If it's the former (momentary mug-width column of water), then would pouring the mug onto the floor to make a wider puddle first give you lots more water than leaving it in the mug?
Yes.
If the water is muddy, is the resulting larger amount of water also muddy? It seems odd that this would dilute any contaminants without saying so, but if it doesn't, then you're creating more than just water. What if it's tea? Thick stew? What if it is water that contains a dose of poison? What if it has a suspension of particles of something valuable (stir in some gold dust, maybe)?
I think it would have to say anything other than water is manipulated. I'd say it replicates the general water type: Ie salt water stays salt water, hard water stays that way. Anything that not thought of as water [mud, tea, food, ect] wouldn't be manupulated.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Useless in that context perhaps. I still like the idea of it being situationally powerful, such as when used in the aforementioned sinking of ships.Rising out of the mug then falling back in would make it utterly useless, so probably not the intent. Simply "spilling" the water, also useless and therefore unlikely. Last scenario much more likely imo.So if I sit a mug of water on the floor of a small dungeon room (say 20x20 feet with 10 foot high ceiling) and cast this spell upon its contents, what happens?
Do I spill the water? Does it rise out of the mug, then fall back into the mug? Is the room now flooded to the ceiling?
Given graystone's interpretation, it can't even do that. It literally does nothing. If the water in the mug instantly raises 10 Feet and then returns back into the mug, without cascading down throughout the room, then the exact same thing would happen in the middle of the ocean. A 50 Foot x 50 Foot square would instantly raise and then go back down, or go down and then come back up, effectively accomplishing nothing at all. It wouldn't cause a wave, it wouldn't sink a ship, it would do nothing.
It wouldn't even put out a fire, as, being instantaneous, the fire wouldn't lose oxygen long enough to go out, that's assuming that whatever was on fire didn't just float on top anyway.
Given graystone's interpretation, it can't even do that. It literally does nothing. If the water in the mug instantly raises 10 Feet and then returns back into the mug, without cascading down throughout the room, then the exact same thing would happen in the middle of the ocean. A 50 Foot x 50 Foot square would instantly raise and then go back down, or go down and then come back up, effectively accomplishing nothing at all. It wouldn't cause a wave, it wouldn't sink a ship, it would do nothing.
Note this is totally and completely NOT what I've stated. This should be clear to anyone that's read through the posts in this thread.
Stating an opinion with a high degree of certainty does not actually make it a statement of absolute truth.
I haven't seen any other that fits the rules in place and the meaning of the words used. People can disagree but if they claim it's right it'd have to meet those criteria. So far I haven't seen another position that does so.
Given graystone's interpretation, it can't even do that. It literally does nothing. If the water in the mug instantly raises 10 Feet and then returns back into the mug, without cascading down throughout the room, then the exact same thing would happen in the middle of the ocean. A 50 Foot x 50 Foot square would instantly raise and then go back down, or go down and then come back up, effectively accomplishing nothing at all. It wouldn't cause a wave, it wouldn't sink a ship, it would do nothing.Note this is totally and completely NOT what I've stated. This should be clear to anyone that's read through the posts in this thread.
It's literally your exact response to Ravingdork's question.
You get a column of water that comes out of your mug 10' to the ceiling which then falls... That's it. Now it you had enough waterskins to cover the whole floor in water you could fill the whole room with water.So if I sit a mug of water on the floor of a small dungeon room (say 20x20 feet with 10 foot high ceiling) and cast this spell upon its contents, what happens?
Do I spill the water? Does it rise out of the mug, then fall back into the mug? Is the room now flooded to the ceiling?
Given graystone's interpretation, it can't even do that. It literally does nothing. If the water in the mug instantly raises 10 Feet and then returns back into the mug, without cascading down throughout the room, then the exact same thing would happen in the middle of the ocean. A 50 Foot x 50 Foot square would instantly raise and then go back down, or go down and then come back up, effectively accomplishing nothing at all. It wouldn't cause a wave, it wouldn't sink a ship, it would do nothing.Note this is totally and completely NOT what I've stated. This should be clear to anyone that's read through the posts in this thread.It's literally your exact response to Ravingdork's question.
