| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Magma Tomb (Su):
Once per day, a great wyrm magma dragon can spit lava onto a target within 120 feet, dealing damage normally for its breath weapon. This magma cools instantly—it does not continue doing damage at this point but does entrap the victim (DC equals the dragon’s breath weapon save DC, 3d6 minutes, hardness 8, hp 45).
You are basically surrounded by a wall much like you would be if you failed the reflex for being entrapped by wall of stone. So does FoM give the "wall" a middle finger, or would is being trapped by a wall of stone or this dragon ability beyond FoM since you are basically surrounded?
PS: If you are in my RotRL game this is not for you, so don't worry.. :)
There's some conflict I feel in how the spell works. On one hand, you can totally ignore very physical webs and walk right through them because they hinder you. A adamantium wall, on the other hand, can not be glided through just because you have FoM.
Despite being a Supernatural effect, the wall itself is not a magical effect. It's cooled lava, i.e. rock. I would say you can't pass through because you can't walk through walls... but if we go to the entrap description, it says it basically entangles you. Which FoM usually does ignore.
I would say logically, fluff-wise, FoM should work here, but mechanically it might not. Tough call.
Hm. I think i would say FoM works.
It's no longer a magical effect, it's just rock.
I'd rule FoM doesn't work.
I will probably say walls and wall-like effects can not be walked though when I rewrite the spell.
If FoM was already up... magma doesn't stick/solidify.
If FoM was cast after... too late, magma is a physical wall now.
Would I hold myself to that tomorrow?
Not likely. FoM is involved. That spell could use a serious FAQ'ing or, better yet, an errata to clarify. Always a moment by moment, instance by instance thing.
If the DM described the entrapment as just parts of the body surronded, say just the feet and legs, i'd say it works all the time. I said the above two answers assuming the DM ruled it was a total body entrapment (ala ice tomb but with lava).
Again... Freedom of Movement. Can't think of many spells with more (pain in the butt) room for interpretation in their RAW (and fewer still with that and so little clarty to their RAI in their description or from devs).
ok, so it would also work again wall of stone if it is use to entrap someone then.
It is possible, but difficult, to trap mobile opponents within or under a wall of stone, provided the wall is shaped so it can hold the creatures. Creatures can avoid entrapment with successful Reflex saves
In that case I will just say Wall of Stone and Tomb of Magma get an autopass on the as far as getting trapped.
I am aware that "entrapment" might not be entrap, but it is close enough to keep things simple.
For anyone reading this you can still surround someone with a wall of stone without trying to entrap them, but their actions won't be as limited.
Being "surrounded by a wall much like you would be if you failed the reflex for being entrapped by wall of stone" is the fluff of the Magma Tomb ability...
No where in the fluff is that stated conclusively. That is an assumption. Probably even the assumption I also would make if I was GM'ing ... however not one, if a GM viewed it as being just clumps of lava around various parts of the persons body (including the legs/ankles/feet), that could be defended conclusively by the rules as written in the rules forum. The hardness/HP could be representing clumps of lava, not one solid all encompassing mass, the victim needs removed. The ability description simply doesn't clarify it enough.
...Look at the game mechanics of the ability......Being entangled impedes movement, but does not entirely prevent it unless the bonds are anchored to an immobile object or tethered by an opposing force ...
Freedom of Movement does not universally work against entangled, again that's an assumption being made in that conclussion, due to the bolded. In fact if we take your first assumption (which again, by default I'd probably agree with if I had to make the call), then the entirely solidified lava would be anchored to floor. Thus entirely preventing movement, in the same manner as a tomb/solid wall effect [i.e., a completely physical barrier is surrounding the victim]. In which case FoM would seem to be negated, just as it doesn't allow walking through a solid wall normally.
W/O a clarification on what the magma is like on the victim, and in more cases with FoM than almost any other spell, I would assume table variation on this.
As always I'm FAQ'ing this, and I'd encourage others to do the same, but given Freedom of Movement is a legacy spell that's never been clarified from core, and probably couldn't be in it's current form w/o an errata rewrite which Paizo is always loathe to do, I expect things like this to stay GM's discretion.
-----
Suggestion
The next time someone here gets completely trashed on a night around town, I'm talking like "Dwarf that just had a bad breakup, forgot to eat a full mountain goat steak before he went out, and is losing to his Duergar archnemesis in a drinking contest and isn't calling it a night until he turns that around" trashed, come home and put a 2-5 inch action figure standing on the ground. Put your head about a foot away and just blast him when your stomach makes you pay for the night. The next morning tell us how much was covered. (Please no pictures, we'll take your word). ;)
Indeed. That's why you've got to look past the fluff at times.
Ah, I see what you were saying now, we were in agreement originally. I thought you were using the fluff to defend your view when you were saying the opposite.
I mentioned yesterday with FoM it can take a bit to get to the best way to resolve conflicts, on that note I think the best way to resolve it is to switch the first assumption we had (that it's an all covering mass) and consider the default effect is probably that the lava hardens in clumps and is NOT a solid mass entirely encompassing the person. After all, no where in the ability does it qualify that as it does with say Ice Tomb (or Wall of Stone would if you surround their 5 foot square). So, briefly, it's more like a hardened Web. Less 100% covering of the victim and more like large clumps and enough of them to virtually guaranteeing something gets the lower body to entangle when solidified. So hacking is one way out of it, but likely so is FoM.
The first (weaker) reason, this isn't RAW in a magic world, is a bit of the physics. Earlier joke aside, if you blast someone with a liquid/semiliquid at force the odds are it won't get all of them. Their side facing you will shield the side opposite, for example. Additionally as the liquid leaves the source at speed it will spread out and gaps will begin to appear. [and in a game of abstracts like PF that means no one is entirely covered]
The second reason, it's the simplest way to interpret the game world/rules. If it's just large clumps and not one solid mass then FoM works just fine and the ability also works exactly as written. If two rules can be read to conflict or not conflict the way that doesn't conflict is probably correct. So while both the lava in a total shell and the lava in hindering clumps could both be read from the description only the latter fits what the RAW seems to say about FoM's effect.
So, going back to the assumptions, I change my first one, which also changes my second one. By RAW both could work but one would require fewer mental gymnastics to make everything synergize and, because when you're in a spot it can fit the situation why not, real world physics would probably support it.
... or not. I already said, FoM. Expect table variation. ;)