|
So one of my players had a question and I am a little stumped as to the answer. They wish to use a spell that targets unattended objects on an object that is either falling or in flight such as a falling boulder or a missile weapon from a siege weapon. Such as to catch it or destroy it. so are these items considered unattended? (I want to say yes but i figured i would get some extra input.)
I cannot see any reason to call a projectile "attended" after it has been fired/launched from the weapon - once it is in flight, it is no longer in the possession of, or attended by, the individual who fired it. It would also seem inappropriate for a projectile that is targeted by a spell while in flight to use the saving throws of the guy who fired it.
However...
There may be game balance issues. For example, if you want to use a spell to affect the barbarian's sword, the barbarian gets a saving throw for his item. If you want to affect the rogue's rapier, the rogue gets a saving throw for his item. But if you want to affect the ranger's arrows in flight and those arrows get no saving throw, suddenly this application of the spell can totally nerf one type of combatant (ranged) while it would otherwise be much less effective against other types of combatant.
That wouldn't be good game balance.
Then again, many DPR theorycrafters can demonstrate that ranged combatants might be the best of all, so maybe a little occasional nerfing could be a good idea.
My biggest concern is one of time. The game assumes things fall quite quickly.
It may be possible to use a spell w/ a casting time of immediate, or perhaps a readied spell that is also quickened, but otherwise there may not be time to cast the spell before the object arrives at its final destination (rather a boulder hitting the ground or an arrow hitting you!).
EDIT: Basically, this part:
A character cannot cast a spell while falling, unless the fall is greater than 500 feet or the spell is an immediate action, such as feather fall. Casting a spell while falling requires a concentration check with a DC equal to 20 + the spell's level. Casting teleport or a similar spell while falling does not end your momentum, it just changes your location, meaning that you still take falling damage, even if you arrive atop a solid surface.
That leads me to believe casting a spell on something else that is falling would fall under the same rules.
I can see where DM Blake is coming from on this point. I would have to probably say that once the item leaves the possession of the creature who originally possessed it, then it would be considered unattended.
I think there has always been an unbalance between ranged and melee attacks. Just look at what it takes to get Deflect Arrows (One feat and an ability score) versus what it takes to get Crane Wing (3 feats and specific BAB/monk level). The firing into melee and the soft cover bonuses also show how ranged attacks get penalized a little more. On the flip side the ranged attackers tend to not receive as much of the damage and impact from the bad guys as the melee attackers do. So therein lies the balance to keep all players from just going the ranged attack way.
Anyway, I could see a wizard/sorcerer ready an action to use telekinesis to catch the incoming flaming rock form the catapult or trebuchet. Maybe even the ballista or scorpion projectile could be stopped in that way. I think it would take a lot of discipline and be very cinematic so I would allow it in my games. If the item were unattended many spells would be able to easily affect it, but they would all have to be spells where an object can be the target.
Disintegrating the income siege attacks would be a costly, yet effective, way of participating in a siege of a keep or castle.
I might be loathe to allow Mage Hand to snatch an arrow for a few reasons. One, even though the arrow is less than 5lbs, you have to think that the force of the arrow is much greater due to the energy of the motion of a flying arrow. Also, this is covered by feat tree that includes Deflect Arrow and Snatch Arrow. I also have issues with allowing too much to be done with a 0 level spell cast at will.
Would I be more willing to allow Telekinesis or one of the "Bigby" Hands spells to do it? Perhaps. In this situation you have a spell that you have a lot more limitations on the number of castings per day and they have spell descriptions that lend them more to this task.
In the end there is no rule saying you can or cannot do this, but the DM may want to be careful of the slippery slope that he starts down when adjudicating in favor of tricks like this. Something done in the heat of battle against a foe once or twice in an epic career is dramatic. If it is done as a standard operating procedure, then it starts to get cheesy. Besides, what caster is going to want to ready an action every round just cast Mage Hand, et al., when they could be doing some real damage. Just put up Mage Armor and Shield and move on...
I would only allow the Mage Hand trick if you also have the feats Deflect Arrow and Snatch Arrow. Then you could use your own hand, or your Mage Hand - at that point the technicality of HOW you do it is just fluff - I would insist on the same limitations as the feats, including that the arrow must be shot at you. OK, maybe if the arrow is made of acid or dipped in poison, it would be safer with Mage Hand; I'd just call that a perk of being a mage rather than a monk.
