioning it. That's just the druid's version of a tanglefoot bag I'd say, yeah it's cheaper than spending the 50gp but if he has room in his handy haversack or bag of holding for the plant and wants to use it in this way it'd be the way to go for him.


Looks good to me.


pH unbalanced wrote:

So I read the original question as "Can a Druid use a pot plant to Entangle?"

And I was like, of course. Why shouldn't pot entangle just like any other kind of plant? Of course, then you'd need to make a Fort save vs the munchies or take starvation damage.

I agree, the pot-plant can entangle anything small enough to be entangled by a pot-plant. However where I disagree with ImperatorK (and what he somehow fails to mention in his leading post, which caused much contention in another thread) is that he maintains that this means said pot-plant entangles everyone and everything in a 40' radius.

To which the answer was from most, after the laughter died down, "No way!"


Oh I think we're all in agreement that the pot-plant can entangle you at least enough to lower ambitions and in some cases it's a gateway to more dangerous second and third level spells.


Ok, a less silly question:

Quote:

verdant Boots

prICe
12,000 gp
AurA faint transmutation Cl 5th WeIght 2 lbs.
The wearer of these boots can, on command three times
per day, cause her current square to sprout a thick canopy of
fruit-bearing or otherwise edible plants. These plants count
as difficult terrain and grant cover to any Medium or smaller
creature within the square. They also provide enough food
to sustain two Medium creatures for 1 full day. While the
plants can grow on surfaces that would not normally support
vegetation such as a wooden floor or cave stone, they cannot
sprout on surfaces explicitly hostile to vegetation. The plants
are usually of a sort common to the terrain or climate of the
area in which they were produced. They disappear after 24
hours or when completely harvested, whichever comes first.
ConstruCtIon requIrements Cost 6,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, plant growth

Your job is to figure out what I'm wondering and answer it.


Yar!

Grimmy wrote:

Oh you were definitely in the right to point that out ossian666. At the end of the day though I'm not sure this one really needed an FAQ. I think we might have got trolled pretty hard. The fact that imperatork was switching to his "Creative Munchkin" alias was a red flag to me.

I didn't hit FAQ because I'm sure the devs have better things to worry about. We should ask for clarification when the rules aren't clear. In this case they are.

Agreed.

Sara Marie (Customer Carebear): Thank you so very much! *big sigh of relief*

~P


Heaven's Agent wrote:
ossian666 wrote:

I have to disagree with this...the spell just says "creatures" which is a vague statement used to include anyone in the Area of Effect.

Edit: Also read the bottom of the SRD...it says ANY not all enemies or any other variant...its meant to be ANYONE caught in the area friend or foe gets Entangled.

Clicky

So it does; they changed it at some point. The spell used to specify "foes," instead of "creatures." I just checked my Core Rulebook to be sure.

The erata I have does make the change:

Page 278—In the entangle description, in the f irst
paragraph, in the f irst sentence, change “foes in the
area” to “creatures in the area”.

Sczarni

Cheapy wrote:

Ok, a less silly question:

Quote:

verdant Boots

prICe
12,000 gp
AurA faint transmutation Cl 5th WeIght 2 lbs.
The wearer of these boots can, on command three times
per day, cause her current square to sprout a thick canopy of
fruit-bearing or otherwise edible plants. These plants count
as difficult terrain and grant cover to any Medium or smaller
creature within the square. They also provide enough food
to sustain two Medium creatures for 1 full day. While the
plants can grow on surfaces that would not normally support
vegetation such as a wooden floor or cave stone, they cannot
sprout on surfaces explicitly hostile to vegetation.
The plants
are usually of a sort common to the terrain or climate of the
area in which they were produced. They disappear after 24
hours or when completely harvested, whichever comes first.
ConstruCtIon requIrements Cost 6,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, plant growth
Your job is to figure out what I'm wondering and answer it.

