| Lifat |
Technically speaking no margarine wouldn't cut it for the spell as it specifically states butter and there are no rules allowing margarine to substitute butter as a spell component.
That said, it would not be gamebreaking in any way or form to allow the substitution, but it would not be RAW.
... And I actually managed to keep a straight face while writing this :D
| Adamantine Dragon |
I actually think it's odd that butter would be a component for the spell "grease" since in the real world grease and butter are two very different things, even accepting the ridiculously wide range of things that are called "grease".
In general "grease" is either the drippings left over after rendering meat (melted fat essentially) or else it's a petroleum byproduct. I personally think "lard" would be a much better genre-appropriate choice as a spell component than butter. And yes, I'd totally accept lard as a substitute for butter.
| Lifat |
I actually think it's odd that butter would be a component for the spell "grease" since in the real world grease and butter are two very different things, even accepting the ridiculously wide range of things that are called "grease".
In general "grease" is either the drippings left over after rendering meat (melted fat essentially) or else it's a petroleum byproduct. I personally think "lard" would be a much better genre-appropriate choice as a spell component than butter. And yes, I'd totally accept lard as a substitute for butter.
You might accept lard as a substitute, but that would not be RAW :D
| Adamantine Dragon |
Adamantine Dragon wrote:You might accept lard as a substitute, but that would not be RAW :DI actually think it's odd that butter would be a component for the spell "grease" since in the real world grease and butter are two very different things, even accepting the ridiculously wide range of things that are called "grease".
In general "grease" is either the drippings left over after rendering meat (melted fat essentially) or else it's a petroleum byproduct. I personally think "lard" would be a much better genre-appropriate choice as a spell component than butter. And yes, I'd totally accept lard as a substitute for butter.
Would it make it better if I COOKED it?
| Lord_Malkov |
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It all depends.... first you have to make a will save to see if you can disbelieve the margarine. If you fail, then you believe it IS butter. Even if you succeed you can't believe that it isn't butter. Then you spontaneously have a brain aneurysm, because you simultaneously disbelieve and believe in the butter-ness of something that clearly is not butter... or is it?
The magical energies you tapped to fuel the casting of grease multiply and contort in your mind as an infinite logic loop causes the magic invocations to reverberate and they build and build until they reach a critical mass. The particle escapes the infinite energy well, and a minuscule singularity occurs within your head. That singularity expands instantly to envelope the current universe, and replaces reality as you know it.
All of this in less than an instant, and there you are, recreated in the sinchronic death and rebirth of reality. And you look again, at the object you were holding. This margarine, and you think, eh, whats the difference? So you cast grease, and it works. But you still worry about the trans-fats.
| Lifat |
It all depends.... first you have to make a will save to see if you can disbelieve the margarine. If you fail, then you believe it IS butter. Even if you succeed you can't believe that it isn't butter. Then you spontaneously have a brain aneurysm, because you simultaneously disbelieve and believe in the butter-ness of something that clearly is not butter... or is it?
The magical energies you tapped to fuel the casting of grease multiply and contort in your mind as an infinite logic loop causes the magic invocations to reverberate and they build and build until they reach a critical mass. The particle escapes the infinite energy well, and a minuscule singularity occurs within your head. That singularity expands instantly to envelope the current universe, and replaces reality as you know it.
All of this in less than an instant, and there you are, recreated in the sinchronic death and rebirth of reality. And you look again, at the object you were holding. This margarine, and you think, eh, whats the difference? So you cast grease, and it works. But you still worry about the trans-fats.
Quoted for EPICNESS
| Lifat |
Lifat wrote:Would it make it better if I COOKED it?Adamantine Dragon wrote:You might accept lard as a substitute, but that would not be RAW :DI actually think it's odd that butter would be a component for the spell "grease" since in the real world grease and butter are two very different things, even accepting the ridiculously wide range of things that are called "grease".
In general "grease" is either the drippings left over after rendering meat (melted fat essentially) or else it's a petroleum byproduct. I personally think "lard" would be a much better genre-appropriate choice as a spell component than butter. And yes, I'd totally accept lard as a substitute for butter.
Why would it make it better simply by cooking it? Now all you have is a melted mess.
| Bruunwald |
Here's an interesting thought. The grease entry says:
A creature wearing greased armor or clothing gains a +10 circumstance bonus on Escape Artist checks and combat maneuver checks made to escape a grapple, and to their CMD to avoid being grappled.
So would my fellow GMs allow that same bonus to Escape Artist checks for getting out of manacles and through tight spaces (when applied to the manacles or spaces)? I would. My players love the spell and I would prefer to reward them for their ingenuity.
| Lifat |
Here's an interesting thought. The grease entry says:
A creature wearing greased armor or clothing gains a +10 circumstance bonus on Escape Artist checks and combat maneuver checks made to escape a grapple, and to their CMD to avoid being grappled.
So would my fellow GMs allow that same bonus to Escape Artist checks for getting out of manacles and through tight spaces (when applied to the manacles or spaces)? I would. My players love the spell and I would prefer to reward them for their ingenuity.
Well... The line you quoted could go either way depending on grammar. I'm unsure what RAW is for that reason, but I would absolutely allow it.
dfsearles
|
I could see it rules as both ways, personally I would allow it, but on the flip side when you look at the mechanics, it wouldn't work. Manacles are fitted so that the device secures around the wrist, and the position of your thumb and fingers keeps it in place. That's why you have to dislocate your thumb to escape them (not that I have any practice). In tight spaces, you are squeezing your body in roughly the same manner. You may not have to dislocate anything, but the principle is still there. If you tried to squeeze through a tight area covered in grease, it would just scrape off. But you rule it as you will. Like I said, just the ingenuity of it I would allow it, but you should be careful not to let the spell do to much. It is after all, just a first level spell.