You get a column of water that comes out of your mug 10' to the ceiling which then falls... That's it. Now it you had enough waterskins to cover the whole floor in water you could fill the whole room with water.So if I sit a mug of water on the floor of a small dungeon room (say 20x20 feet with 10 foot high ceiling) and cast this spell upon its contents, what happens?
Do I spill the water? Does it rise out of the mug, then fall back into the mug? Is the room now flooded to the ceiling?
Yep, the column of water falls: IE nature/gravity takes it's course. Water was created and doesn't vanish. "If the water in the mug instantly raises 10 Feet and then returns back into the mug, without cascading down throughout the room" is COMPLETELY incorrect.
Me: "I agree it'd be on the surface but that doesn't take into account the water that wasn't affected: IE you put the edge of the affect next to the boat and you have a 50' long, 10' tall tsunami coming at the boat [assuming open water]."
Me: "If nothing else it explicitly slows water creatures. That is of course if you ignore the value of the possibility of creating [or removing] 193,750 gallons of water."
I've been very clear it can create and destroy water and that water acts naturally once created or destroyed; IE falls down with gravity or raises up with water tension.
The big problem with this spell is that it doesn't specify how much water is created. Raising the level of water in an area is not a set or defined term. It is fairly easy to create a logical model for how that works for water in containers like basins or pools, etc. But it has no real world comparison for us to be basing our decision on, when it comes to magically and instantaneously raising "the level of water" in an area where the water would not be bound horizontally.
I think some people might be arguing that raising the water level is just moving existing water up or down 10ft and that would be an extremely weird reading to do anything with mechanically, but it is as valid of a reading of the spell as any other at this point. The spell makes no comment at all about making or removing water, or how to arbitrate that.
It is logical for people for assuming that "control water" would mean literally moving and manipulating water, especially if your primary argument is this spell is not capable of conjuring water.
|
I copied earlier the trait for water which clearly states that spells with this trait are manipulate or conjuration.
Still it seems nearly everyone discussing the spell acknowledges it is manipulate but then adds it had to be conjuration as well because it fills a greater volume.
Then interesting discussions follow based on it creating water.
It is a logical fallacy that it has to be conjugation as well. Shrink and Enlarge are not conjurations - they still fill different space as before.
So instead of insisting it creates water, just envision it as an enlargement (or shrinking) of water in a single dimension.
Why should a fish be slowed if you add more water to its habitat. Compress or expand the water in which he swims in the other hand ....
I copied earlier the trait for water which clearly states that spells with this trait are manipulate or conjuration.
Still it seems nearly everyone discussing the spell acknowledges it is manipulate but then adds it had to be conjuration as well because it fills a greater volume.
Then interesting discussions follow based on it creating water.
It is a logical fallacy that it has to be conjugation as well. Shrink and Enlarge are not conjurations - they still fill different space as before.
So instead of insisting it creates water, just envision it as an enlargement (or shrinking) of water in a single dimension.
Why should a fish be slowed if you add more water to its habitat. Compress or expand the water in which he swims in the other hand ....
Fish have the aquatic trait, not the water trait (at least the shark I looked at did), so they would not be slowed in the area where "the water" was raised or lowered.
Enlarge and shrink are transmutation, which is the school for manipulating existing matter, although the descriptions of the schools are probably much too brief to be that helpful for trying to think too deeply about this. The description for transmutation is:
"Transmutation spells make alterations to or transform the physical form of a creature or object. The morph and polymorph traits appear primarily in transmutation spells."
If "the water" is an object, and the spell requires an object that it modifies, it should have been transmutation.
Evocation on the other hand, is described as:
"Evocations capture magical energy and then shape it to harm your foes or protect your allies. Evocation spells often have a trait that comes from the type of damage they deal, such as acid, cold, fire, force, or sonic."
