| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think also that there is rule wording that says that spells damaging items is left up to the GM. Important items don't get destroyed normally - especially plot needed ones. But having spells damage terrain for narrative flavor isn't actually forbidden.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's no "only for flavor" in that rule. It's just that the effects of AoEs that only describe what they do to creatures have on the environment is entirely up to GM discretion. There are no limits on how important or unimportant they can be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In General:
I think also that there is rule wording that says that spells damaging items is left up to the GM. [...]
Found one in paragraph on Areas:
Many area effects describe only the effects on creatures in the area. The GM determines any effects to the environment and unattended objects.
Seems somewhat logical to me, that this holds for single target spells analogously, but don't know of an explicit rule or quote.
Unfortunately, there is this oddity that very many spells as well as strikes only mention targeting creatures. (Which is not in accordance to my imagination and counter-intuitive too, IMHO.) I hope this gets somehow fixed in the remaster. But who knows...? If nothing helps, ofc there is always the First Rule, anyway.
Specifically:
There are a couple of spells that (as of now, pre-core remaster, post rage of elements) explicitly mention targeting objects and apply direct damage or have an affect that I'd consider damaging and/or would indirectly lead to damage.
Example for the latter: If you levitated an object with Levitate spell as high as possible until the duration ran out, I can easily imagine (depending on the nature of the item) that this could eventually result in massive damage...
Example Spells I found (not necessarily an exhaustive list), ordered by rank and alphabetically:
- Hydraulic Push (Spell 1)
- Weaken Earth (Spell 1)
- Withering Grasp (Focus 1)
- Allfood (U, Spoiler SKT) (Spell 3) - debatable / under certain conditions; further discussion omitted because of the spoiler aspect
- Dismantle (Spell 2)
- Sudden Bolt (U, Spoiler EC) (Spell 2)
- Curse of Lost Time (Spell 3)
- Magnetic Acceleration (Spell 3) - debatable / far-fetched: It accelerates the small object at "massive speed". Would the item itself be damaged on impact??
- Levitate (Spell 3) - possibly indirectly by falling damage after spell, see comment above
- Shrink (Spell 3) - not technically damaging, yet if one depends a shrunken item as "damaged" this might stay on this list
- Shape Stone (Spell 4) - again, not technically damaging, yet I'm sure one could use it to wreak lasting havoc to stone objects and structures
- Disintegrate (Spell 6)
- Stone to Flesh (Spell 6) - not a typical damage spell, but if the goal is to end the existence of a stone object as such, it does its job ...
- Heaving Earth (Spell 7)
- Alter Reality / Miracle / Primal Phenomenon / Wish (Spell 10) - IIRC becoming superseded by Manifestation (Spell 10) (+ complemented by a rare ritual 10) in remaster - these will most definitely be able to damage objects
It makes sense that Fireballs would at least scorch the wooden furniture when you inevitably cast it inside a bar.
Unfortunately, many things in game do not follow irl sense. for instance, taming an animal wouldn't slow it down vs a wild one [2 action move/rd vs 3 action move/rd]. Or bulk for bodies set to a point that anyone can pick one up and carry it around for hours without fatigue.
And, IMO, if anything should deviate from IRL sensibilities, it's magic which by it's nature creates effects impossible irl.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We will see if this long stand issue gets addressed in the remaster, or if the ambiguity is intentional to force “ask your GM” before making any assumptions about coming up with some trick that will let you use fireball to destroy the floorboards of the room you are in without just automatically destroy all the loot in the game as well.
I think also that there is rule wording that says that spells damaging items is left up to the GM. [...]Found one in paragraph on Areas:
Many area effects describe only the effects on creatures in the area. The GM determines any effects to the environment and unattended objects.
Yes. That is what I was remembering.
The GM determines any effects to the environment and unattended objects.
And that doesn't sound ambiguous to me. Ambiguous is where the rule doesn't specify what happens. Here the rule clearly states what happens - the GM makes a decision based on the needs of the story.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, I meant “ambiguous to the player about whether something they want to do (especially repeatedly as a tactic) is going to default work all the time or not.”
I think ambiguous is the correct word here because the the purpose of the thread in the first place was looking for spells that can reliably damage objects. There is not a lot of value in having “damaging objects is intentionally an area of GM fiat” as a rule along side a bunch of ways for players to just reliably do damage to objects.
Sorry, I meant “ambiguous to the player about whether something they want to do (especially repeatedly as a tactic) is going to default work all the time or not.”
I think ambiguous is the correct word here because the the purpose of the thread in the first place was looking for spells that can reliably damage objects. There is not a lot of value in having “damaging objects is intentionally an area of GM fiat” as a rule along side a bunch of ways for players to just reliably do damage to objects.
OK. That's fair. But it does run into the problem that "ambiguous rules" is actually a game term. It would be better to come up with a different word for that concept. But that isn't necessarily easy.
"Nondeterministic".
"Nondeterministic".
Right. Because everyone automatically knows what that means.
Literally anything that does damage, but requires GM.
Require a directed attack against an object, then allow foes to attempt saving throws against the object’s effect at a DC you choose. Example: cast a produce flame spell at a barrel of explosives.
Nice finding, which to me mitigates CRB's oddity about strikes and spells targeting (or not targeting) objects. Let's see whether this becomes improved in remaster.