| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
A wizard casts one of the pit spells. Baddie falls into said pit. The wizard casts a horizontal wall of stone over said pit. When the duration of the pit spell ends, fun ensues... "When the duration of the spell ends, creatures within the hole rise up with the bottom of the pit until they are standing on the surface over the course of a single round."
My question...how would gm's handle this situation? Squish? Save? Save details?
My take: Since the span is 20feet (10feet of pit +5feet of slope on either side) it needs to be buttressed. The buttressing would rise up as the pit does. It would create a several foot gap underneath the stone. That is where the creature winds up.
Now, with that said, the creature would be basically pinned underneath unless it can crawl out (depending on size). Neatly sidesteps the problem of damage without negating the effort the player went through.
- Gauss
Wall of Stone: "The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object."
Create Pit: "You create a 10-foot-by-10-foot extra-dimensional hole."
You cannot put the wall in the same space as the pit, so you cannot cover the hole in the way you are describing.
The best you could do would be to make a dome or box or something over the pit, but that would leave at least 5 feet of space for the creature in the pit to occupy at the top.
|
Wall of Stone: "The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object."
Create Pit: "You create a 10-foot-by-10-foot extra-dimensional hole."
You cannot put the wall in the same space as the pit, so you cannot cover the hole in the way you are describing.
The best you could do would be to make a dome or box or something over the pit, but that would leave at least 5 feet of space for the creature in the pit to occupy at the top.
I dunno about that. When conjured it isn't occupying the same space, and it's no fault of the spell's that later on a creature is forced into it. I see no real difference between conjuring a wall over a pit spell and say conjuring a wall and then slamming someone into it via telekinesis.
I dunno about that. When conjured it isn't occupying the same space, and it's no fault of the spell's that later on a creature is forced into it. I see no real difference between conjuring a wall over a pit spell and say conjuring a wall and then slamming someone into it via telekinesis.
No, I'm not suggesting the person in the pit is taking up the space, I'm suggesting the pit itself is.
The spell Create Pit creates an extradimensional hole. That hole is an object, which takes up space (a 10x10 area, in fact). Therefore, the wall cannot be in that space. It can be 5' above the pit, though, as spaces are 5x5x5 cubes.
mplindustries, I believe that is what is being done. If the pit is below ground (extradimensionally) and the wall of stone is above ground (normal dimension) then it is ocupying the 5' height above the pit. This really is not in question.
- Gauss
|
|
^^Ok, I see what you're saying. Yeah, I guess that makes sense, although it definitely stretches the limits of the term "Object"
Although now whenever I create a dungeon as a GM, I'm going to cover every square inch of it with wallpaper and then whenever someone tries to create a wall of stone I'm going to wag my finger and go "Nope, the paper covers all surfaces and is an object, therefore your stone cannot occupy that square and since there is no place to anchor the wall, the spell fizzles"
Then just sit back and watch the rage.
^^Ok, I see what you're saying. Yeah, I guess that makes sense, although it definitely stretches the limits of the term "Object"
Although now whenever I create a dungeon as a GM, I'm going to cover every square inch of it with wallpaper and then whenever someone tries to create a wall of stone I'm going to wag my finger and go "Nope, the paper covers all surfaces and is an object, therefore your stone cannot occupy that square and since there is no place to anchor the wall, the spell fizzles"
Then just sit back and watch the rage.
First, wallpaper really would stop a Wall of Stone: "it must merge with and be solidly supported by existing stone." If everything was covered in wallpaper, it couldn't merge.
Secondly, Conjuration(creation) spells create a creature, object, or force. Unless you want to argue that the pit is a force, it's something that blocks Wall of Stone.
Thirdly, I think you're looking at this the wrong way--you do not move the ground or anything with this spell. You create extradimensional space--the opening is all that interacts with real space and is the object in question. Would you argue that a Portable Hole is not an object? Create Pit basically makes a non-portable Portable Hole (that is later on filled with nasty things).
Elamdri and mplindustries, we are getting off base here. Wall of Stone is NOT in the same X Y Z co-ordinates that the Pit are in. The Wall of Stone is above the Pit.
Each letter is equal to 5'. This is a side-view.
G = Ground
S = Sloped Ground (the 5' radius around the pit)
P = Pit
W = Wall of Stone
WWWWWW
GSPPSG
As you can see, the Wall does not occupy the same space. It is above the Pit.