That description is problematic because it seems to imply that evocation spells are purely combat/attacking/defending spells, but that has never been true.
Now really strangely, Control Water in PF1 was transmutation, but was switched to evocation in PF2, which is another reason it really feels like there was a conscious decision to exclude calling out a specific target. As an evocation spell, it makes sense that control water is essential a spell that is capable of instantly destroying or creating a vastly larger quantity of water than the create water spell.
You get a column of water that comes out of your mug 10' to the ceiling which then falls...
Presumably this splashes all over the floor, creating an enormous puddle. You could then cast the same spell again; since you now have a much larger surface area to raise, it instantly fills the room with many thousands of gallons of water.
You get a column of water that comes out of your mug 10' to the ceiling which then falls...Presumably this splashes all over the floor
Sure, I agree with that.
creating an enormous puddle.
It creates as large of a puddle as the DM wants it to. Various factors could limit it's size or the ability of the water to pool or the Dm might just not want to see a room full of water later.
since you now have a much larger surface area to raise, it instantly fills the room with many thousands of gallons of water.
Sounds right
The big problem with this spell is that it doesn't specify how much water is created.
how can it when it doesn't know how much water is there to manipulate? It's not creating out of thin air but affecting current water.
Raising the level of water in an area is not a set or defined term.
The english language disagrees.
But it has no real world comparison for us to be basing our decision on, when it comes to magically and instantaneously raising "the level of water" in an area where the water would not be bound horizontally.
I disagree. Why does horizontal boundaries matter in the least with an instantaneous affect? How long do you think instantaneous takes? What horizontal movement can happen in an instant?
I think some people might be arguing that raising the water level is just moving existing water up or down 10ft
That's what the words in the spell mean... And it doesn't JUST do that. It also slows water creatures.
The spell makes no comment at all about making or removing water, or how to arbitrate that.
It seems an even weirder reading that the spell in affect does nothing other than slow. What would a spell that raises/lower existing water instantly do? It gets things wet for an instant and then everything goes back to normal... Which version seems to do less?
It is logical for people for assuming that "control water" would mean literally moving and manipulating water, especially if your primary argument is this spell is not capable of conjuring water.
I kind of assumed the spell was meant to have a meaningful affect. Outside of navel combat, I can't see a viable use for a spell like this that merely moves existing water for an instant.
example: you have a 20'x20'x10' pool. You use the spell. Your version, you get a splash then everything returns to normal. My version you get 20'x20'x10' more water or you empty the pool...
The more I think about this spell the more sense it makes that it was evocation and not transmutation or conjuration. The name of the spell is an unfortunate hold over from past editions, but all this spell really does is create or destroy water in a specific area. If there was just more clarity on how much water it created and what are the expected conditions for its casting, I think it would be fine.
I.E. is it supposed to target a solitary body of water? I wouldn't have thought so, but "the" is a very specific article that wouldn't even be necessary in the first sentence of the description if the purpose of the spell was to target all water in the area, or to create water on its own.
In response to Greystone:
What horizontal movement can happen in an instant?
In my personal interpretation of the spell (which is not the one I was explaining above):
Exactly as much as vertical? The spell instantly creates the water necessary to raise the water level within the spells area. Without vertical boundaries there is no reason not to assume that it wouldn't fill the area.
Without vertical boundaries there is no reason not to assume that it wouldn't fill the area.
But that's the thing, it affects water in the area and lifts water up 10'. If horizontal movement is allowed there is no boundaries to that movement: nothing in the spell suggests it acts as a boundary to water to that kind of movement. As such, it you want to a mountain top you could flood the world as it attempts to raise the water level to 10' above the mountain. Or use it on on top of a 30'x30', 100' high tower: if the water floods outward and keeps flowing until raises 10' above where you place the water, then you flood everything up to 110' above the ground... Yeah, that is clearly not what it's meant to do.
What's worse, it works at a range of 500' so you could cast it on a bucket of water carries by a bird to fill everything with water 510' from the ground... It's a 6th level spell not a flood the world spell.
