Zog makes a good point. The spell conjures tentacles, the tentacles then deal damage. However, the way merciful spell is worded, is that if the spell deals damage, then it is non-lethal.
I'm iffy on whether that should allow the damage the tentacles cause to be non-lethal or not.
Interpretation a) the tentacles are an effect of the spell, and therefore should do non-lethal damage.
Counter to a) If you summon monter 1 (merciful) the summoned monster is an effect of the spell, and should therefore do non-lethal damage.
Interpretation b) the tentacles are the spell effect, not the damage. The summoning of the tentacles does no damage, and so merciful has no effect.
I don't really have a counter to B. So I think I would go with that in my games. Merciful does nothing for black tentacles/other created/summoned spells.
Yes, but you're not grappling your foe, you're casting a spell that deals constricting killing damage that is described by grappling by a mindless spell effect whose only mode of operation is Crush Kill Destroy.
It doesn't say it deals constricting damage. And they are grappling the foe. That is why they must succeed at grapple checks. It even says they can't move/pin foes (which are results of successful grapple checks). Leaving the only other grapple success option of damage. Which states explicitly that it can be lethal or non-lethal.
The question, is can the caster tell the tentacles to do non-lethal damage.
RAW is no, obviously.
House-rule, I'd allow it, because as earlier, I don't think merciful spell actually would make them do non-lethal damage.
|
Zog makes a good point. The spell conjures tentacles, the tentacles then deal damage. However, the way merciful spell is worded, is that if the spell deals damage, then it is non-lethal.
I'm iffy on whether that should allow the damage the tentacles cause to be non-lethal or not.
Interpretation a) the tentacles are an effect of the spell, and therefore should do non-lethal damage.
Counter to a) If you summon monter 1 (merciful) the summoned monster is an effect of the spell, and should therefore do non-lethal damage.Interpretation b) the tentacles are the spell effect, not the damage. The summoning of the tentacles does no damage, and so merciful has no effect.
I don't really have a counter to B. So I think I would go with that in my games. Merciful does nothing for black tentacles/other created/summoned spells.
The which spell would work ? The fireball spell creates a sphere of fire, and then the sphere of fire deals damage, not the spell. Any spell can be described that way. the only spell that deals direct damage is the inflinct wounds spells.
Let us read the Merciful Spell Feat again and break it down guys.
Your damaging spells subdue rather than kill.
Benefit: You can alter spells that inflict damage to inflict nonlethal damage instead. Spells that inflict damage of a particular type (such as fire) inflict nonlethal damage of that same type.
Level Increase: None (a merciful spell does not use up a higher-level spell slot than the spell’s actual level.)
1) Allows you to alter spells that damage.
2) Doesn't say which school of spells can be altered, so this means ANY and ALL spells that inflict damage. There is no caveat that it's summoning or evocation or conjuration here, none.
3) It then goes on to say the particular type (such as fire) then go on to inflict nonlethal damage.
4) RAW - Black Tentacles specifically says it deals 1d6+4 points of damage
What this means as simple as I can put it, and how I'd rule it as RAW: Black tentacles does 1d6+4 points of lethal damage, add in the Metamagic Merciful Spell feat and that lethal damage can be ALTERED to inflict nonlethal instead.
I really don't get all the arguments to the contrary that it isn't subject to Merciful Spells and that the caster could change lethal to nonlethal if they wanted to w/o it. Again, house-rule however you wish, but if you are going for a RAW, then stop reading so much into it.
And they are grappling the foe. That is why they must succeed at grapple checks. It even says they can't move/pin foes (which are results of successful grapple checks).
Now I want to make a Greater version of this spell that moves creatures to the center and then pins them there...
Let us read the Merciful Spell Feat again and break it down guys.
** spoiler omitted **
1) Allows you to alter spells that damage.
2) Doesn't say which school of spells can be altered, so this means ANY and ALL spells that inflict damage. There is no caveat that it's summoning or evocation or conjuration here, none.
