Question on DC Of Banishment Spell

[Versanus]

Background:Currently in my campaign, I have my player's preparing to fend off "a great evil" as I am a cliche and vague GM. They're currently learning all about various planar beings and such, and it's great fun. The player's will soon learn what the "evil" specifically is, but they are currently speculating. They've speculated that a Daemon could be the "evil", so they're are contemplating obtaining a scroll of Banishment.

The Actual Question: Banishment states "You can improve the spell’s chance of success by presenting at least one object or substance that the target hates, fears, or otherwise opposes. For each such object or substance, you gain a +1 bonus on your caster level check to overcome the target’s Spell Resistance (if any), and the saving throw DC increases by 2."
One player laughed and just said they just needed to get the whole town present when the spell is cast and the DC will just be unbeatable because daemons are "Notorious for their hatred of the living". I argued that that wasn't what the rule meant, it meant something like silver or holy symbols, but as a rule lawyer myself, I can't present a real argument. Any help on how to interpret that?

TL;DR: Do having many humans present during a banishment spell cast on a daemon make the DC impossible to beat?

[Tarik Blackhands]

Fully depends on your interpretation of the mechanic. Me personally, basic things like holy symbols, silver/cold iron, and similarly opposed things would NOT count as a hated object. That's the basic rigour for your outsiders. Business as usual.

To me, a hated object is something that's personal to that fiend. Presenting the daemon with the sword that banished it for a thousand years and a day or a shard of the mirror it was imprisoned in for a millenia or something along those lines.

Of course there's no RAW way to argue any of this, but thematically I like that interpretation. Plus it stands to reason that hated objects aren't something that you can come by easy, at least extrapolating that part of a Paladin's capstone is to have a universal hated object for fiends in regard to smite banishes.

[Jeraa]

A living creature is neither an object nor a substance.

Quote:

You can improve the spell's chance of success by presenting at least one object or substance that the target hates, fears, or otherwise opposes. For each such object or substance, you gain a +1 bonus on your caster level check to overcome the target's spell resistance (if any), and the saving throw DC increases by 2.

[Versanus]

Tarik Blackhands wrote:

Fully depends on your interpretation of the mechanic. Me personally, basic things like holy symbols, silver/cold iron, and similarly opposed things would NOT count as a hated object. That's the basic rigour for your outsiders. Business as usual.

To me, a hated object is something that's personal to that fiend. Presenting the daemon with the sword that banished it for a thousand years and a day or a shard of the mirror it was imprisoned in for a millenia or something along those lines.

Of course there's no RAW way to argue any of this, but thematically I like that interpretation. Plus it stands to reason that hated objects aren't something that you can come by easy, at least extrapolating that part of a Paladin's capstone is to have a universal hated object for fiends in regard to smite banishes.

That aligns with my personal interpretation of the rule (and I can agree with the "holy symbol and silver" as "business as usual". But I don't know if my player's would buy that. I know I wouldn't if I was in their shoes. As a GM I can just play the "I'm the GM, what I say goes", but I like to avoid that as much as possible.

I do think you're right about the lack of a RAW way to argue the rule. I'll probably just have to put my foot down.

[Versanus]

Jeraa wrote:

A living creature is neither an object nor a substance.

I thought about that too, but it didn't seem like a very strong argument, but it seems to be the best I got, other than what Tarik suggested.