In a culminating boss fight of our campaign, the boss cast Wall of Lava.
Is there any reason my witch could not use Greater Object Possession to turn the wall on its maker? I don't see any limitation under the Object Possession spell description. I don't see any limitation under the spell Wall of Lava -- unless you wanted to argue that it is a spell rather than an object.
Under Wall of Lava it states, Quote: "Once per round as a move action, you can direct the wall of lava to erupt." Would that mean that this portion of Greater Object Possession applies? Quote: "You can attempt to possess a construct instead of an unattended object as your first possession with this spell. If you do, this spell acts as control construct, except as noted above." And if so, does that put us in the general ballpark of this text from Control Construct? Quote: "If the construct’s creator or master is present and trying to control the construct, you both must make opposed Spellcraft checks each round to control the construct." Ultimately this is of course all up to our GM. I'm just trying to pull together any known info to simplify things for him.
Wall of lava is a spell, not a creature construct, correct?
If it was a lava golem or something, then maybe, but the spell is not technically an unattended object or a construct (it is constructed by the spell, but not a Construct for purposes of control construct). It's more of a magical effect, like the sphere formed by flaming sphere.
The spell wall of lava is Conjuration (Creation), so I would say that its effect is an object. It is debatable whether it counts as unattended object, but I think it probably does. However, it is definitely not a construct.
Therefore IMNSHO, you can cast greater object possession on it, but you'll get the standard object-possession version with the CP, not the control construct version.
BTW, this should probably be in Rules Questions. Flagged.
As a GM, I would not let you possess the wall of lava.
You could attempt to possess the BBEG, but that's not what you meant.
Moved to Rules Questions! Thanks for the heads up, glass!
glass wrote: The spell wall of lava is Conjuration (Creation), so I would say that its effect is an object. It is debatable whether it counts as unattended object, but I think it probably does. However, it is definitely not a construct.
Therefore IMNSHO, you can cast greater object possession on it, but you'll get the standard object-possession version with the CP, not the control construct version.
I think I pretty much agree with this. While doable, barring the debatable unattended issue, you'd basically need to build the wall of lava using your CP (i.e. one CP for stone, once CP for burning, etc...)
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Couple of quick rules check first.
Creation wrote:
Source PRPG Core Rulebook
Definition Type Subschool
A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.
Wall of Lava has a duration, so magic is holding it together. May be hard to classify as "unattended," so it would be reasonable to at least require some kind of skill/ability check along the lines of Control summoned creature. However, there is also the strong probability that the size of the wall exceeds the gargantuan limit of Greater Object Possession. Finally, Wall of Lava is dismissible, so it wouldn't last long even if allowed.
With regards to the ability to shoot lava, that is not an ability inherent to the lava, it is something the caster can control through its magic manipulation, so not something the possessor may do, again assuming this gets allowed by GM.
Claxon wrote: As a GM, I would not let you possess the wall of lava.
You could attempt to possess the BBEG, but that's not what you meant.
Not with object possession, presumably? (Unless the BBEG is actually a construct.)
glass wrote: Claxon wrote: As a GM, I would not let you possess the wall of lava.
You could attempt to possess the BBEG, but that's not what you meant.
Not with object possession, presumably? (Unless the BBEG is actually a construct.) I mean, I wasn't trying to be specific about which kind of possession.
I was simply saying that I wouldn't let any kind of possession work on the wall (my ruling is that it's a spell effect not an actual object). But yes, you would need the appropriate kind of possession spell to possess the caster.
I Grok do u raises some important points though.
1) The effect of the spell is ongoing and has the ability for the caster to interact with it, so is it really unattended?
2) Assuming you do count the lava wall as an unattended object, it may exceed what is considered "gargantuan" size.
3) If you get past the first two objections, the caster will likely just dismiss the wall.
Northern Spotted Owl wrote: {paraphrased} Does →Greater Object Possession:N4 spell work on →Wall of Lava:C8 spell?
...
Ultimately this is of course all up to our GM. I'm just trying to pull together any known info to simplify things for him.
no
Part of it is the spell parameters, the other is what constitutes an object.
Parameters: This is the greater version of a series of spells. The lesser Target unattended Tiny or Small object, regular Target unattended Large or smaller object (minimum Tiny), and greater Target unattended Gargantuan or smaller object (minimum Tiny) or construct. The wall Once per round as a move action, you can direct the wall of lava to erupt. so it cannot be considered unattended. It is not a construct(creature) as that's not in the Wall of Lava spell.
Object: Part of the issue is general english usage & technical terms.
1) The wall is a spell effect and has a duration. If I had to use a phrase, at best it is a "temporary object".