3) It then goes on to say the particular type (such as fire) then go on to inflict nonlethal damage.
4) RAW - Black Tentacles specifically says it deals 1d6+4 points of damageWhat this means as simple as I can put it, and how I'd rule it as RAW: Black tentacles does 1d6+4 points of lethal damage, add in the Metamagic Merciful Spell feat and that lethal damage can be ALTERED to inflict nonlethal instead.
I really don't get all the arguments to the contrary that it isn't subject to Merciful Spells and that the caster could change lethal to nonlethal if they wanted to w/o it. Again, house-rule however you wish, but if you are going for a RAW, then stop reading so much into it.
Lets look at how spells do damage.
Fireball: Area 20ft spread
Acid Arrow(Creation): Effect: One arrow of acid
The difference is that an Effect, as defined in the magic chapter: "Effect: Some spells create or summon things rather than affecting things that are already present."
Creates or summons something rather than affecting something already present. Fireball affects creatures present in the area. The Acid Arrow spell makes an arrow of acid appear, that the caster aims and fires, which then does damage. The spell effect, is creating an arrow. The arrow effect, is dealing damage.
Merciful acid arrow also should not function, as creating an arrow (the spell effect) does no deal any damage.
I still will disagree with you @Tarantula. The Merciful feat says spells that do damage can be altered to become nonlethal.
Again, I'll said it: The feat has NO CAVEAT for the school of the spell, the only thing it states is that the spell with damage when used in conjunction with Merciful metamagic alters it to become nonlethal. Nothing more, nothing less.
Effect: makes no difference whatsoever, otherwise the feat would say so and it doesn't. The effect is if someone comes into contact with the tentacles and can't escape the attempted grapple of the spell. Then they are grappled and subject to DAMAGE, which with Merciful (again it's a damage spell as well) will be ALTERED per the feat to become nonlethal.
Acid Arrow: It would alter the lethal damage to nonlethal if merciful spell metamagic feat is applied.
Now, again I'll say it: If you want to rule differently than RAW in your game and HOUSE-RULE it, that's more than fine in your group, but here in the RULES section you are wrong.
ub3rn3rd, by your interpretation, then summon monster spells can be merciful, and it causes the summoned creature to do non-lethal damage correct?
That is the point, spells that do damage.
Does a create pit spell do damage? Does a black tentacle spell do damage? Does a summon monster spell do damage?
The point is creation spells almost never do damage themselves. They create an effect which then deals damage. Create pit makes a pit, if something falls down the pit, it takes falling damage, but the spell didn't cause that damage. If the summoned tentacles grapple something, the spell didn't do damage, the created tentacles did. If a summoned monster grapples something, the spell didn't do damage, the summoned monster did.
Fireball: "A fireball spell generates a searing explosion of flame that detonates with a low roar and deals 1d6 points of fire damage per caster level (maximum 10d6) to every creature within the area."
This says the spell deals 1d6 points of damage.
Black Tentacles:"Each round that black tentacles succeeds on a grapple check, it deals an additional 1d6+4 points of damage."
The "it" in this case, is the tentacles which succeeded on a grapple check. The tentacles deal the damage, not the spell. The spell created the tentacles, that is it.
Tell me this: If I use Major Creation to create a longsword. Can I wield it like a normal longsword (for the duration of the spell)?
If I use a Merciful Major Creation to create a longsword, does that longsword now only do non-lethal damage?
Major creation is conjuration(creation) the exact same as black tentacles is.
Sure, why not? There is no caveat in the feat at all. You use a merciful summoning spell to bring in some creatures that are claw-less and hit with fists, that headbutt rather than bite and they are doing nonlethal (if that's the fluff you wanna use), but as long as you are using the merciful feat it converts any spell damage no matter the school to nonlethal.
Create pit: Fall down the pit and tumble down the sides taking nonlethal damage, check.