And to "there is no reason not to assume that it wouldn't fill the area", I ask WHAT area? It only has 2 dimensions: water in that area raises up 10' from the level it's at. It's NOT a 50'x50'x10' area so there isn't a horizontal barrier for the water [it's 0' tall at the edges].
I don't believe it would flood the world, just a 50x50x10 foot part of it. If there's nothing to contain it, it would simply splash outwards.
If you were to cast it from atop a mountain, then I suppose it could start a mud slide I guess.
The spell has a bound area. It says nothing at all about what happens within that area when you raise "the water" by 10ft.
I don't believe it would flood the world, just a 50x50x10 foot part of it. If there's nothing to contain it, it would simply splash outwards.
No, it manipulates the water in that area and attempts to raise it's level 10': if horizontal movement is allowed, why would it be bound by that? If it can be bound by a vertical wall at the edge of the area, what is the argument that it can't be raised from the water source without horizontal movement? Both create a vertical wall of water. Unicore's way just always creates a huge block of water no matter how small the source is while mine raise current water up 10'. If it was meant to be as Unicore says, it's a complete failure of wording: you could just say you 'create or destroy 50'x50'10' of water': full stop and it would say everything it needed to.
If you were to cast it from atop a mountain, then I suppose it could start a mud slide I guess.
It manipulates the water to rise: nothing states said water is bound to the area after creation and it's an instantaneous spell. If it can fall, it can leave the area.
The spell has a bound area. It says nothing at all about what happens within that area when you raise "the water" by 10ft.
The source water you manipulate is bound to the area: the ONLY limit on the water created is the 10' raise, so if horizontal movement happens in the instant of the spell creation it has to create more water to do so. It's like trying to fill a 5' tall barrel to a 10' height: to do so, you have to raise the water outside the barrel to 10' as the water just rushes out the sides of the barrel.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect the developers had something in mind other than graystone's very narrow interpretation.
Like what? The spell says you can use it to raise or lower the level of water by 10 feet and graystone's interpretation is... raising or lowering the level of water by 10 feet. What additional, hidden functionality do you think exists there?
I feel like even calling it an 'interpretation' is a little bit misleading at this point, even. Because it's exactly what the spell says it does.
I suspect the developers had something in mind other than graystone's very narrow interpretation.
If they intended it to be Create Water, Superior what's only intent was to create/destroy a huge block of water, why not say so? IMO, the other way is stretching the meaning of "interpretation" by adding to the material to make it work.
"Create Water
As you cup your hands, water begins to flow forth from them. You create 2 gallons of water. If no one drinks it, it evaporates after 1 day."
Create Water, Superior [Unicore's version of Control Water]
You create or destroy 50'x50'10' of water. Water creatures in the area are subjected to the effects of slow.
Control Water
"By imposing your will upon the water, you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10 feet. Water creatures in the area are subjected to the effects of slow."
See the difference between the two? Raising the level of water ISN'T needed if it creates a monolithic block each and every time no matter that the local is. Unicone's method floods the area each and every time it's used in an area without at least a 50'x50'x10' pool available to hold it making much less usable than one that is limited to smaller areas of existing water. So, IMO, it seems to me to fit intent in wording AND usability /versatility for it to not be the block remake as opposed to it actually just raising the water there.
The spell says you can use it to raise or lower the level of water by 10 feet and graystone's interpretation is... raising or lowering the level of water by 10 feet. What additional, hidden functionality do you think exists there?
Possible other interpretations of raising water level:
(1) It only raises it within an enclosed space that can hold water. You could use it to fill a bucket (or swimming pool), but the water couldn't rise beyond the rim of the bucket.(2) It creates magic water that is resistant by normal physics - you can cast it on a lake, and now there is a big cube of water sticking up vertically with flat vertical edges. Or, if you lower the water level, there is a big cubic hole in the lake. Since the spell has no duration, this is effectively permanent. This would have big implications for any boats in the area.
Do either of these work better for gameplay?
