Title says it all. Can the spell foul firearms ("soil" per the spell description) enough that they have a chance of not firing?
I am on the fence with this. Would this not fall into the minor effects arena? Not talking the weapon is fouled every time it is cast, just that there is a chance of being fouled.
I thought it could be a creative application of the spell.
If you are within 10 ft. of the firearm (within range,) and you are looking directly down the barrel of the gun (you have line of effect,) I would allow you to use Prestidigitation to up the misfire chance.
That said, if both those things were true and the wielder didn't misfire, they would get an auto-crit on you. Because why would you think it's a good idea to stare down the barrel of a loaded gun at point-blank range??
You could make the firearm look crappy. It is very doubtful you could clog any of the internal mechanism.
While prestidigitation leaves room for interpretation, so RAW it's GMs call and table variation may occur, what you are describing is generally considered beyond the scope of the spell.
[Edit: ... and if a GM did allow it, I think Rumpin has the right idea. Ie, only allow it with a significant balancing factor]
Cantrips are very limited, particularly that spell. It does cosmetic things not functional. It's written and is generally ruled on in a way that when in doubt, No.
[Edit: otherwise it becomes a very (very) limited version of limited wish... which would still be at least a first level spell not a cantrip.]
"Cosmetic not functional"
That is the descriptor I was looking for right there. Case closed.
"Cosmetic not functional"
That is the descriptor I was looking for right there. Case closed.
Yup, I did oversimplify it a little but not by much. While technically there is some functional use to, say, creating candle light. However the writing of Prestidigitation is clear on "more limited, less powerful". Any functional use should be BARELY functional (no more than examples like lifting only one pound, with poor control/only slowly up and down, no more than 10 feet away.)
Giving it even, say, a 5% chance to stop a Gunslinger, when the wizard and his allies already let him get that close to the wizard, is almost unquestionably beyond the scope. That's equivalent to a plus one functional bonus. Probably better since it requires the gun to then be cleaned. That's almost unarguably, for non munchkins it probably is unarguably, beyond the scope of an unlimited use cantrip.
Um, many of the things Prestidigitation does are functional, not cosmetic. Lifting is functional, heating and cooling are functional. I wouldn't say "case closed" just because someone uses a phrase that isn't anywhere in the spell description, or even implied in it.
My general thoughts: I am in favor of creative uses of cantrips, but I'm also constantly amazed at how people think it can do all sorts of things that it can't do. Like starting fires - so many people seem to think it can start fires when that is one thing it is EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED from doing - that would be the Spark spell.
Specific thoughts: it can explicitly soil objects, so if you think that is enough to jam a gun, I think that's very reasonable (and creative.) But, like I said, rules on line of effect and range still apply.
... Um, many of the things Prestidigitation does are functional, not cosmetic. ... so if you think that is enough to jam a gun, I think that's very reasonable (and creative.) But, like I said, rules on line of effect and range still apply.
See my above post. Ninja'd you.
You can be creative within the rules you don't need to make a 0 level spell of arguably the most powerful classes even better, see my "very limited wish" point, to be creative. Grease shouldn't be allowed to be set on fire either (and can't by RAW), for example. Creative use? Sure. Not supported by the rules though any more than, say, "I jump on the dragons head and stab his brain through his eye so he dies". Melee classes can't just do that, so spell casting classes shouldn't just get even more of a bye on breaking reality.
So I'll admit, IMO, I don't think the texts supports your interpretation, I explained why above, however I also think you balanced it with another factor so fine at your table. As I first stated this is GM call so I won't debate this with other people. You'd be wrong, I'd be wrong, because there is no absolute beyond what a players GM says. This, like how to use Freedom of Movement, is not one that can be concretely argued. All I can say is I think the available evidence we can try and draw from says no, that takes the spell too far.
I'd say no.
It cannot duplicate other spells.
There's already a spell to increase misfire chance.
Exactly as Magic said. I'm willing to be flexible on a lot of things but having a cantrip do exactly what a higher level spell does seems a little over the top to me.
Good catch, I did not know about the Destabilize Powder spell. Between Weaken Powder, Damp Powder, and Destabilize Powder, pretty much anything you could try to do with this trick would be duplicating the effect of an existing spell, and therefore not allowed.