Fireball: The concussive wave blasts them down without burning them lethally, nonlethal damage, check.
Cloudkill: A poison gas that normally does lethal damage, rather than lethal it chokes them like drowning which you can take nonlethal damage from, check.
Major Creation longsword, sure can. Ever heard of the Blade of Mercy? You can still use a bladed weapon and inflict nonlethal damage with penalties in melee, so this spell would be like the Blade of Mercy version of it.
You can apply this to literally any spell that does damage because it says so.
It just seems you are taking the different schools of magic and trying to apply them differently to a feat that does NOT say anything about schools of magic but rather the only thing it applies to are spells that do damage.
I'm not trying to take different schools of magic and apply the effect differently. The point is the different schools of magic have spells which have different effects.
The effect of a fireball spell is that creatures in the area take damage. This damage is caused by the spell.
The effect of a Create Pit spell is an extra-dimensional space is made in the floor. If a creature falls in it, that damage is NOT caused by the spell, and so merciful would have no effect.
The effect of a summon monster spell is that a monster chosen from the list appears and attacks enemies. The damage the monster does is not an effect of the spell. Merciful should not affect it.
The effect of a major creation spell is to make an object. What you do with that object is not an effect of the spell. Merciful should not affect it.
Here's another metamagic feat that triggers off spell damage. Dazing spell.
By your interpretation, I could use dazing summon monster, and any damage dealt by the summoned monsters would cause the creature to have to save vs daze. I do not think that is the case.
Spells that do damage are altered. Yes. Conjuration spells don't do damage, they create things which then do damage. Its the same reason you can cast summon monster while invisible, but remain invisible.
No the point is that the feat doesn't distinguish between effects. It only states that spells that do damage can be altered. This means that the caster is changing the spell to become a nonlethal version and that also means that it'd be up to the player/GM to determine the fluff of how it looks or acts.
The Create Pit spell causes fall damage when they hit the bottom, the effect is lethal damage from a straight down fall x amount of feet. I don't see anything in the RAW to support the merciful not being able to be applied here. The fluff could easily be that it's slightly sloped and the creature doesn't fall straight down but rather takes bumps and bruises (nonlethal) damage from the fall.
The monsters can be altered nonlethal versions of themselves that inflict only nonlethal damage as the spell was changed by the caster again to be these different kinds of creatures, variants of the lethal creatures perhaps.
The object is temporary and another variant of the spell if used in conjunction with merciful. My point is that the blade can be used to deal nonlethal just like a normal sword can be used to do nonlethal damage.
Daze Spell: So I see your point here with creatures and dazing, but this one is a bit more of a grey area and I could see this being broken or used to create OP characters. I see the merciful as being less powerful in terms of metamagic goes since it's not doing MORE damage or creating a condition like daze.
So perhaps Metamagic feats in conjunction with conjuration/summoned creatures/items needs a FAQ?
Just because Daze seems broken to you and Merciful doesn't the fact is they use the same wording, and so should function the same.
Could I case a Dazing Major Creation to make my fighter a longsword that will force daze saves every hit he deals with it?
If your answer to that is no, then merciful also won't apply.
Same thing with create pit (which makes a pit, not deals damage) summon monster (which summons monsters, not deals damage) or acid arrow (which creates an arrow, not deals damage).
It might be worth a FAQ as to what is "spell damage" (i.e. fireball) vs "spell effect which can cause damage"(i.e. summon monster). However, I expect it will end up being "no answer required."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now you've done it Tarantula - now all the local cheesters will be casting dazing major creation!
|
Create pit does not cause falling damage. There is no such thing as falling damage. There is hitting the ground damage.
There seems to be a view here that any subsequent results caused by casting the spell are subject to the feat applied to the spell.
If I cast a merciful knock on the shackles that bind a lion, freeing the lion to attack you, then suddenly the lion's attacks now do non-lethal damage.