Now the debate then begins what happens when it goes from the above configuration to:
WWWWWW
GGGGGG
My belief is that since Wall of Stone will require buttressing then will be a gap between the ground and the Wall when the Pit spell ends.
- Gauss
Edit: I really wish the formatting would stay the same when creating the post compared to displaying the post.
My belief is that since Wall of Stone will require buttressing then will be a gap between the ground and the Wall when the Pit spell ends.
I would probably rules something similar to this.
Ya, the bridge would have to start and end on ether side of the pit above the slopes. That would be more then 20 feet span. Depending on your definition of span.
I would say it would be a clever trap.
|
|
Well, I think Gauss that the argument is that while the Pit itself is below the wall of stone, that the OPENING of the pit, However thin it might be, may be classified as an "Object".
Take my paper example.
Lets say we have three 5ft squares stacked vertically on top of one another. Two are ground, and the third is air (empty space).
A
G
G
now if I dig a pit and cover the pit with a sheet of paper:
Pa
Pi
Pi
What mpl is saying (I think) is that no matter how thin the object is, technically it is still an object, and in the case of the "mouth" of the pit, it is in fact occupying the space in the top square.
Think of it like in cartoons, where a character picks up a whole in the ground like a piece of paper, and then lays it down again and jumps in.
*Edited to remove quote of deleted post*
Create Pit creates an object and the Wall of Stone cannot occupy the same square as that object.
Further, I believe there are two things wrong about your diagram:
1) The Wall of Stone would not need to be buttressed as Create Pit is 10x10. You only need to buttress/arch spans of 20' or more, and a span over Create Pit would only be 10'.
2) Create Pit does not create a gap in the floor, it creates an extra dimensional opening that sits on top of the floor.
If you dig a pit and then cover it with paper that does not make that paper occupy the 5' square above it. It means the paper is now the floor.
Logic like this would also make just about any magic (such as conjuration magic) impossible because there is...wait for it...DIRT on the ground! That dirt must occupy space right?
Back on topic: If you use create pit, yes there is a portal to an extradimensional space at the level of the ground. But that portal is not going to stop something from being placed on TOP of it. Inside it sure, but the OP was not talking about inside. Nobody here has been talking about inside except for you and mplindustries.
Portal in the ground, Wall of stone on top.
- Gauss
|
|
If you dig a pit and then cover it with paper that does not make that paper occupy the 5' square above it. It means the paper is now the floor.
Logic like this would also make just about any magic (such as conjuration magic) impossible because there is...wait for it...DIRT on the ground! That dirt must occupy space right?
I was just trying to explain the argument. I don't necessarily agree with it (See my wallpaper dungeon example).
If you dig a pit and then cover it with paper that does not make that paper occupy the 5' square above it. It means the paper is now the floor.
That is quite debatable, actually.
Logic like this would also make just about any magic (such as conjuration magic) impossible because there is...wait for it...DIRT on the ground! That dirt must occupy space right?
Most magic does not specifically disallow you from putting it in the same square as an object.
Back on topic: If you use create pit, yes there is a portal to an extradimensional space at the level of the ground.
I disagree--the entrance is on top of the ground. It is exactly like a Portable Hole (except you can't fold it up and move it).
But that portal is not going to stop something from being placed on TOP of it.
I agree, unless that something explicitly can't occupy the same space as another object.
Portal in the ground, Wall of stone on top.
Portal is not in the ground, it is on the ground.
mplindustries, bah..I didnt delete it soon enough. :) LOL I was trying to delete it and rephrase but you copied it before I finished that.
Anyhow
1) Create Pit's total area is not 10x10. It is 10x10 +5' all around. That is 20feet. The pit itself is 10x10...the extra slope around it is a 5' radius.
2) Nothing in the description states it is ON TOP of the ground. Even if it were, that is only a tiny fraction of an inch. It does not occupy a 5' vertical space any more than a peice of paper would.
- Gauss
You create a 10-foot-by-10-foot extradimensional hole with a depth of 10 feet per two caster levels (maximum 30 feet). You must create the pit on a horizontal surface of sufficient size. Since it extends into another dimension, the pit has no weight and does not otherwise displace the original underlying material. You can create the pit in the deck of a ship as easily as in a dungeon floor or the ground of a forest. Any creature standing in the area where you first conjured the pit must make a Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space. In addition, the edges of the pit are sloped, and any creature ending its turn on a square adjacent to the pit must make a Reflex saving throw with a +2 bonus to avoid falling into it. Creatures subjected to an effect intended to push them into the pit (such as bull rush) do not get a saving throw to avoid falling in if they are affected by the pushing effect.