The spell says you can use it to raise or lower the level of water by 10 feet and graystone's interpretation is... raising or lowering the level of water by 10 feet. What additional, hidden functionality do you think exists there?Possible other interpretations of raising water level:
(1) It only raises it within an enclosed space that can hold water. You could use it to fill a bucket (or swimming pool), but the water couldn't rise beyond the rim of the bucket.
(2) It creates magic water that is resistant by normal physics - you can cast it on a lake, and now there is a big cube of water sticking up vertically with flat vertical edges. Or, if you lower the water level, there is a big cubic hole in the lake. Since the spell has no duration, this is effectively permanent. This would have big implications for any boats in the area.Do either of these work better for gameplay?
#1 can't be a possible interpretation as it add something to the wording: IE the limiting factor of a container. You could argue intent and that the spell isn't worded right, but i don't see how one could argue it from a 'words on the page' RAW view. Now it could be a houserule if you wish.
As for "work better for gameplay": #1 makes the spell fairly useless. Does it mean you have to lure water creatures into a container to be slowed?
Greystone,
I think the issue I am having accepting your interpretation as the RAW is that "you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10 feet" is not a clear and obvious statement for the outcome of this spell.
You have managed to find an interpretation that feels most correct for yourself, but just the use of a verb like "raise" for a spell with an instantaneous duration is really problematic for human beings on planet earth to comprehend because raise implies movement, which requires time in our universe.
Now Golarion is obviously not in our universe, and magic, and teleportation, are things that make earth rules for what "raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area" could mean, not especially clear and explicit.
It is entirely possible that this spell was left intentionally vague, to be something that encourages imaginative play, but, from your past posts, I think you'd agree that that is not a great strategy for as mechanically a driven game as PF2, because it mostly results in arguments between players and GMs, unless communication between players and GMs is already strong.
Clearly the developers agree that more specificity with spells was something important to them as well, because they put much clearer mechanical boundaries on a whole host of other spells, like illusions. Which is why it feels like this is probably a spell that went through the entire play test without any players picking it, and it mostly just flew under the radar.
Generally I am usually fine with a little more openness with spells than excessively wordy arbitration, but this spell in particular has conflicting language and use of traits that makes it too difficult to discern intention. My hang ups are particularly emphasized by the school of magic it belongs to, because that is usually where I turn to for trying to get a sense of what a spell is supposed to be capable of doing, but the description for evocation in PF2 is problematic for a whole host of spells.
I think the issue I am having accepting your interpretation as the RAW is that "you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10 feet" is not a clear and obvious statement for the outcome of this spell.
It's quite clear IMO. The water there raises/lowers 10': full stop.
You have managed to find an interpretation that feels most correct for yourself, but just the use of a verb like "raise" for a spell with an instantaneous duration is really problematic for human beings on planet earth to comprehend because raise implies movement, which requires time in our universe.
... We're talking a world of magic where a ball of fire shows up when you snap your fingers and you expect me to take you seriously when raising water blows your mind? :P
raise*
1.lift or move to a higher position or level.
2.increase the amount, level, or strength of.
instantaneous*
occurring or done in an instant or instantly.
existing or measured at a particular instant.
*oxford dictionary
I'm not seeing what is even slightly confusing.
from your past posts, I think you'd agree that that is not a great strategy for as mechanically a driven game as PF2, because it mostly results in arguments between players and GMs, unless communication between players and GMs is already strong.
The spell clearly can create or destroy up to 50'x50'x10' as a clear mechanic: that's more than fine with me for results. if the DM wants to give me more than that great. It can clear out a flooded room or make thousand of water for a rice paddy or fields in a drought. If the game wants to expand on thing, that's great but I don't think it'd needed.
The main issue I have with the way I see with your version is that it's incredibly, super easy to put it that way by saying it JUST creates or destroys that block of water irregardless of existing conditions in the area but instead they went with raising/lowering which has a different meaning that simple creation: manipulation of existing water vs pure creation/destruction.