If I cast merciful stone to flesh on a bridge and the bridge collapses out from under you, you take non-lethal damage.
If I cast merciful make whole on a broken crossbow, then the crossbow now only fires blunted bolts.
I cast merciful animate rope on the rope holding the blade to the guillotine causing it to untie. Now the guillotine blade drops, dealing non-lethal damage. But no one was in that guillotine, instead there was a rope in there holding the blade to another guillotine. That rope is cut by the first guillotine, which drops...for non-lethal damage.
Create pit does not cause falling damage. There is no such thing as falling damage. There is hitting the ground damage.
First, your examples are more of why I th,ink ub3rn3rd is in the wrong here. So thanks for that.
But there is such a thing as falling damage. Such as from a pit trap.
"Effect 20-ft.-deep pit (2d6 falling damage);"
I was looking at the RAW for Metamagic feats and came across this little tidbit: Metamagic feats cannot be used with all spells. See the specific feat descriptions for the spells that a particular feat can't modify.
Now the question is when looking at Merciful metamagic feat which states:
Your damaging spells subdue rather than kill.
Benefit: You can alter spells that inflict damage to inflict nonlethal damage instead. Spells that inflict damage of a particular type (such as fire) inflict nonlethal damage of that same type.
Level Increase: None (a merciful spell does not use up a higher-level spell slot than the spell’s actual level.)
Now I don't see ANYTHING in this that states it cannot be used with ANY spells do you? The only thing I can think of are the words "damaging spells," but how do we define "damaging spells?"
Are they defined as a direct result of the spell causing damage like a fireball blows up and damages the enemy or does it also work with spells that cause damage with an if/when type of scenario such as the Create Pit, Black Tentacles, or even Summoned Creatures? The direct result of a pit can cause damage IF they fall in, the direct result of the tentacles can cause damage IF they get grappled, the direct result of summoned creatures can cause damage if they hit with a d20 roll vs AC.
Having thought about it more overnight, I guess I really don't know the answer to that since it is very open for interpretation and we'll get "well it depends" on the spell. I'd err on the side of the Player as a GM for this and allow them to alter probably most - if not all - of their spells to become Merciful. I don't think it'd be a house-rule simply because RAW this particular metamagic feat doesn't say you CAN'T do that to your spells and I can see the fluff being altered just as the caster alters their spells.
ub3rn3rd, it says "damaging spells".
What spells cause damage? Those which state they deal damage as their effect. Fireball is the usual example.
What effect does black tentacles do? It creates tentacles which rise up out of the floor. Those tentacles then can do damage, if they succeed on grapple checks.
What effect does summon monster do? It summons a monster which appears when the spell completes. The monster then can do damage, if they succeed on attack rolls.
Fireball deals damage as a result of the spell, because that is what the spell says it does.
Tentacles/summon monster does not deal damage as a result of the spell, but as a consequence of the spell effect. Sort of like casting levitate, then dismissing it when they are 100 feet up. The spell didn't cause the damage, but damage was caused as a consequence of the spells effects.
ub3rn3rd, it says "damaging spells".
What spells cause damage? Those which state they deal damage as their effect. Fireball is the usual example.
What effect does black tentacles do? It creates tentacles which rise up out of the floor. Those tentacles then can do damage, if they succeed on grapple checks.
What effect does summon monster do? It summons a monster which appears when the spell completes. The monster then can do damage, if they succeed on attack rolls.
Fireball deals damage as a result of the spell, because that is what the spell says it does.
Tentacles/summon monster does not deal damage as a result of the spell, but as a consequence of the spell effect. Sort of like casting levitate, then dismissing it when they are 100 feet up. The spell didn't cause the damage, but damage was caused as a consequence of the spells effects.
See I see it the other way especially for the Tentacles and the Pit. You create the fireball the same as you create the pit or the tentacles, to do damage to your enemies.
The direct result of the fireball is the damage.
