Shadow evocation and metamagic


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A player of mine has asked for clarification on some rules before he makes feat choices.
He intends to use the spell Shadow Evocation in conjunction with Eclipsed, Tenebrous, Umbral and Shadowgrasp to cast Continuous Flame on the rogues dagger. While using his wizard discovery Resilient Illusions to bump up the save DC on the entangle effect. I can find no rules reason why this shouldn't be allowed though I'm worried about passing out a DC 30+ permanent entangle effect.
What ,in your opinion, is a reasonable compromise for the effect my player is after? I've already ruled that he may prepare shadow evocation and shadow conjuration spells with metamagic that may not be legal or valid for the spell he decides to mimic, using a higher level spell slot but losing the effect of the invalid metamagic.

Resilient Illusions:
Anytime a creature tries to disbelieve one of your illusion effects, make a caster level check. Treat the illusion’s save DC as its normal DC or the result of the caster level check, whichever is higher.

Shadow Evocation:
You tap energy from the Plane of Shadow to cast a quasi-real, illusory version of a sorcerer or wizard evocation spell of 4th level or lower. Spells that deal damage have normal effects unless an affected creature succeeds on a Will save. Each disbelieving creature takes only one-fifth damage from the attack. If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur. If recognized as a shadow evocation, a damaging spell deals only one-fifth (20%) damage. Regardless of the result of the save to disbelieve, an affected creature is also allowed any save (or spell resistance) that the spell being simulated allows, but the save DC is set according to shadow evocation’s level (5th) rather than the spell’s normal level.

Non-damaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.

Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.

Continual Flame:
A flame, equivalent in brightness to a torch, springs forth from an object that you touch. The effect looks like a regular flame, but it creates no heat and doesn’t use oxygen. A continual flame can be covered and hidden but not smothered or quenched.

Light spells counter and dispel darkness spells of an equal or lower level.

Eclipsed Spell:
Only spells that create areas of light or darkness can be eclipsed spells. If the eclipsed spell creates an area that shines like a torch or raises the light level by one step, you can choose to have the spell lower the illumination level in the affected area by one step, functioning like darkness. If the eclipsed spell creates an area that shines like daylight or raises the light level by two steps, you can choose to have the spell lower the illumination level in the affected area by two steps and create an area of magical darkness, functioning like deeper darkness.

If the eclipsed spell lowers the illumination level in the affected area by one step, you can choose to have the spell cause the affected area to glow with normal light, functioning like light. If the eclipsed spell lowers the illumination level in the affected area by two steps, you can choose to have the spell cause the affected area to shed bright light, functioning like daylight.

An eclipsed spell does not use up a higher-level spell slot than the spell’s actual level.

Umbral Spell:
An umbral spell gains the darkness descriptor. As long as the spell is in effect, the creature or object affected radiates darkness in a 10-foot radius, reducing illumination similar to the effects of the darkness spell. Nonmagical sources of light, such as torches or lanterns, do not increase the light level in this area. Magical light sources only increase the light level in an area affected by an umbral spell if they are of a higher level than the umbral spell’s unmodified spell level. This effect does not stack with itself or with any other effect that creates darkness.

Level Increase: +2 (an umbral spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell’s actual level.)

You cannot use this feat on a spell with an instantaneous duration or a spell that does not target a creature or object.

Shadow Grasp:
When you cast a spell with the darkness descriptor that affects an area, creatures in the area are entangled. If the spell allows a saving throw, a successful save negates the entangle effect. If the spell does not normally allow a save, a creature can make a Reflex save (DC = the spell’s DC if it had a saving throw) to negate the effect. If the spell allows spell resistance, failing to overcome a creature’s spell resistance means it is not entangled. An entangled creature remains so as long as it is in the area of the spell and for 1 round after it leaves. A creature that leaves and reenters the area must make a new saving throw to avoid becoming entangled. Creatures that succeed at a save to resist being entangled do not have to make additional saves if they stay within the darkened area. You are never impeded by the effects of your spells modified by this feat.

Level Increase: +1 (a shadow grasp spell uses up a slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.)


Something like this (less specific) came up before and the majority conclusion was that Shadow Conjuration etc. couldn't mimic spells enhanced by metamagic even if you had the relevant feats. If the feats could be applied directly to shadow evocation they'd apply but in many cases like the eclipsed spell you mention, it wouldn't initially work.


I'll look over the threads I found again. Your advice as I understand it is to reverse the houserule on metamagic, leaving only tenebrous spell as a valid choice? Let me know if I misunderstood.