Creatures who fall into the pit take falling damage as normal. The pit’s coarse stone walls have a Climb DC of 25. When the duration of the spell ends, creatures within the hole rise up with the bottom of the pit until they are standing on the surface over the course of a single round.
Note my bold. In a floor, not on a floor. You will find nothing here anywhere that states it is on top of the ground it was created in.
Additionally, yes there are spells that state you cannot do something in the same space as another object. That does NOT mean you cannot do them above, to the side, etc of that object. Sheesh. Objects do not occupy 5' cubes unless they are that big (such as a wall) or are a specific spell effect that states they do.
- Gauss
Here is my take on the matter:
Option 1) No save and die. As the victim is trapped between a stone wall and an unyielding floor this clearly results in a lot of 'rasberry jam'. Try this on your players as soon as you can.
Option 2) Save or die. Not sure how, but there is a way to escape your sandwichy doom.
Option 3) Reflex negs. Remember that this is a game and not a reality simulator. The same dimensional extrusion that allows the pit to exist in the first place also allows some sort of extradimensional 'burp' through the wall. The victim gets a save and failure results in additional damage as if he or she had fallen into the pit.
TL;DR
Quantum tunneling is your friend. Sensible or not, the game allows saves.
Elamdri, my apologies. Like I said, I did not delete it soon enough. I realized too late that you were repeating and not originating the argument.
- Gauss
|
|
Elamdri, my apologies. Like I said, I did not delete it soon enough. I realized too late that you were repeating and not originating the argument.
- Gauss
No worries, like I said in my original post, it's an interesting problem. While I see where MLP is coming from, in that things like portable holes are technically objects, it does create a bit of a abstract argument in terms of what exactly qualifies as an object.
*laughs* funny Elamdri. :)
- Gauss
Portable Hole is an object, it is a physical object containing a doorway. This is a spell, not an object. It has no physical object to contain the doorway.
- Gauss
mplindustries, bah..I didnt delete it soon enough. :) LOL I was trying to delete it and rephrase but you copied it before I finished that.
Fixed.
1) Create Pit's total area is not 10x10. It is 10x10 +5' all around. That is 20feet. The pit itself is 10x10...the extra slope around it is a 5' radius.
No, the total area is 10x10. You simply need to make a check to avoid falling in if you are adjacent to the area.
2) Nothing in the description states it is ON TOP of the ground.
"You must create the pit on a horizontal surface of sufficient size." (Emphasis mine)
"Since it extends into another dimension, the pit has no weight and does not otherwise displace the original underlying material."
If it were not an object on top of the ground, why would it's potential weight matter?
Even if it were, that is only a tiny fraction of an inch. It does not occupy a 5' vertical space any more than a peice of paper would.
Exactly how many inches must something be thick before it counts as an object? Any answer you could give here will cause problems.
mplindustries: Show me ANY rule that states a peice of paper on the ground occupies a 5' cube. You will not find it. Objects do not occupy cubes unless they are large enough to.
- Gauss
mplindustries: Show me ANY rule that states a peice of paper on the ground occupies a 5' cube.
I don't need to do that.
"The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object."
If you define "space" in D&D terms, you'll find it refers to a 5x5x5 cube.
All things occupy a space. It must in order to be a "thing" at all. A piece of paper occupies a space, as does literally every other object that exists. It does not fill a space, sure, but that is irrelevant.
The Wall of Stone spell does not say, "The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space that another creature or object is currently filling." It cannot share a space (a 5x5x5 cube) at all, with anything.
Let me come at this from another angle, too:
My argument solves the core problem of the thread. Q: what happens when you seal off a Create Pit? A: you can't do that in the first place.
Your argument leads to a situation in which create pit essentially unavoidably kills anyone. I don't know why you'd want to be right.
And here's a third angle:
The RAW answer--the one I'm trying to give--is problematic and stupid, so, the real answer is "ask your GM." Let's face it, Wall of Stone requires GM adjucation to run properly. Really think about this line, for a minute:
"It is possible, but difficult, to trap mobile opponents within or under a wall of stone, provided the wall is shaped so it can hold the creatures. Creatures can avoid entrapment with successful Reflex saves."