The direct result of someone getting grappled by the tentacles is the damage.
The direct result of someone falling into a pit is damage.
See the commonality here? Damage. All these spells can damage someone lethally. Just because they are from different schools doesn't stop them from doing so.
The pit and the tentacles are a bit delayed since they aren't damaging right away unless someone fails their save/CMD check, but the same could be said for a delayed blast fireball against a rogue who has improved evasion, IF he fails his reflex he'd take nonlethal damage, IF he succeeds (like a tentacle cmd or pit reflex), he doesn't take any damage of any kind.
See where I'm going with this? Again, the metamagic feats section in the rules states that metamagic feats tell you what spells they can't be used with.
So we are back to arguing semantics of what damaging means, whether the spell causes the damage directly or indirectly from something such as a fireball or a pit. Both have damage in their descriptions.
The direct result of the fireball[/b is the damage.
The direct result of someone [b]getting grappled by the tentacles is the damage.
The direct result of someone falling into a pit is damage.
Do you see the difference?
Where does the damage come from a fireball spell? From the fireball. That is damage caused by the spell.Where does the damage come from tentacles? From the grapple check. That is not caused by the spell, it is caused by the tentacles.
Where does the damage come from a pit? From falling. That is not caused by the spell, it is caused by falling in.
Delayed blast fireball still directly deals the damage. It is not indirect damage like the tentacles or pit.
Additionally, the schools of magic do work differently.
Magic section: Evocation: "evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage."
No where in the conjuration section is damage ever mentioned. Conjuration spells do not do damage. They create things, which might later cause damage.
The direct result of the fireball is the damage.
The direct result of someone getting grappled by the tentacles is the damage.
The direct result of someone falling into a pit is damage.
Do you see the difference?
Where does the damage come from a fireball spell? From the fireball. That is damage caused by the spell.Where does the damage come from tentacles? From the grapple check. That is not caused by the spell, it is caused by the tentacles.
Where does the damage come from a pit? From falling. That is not caused by the spell, it is caused by falling in.
Delayed blast fireball still directly deals the damage. It is not indirect damage like the tentacles or pit.
Additionally, the schools of magic do work differently.
Magic section: Evocation: "evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage."
No where in the conjuration section is damage ever mentioned. Conjuration spells do not do damage. They create things, which might later cause damage.
Real quick, you say conjuration spells don't damage... I beg to differ. First one I look up is Acid Splash. Guess what? It does DAMAGE and it's a 0 level spell, which could be combined with Merciful to make it nonlethal. Another is Stone Call, yep 2nd level spell that does bludgeoning damage (which is also the most common type of nonlethal).
Guess we will have to agree to disagree here dude, I don't see it your way and the RAW don't support you so you won't convince me otherwise and I obviously no matter how I quote RAW in metamagic or show that damage is the direct result of any of those spells will convince you.
We are at an impasse, so I'll go along my merry way and I suggest you do the same and we'll part at an amicable disagreement.
Acid Splash
School conjuration (creation) [acid];
Effect one missile of acid
You fire a small orb of acid at the target. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to hit your target. The orb deals 1d3 points of acid damage. This acid disappears after 1 round.
Acid splash. What does it do? It creates a missile of acid. The orb then deals damage. The spell creates the orb. The spell effect is to create an orb of acid. The orb of acid effect is to deal damage.
Stone call... It says it deals bludgeoning damage. So yes, you can merciful stone call. I'd say stone call is written poorly.
You say the RAW doesn't support me. I don't think the RAW supports you. Lets say we both read it different, and you can continue thinking falling from a merciful levitate spell will do non-lethal damage.
Yep read it differently and I'll ignore the last part of your post in the interest of keeping it civil :)
It honestly doesn't matter whether Black Tentacles is lethal or non-lethal damage. If you can not escape the area, you will DIE. Non-lethal just means that it will take longer for the tentacles to kill you.