Creating 193,750 gallons of water sure sounds like conjuring water.That is of course if you ignore the value of the possibility of creating [or removing] 193,750 gallons of water.
. . .
changing the water level sure sounds like manipulating water.
Still not enough water to deal with that wicked burn!
So one fundamental issue with the spell is that it doesn't specify in the description or in the area that you can possibly do anything less than then maximum with this spell, as the spell descritpion does not say "you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by up to 10 feet."
And then in the area description of the spell it says: "50 feet long by 50 feet wide" with no mitigating words like up to.
This makes it difficult to see how you are really doing much controlling at all. All the spell does is raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10ft.
But the issue really is the verb raise.
It could be definition 1: lift or move to a higher position or level
That definition would mean that the spell instantly moves the existing water up or down 10ft. Because there is no duration, and no suggestion that it holds the water at that level, the water would just fall back down. That definition is very strange, with incredibly limited applications, but it is not an incorrect reading of what the spell might be limited to. However, I can't imagine someone thought this is what we should change an existing spell to be, although it would fit with all of the telekinetic evocation spells. However, how do you lower the level of water that is already in a solid basin if the spell is not just moving the water, but destroying it?
So I think Greystone and I both agree that the 2nd definition is the correct one,
2.increase the amount, level, or strength of.
but we have different interpretations of how it gets applied within the area, and what is necessary to get the spell started.
Notice nothing about this 2nd definition is dependent upon purely vertical movement.
In the real world, if a river raised by 10ft, the water does not just shoot out vertically, it surpasses its container and then moves out into every direction it possibly can.
Greystone, you are suggesting that this would potentially flood the world, but the spell does have a very set area, with no actual target. The most water it could possibly create, in any of our definitions is what would fill a 50x50x10ft area, which as has been pointed out, is a lot of water, and it is left entirely up to the GM to figure out what to do with that, but that is still the case if the water is, for some reason, limited only to vertical movement.
But even by your definition, I don't know why I couldn't cast this spell on a cloud, and that would be the same problem. It would be a huge problem if you can point 500ft into the air and create 50x50x10ft of water, that would destroy castles.
It seems to me that there is a clear implication, although it is not stated, that we are to assume that raising or lowering the level of water in an area is defined by a surface level that we can consider to be a 0, and that this spell raises or lowers the water in this area from this surface level by +/- 10ft. But "the water" is not a good assumed target for this spell, mostly because water is a substance that should be measured by volume and especially not surface area, and the spell doesn't even make it clear that it is targeting the surface area of existing water in the first place.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A 50 Foot x 50 Foot square would instantly raise and then go back down, or go down and then come back up, effectively accomplishing nothing at all.
Also, 50 foot x 50 foot is an area, not a volume. No depth is provided, but a height is. So we’re instantly moving two dimensional water through three dimensional space.
|
|
So if it simply "raises/lowers" the water level does that mean that the affected water is compressed/expanded or does the water just magically end up being created/destroyed?
If you raise it and there aren't any "walls" to keep it from flowing outward wouldn't is simply just... flow downward and level with the rest of the area it is contained in?
If it's lowered does this create some kind of magical boundary that prevents water OUTSIDE of the area from just instantly flowing inward to cover the lowered zone and vice versa, is there a magical wall that prevents the water from flowing outward?
Depending on what it actually DOES would dramatically change how a situation would work. Ex: Use it to lower the water in a line across a fast-moving river that's 10 ft deep. Would the water that's upsteam simply end up being dammed off thereby creating an instant flood in the surrounding region and spill over the banks? Does the river just continue to flow uninterrupted by teleporting across the area? Does the river instantly just refill that area negating the spell altogether?
What about a bucket of water? Does it create a liquid pillar of water or does the volume of water simply levitate out of the bucket up to 10 ft in the air and float there? Does it instantly fall?
I get that this kind of stuff is supposed to be handled by the GM since it's so ambiguous but depending on the interpretation that makes the spell DRAMATICALLY more or less powerful depending on the interpretation, imagine spilling the contents of a waterskin in a 10 ft tall locked room and then casting this. Depending on the intepretation you'll either have something that's mildly inconvenient to something that is outright deadly and unavoidable for any creature regardless of their actual level if they are the type of creature that needs to breathe.