What does that mean exactly? If I try and put a 20' radius dome over you, and you make your save, where do you end up after the spell? If you stay in the same square, the dome obviously exists, but you're not trapped inside--can you just phase through the wall or something now?
Does the wall just fail to materialize then? That causes problems, too, if 10 people fail a save, but as long as an 11th person succeeds, they're all free from the effects?
Or does making the save let you move out of turn? Would you end up 5 squares away from your starting point? If so, who gets to decide which square, you or the GM or something random, like the splash weapon chart? Does that movement provoke AoOs?
So, yeah, either you end up with my answer that you don't like, or you get "ask your GM." Pick one.
The 5x5x5 space does not need to include the peice of paper. It could be in the adjacent 5x5x5 space that also includes the ground. Nothing in the rules regarding that.
- Gauss
|
Not really sure why there's an argument about a pit being an object. The spell is creating the extradimensional space, not some arbitrarily thin gateway. Also, if it qualified as an object taking up that space wouldn't that make it so that you'd be unable to cast it under a person standing on the ground?
personally i have to side with gauss. does a speck of dust, being an object, stop you from casting a wall of stone there? it has mass, takes up a small fraction of the square, in your definition mpl that should stop it.
and one thing you guys have forgotten is the OP post, and to get the thread back on subject i will modify his scenario by changing one level 5 wall spell with another. wall of stone becomes wall of force, which has no silly restrictions on stopping it from being formed 0.000001 inches above the ground because it can be a flat plane, not cubes.
i have no idea how i would adjudicate that scenario. my guess would be, since it is extraplanar, to say it works like the various teleporting into stone abilities. they get shunted to the nearest open square and take some amount of damage because of it. but that really isn't that great of a solution to it.
Wow...I go to bed last night, and when I get up, there are a butt-load of responses. That's the beauty of forums. All of you rock. I should have clarified a few points in my original post here. In my group, where several of us alternate gm-ing, two of the gm's have made a decision that "pit is too powerful" and have house-ruled out the 5 foot perimeter of the pit being sloped, along with the effects of that sloping. So now you have a cylinder, (or cube) not too different from a really deep pothole. I live near Chicago, and there are times when either monster potholes, or pits/trenches dug by construction crews can't be filled, and traffic needs to keep moving. The street guys place HUGE steel sheets over the holes, and cars just drive over them. These sheets are 1/2 inch to 3/4 inches thick, and need cranes to lift and place. So I got to thinking, hmmm...."Wall of Iron"
So, without the buttressing argument, you have a pit spell ending, and the bottom rising like a cylinder in your car's engine: "...When the duration of the spell ends, creatures within the hole rise up with the bottom of the pit until they are standing on the surface over the course of a single round."
If you look at the Wall of Iron spell, it says, "...Creatures with room to flee the falling wall may do so by making successful Reflex saves. Any Large or smaller creature that fails takes 10d6 points of damage while fleeing from the wall..."
With the falling Wall of Iron, you have an irresistible force (the wall, if you are a medium creature) meeting an immovable object. (The ground). Getting into physics here is a bad idea, this being a game, but the point is, the WoI spell says "with room to flee". If the WoI is the same size as the room, and is created next to a wall, and can only fall one way, there IS no room to flee. The 10d6 damage is for FAILING the reflex save. The spell itself doesn't go into what happens when there is no place to go at all. The current version of the game doesn't like absolutes..."Save or die" situations, especially at low levels. Previous editions were more vague, and open to gm/dm interpretation, as far as spell effects. In the spirit of the game, a save is allowed in any situation, for balance, and to keep everybody having fun. Think fireball in a 10x10 room. Where would you dodge to? For game balance, you could roll a reflex save. Maybe you get behind the huge barbarian...
Anyway, options for a Wall of (whatever) over an ending pit spell could include:
1) Total jelly-like death. Eww. No fun.
2) The "shunting concept" 10d6 damage, and you are next to the wall.
Not realistic, but it IS a game. Perhaps residual extra-dimensional
magic as the spell fades.
3) It just can't be done, although I believe this would be a bad gm-ing
call, personally.
