I think the time argument matters in terms of the verb raise. If it happed over seconds, instead of instantly, I think it is easier for some people to visualize what the effect of trying to raise the level of water in an area would be, rather than trying to imagine it suddenly being there.
Really whatever works for your table is best, it just seems important to contextualize the spell as a 5th level spell when your table is trying to settle this. Try to pick an interpretation that feels about right in comparison to the spells equal to it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can measure height by any number of reference points.
You sure can... When such a reference point isn't given what other point can you take other than the actual surface vs water floor? You need an arbitrary point if you're going to base it on aything else and there isn't one in the spell.
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"
I've asked a few time for you to give me one that overrides the actual dictionary definition of it. Without that, it's hard to take the argument seriously. None of the things you've brought up [like ground water] don't make sense as they can't work in terms of the spell [outside line of effect and sight].
Attempting to raise the water level of a body of water beyond the bounds of its container is impossible.
Why? Magic can't trump science? I literally don't understand the point in reference to an instant spell.
But if the spilled water was teleported to 10 feet high
Can't be, as Teleportation is a trait the spell doesn't have...
stated, in the usual absolute terms, that the spell has to be completely done in every possible aspect before your next action, or the next person's next action. I agree with you that this is not important and is not the only possible way to do things. That is the reason I mentioned it.
It's important. Lets say I cast the spell to lower the water in a passage ahead of me that's been flooded. So it's the difference between moving into the passage this turn or waiting until next turn: this could be a pretty big issue depending on how quickly the passage fills back up or if there are things coming to eat me.
As to the other posts and such: instant is instant and I see no evidence that instant spells aren't resolved in an instant. Do I have to wait actions to see if my fireball killed creatures? Can I hop over the wall of stone I just made before it forms? I don't see storytelling overriding mechanics: describe it anyway you like but it should mechanically work in an instant. I just don't see anything like 'spells have a time lag' anyplace in the rules.
Attempting to raise the water level of a body of water beyond the bounds of its container is impossible.Why? Magic can't trump science? I literally don't understand the point in reference to an instant spell.
Look at your definition for water level:
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.
water level can only be the water in a reservoir, river, storage tank, etc.
by your definition the water would not be in the reservoir or container if it exceeded the bounds of its container.
However, for natural bodies of water, the container is not defined by vertical boundaries, so it is perfectly logical to assume that the water expands to fill its container, up to the maximum area of the spell.
The spell takes two actions to cast. Most people's vision of magic is shaped by movies and books where effects are described as taking some unit of time, even if it is seconds or milliseconds. The difference is trivial and arbitrary, but if it effects the way people envision the spell working, and makes for something that feels appropriate for the table, good for them.
water level can only be the water in a reservoir, river, storage tank, etc.
I used that definition as someone ASKED about levels in a container [a pool].
"the surface of still water: such as the level assumed by the surface of a particular body or column of water" is one without a particular reference to a container. I think a container is a red herring as we are specifically talking about magic that defies physics. Why assume unnatural movement requires a container? Why assume the water stops at the edge of the spell area but find it impossible for it to stop at the edge of the body of water? I find it inconsistent logic.
The spell takes two actions to cast.
So does a fireball... Do I have to worry about getting burned by it before I toss it as it forms for 2 actions?
Most people's vision of magic is shaped by movies and books where effects are described as taking some unit of time, even if it is seconds or milliseconds.
I don't agree. Dr Strange causes some mystic symbols to appear and when it's done, things happen. For instance, once the teleportation circle is made, the portal is active without a visible lag. If we're down to milliseconds, I'm willing to call it instant: how much water goes vertical from a firehose fired up in a millisecond.
I'm fine with Control Water happening instantaneously. What I'm not fine with is that every possible interpretation I've made with the spell description seems wrong in some way, regarding raising water level by 10 feet.
1) New water is conjured or "evoked" to raise the water level by 10 feet -> Causes a miniature tsunami with no rules adjudicating how it impacts surrounding creatures / objects if the full area 50 x 50 x 10 is raised. With such an impact, "raising the water level by 10 feet" becomes the flavor text, and the mechanics on the following tsunami are lacking and left for the GM to devise. How is a player (or GM) supposed to predict what happens after casting this spell?
