Re: water, air interface
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:31 am
Undying - I agree with every point that you raise, but I don't agree with the conclusions you reach.
I know that weaving a kernel of a True Element into something does not necessarily grant the item improved protection from the opposing element. But I know that many of the so-called "common magical items" are made that way. I seemed to vaguely recall that there was a fireproof cloak available, but I don't recall any details about it nor see it in the main book. Maybe it was in one of the supplements or maybe I am just mixing it up with something else. In any case, even if it is not in the book, I would imagine that a fireproof cloak could be made using methods similar to making a warm cloak, just with different elements. Weaving a few true elements into a cloak is of course not sufficient in and of itself, you need to have a plan, know what you are doing, etc.
However my point was that what a few kernels of a true element cleverly applied can do. It is possible that several tons of the base element hastily applied might also do. Not perfectly, not elegantly, not permanently, nor portably. But as a temporary field expedient, maybe. Just because there is a spell called "snuff", does not mean you can't ALSO put out a fire by pouring water on it. Even if snuff is listed in the rulebook and pouring water is not. For that matter, there is an elemental warm cloak in the book, but it neglects to list the simple and mundane fur coat. Sometimes mundane things can do the same job as magical things. There can be mundane ways to duplicate the resist elements spell.
There are magical items that protect against fire, even fire based spells, and some of these are listed in the book. There could be mundane items that protect against fire, I can't recall any of those being listed in the book. huge quantities of water protect against fire, even if exact listings for them do not appear in the book.
You totally and completely missed all my points with Stone Rain. My comments were not at all about somebody taking shelter from a spell after it was cast (there is no need to take shelter after it is cast, you can just move out of it's AoE). My comments were that somebody who intelligently thinks, "hey, I wonder if that spellcaster is casting the spell that causes it to rain stones again. I better step under this roof here" will be protected from the spell BEFORE IT IS EVEN CAST (assuming he moves while the caster is still pulling threads). Because (in my opinion) if it is cast on him the stones will just bounce off the roof of the building he just moved into. So once again, the caster can see him, but he has a roof over his head to protect him from falling stones.
Also, Stone Rain does not require a cloud (death rain requires cloud cover, stone rain does not). The only time the sky is mentioned in the spell description is the short summary at the beginning - "Earth. This spell showers fist-sized stones from the sky... If successful, affected targets are struck by falling stones." So a truly literal reading of the rules could allow one (incorrectly in my view) to rule that a person hundreds of feet underground in a locked room could cast "Stone Rain", and rocks would rain from the sky, somehow find their way into the locked room hundreds of feet underground and strike the target. I therefor feel that the literal reading of the rules is the wrong way to do it.
I think that a major consideration in how people answer this question is how much of the spell they look at. Do they look at the entire spell with all of it's fluffy text? Or do they only look at the words "2 yard radius" and " If successful, affected targets are struck by falling stones"? If you think that those two phrases are the only important ones and the rest is just fluff to be ignored, then you see a spell that moves through astral space towards a target and manifests as rocks directly above his head.
However if you look at all the text of the spell, you might think of a spell that moves through astral space to a target, then moves up several hundred feet and (after adjusting for windage), manifests a bunch of rocks that will fall out of the sky onto the guys head. But only if there is a way for a rock falling from the sky to hit the guy. The spell as written seems to be capable of bank shots, ricochets and careens, to hit people with partial overhead cover. However I don't see anything to make me think that the falling rocks should somehow phase through a roof (or several hundred feet of earth) in order to strike their target. I think the spell, as written has a built in limitation. It only effects people who are in a place where they can be struck by stones falling out of the sky.
Now I can see somebody might say "from the sky" is just fluff text, and should be ignored. And I can see some people might say that the stones should phase through the roof, because "hey, it's magic". I can see how some might think it is a huge can of worms (1000 variations of what ifs). I see a spell that has limitations. It does not affect people with 100% overhead cover. It is just written with that limitation.