I can see the appeal and ease of having ruled that way, but now that the proverbial cat has spilled the proverbial beans out of the bag and there's proverbial milk everywhere and something about fans covered in filth, how would you compromise?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Eh. It's still a shadow evocation. I'd assume that any rider metamagic effects would be subject to the same "Will save or it only has a 20% likelihood of working" language as the spell itself. Besides, this sounds like a pretty high level game given the DC 30 spell save mentioned above. Is it really that much of a problem?

Beyond that, it's perfectly acceptable to admit mea culpa, stuff the cat and its beans back into the bag, and let the player retcon whatever expenditures they made toward the now-unworkable idea.


I did some perusing around, and honestly I can't find anything that would not allow him to do this but only as long as all those Metamagic feats were pumped into the Shadow Evocation spell that duplicates the Continual Flame. It would have to be a level 8 spell slot though, but sounds like 30+ DC you're probably already lvl 15+. That seems like a lot of feat/discovery slots just to make a perma-entangle though.

The mobs are still allowed SR, Will Save, and then a Reflex Save {and I don't think the 1/5th effectiveness or 20% likely to occur would apply, but rather the "Non-damaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect" part of the Shadow Evocation spell would apply). Anyone who makes the Will save wouldn’t be subject to the darkness effect from the Eclipsed Continual Flame either. And anything intelligent will either Dispel to suppress for 1d4 rounds, Forcecage the rogue, or Mage's Disjunction to obliterate it entirely. Also, you can't take that weapon into a tavern anymore :P

Honestly, I don't see why he couldn't do this because it looks cleverly kosher per the rules. But perma- 20ft radius entangle with nigh-impossible saves because of Resilient Illusions..? Making a GM call to say "No" wouldn't be out of line either though. I dunno, tough call. /shrug


Oh this is a good one. Alright first let's check the validity of the rules.

- Shadow Evocation, a 5th level sorcerer/wizard spell with the illusion (shadow) description. It can be used to simulate sorc/wiz evocation spells of 4th level or lower.

- Shadow evocation is used to cast continual flame, which is indeed a sorc/wiz spell of appropriate level and does have the evocation (light) descriptor.

- Eclipsed Spell is used to flip the light effects of the shadow evocation continual flame spell, making it instead lower the light level.

- Umbral Spell is used to make the shadow evocation continual flame spell gain the darkness descriptor, and adds some additional darkness to it. This also increased the spell slot by 2, making the spell level 7 now.

- Tenebrous Spell increased the caster level and save DCs and difficulty to dispel the eclipsed umbral shadow evocation continual flame spell. Now very technically speaking the spell has both the darkness and light descriptors at this point, since nothing has technically stopped the spell from having the light descriptor despite it only giving off darkness now. But it's a very technical point, so let's move on.

- Shadow Grasp is used to make anybody within the darkness range of the eclipsed umbral tenebrous shadow evocation continual flame spell also be entangled. It also increases the spell level by 1, making it level 8.

- Resilient Illusions is used to potentially increase the DC to disbelieve the illusion of the eclipsed umbral tenebrous shadow grasp shadow evocation continual flame spell.

So according to the tenebrous spell, since the spell still technically has the light descriptor, some of this would not work. However IMHO this seems an asinine point, and reasonable to assume that the eclipse metamagic would get rid of the light descriptor, or otherwise make a very reasonable houserule that the spell no longer has the light descriptor, so let's move on from that.

More importantly, this is going off the assumption that the metamagic feats are working on the shadow evocation spell, and not the continual flame spell. Since you're actually trying to modify the continual flame spell, it may seem more appropriate that the metamagic feats apply to that, meaning the continual flame spells total level after metamagic feats would have to be 4 or less in order for shadow evocation to be cast. Which means you would have to drop either umbral or shadow grasp.

And finally let's evaluate the actual impact on the game. Your character is investing an arcane discovery, at least 4 feats, a high level spell slot (probably 8th level), in order to get an entangle effect in a small area. Entangle is not that bad of a debuff, giving a small penalty to hit and AC (-2) and making movement difficult. Not nothing, but not very impactful considering the level required to pull this off. Also it allows spell resistance and saves still. Also, and possibly the most important part, this also effects his allies, even the rogue holding it.

So no, I don't think this is broken at all. The rules are a bit convoluted, technically not working but reasonable to allow it to function. And it's a lot of investment for a very cool trick that's not very good. IMHO anyways.


It wouldn't affect the rogue or his allies though. All the wizard has to do is say, "This is an illusion, don't believe it," and his allies will know that it isn't real.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reason to disallow: The shadow evoked continual flame is targeting the dagger. That's an object. (In fact, continual flame must target an object.) Here's the final two lines of shadow evocation:

Quote:

Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.

Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.

The dagger automatically succeeds on the save, and therefore the spell has no effect.


Well done Belafon. That’s so simple it’s elegant.


Belafon wrote:

Reason to disallow: The shadow evoked continual flame is targeting the dagger. That's an object. (In fact, continual flame must target an object.) Here's the final two lines of shadow evocation:

Quote:

Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.

Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.

The dagger automatically succeeds on the save, and therefore the spell has no effect.

This would be true, unless it's a non-magical dagger. An unattended, mundane item doesn't even get saving throws, and so it has no save to succeed against.

Of course, I'm taking that from this portion of the rules https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/damaging-objects/ and some might read it differently. I see it as "the specific from the spell causes savings throws to auto-succeed, but regular items don't have a throw to succeed with anyway, and therefore it's an auto fail (not because the item always fails saves, but because it can't save in the first place)." Someone else might read it as "items always fail their saves generally, but this specifically says that they succeed against Shadow Evocation". So still a toss-up. And a bit unnecessary, since I can't imagine that the Rogue would rather have a regular iron dagger with an entangle over an enhanced one. But I suppose they could then ust put the same spell on a button or something and have the same effect, so it seemed worth mentioning.


Thanks for all the advice everyone. My player and I have talked and looked over the thread and come to the agreement that it will work in our game. I'd forgotten to look closely at Shadow evocation and didn't realize that SR would apply every time which is enough of a defense against the effect he wants that I'm okay with letting it happen.


Shadow Evocation wrote:
Spells that deal damage have normal effects

Since spell damage can depend on the descriptors, it seems clear the intent is to preserve the origanal's descriptors and adding the SE descriptors.

Continual Flame wrote:
School evocation [light];

Therefore SE(CF) has the light descriptor.

Tenebrous spell wrote:
cannot use this feat on spells with the light descriptor.

Concept broke for this spell combo.

Moving on...
Had it worked, it would be a 8th level slot. That means casting stat of 18, or mod +4 as a minimum. DC would be 10+SL+Mod=22 minimum. CL is 15 minimum. If cast in a dim/dark area, Tenebrous Spell bumps the DC by +1. Dispelling in dim/dark has a -2 penalty. Resilient Illusions makes disbelief the better of a CL check or the DC. Avg min CL check is 25 with a -2 penalty vs. 22, so a good chance of being about 25 w/-2. Stat boosters can bump the DC but not the CL check. There are some CL boosters about, but let's say none were used. [Given the coven ability, CL boost can go real high.] You now have an Eclipsed CF with say a DC 25 w/-2 that entangles.

A good/bad save is +9/+5 plus stat mod. Avg save is 18/15 plus mod vs. 25/-2, off by 9/12 giving a 5%-10% effective save rate for the combo. [With +5% for each point of stat mod to the save.] This is for HD = APL.

If they got entangled, they have interacted with it, so get a chance to disbelieve. If the illusion is disbelieved, then no entangle. The party, knowing this is an illusion directly, can auto disbelieve, and thus not be entangled.

This is a great concept, but don't have the item out in an inhabited area, cause everyone else will be affected.

Powerful, but entangled only imposes some minor penalties at that point in the game.

Me, I would rather go SE(CF) w/Umbral and Shadow Grasp. Lower level, fewer feats, and still has the desired effect, with a lesser DC. Perhaps better would be Shadow Conjuration(Obscuring Mist) that the party knows you use. Concealment prevents ranged attacking, sneak attacking, and gives a miss chance. Fewer hits is better than weaker hits, since the reduced damage is far less than a missed hit.

/cevah

Liberty's Edge

Belafon wrote:

Reason to disallow: The shadow evoked continual flame is targeting the dagger. That's an object. (In fact, continual flame must target an object.) Here's the final two lines of shadow evocation:

Quote:

Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.

Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.

The dagger automatically succeeds on the save, and therefore the spell has no effect.

Except shadow evocation is not an illusion. It is shadows with form. Even if the object makes its will save, which it does always, it can still be affected 20% of the time.

So 20% chance each casting that it would work.


Shadow Evocation wrote:

You tap energy from the Plane of Shadow to cast a quasi-real, illusory version of a sorcerer or wizard evocation spell of 4th level or lower. Spells that deal damage have normal effects unless an affected creature succeeds on a Will save. Each disbelieving creature takes only one-fifth damage from the attack. [1] If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur. If recognized as a shadow evocation, a damaging spell deals only one-fifth (20%) damage. Regardless of the result of the save to disbelieve, an affected creature is also allowed any save (or spell resistance) that the spell being simulated allows, but the save DC is set according to shadow evocation's level (5th) rather than the spell's normal level.

[2] Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.

Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell.

[1] and [2] seem to contradict each other.

My interpretation is that for spells that do damage and a rider effect, the rider is reduced (lesser effect or only 20% chance), but if they're entirely non-damaging, disbelief erases them completely.

Continuous Flame is entirely non-damaging.
And, well, objects always disbelieve.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Shadow evocation and metamagic All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.