Incorporeality Question

[richard develyn]

Excuse me if these seems needlessly technical but I would like to double check incorporeal movement.

I believe I'm right in saying that an incorporeal creature can move through solid objects as long as at least one small part of it remains in contact with the outside of the solid object.

For example, a Wraith could not move through a 10' block of stone. However a tiny crack leading through the stone would let it through. In fact, if the stone had a number of cracks inside it, even without having one necessarily going all the way through, as long as the Wraith could get from crack to crack it would be able to get through the stone.

Equally a wraith could move through a mountain of small stones, for example, though I'm not sure about sand.

Is that right?

Richard

[Orfamay Quest]

It's certainly right if that's how you house-rule at your table. We make the opposite ruling at mine.

[Robert A Matthews]

Incorporeal doesn't mean gaseous. I would say no to incorporeal creatures moving through cracks. While an incorporeal creature can't move through a 10' block of stone, it can move along the edge of it and come out the other side, which doesn't cost any extra movement so would effectively be the same thing. I'd say no to the mountain of small stones as well.

[Gilarius]

Robert A Matthews wrote:

Incorporeal doesn't mean gaseous. I would say no to incorporeal creatures moving through cracks. While an incorporeal creature can't move through a 10' block of stone, it can move along the edge of it and come out the other side, which doesn't cost any extra movement so would effectively be the same thing. I'd say no to the mountain of small stones as well.

Since I've just been looking up incorporeal for a different post, here's the relevant rule:

Spoiler:

An incorporeal creature can enter or pass through solid objects, but must remain adjacent to the object’s exterior, and so cannot pass entirely through an object whose space is larger than its own. It can sense the presence of creatures or objects within a square adjacent to its current location, but enemies have total concealment (50% miss chance) from an incorporeal creature that is inside an object. In order to see beyond the object it is in and attack normally, the incorporeal creature must emerge. An incorporeal creature inside an object has total cover, but when it attacks a creature outside the object it only has cover, so a creature outside with a readied action could strike at it as it attacks. An incorporeal creature cannot pass through a force effect.

For cracks to allow the incorporeal being to count as 'being adjacent to the exterior' while using them to move deeper into the object, I'd say that they would have to be at least 5 feet wide. Which would also rule out movement through a pile of sand or rocks.

[richard develyn]

Well, IMO an object's exterior is anything which isn't part of the object. The holes in a swiss cheese, for example, are not part of the cheese.

As for the piles of stones - none of the stones have a space which is larger than the wraith, so the wraith should be able to walk through them without a problem.

Richard

[CoyoteOld1]

Our house rule has always been incorporeal means incorporeal - as in not really interacting with the real world physically. So incorporeal creatures like ghosts, ethereal beings, etc. can move through walls, sand, dirt, giant stone blocks, gravy, or whatever, unless there is some specific ward or abjuration in place.

I'm sure there's some rationale behind the idea that incorporeal beings might have some limitation, but for me, the scary/frustrating aspect of them being able to pass through solid objects at will takes precedence.

As I say, though, that's a house rule.

If I want a creature that's semi-incorporeal, and can't just wander willy-nilly anywhere they want, I treat them as being similar to a vampire's mist form.

[Urza82]

I have a question does the seeking enchantment on a ranged weapon bypass an incorporeal creature's 50% miss chance? I have had some GM'S argue that ghost touch on melee weapons is the only way to bypass that besides the old classic magic missile of course.

[Jeraa]

Urza82 wrote:

I have a question does the seeking enchantment on a ranged weapon bypass an incorporeal creature's 50% miss chance? I have had some GM'S argue that ghost touch on melee weapons is the only way to bypass that besides the old classic magic missile of course.

Incorporeal creatures do not have a 50% miss chance. They negate 50% of damage done to them (from magical sources). That is not the same thing. Seeking does nothing to mitigate that.

A miss chance changes a hit into a miss. Incorporeal doesn't negate the hit, it just nullifies damage the hit does. You still hit.

[Urza82]

Jeraa wrote:

Urza82 wrote:

I have a question does the seeking enchantment on a ranged weapon bypass an incorporeal creature's 50% miss chance? I have had some GM'S argue that ghost touch on melee weapons is the only way to bypass that besides the old classic magic missile of course.

Incorporeal creatures do not have a 50% miss chance. They negate 50% of damage done to them (from magical sources). That is not the same thing. Seeking does nothing to mitigate that.

A miss chance changes a hit into a miss. Incorporeal doesn't negate the hit, it just nullifies damage the hit does. You still hit.

Wow you are right I had to read up on that. I'm glad I did we have been playing that wrong from the beginning. Thanks for the insight.