Creating 193,750 gallons of water sure sounds like conjuring water.
It would be is it wasn't relent on raising it's level: it can't modify a level that doesn't exist.
Actually, after reading p 304 again of the CRB, I think the effect of raising/lowering the water is clearly permanent.
Looking at 304, you are clearly wrong. "Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration entry" pg# 304. With no duration listed, duration defaults to instant.
"For instance, a spell that creates a loud sound and has no duration might deafen someone for a time, even permanently." Creating a permanent affect doesn't result in a permanent duration. In the case of the spell, the water is instantly manipulated and that results in a permanent affect.
The most ironic part is that no matter what the answer is, very few people are likely to ever even take this spell, given that they could get Acid Storm, Black Tentacles, Cloak of Colors, Cloudkill, Cone of Cold, Elemental Form, Summon Dragon, Wall of Ice, or Wall of Stone instead, all of which are far more useful in a far wider variety of situations.
Sure, if you're having a naval adventure, Control Water can be great, but 99% of the time, it's meaningless.
as the spell descritpion does not say "you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by up to 10 feet."
If raises every body of water in the area up or down 10': the 10' is set so, no you couldn't raise it 3' or drop it 7'.
And then in the area description of the spell it says: "50 feet long by 50 feet wide" with no mitigating words like up to.
There is nothing saying every body of water must be all raised or lowered: it could be argued that you could raise the level of a bucket but lower the river next to it.
This makes it difficult to see how you are really doing much controlling at all. All the spell does is raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10ft.
I think it's a failure of imagination: I can think of a lot of uses.
Notice nothing about this 2nd definition is dependent upon purely vertical movement.
ONLY if you ignore the word level as it relates to water. You continue to ignore that water level is a thing: words have meaning. Do you have another meaning for the level of water that does not relate to the height/depth of water? Any reference that talks about water level [or level of water] as a horizontal movement? I haven't seen one.
For instance, look at flood level: It "is the level at which a body of water's surface has risen to a sufficient level to cause sufficient inundation of areas that are not normally covered by water, causing an inconvenience or a threat to life and property." Note the level is a measurement of the surface of the water. Horizontal movement isn't a factor in the least: a current of 5 MPH jumping to 10 MPH doesn't impact water level.
That sure sounds like conjuring water under a specified condition.Creating 193,750 gallons of water sure sounds like conjuring water.It would be is it wasn't relent on raising it's level: it can't modify a level that doesn't exist.
IMO, it sounds more like a transmutation.
"Conjuration spells transport creatures via teleportation, create an object, or bring a creature or object from somewhere else (typically from another plane) to follow your commands."
"Transmutation spells make alterations to or transform the physical form of a creature or object. The morph and polymorph traits appear primarily in transmutation spells."
Sounds more like a "make alterations to or transform the physical form of a creature or object" vs "create an object" out of no where.
|
|
"Conjuration spells . . . create an object[.]"
And, as I said, “Creating 193,750 gallons of water sure sounds like conjuring water.”
Sounds more like a "make alterations to or transform the physical form of a creature or object" vs "create an object" out of no where.
That’s possible, but if the physical form of the existing water is being changed with no duration then there would be no additional water after the instant the spell happened and ended.
Note that the spell doesn’t specify that the volume or depth of the water is increased, so it’s possible the water just jumps up 10 feet and then immediately drops back down.
We keep talking about a mug of water. If I lift a mug of water I’ve increased the water’s level, but I haven’t increased its volume, nor have I increased its depth, as measured from its surface.
The most ironic part is that no matter what the answer is, very few people are likely to ever even take this spell, given that they could get Acid Storm, Black Tentacles, Cloak of Colors, Cloudkill, Cone of Cold, Elemental Form, Summon Dragon, Wall of Ice, or Wall of Stone instead, all of which are far more useful in a far wider variety of situations.