2) Existing water is "stretched" to 10 feet high -> Depending on the volume of the stretched water, the water might instantly vaporize. If it didn't vaporize, then the water would return to its prior position, and raising it 10 feet would have no mechanical impact whatsoever. Why even allow this option? It does literally nothing.
I think we can all agree that the spell is meant to do something so we can agree that #2 isn't the intent. #2 can be correct but it falls victim of a lot of things in the game: DM fiat. It leaves any mechanics up to the DM to figure out This is in part, IMO, because it's got an incredibly variable amount of water: it could be a 2"x2"x10' column of water or a 50'x50'x10' block of water so it's not going to be as simple as a one size fits all mechanic. Add to that, the affect of it would change depending on the terrain: Raising a lake by the woods has a far different affect than in open water or an enclosed cavern. You could write a page or 2 just covering all the variables.
I'm fine with Control Water happening instantaneously. What I'm not fine with is that every possible interpretation I've made with the spell description seems wrong in some way, regarding raising water level by 10 feet.
1) New water is conjured or "evoked" to raise the water level by 10 feet -> Causes a miniature tsunami with no rules adjudicating how it impacts surrounding creatures / objects if the full area 50 x 50 x 10 is raised. With such an impact, "raising the water level by 10 feet" becomes the flavor text, and the mechanics on the following tsunami are lacking and left for the GM to devise. How is a player (or GM) supposed to predict what happens after casting this spell?
2) Existing water is "stretched" to 10 feet high -> Depending on the volume of the stretched water, the water might instantly vaporize. If it didn't vaporize, then the water would return to its prior position, and raising it 10 feet would have no mechanical impact whatsoever. Why even allow this option? It does literally nothing.
I think we can all agree that the spell is meant to do something so we can agree that #2 isn't the intent. #2 can be correct but it falls victim of a lot of things in the game: DM fiat. It leaves any mechanics up to the DM to figure out This is in part, IMO, because it's got an incredibly variable amount of water: it could be a 2"x2"x10' column of water or a 50'x50'x10' block of water so it's not going to be as simple as a one size fits all mechanic. Add to that, the affect of it would change depending on the terrain: Raising a lake by the woods has a far different affect than in open water or an enclosed cavern. You could write a page or 2 just covering all the variables.
A couple of points or thoughts.
Water level refers to the height of some sort of body of water, as measured against some fixed height. Depth of the body of water is irrelevant to the height of the water level, as you are simply measuring from the plane of the water table to the plane defined by that fixed height.
But ground water, or the water table, should not be so lightly tossed aside here. A standing body of water is really just where the ground is low enough that the water table is exposed. But there is a gradient from pure water to water filled with sediment to quicksand (mineral completely saturated with water) to mud to dry earth.
If I raise the water in a well, does it also raise the water table height in the earth around it? If there are 2 wells, side by side, both in the area of effect of the spell, and I cast it while looking down just one of them, what happens? Does the water in both rise? Just one? Both plus the connecting water in the earth?
I also don't understand if this spell is creating water or not, and if any water is moving during the spell effect.
I really am not trying to say that there is only one right way to interpret this spell and everyone else's way is wrong. If you want to interpret that the spell requires a specified body of water and it vertically raises the water of that body of water 10ft, that is fine for your table as long as everyone knows that it what it is going to do. It seems pretty absurd to say that is the only possible interpretation of a spell that is so poorly defined, when there are real world consequences for raising the level of water in an area, and none of them involve the water extending vertically without bounds.
But ground water, or the water table
Line of effect means that ground water can't be reached by the spell.
Line of effect: "When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path to the target of a spell, the origin point of an effect’s area, or the place where you create something with a spell or other ability." You don't have an unblocked path to the place where you'd create the water to raise.
In other words, examples from Marvel movies are fine as long as they support your position, and your position only.
Not at all. You use the phrase "Most people's vision of magic" and I showed an example that doesn't follow that. I agree some people might see it your way, I'm just disagreeing with "most" and showed an example. i'm not sure how you could prove what "most people" think.