4) *** Please insert alternative here ***
Reductio ad absurdum:
Have no fear, Conjuring spells flat-out fail because every single cubic inch of space is teeming with thousands of microbes!
Now that I've got that off my chest (with the extra "isn't it funny that huge numbers of Conjuration spells fail because a fly zipped through the wrong place at the wrong time?" Thrown in for good measure), I don't think wall of stone would be wrecked by wallpaper. The possibility that a 5th level spell could be countered by some conscientious decorating is somewhat laughable.
As for the actual question, I think that it would be fair to use in-place rules for dodging effects to be tried, and if a situation is created where the effect becomes un-dodge-able, a flat damage amount (10d6 seems fair) is reasonable for being squashed, and it's then up to the trapped character to figure out how to get out.
Reductio ad absurdum:
Yes, that is exactly the technique I was using. The RAW answer is that it fails all the time. Since nobody runs things that way, the only other possible answer is "ask your GM."
That is precisely my point--ask your GM. Wall of Stone does not work at all without a GM's fiat (and not just because objects are in the way).
I don't think wall of stone would be wrecked by wallpaper. The possibility that a 5th level spell could be countered by some conscientious decorating is somewhat laughable.
It has to be able to meld with stone. If there's no stone to meld with, it doesn't work. If the Wall of Stone can merge through wallpaper, what else can it merge through? Cloth? Wood? People? Where does it stop?
PS - Once again, the point is: Ask the GM, because the RAW answer is stupid.
As for the actual question, I think that it would be fair to use in-place rules for dodging effects to be tried, and if a situation is created where the effect becomes un-dodge-able, a flat damage amount (10d6 seems fair) is reasonable for being squashed, and it's then up to the trapped character to figure out how to get out.
The spell does explicitly allow a save if it would trap the character, and it doesn't specify anything about the PC having room or movement to get away or whatever. If you follow that RAW, they get to make a Reflex save, and if they make it, the wall fails to trap them. What that actually means, though, well, hey, "ask the GM."
Lord Orion:
Why is Pit too powerful? I have GM'd against it and played using it. The slope only affects those who stop movement next to the pit (easy to avoid that). It is easy to climb out for many creatures because the Pit's Climb DC is automatically 5 less than listed and for a large creature or a creature with a 10' reach it is 15 less.
Yes, they fall in, yes they get hurt. But getting out is easy.
- Gauss
The spell does explicitly allow a save if it would trap the character, and it doesn't specify anything about the PC having room or movement to get away or whatever. If you follow that RAW, they get to make a Reflex save, and if they make it, the wall fails to trap them. What that actually means, though, well, hey, "ask the GM."
the trap doesnt have to be perfectly square. i always looked at this as a modified squeezing rules. the spell kind of implies that youre shaping the stone (ie pulling and shaping the 'liquid stone' up from the stone source its required to be attached to) and that its not exact, especially in the heat of combat. so in trying to trap them in your bubble of stone, they moved a little to the side to be in the part of the square that isn't on the inside of the trap(making the save). or in some cases the sneaky rogueish good reflex save person does a flip in the air right when youre forming the wall and ends up landing on top of it.
The spell does explicitly allow a save if it would trap the character, and it doesn't specify anything about the PC having room or movement to get away or whatever. If you follow that RAW, they get to make a Reflex save, and if they make it, the wall fails to trap them. What that actually means, though, well, hey, "ask the GM."the trap doesnt have to be perfectly square. i always looked at this as a modified squeezing rules. the spell kind of implies that youre shaping the stone (ie pulling and shaping the 'liquid stone' up from the stone source its required to be attached to) and that its not exact, especially in the heat of combat. so in trying to trap them in your bubble of stone, they moved a little to the side to be in the part of the square that isn't on the inside of the trap(making the save). or in some cases the sneaky rogueish good reflex save person does a flip in the air right when youre forming the wall and ends up landing on top of it.
And what happens if you form the stone as a 15x15 box around them? They are still being trapped, so they get a save. Where do they end up if they make it? 20' away? In which square 20' away? Do they choose or does the caster? Can I try and use it to help my party move faster by trapping them and assuming they'll make their save?
Seriously, Wall of Stone is totally reliant on GM fiat as written.
|
|
Why is Pit too powerful? I have GM'd against it and played using it. The slope only affects those who stop movement next to the pit (easy to avoid that). It is easy to climb out for many creatures because the Pit's Climb DC is automatically 5 less than listed and for a large creature or a creature with a 10' reach it is 15 less.
