|
Area cylinder (40-ft. radius, 20 ft. high)
DESCRIPTION
A rain of dirt, gravel, and small pebbles fills the area, dealing 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage to every creature in the area. This damage only occurs once, when the spell is cast.For the remaining duration of the spell, this debris covers the ground, making the entire area difficult terrain. At the end of the duration, the rocks disappear, leaving no aftereffects (other than the damage dealt).
Stone Call clearly does not remove invisibility or other stealth effects. However, during the round when the pebbles fall, wouldn't it act like Glitterdust, giving indicators? Enough for a circumstance Perception bonus at least?
Combining the two spells would be aggressively effective.
Related question - how does difficult terrain affect spotting invisibility? Sand, snow and gravel all makes noise and footprints.
Oh no. Oh no. Oh no.
Realism vs Actual Spell functionality. I'm not sure if I can cope with this thread!
|
I like creative spell use as much as the next guy, but sometimes balance takes precedence over logic. If they intended for it to be used to 'detect invisible' creatures, they would have noted something about it in the spell...and they probably would have raised the level as well.
.
.
.
If you tried to applied logic to this spell, a couple of other things could come out of it as well:
- If a 15th level wizard were to cast it, since it lasts 15 rounds, would the area end up being covered in 4 to 6 feet of debris?
- If the rain of debris is falling continually for 15 rounds, should it not obscure vision?
They don't talk about these possibilities either.
|
From the APG:
Powdered chalk, flour, and similar materials are popular with adventurers for their utility in pinpointing invisible creatures. Throwing a bag of powder into a square is an attack against AC 5, and momentarily reveals if there is an invisible creature there. A much more effective method is to spread powder on a surface (which takes 1 full round) and look for footprints.
Since a mundane method such as flour can momentarily reveal an invisible creature, or show footprints, I think it's reasonable to allow a spell that scatters debris to do something similar. But since the debris scattered by Stone Call isn't as fine as flour, and since you've got a larger area to watch, I'd only allow a perception bonus (somewhere in the +10 range) rather than automatically revealing the creature's position. And as soon as the creature acts, you won't know where it is anymore.
The settled debris would probably allow a small ongoing bonus (+2?) to spot the creature as its footsteps displace or scatter pebbles.
You really shouldn't allow spells to do things other than what is stated in the spell description. Otherwise Spell Casters get a huge boost in "but it makes sense!" department when they're using flippin magic so nothing makes sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could always use the Stone Call and listen for the outburst of profanity when it hits the invisible target. This would at least give a clue.
|
|
You really shouldn't allow spells to do things other than what is stated in the spell description. Otherwise Spell Casters get a huge boost in "but it makes sense!" department when they're using flippin magic so nothing makes sense.
You can use mundane items to do things other than what's in their description. I'm pretty sure flour has been used to detect invisible creatures for longer than it had an official item entry.
You can also use skills to do things other than what's in their description. There's nothing in the Acrobatics skill description that says you can use the skill to swing from chandeliers, but if a player wants to swing from a chandelier, I'm not going to say they can't do that, I'm going to ask for an Acrobatics check.
Allowing a second-level spell to provide a less dramatic effect than a bag of flour is not a huge boost.
Alternatively, you could use Stone Call to force the "in combat" penalty to stealth checks for invisible creatures, which is -20 (and RAW).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You really shouldn't allow spells to do things other than what is stated in the spell description. Otherwise Spell Casters get a huge boost in "but it makes sense!" department when they're using flippin magic so nothing makes sense.You can use mundane items to do things other than what's in their description. I'm pretty sure flour has been used to detect invisible creatures for longer than it had an official item entry.
You can also use skills to do things other than what's in their description. There's nothing in the Acrobatics skill description that says you can use the skill to swing from chandeliers, but if a player wants to swing from a chandelier, I'm not going to say they can't do that, I'm going to ask for an Acrobatics check.
Allowing a second-level spell to provide a less dramatic effect than a bag of flour is not a huge boost.
Alternatively, you could use Stone Call to force the "in combat" penalty to stealth checks for invisible creatures, which is -20 (and RAW).
I'm not going to go into an argument about this, but theres a difference between allowing sensible ingenuity and allowing Casters to get even greater benefits from what is already delineated from their spells.
|
|
Is there any unusual application of a spell you would describe as "sensible ingenuity," or is ingenuity reserved for mundane abilities?
For example, there was a thread recently where someone used a Floating Disk to ferry himself and his party over a dangerous floor (pulling a rope to move himself on the disk). Despite the fact that the spell is designed to carry loads, not people, the spell doesn't say that you can't stand on the disk, only that follows you rather than having its own motive power (in this case, the caster is propelled by a rope). Would you consider this sensible ingenuity? What if the caster were to tightrope walk, jump, or fly over the surface while the party rides the disk? What about in the same thread where the caster used it as a cooking surface (a mostly flavour rather than mechanical benefit)?
Is there any unusual application of a spell you would describe as "sensible ingenuity," or is ingenuity reserved for mundane abilities?
The latter. Mundanity is the underdog of the universe. Casters don't get shortcuts. The universe should literally repulse the notion of using magic outside of it's boundaries.
And no to either of your examples.
|
|
I respect that opinion but I'll never agree with it. Ingenuity should always be rewarded and if the nonmagical classes are underdogs, the response should be to make them more powerful or make magic inherently harder (eg more difficult concentration checks or longer casting times), not to prevent players from being creative with their spells.