And just in case there's any confusion, magic is not actually real, therefore nobody can claim expertise about it, or be categorically "right" about how every aspect of a spell works.
Curious though how you can claim how "most people" see it though...
As to the game though, you can be an expert in the rules that govern magic in that game system. If we're JUST going off a 'well it makes sense' thing, then I'd say the Dev's that create the rule would be experts in how the magic in that world work. The thing is, I'm not the one claiming things work differently than what the words on the page mean: instant means instant. Level of water means level of water. I'm literally following what the spells says it does. IMO, the onus is on those that want to say that words have a different meanings than their definitions would indicate: I've asked this thing from Unicone SEVERAL times but still haven't gotten any definition or rational that would override them.
I really am not trying to say that there is only one right way to interpret this spell and everyone else's way is wrong.
I have a real struggle with your 'is always creates a 50'x50'x10' block of water' as it is stupidly easy to say that with the same word length. "create or destroy 50'x50'x10' of water. Any Water creature in the area is affected by Slow." Add to that that I see technical issues with it as well [the current spell doesn't bound water movement other than height] and I just don't see it possible with the current wording. I just don't see this as 'does thrown weapon mean a weapon you are currently throwing or the thrown weapon group' issue with 2 equally valid reads.
Saying that, it's entirely possible you are totally correct on intent and someone just butchered the wording very, very badly. We have no way to determine that though unless a Dev comes in and says something. I don't think we'll see it though as I think it was left super vague by intent that's in line with the general theme of 'PF2: DM fiat edition'...
But ground water, or the water tableLine of effect means that ground water can't be reached by the spell.
Line of effect: "When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path to the target of a spell, the origin point of an effect’s area, or the place where you create something with a spell or other ability." You don't have an unblocked path to the place where you'd create the water to raise.
In other words, examples from Marvel movies are fine as long as they support your position, and your position only.Not at all. You use the phrase "Most people's vision of magic" and I showed an example that doesn't follow that. I agree some people might see it your way, I'm just disagreeing with "most" and showed an example. i'm not sure how you could prove what "most people" think.
And just in case there's any confusion, magic is not actually real, therefore nobody can claim expertise about it, or be categorically "right" about how every aspect of a spell works.Curious though how you can claim how "most people" see it though...
As to the game though, you can be an expert in the rules that govern magic in that game system. If we're JUST going off a 'well it makes sense' thing, then I'd say the Dev's that create the rule would be experts in how the magic in that world work. The thing is, I'm not the one claiming things work differently than what the words on the page mean: instant means instant. Level of water means level of water. I'm literally following what the spells says it does. IMO, the onus is on those that want to say that words have a different meanings than their definitions would indicate: I've asked this thing from Unicone SEVERAL times but still haven't gotten any definition or rational that would override them.
I really am not trying to say that there is only one right way to interpret this spell and everyone else's way is wrong.I have a real struggle with your 'is always...
In a canyon with 15ft walls, the spell would not create 50ft by 50ft by 10ft of water. It would raise the water level in the canyon by 10ft.
The target is not the water, because there is no listed target of the spell.
Therefore, I think it is fair to interpret the spell as: If you can see the ground, you can raise the water level by 10ft in the specified area. If the water table is only 3ft under the ground, raising the level of water in the area would only flood 7ft. If it was more than 10 ft below the surface of the ground, it would do nothing that anyone could see.
I have provided that one definition of water level could be the level of the water table in the area much earlier in the thread.
Water level is not a phrase in the spell. the level of water could be something different.
In a canyon with 15ft walls, the spell would not create 50ft by 50ft by 10ft of water. It would raise the water level in the canyon by 10ft.
Not an issue as Line of Effect takes care of that: it fills 50'x15'x10' in that situation because that's how the rules work.
The target is not the water, because there is no listed target of the spell.
You can't manipulate water that doesn't exist: you can raise a water level that isn't there. Hence no need to explicitly have a water target.
Therefore, I think it is fair to interpret the spell as: If you can see the ground
What does the ground matter is you've ignored needing water?