Sure, if you're having a naval adventure, Control Water can be great, but 99% of the time, it's meaningless.
It's really going to depend on the game: games with either lots of water or a great lack of it can could find a use out of it. For instance a desert game or a came in a place like Venice could see some use. It's never going to be anyone's go to attack spell but a 50'x50' area up to 500' away is a darn good distraction. I think everyone at the dock is going to look and see what made a HUGE splash out in the bay. ;)
Do you have another meaning for the level of water that does not relate to the height/depth of water?I’m not sure water level depends on depth. The shallow end and the deep end of most swimming pools have the same water level, but different depths.
Water level definition: 1."the height reached by the water in a reservoir, river, storage tank, etc." By definition, it depends on the depth or you have no way to determine the height.
height definition
"the distance from the top to the bottom of something, or the quality of being tall" How do you measure how high something is if you don't figure out where to start from? The only thing that works like you're talking about is sea level measurements but the game has nothing like that.
There is no real world equivalent for instantly raising the water level of an existing body of water beyond the confines of its boundaries.
What you are suggesting raising the water level to mean is completely impossible, so trying to use the word from our world, for a situation that is impossible in our world is a mistake. In our world, saying "the river raised 10ft overnight" means something very specific, and likely dangerous for people in the surrounding area.
If we are expected to refer to basic assumptions about words that don't have specific definitions in the rule book, there is no reason to assume that raising a 10ft wide river 10ft, would not flood the immediate area, up to the area limit specified by the spell.
That’s possible, but if the physical form of the existing water is being changed with no duration then there would be no additional water after the instant the spell happened and ended.
Can you point out the different durations for created or modified items based on school of the spell? How does an instant conjuration spell differ from a transmutation spell? What it the difference between water increased vs water created?
I think the effect of raising/lowering the water is clearly permanent.
I took it as spell duration: if it was water created then, my bad.
As to the time it takes to "raise the level of the water", I stand by my assertion that it is unspecified rather than instantaneous. Just because the spell may take only a snap of the fingers to execute, the time for the effect to fully manifest could be different, and the effect, as we agree, is permanent in this case. All these time frames can be different.
I'll stand by instant being instant. Snap your fingers and the water level has changed: It REALLY has to work this way as the spell is completely finished and done before your next, or the next person's, next actions. It'd be an important factor to mention if it takes time to enact it. It seems odd to say people can move in and out of the area before an instant spell takes effect.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Water level definition: 1."the height reached by the water in a reservoir, river, storage tank, etc." By definition, it depends on the depth or you have no way to determine the height.
You can measure height by any number of reference points.
The water level of an above-ground pool of a given set of dimensions and that of an in-ground pool of the exact same dimensions, at the same elevation are different from one another, though their depths are the same.
The deep end of an in-ground pool has the same water level as the shallow end, but obviously their depths vary.
When I raise my glass of water the water level changes relative to the ground, though the depth remains the same. When I return the glass to its starting point the previous water level is reestablished.
Water level definition: 1."the height reached by the water in a reservoir, river, storage tank, etc." By definition, it depends on the depth or you have no way to determine the height.
I do not accept that the description of this spell is equivocating the level of water in an area with this specific definition of "water level" but if it were, I think the clear answer would be that you could not possibly exceed the boundaries of the container. Attempting to raise the water level of a body of water beyond the bounds of its container is impossible.
However, the boundaries of containment of rivers, lakes and oceans are almost never vertical, but usually banked, because the boundary is the physical topography of the land itself. Raising the water of a river inside the area of the spell absolutely would see the water expand to fill its container within the confines of the area of the spell, because the container of a river is not a clear and set point on the shore.
|
|
If I hypothetically spilled a glass of water on the floor and cast this hypothetical "Control Water" to "stretch" the water to 10ft high, then unless new water is being conjured or evoked, the liquid water would become gaseous.
But if the spilled water was teleported to 10 feet high, no new water would be required and the “water level” would have increased by 10 feet.