My guess is you wonder why plant life doesn't grow in those places like wooden floors to begin with but its allowed to grow there with the boots? The wording is counter productive.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Cheapy wrote:

Ok, a less silly question:

Quote:

verdant Boots

prICe
12,000 gp
AurA faint transmutation Cl 5th WeIght 2 lbs.
The wearer of these boots can, on command three times
per day, cause her current square to sprout a thick canopy of
fruit-bearing or otherwise edible plants. These plants count
as difficult terrain and grant cover to any Medium or smaller
creature within the square. They also provide enough food
to sustain two Medium creatures for 1 full day. While the
plants can grow on surfaces that would not normally support
vegetation such as a wooden floor or cave stone, they cannot
sprout on surfaces explicitly hostile to vegetation. The plants
are usually of a sort common to the terrain or climate of the
area in which they were produced. They disappear after 24
hours or when completely harvested, whichever comes first.
ConstruCtIon requIrements Cost 6,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, plant growth
Your job is to figure out what I'm wondering and answer it.

Your question is: If you use the Verdant Boots to grow plants, and then use Entangle to trap a foe in them, how long will it take them to harvest all the food and make the plants disappear, thus freeing themselves?

The answer is: 1d4 rounds. Unless they're really hungry.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I am curious once we get a ruling from Paizo what it will be, or even if just staff weigh in what they think. I know how I would rule it but curious if they would agree.


Dark_Mistress wrote:
I am curious once we get a ruling from Paizo what it will be, or even if just staff weigh in what they think. I know how I would rule it but curious if they would agree.

I don't think anyone, ImperatorK included, have any doubts how Paizo would rule it and he has already said as much, and that ruling is that while the plant in a pot may entangle, one hand-thrown pot plant cannot entangle the entire 40' radius of the spells area of effect.


Cheapy wrote:

Ok, a less silly question:

Quote:

verdant Boots

prICe
12,000 gp
AurA faint transmutation Cl 5th WeIght 2 lbs.
The wearer of these boots can, on command three times
per day, cause her current square to sprout a thick canopy of
fruit-bearing or otherwise edible plants. These plants count
as difficult terrain and grant cover to any Medium or smaller
creature within the square. They also provide enough food
to sustain two Medium creatures for 1 full day. While the
plants can grow on surfaces that would not normally support
vegetation such as a wooden floor or cave stone, they cannot
sprout on surfaces explicitly hostile to vegetation. The plants
are usually of a sort common to the terrain or climate of the
area in which they were produced. They disappear after 24
hours or when completely harvested, whichever comes first.
ConstruCtIon requIrements Cost 6,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, plant growth
Your job is to figure out what I'm wondering and answer it.

I'M wondering why that is worth 12k gold but to answer your question pot may or may not be an "edible" plant. Catnip is though.


Just Some Bard wrote:
Cheapy wrote:

Ok, a less silly question:

Quote:

verdant Boots

prICe
12,000 gp
AurA faint transmutation Cl 5th WeIght 2 lbs.
The wearer of these boots can, on command three times
per day, cause her current square to sprout a thick canopy of
fruit-bearing or otherwise edible plants. These plants count
as difficult terrain and grant cover to any Medium or smaller
creature within the square. They also provide enough food
to sustain two Medium creatures for 1 full day. While the
plants can grow on surfaces that would not normally support
vegetation such as a wooden floor or cave stone, they cannot
sprout on surfaces explicitly hostile to vegetation. The plants
are usually of a sort common to the terrain or climate of the
area in which they were produced. They disappear after 24
hours or when completely harvested, whichever comes first.
ConstruCtIon requIrements Cost 6,000 GP
Craft Wondrous Item, plant growth
Your job is to figure out what I'm wondering and answer it.
I'M wondering why that is worth 12k gold but to answer your question pot may or may not be an "edible" plant. Catnip is though.

12K gold will buy you LOTS of fruit and vegetables to eat. Wagonloads. In-fact, you could hire a chuckwagon to follow you around and provide you with hot meals wherever you go.

Now then, I propose the opposite of RAW, and put forth an interpretation by SOR (Spirit of the Rules); The druid would not hurl a potted plant to cast Engtangle, because Entangle is a spell wherein the Druid connects with the natural magic in an area, and causes the plants to "go wild", entangling his opponents. There is no inherent magic-of-the-forest present in a potted plant. It would be like like a Paladin attempting to Smite someone who isn't really evil, but just took the Paladin's parking spot. It's against the spirit of the game.

101 to 145 of 145 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can a Druid use plant(s) in a pot as a base for Entangle? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.