If the water table is only 3ft under the ground
Full stop: line of effect stops this. You have NO way to affect that water.
I have provided that one definition of water level could be the level of the water table in the area much earlier in the thread.
As I've said a few times, it makes 0% sense as it can't possibly happen within the rules that game is based on: you have NO line of effect to the water table. As such, that definition has no baring on this in the least.
Water level is not a phrase in the spell. the level of water could be something different.
As I've said, I've asked and haven't gotten one that fit within the rules like the water table one: it can't can't be a possibility as "You don't have an unblocked path" to the water table.
3 pages of conjecture seems to point at that this spell should sit in the fridge until it gets FAQd.
We have enough extrapolations with Illusion spells already.
@graystone
You confused my post with Unicore's.
Sorry you made a reply to my reply to him and i missed the difference. IMO, the point still stands.
Also, you refer to the words on the page. I'd point out that the Control Water spell does not mention the word "instant". You are also confusing "last for an instant" with "instantaneous", which are not necessarily the same. The first synonym for "for an instant" at dictionary.com is "briefly", which is somewhat more vague than "instantaneous".
I don't think "vague" can be stretched to include other actions between. 'In an instant" and "over several seconds or minutes" isn't saying the same thing to me: not even close.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter since the place where the word does appear, which you seem to have fixated on, is talking about Duration.
That's all that matters: that the time the effect is in place.
That has nothing to do with how long it takes to cast the spell
What does this possibly have to do with anything? Again, do I have to worry about my fireball burning me while I cast it? I see nothing in the rules that covers things like this.
which may or may not be how long it takes for the water level to change.
100%, unequivocal no. How can you suggest that an effect starts before you finish the spell: if my spell gets disrupted, do you think it has a partial effect because effects begin at the first casting action? I don't see it.
I've become pretty comfortable that the intent of the devs was probably that the water level changes over the time it takes for the 2 actions of the spell, based on the discussion in this thread.
You are seeing something I don't even see as possible in the rules. "Disrupted and Lost Spells Some abilities and spells can disrupt a spell, causing it to have no effect and be lost." core pg# 302 How can the spell have no effect if it starts to have an effect before you finish casting?
How long is an action? I'm not sure that is defined in the book, but I'm pretty sure it can vary from almost no time to quite a few seconds. If the length of time for an action is defined somewhere, let me know.
3 actions in 6 seconds is a combat round. 4 seconds IMO left 'instant' WAY behind when free actions and reactions exist... For spells, it's quicker than an action as it happens after you finish casting but before you take the next action in that 'instant' between. A fireball shows up after casting, you deal damage and then you can move through spaces of creatures you killed. A fireball isn't sitting in front of you for 2 actions...
But ground water, or the water tableLine of effect means that ground water can't be reached by the spell.
Unless you are arguing that you can't look down a well or see the edge of a stream, I'm not sure what that has to do with my post.
Let's try again, with the example of a water table that is 3 feet below ground. Suppose you dig a 4 foot hole (or remove a 5' cube of ground). If you wait, it will fill with water, until you have a little pool that is 3 feet down. You could even just fill it with water yourself. Now, you have line of effect to the water table. Line of Effect does not require you to see all of the thing you are affecting.
So what happens when you cast Control Water? Do you get a small tower of water out of the hole? Or do you get a 7' flood in a 50'50' area? Remember that the water in the hole is still connected to the water in the ground.
Unless you are arguing that you can't look down a well or see the edge of a stream, I'm not sure what that has to do with my post.
You asked about the water table: you can't see the water table so you can't effect the water table. I said nothing about the well.
Let's try again
It affects the water you SEE. "When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path": full stop. you have line of effect to the water in the hole... You can't see or affect the water table outside the hole. It's the same way you can't slow an elemental in the next room when there is a wall between you. Or how you can't hit a section of wall that has a house in front of it even though you can see sections of the wall around it.
line of sight applies to the target. The spell has no target, it affects an area
|
Yeahhhh, at this point I would be SMASHING that FAQ button... [i]if only I had one!!![i]
I think this spell needs some clarification, especially if they EVER hope to release the Kinetecist who should almost certainly have access to this spell or an effect that is nigh-identical to it.