2) Spell descriptions scroll down to Conjuration school and then creation. Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence. Here RAW considers the Wall of Lava held together by magic which makes it not the usual object.
= = =
IMO a plain old object has Hardness and HPs, no duration, cannot be dispelled or negated, and can be affected by mundane and magical processes like crafting and alchemy.
see →PF Unch Simple Actions for language use and interactions using the word "object".
Object Possession does not include "mundane" so the caster can possess magic armor, a magic staff, and the like.
Azothath wrote: Northern Spotted Owl wrote: {paraphrased} Does →Greater Object Possession:N4 spell work on →Wall of Lava:C8 spell?
...
Ultimately this is of course all up to our GM. I'm just trying to pull together any known info to simplify things for him.
no if this was a "Yes" it would have a lot of implications, like possessing Create Pit:C2.
Quote: The wall Once per round as a move action, you can direct the wall of lava to erupt. so it cannot be considered unattended. I find that persuasive. Thanks one & all.
Azothath wrote: Object: Part of the issue is general english usage & technical terms.
1) The wall is a spell effect and has a duration. If I had to use a phrase, at best it is a "temporary object".
2) Spell descriptions scroll down to Conjuration school and then creation. Creation: A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates. If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence. Here RAW considers the Wall of Lava held together by magic which makes it not the usual object.
(Bolding mine.) You appear to have inadvertently proved that the wall is in fact an object (it is certainly not a creature, and those are the only options).
It may not be "the usual object" but object possession does not care about "usual"-ness, just whether it is an object (and its size).
Azothath wrote: if this was a "Yes" it would have a lot of implications, like possessing Create Pit:C2.
What exactly is an is not an object is not well defined, and before I saw your post above I would not have considered create pit's pit to be one, but it seems like technically it is.
That obviously has the potential to lead to some oddities. But since the pit an absence rather than a presence, if you possessed it there would be no body to become an animated object, which would seem to aleviate most of them.
Northern Spotted Owl wrote: Quote: The wall Once per round as a move action, you can direct the wall of lava to erupt. so it cannot be considered unattended. I find that persuasive. Thanks one & all. Whether it is unattended is a better question than whether it is an object. I'd love to be shown otherwise, but I don't believe there is ever a concrete definition of "attended". But ISTM that it is generally used to mean worn, carried, or wielded - being magically controlled from a distance does not seem to cut it.
glass wrote: But ISTM that it is generally used to mean worn, carried, or wielded - being magically controlled from a distance does not seem to cut it. Dancing (Weapon quality) wrote: The weapon is considered wielded or attended by the activating character for all maneuvers and effects that target items. A dancing weapon is something you manipulate magically (it attacks whoever or whatever you want it to, unless you think it attacks a random target) and counts as wielded.
Ioun stones should count as wielded, as you benefit from them and can even command some of them to absorb incoming magic.
Wield was never clearly defined in the rules, but the meaning seems a bit more extensive than "being in your grasp and using it".
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Posses Object, lesser wrote:
A possessed object becomes capable of animation, gaining the statistics of an animated object of its size (including 1 CP worth of abilities; Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 14). You can’t use any spells or other abilities while possessing an object.
The possessed Wall of lava (assuming the caster can animate something that big) doesn't retain any of the spell's properties. It becomes an Animate object with its characteristic based on the "creature" entry.
As it is a spell effect that is a temporary object held together by the magic of the original spell, what happens is totally uncharted territory for Paizo rules, AFAIK (some third-party product has animated spells monsters).
I probably will rule "the possession doesn't work, invalid target". Alternatively, taking control of the physical object created by the spell without taking control of the spell itself will make the spell "fizzle", essentially dispelling the Wall.
It is a GM call.
Diego Rossi wrote: Posses Object, lesser wrote:
A possessed object becomes capable of animation, gaining the statistics of an animated object of its size (including 1 CP worth of abilities; Pathfinder RPG Bestiary 14). You can’t use any spells or other abilities while possessing an object.
The possessed Wall of lava (assuming the caster can animate something that big) doesn't retain any of the spell's properties. It becomes an Animate object with its characteristic based on the "creature" entry.
As it is a spell effect that is a temporary object held together by the magic of the original spell, what happens is totally uncharted territory for Paizo rules, AFAIK (some third-party product has animated spells monsters).
I probably will rule "the possession doesn't work, invalid target". Alternatively, taking control of the physical object created by the spell without taking control of the spell itself will make the spell "fizzle", essentially dispelling the Wall.
It is a GM call.
Yep, these are the only two options I would give.
1) The spell fails to take control because it's a temporary object held together by magic
2) Taking control of the object, but not the magic essentially just results in dispelling the spell
In no case would I as a GM, allow the object possession spell to actually gain control over and use the lava wall.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