Wait, what? Why exactly is that?
Elamdri:
First, note that the pit created via Create Pit is a 10x10foot square (not a radius).
Second, check the Climb rules on CRB p91 under 'Climb DC modifier'.
If you can use a corner where you can brace against perpendicular walls then the DC drops by 5. Since the pit created via the spell Create Pit is a square you can do this.
If you can climb in a location where you can brace against two opposing walls (ie: you are large or have a 10' reach) then the Dc drops by 10.
Both modifiers are cumulative (it states this). Thus, most creatures with have a DC 5 less than the listed DC because they can use the corners. Large creatures and creatures with a 10' reach have a DC 15 less because they can use corners and the opposite wall.
No creature should be down in a pit created via Create Pit longer than a few rounds. Certainly no creature with a Climb speed.
- Gauss
If you couldn't make a Wall of Stone over a pit you wouldn't be able to make a bridge with it, something it's able to do by RAW.
Guys, if EVERY ITEM occupies a space, wall of stone would be oficcially uncastable. See that little speck of dust floating in the air right there? Occupies your space, no wall of stone for you. Seriously, this is one of the cases where GM-Judgement and common sense are your friends...
Guys, if EVERY ITEM occupies a space, wall of stone would be oficcially uncastable. See that little speck of dust floating in the air right there? Occupies your space, no wall of stone for you. Seriously, this is one of the cases where GM-Judgement and common sense are your friends...
This was my entire point. Wall of Stone doesn't work by RAW at all. It requires GM Fiat, so any question like this is totally irrelevant here because it's going to have to come down to each individual GM's decision.
Hence why I said so many times in this thread: Ask your GM.
|
Wall of Stone says it can be in "almost any shape imaginable", so making it like a huge pothole cover raised one inch above the pit opening is certainly permissible, even if the pit has an (infinitesimally thin) height.
There aren't 5ft cubes in PF that I know of; the ground is divided in a grid, not height, that's a bit more vague. Otherwise we'd be talking about how all those 7ft barbarians have to crouch in their 5ft cubes. So the 5ft cube defense against Create Pit doesn't work.
---
To stay sane, fair and consistent, let's try to keep the solution for Pit With Lid (PWL) the same as that applied to people who save against the pit when it materializes beneath them. I propose using the following rule from the core book:
Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space
Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it's not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there's a legal position that's closer.
So anyone who saves initially against the pit is just moved to the nearest non-pit square. Anyone expelled from a PWL is deposited either on top of the lid or (if you prefer) in the nearest legal position not covered by the lid; sort of squeezed out to the side.
As a variation, have getting caught by the lid take some damage (perhaps based on the amount of wall?), with a reflex save for half damage. Save or no, you're expelled.
---
An alternative is that if people can't exit, the extradimensional space can't completely disappear; it just compresses as small as possible. This means that underneath the wall there's a shrinkwrapped victim in a Pit of Suffocation. That's rough.
---
Alternatively, consider it a Cave in or collapse, which is the closest RAW that I know of, but which is pretty nasty for a two-spell combo. In that case maybe the wall is shattered into rubble from which escape is possible.
There are other things you could do like a moonbridge that would simulate the arguement of sharing space. So I think it is silly to debate that.
The fairest rule would be shutning for 1d6 damage, but honestly I may have them be raised under the wall and their mass pushes the wall up as the piut raises them harmlessly.
So then people I guess could come and jump on the wall to add qeight and squish them.
Sadly to put an end to this debate, this combo is quite limited in the fact that Wall of Stone (unlike almost all of the other wall spells) requires that at least 1 point of it's creation is connected and STRONGLY anchored to it. So you'd need to be in a dungeon with uncovered stone for this to work.
Create Pit, then Wall of Iron tilted over top then knocked over works better for the splat tactic
Well I guyess you could do a wall of iron as wll. I think the oracle moonbridge would be the most fatal as it is a wall of force equivelant.
|
|
Yeah, we should focus on the effects of someone getting smeared against the wall, not trying to disprove that the wall can't be there, because someone will find a way to put a wall there.
I like shunting people to the side with a bit of damage. Maybe even shunted to on top of the wall, but with 1d6 damage from being shunted through it.