Does anyone on staff happen to know who wrote this particular spell so in the least we can get their personal perspective on what they meant?
Let's try againIt affects the water you SEE. "When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path": full stop. you have line of effect to the water in the hole... You can't see or affect the water table outside the hole. It's the same way you can't slow an elemental in the next room when there is a wall between you.
"The same"? Excellent. Let's work with that to help illustrate the issue.
I want to cast Slow/Control Water on an elemental/50'x50' area of water. But I can't, because a wall/the ground prevents me from seeing the elemental/50'x50' area of water. So I make a hole in the wall/ground. Now I can see part of the elemental/50'x50' area of water. I cast Slow/Control Water on the part of the elemental/50'x50' area of water I can see.
a) Nothing happens, because I can't see the entirety of the elemental/50'x50' area of water.
b) The elemental/50'x50' area of water are affected, but only the part I can see. The rest of the elemental/50'x50' area of water are completely unaffected.
c) The entirety of the elemental/50'x50' area of water is affected.
You seem to be arguing that option b is correct.
"When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path": full stop.
Now, let's address this. Why "full stop"? The rest of the paragraph isn't just relevant, it directly addresses the question.
When creating an effect, you usually need an unblocked path to the target of a spell, the origin point of an effect’s area, or the place where you create something with a spell or other ability. This is called a line of effect. You have line of effect unless a creature is entirely behind a solid physical barrier. Visibility doesn’t matter for line of effect, nor do portcullises and other barriers that aren’t totally solid. If you’re unsure whether a barrier is solid enough, usually a 1-foot-square gap is enough to maintain a line of effect, though the GM makes the final call.
In an area effect, creatures or targets must have line of effect to the point of origin to be affected. If there’s no line of effect between the origin of the area and the target, the effect doesn’t apply to that target.
If I'm casting Control Water on an area of water 50 feet long by 50 feet wide, and I have line of effect to at least a 1 foot square gap in the ground, as per the rules, why does it only affect the bit of the area of water I can see?
And this leads us to the heart of one the problems with this spell. What is the target? Is it each water molecule? Is the the 50'x50' area of water? Are their billions of targets? Is there just one? Is the target really a flat, 2D plane perpendicular to gravity, above/below which water level is affected? Any of these are possible.
And the problems continue. When the water level rises, does water actually move? How fast? Is it created? Pulled from somewhere? Expand in some unexplained way? Does the water need to be connected to the local geology in some hydrological fashion? Or can I spread some water on the floor and flood a room?
I think it is fine to have an interpretation you would use at a table. But it is silly to conclude that the questions surrounding the spell are not legitimate.
Another aspect of the problem is that the spell breaks the game rules.
Some effects occupy an area of a specified shape and size. An area effect always has a point of origin and extends out from that point. There are four types of areas: emanations, bursts, cones, and lines.
Control Water has an Area with no emanation. Line of Effect requires a point of emanation. My incomplete search through the CRB spells didn't uncover another example of a spell with this issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"You don't need to see the water table; the spell doesn't have a target entry."
People are nearly 60% water...
*grins evilly*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Get ready men! Don't cast control water until you can see the glint in their eyes!"
Still, I'm only about, oh, 100% certain the developers didn't intend for the spell to explode thousands of people, certainly not without a save or any other means of defense.
Assuming that the level of water in an area only raises vertically, even beyond the bounds of its container, is an assumption that is being read in text of this spell, and a pretty strange and unintuitive assumption for many people familiar with how water works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread has me reading up on hydrostatic pressure and surface tension.
It is interesting how such a simple and straightforward spell description leads to so much debate. Having read this thread my personal interpretation (meaning I'm not insisting you agree) is that much of the debate is from assumptions people are bringing to the spell, rather than anything in the spell itself.
Reading the spell and the water tag entry, I'm with graystone's interpretation, that it does what it says it does and nothing else.
I'm not going to tell you how to GM it, but I'll share how i'll GM it. If that's useful to you then great, if you disagree, then also great, but don't feel the need to try to disprove my interpretation please:
- The spell doesn't create any water. It's not a conjuration spell.
- It will raise or lower the level of a body of water: but only over the area of the water. So if there's a 20ft x 20ft pool, then it raises 20ft x 20ft of water.
- It has no duration, so as soon as the water level has been raised or lowered, physics instantly takes over and the water either splashes back down or rushes back in.
- I would allow some coordination in my party around this, as long as everyone could do their thing simultaneously. For example I'd allow two casters to coordinate Control Water and Wall of Stone to push water aside then wall it in.
- Since it doesn't create water, it's not going to do much for eg: a very shallow pond. It will raise up the water, which then falls back. But it doesn't magically conjure thousands of cubic feet of water from nowhere. If the pool is only an inch deep, then that's all the water you have to work with. But if that pond has a water pipe in it leading to a river, then I'd include the river water in the effect (ie a very large amount of water is pulled in from the river).
- If you are raising some water that's connected to a large source of water then that water will get sucked in or pushed back (hydrostatic pressure...). So, for example, if you raise the level of a stream, then I'd GM it that the 10ft of water would be a 'solid' wall of water the width of the stream, drawn in from water further up and downstream of that area. Likewise, if you lower water in a 10ft deep pool thats 20ft x 20ft in size, then I'd have all the water pushed out of the pond onto the surrounding area, and then probably just flow away, depending on the environment. The pond wouldn't suddenly refill (unless there was a reason for it to do so).
- The Slow effect has a duration of 1 minute, since thats what the Slow spell says.
- Cast at sea or in a lake against a boat, I'm not sure if I'd either:
a) Have the water raise the boat 10feet and then suddenly drop it 10ft as the water rushed away.
b) Have the water raised above the boat, and swamp it and even possibly sink it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The spell does such an effect INSTANTLYYou state this as fact, but it is of course your interpretation. You are not "wrong" anymore than I am, I just don't think that's how it should work or must work per the rules.
There's lots of room for interpretation with this spell, but not when it comes to duration.
p: 304 CRB: "Duration. Spells that last for more than an instant have a Duration entry."
Control water has no duration entry.
Therefore it doesn't last more than an instant. No ambiguity there. No room for ambiguity. That's as RAW as it gets in Pathfinder.
Seriously lets stop making real world physics a flaw in the spell to stop it doing exactly what it says it does.
By imposing your will upon the water, you can raise or lower the level of water in the chosen area by 10 feet.
This is what the spell says it does.
Yossarian says he agrees with Greystone, and then contradicts what greystone says shortly after by saying that it actually does not create any water.
I am not saying Yossarian's definition is wrong, or anyone else's either, but saying "it does exactly what it says it does " over and over again, as if it that was clear as day is obviously not true with how many different interpretations there are for what this spell does.
If we are limiting ourselves to what the spell does, it only targets areas, not a body of water, not the water, not the ground, and not even the water elementals in the area, meaning that they would be affected by the slow spell, even if the caster was unable to see them, and thus unable to target them with a traditional slow spell, which is the most clear thing this spell does: work as a large area of effect slow spell on creatures with the water trait.
Beyond that, the GM and player have a lot of negotiating about what "the water" is referring to in the first half of the sentence, since "the water" is not the target of the spell, and what "raise" means in the second.
The verb raise could mean either increase the amount of water in the area until the surface height the of the water (what water, a body of water? liquid water? hopefully and probably not the water inside of non-water trait entities) in the area reaches 10ft higher. (however the table wants to interpret how that works), or it could mean moving existing water in the area 10ft higher.
All of those definitions are doing exactly what the spell says it does. What you have to decide at your table is which usage of the spell feels like the best fit for what a 5th level spell should be capable of doing...Or we could get an Errata or FAQ that makes it a little more clear how to interpret the evocation trait on top of an elemental trait that suggests the spell belongs either to conjuration or transmutation school of magic.
Most effects are discrete, creating an instantaneous effect when you let the GM know what actions you are going to use. Firing a bow, moving to a new space, or taking something out of your pack all resolve instantly.
The firing of a bow happens instantaneously, no one is arguing that that means the arrow just appears where the target is without moving through the space necessary to make the arrow appear there.
It is fair, especially if you assume the spell can not create water, to assume the water has to move as well. And, if it is creating water, why wouldn't the water then fill the whole area?
... it only targets areas, not a body of water, not the water, not the ground, and not even the water elementals in the area, meaning that they would be affected by the slow spell, even if the caster was unable to see them.
Yes, personally I'd interpret the lack of 'target' in the spell description as meaning precisely that. When you 'control' a body of water, any 'Water creatures in the area are subjected to the effects of slow.' Exactly as its written. You might not even know they are there (poor innocent bystander fish). It's not a strange idea that it works this way (see: fireball).
The verb raise could mean either increase the amount of water in the area until the surface height the of the water ... or it could mean moving existing water in the area 10ft higher.
Yes, that seems to be the bit of the spell that's most open to interpretation: it really could be either given what's written. I wouldn't fault any table for interpreting it either way. But it's advisable to have a discussion about it before a PC takes the spell, then tries to use the glass of water in the noble's hand to flood his room.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, nice necromancy: you broke the 2 year mark.
2nd, Evocation
Source Core Rulebook pg. 631
Effects and magic items with this trait are associated with the evocation school of magic, typically involving energy and elemental forces.
As water is an elemental force, you could use it just as well for a spell that creates/destroys water.
Personal Rain Cloud creates water and it's evocation. Rime Slick creates ice. Wall of ice creates ice. Volcanic Eruption creates lava. Pillar of Water creates a... you guessed it, a pillar of water. Spout can create water "out if thin air". Ice Storm creates ice. I could go on but I think that's enough proof: evocation in no way stops it from creating water.
Piling on the necro to say that it appears to me that graystone's interpretation is inconsistent with their cited definitions (this point may have already been made but I didn't see it while skimming through). They say the water raises only vertically, but if you consider any container that widens at the top, say a martini glass, raising the water level inside necessarily requires more than that. So I don't think it's quite that easy to discard the idea of horizontal "movement" from the spell (quotation marks because there need not be actual movement, but I think it's clear what I mean).
Piling on the necro to say that it appears to me that graystone's interpretation is inconsistent with their cited definitions (this point may have already been made but I didn't see it while skimming through). They say the water raises only vertically, but if you consider any container that widens at the top, say a martini glass, raising the water level inside necessarily requires more than that. So I don't think it's quite that easy to discard the idea of horizontal "movement" from the spell (quotation marks because there need not be actual movement, but I think it's clear what I mean).
Once again, as pointed out in the debate, we are talking about instantaneous movement: as such, things like the normal physics of liquid in a martini glass isn't relevant IMO. As to "cited definitions", BOTH evocation and conjuration cover the effect: one covers elemental forces, one of which is water, and one covers creation of objects. There are plenty of evocation spells that create objects so it doesn't seem that the game limits such things to just conjuration.
This is an interesting discussion, even if it is afflicted with thread necromancy.
IMHO the spell description is incomplete, and the discussions over how to treat spells with no listed duration are moot.
For me, the "lower water by 10'" effect should be played like a "Moses effect" - Moses parting the Red Sea. In a shallow body of water (a river, a bit of lake between the shore and an island, etc) this could allow folks to move across the muddy bottom to reach their goal. The surrounding water is held back for an unspecified duration.
The "raise water" effect should create a 50' x 50' area of raised water, as long as there is a stream, pond or lake surface, with "invisible" border that holds for an unspecified duration.
Yes, I know, the spell doesn't specify a duration. IMHO that is an error in the spell's conception. I houseruled a duration of 10 minutes per spell level (50 minutes for the base spell) or until dismissed. I further houseruled that on expiration or on dismissal, the water rushes to assume its normal level, pushing foes and allies around using the spell DC as an Athletics check.
Yeah, that's a lot of houserules. But IMHO it's the only way to respect the spirit of the spell, and to allow Moses to call the Red Sea in to crush Pharaoh's soldiers.
Also, it's the only way to make it a viable 5th-level spell.
FWIW, I also posited that if the spell level is increased, it affects a larger area. But that hasn't come up yet.
YMMV.