Lets go back to fireball. The book describes how the caster summons a flame, which travels to the point of impact and that it is the size of a beach ball when it explodes doing damage to all within a 4 yard radius. Now lets say you have two possible targets that happen to be on opposite sides of a stone wall that is more than 5 yards high and 10 yards long. The two targets are 1 yard away from the wall, so the caster (on top of the wall) can see them both, but he can only send his beachball to one side of the wall or the other, however he can explode the beachball within 3 yards of both targets. however to reach one of the targets, the blast would have to travel through a wall 1 yard thick and 5 yards high. One school of thought is that "it's magic - the blast effects both sides of the wall". However I would say that the magic is creating a blast at the beachball. That is the magic. outside of the beachball, it is just a blast, and a one yard think stone wall will stop that blast. No effect on the other side of the wall.
So once again, I agree with almost all of your statements, except your conclusions.
Magic does not abide by physics or modern-day logic (agreed). Magic is magic (agreed). The Fireball spell manifests a massive explosion of fire at a spot visible to the magician within range of the spell (agreed). Not on a thing that is flammable - midair is perfectly fine (agreed). Not conditional on having a clear path equal to the diameter of the sphere - viewing through a keyhole is just fine (assuming you meet the other casting requirements) (Not so certain about - The magician conjures a small flame and places one of his hands to the side of the fire, waving it in a circular motion over the top of the flame ... If successful, a small globe of fire erupts from his hand, which quickly expands to the size of a beach ball, before exploding in an intense gout of flame at the point of impact - So it seems you need an opening big enough for both an eyeball and a handful of flame - Because the spell description actually does matter, and you need to meet all the conditions described in the spell description. And since this spell specifically says the flame is conjured in the casters hand and travels to the target, I would say a crystal wall or other thing that prevents the flame from reaching it's target point might block the spell. Because the spell descriptions matter and the specific overrides the general.).
And for the big conclusion, I can see how somebody could feel that the magic is contained in the entire 4 yard radius, and that the magic always sees to it that the entire radius is filled up, no matter what might be blocking it. However I can also see that maybe the magic is just contained in the area the size of a beachball, and everything else in the 4 yard radius is just a fairly mundane blast effect - easily blocked by a stone wall or a lake.
So again I have to say that I don't think that it is too much of a slippery slope, nor too deep into the weeds of science and logic to state that huge amounts of water provides protection against fire, nor that a roof provides protection against rain.
Anybody who rules that fireball effects will pass through stone walls DESERVES to have all the spellcasters in their campaign fireballing every door and wall just to soften up whatever might happen to be behind. THAT sounds like a slippery slope and a can of worms!
I know that weaving a kernel of a True Element into something does not necessarily grant the item improved protection from the opposing element. But I know that many of the so-called "common magical items" are made that way. I seemed to vaguely recall that there was a fireproof cloak available, but I don't recall any details about it nor see it in the main book. Maybe it was in one of the supplements or maybe I am just mixing it up with something else. In any case, even if it is not in the book, I would imagine that a fireproof cloak could be made using methods similar to making a warm cloak, just with different elements. Weaving a few true elements into a cloak is of course not sufficient in and of itself, you need to have a plan, know what you are doing, etc.
However my point was that what a few kernels of a true element cleverly applied can do. It is possible that several tons of the base element hastily applied might also do. Not perfectly, not elegantly, not permanently, nor portably. But as a temporary field expedient, maybe. Just because there is a spell called "snuff", does not mean you can't ALSO put out a fire by pouring water on it. Even if snuff is listed in the rulebook and pouring water is not. For that matter, there is an elemental warm cloak in the book, but it neglects to list the simple and mundane fur coat. Sometimes mundane things can do the same job as magical things. There can be mundane ways to duplicate the resist elements spell.
There are magical items that protect against fire, even fire based spells, and some of these are listed in the book. There could be mundane items that protect against fire, I can't recall any of those being listed in the book. huge quantities of water protect against fire, even if exact listings for them do not appear in the book.
You totally and completely missed all my points with Stone Rain. My comments were not at all about somebody taking shelter from a spell after it was cast (there is no need to take shelter after it is cast, you can just move out of it's AoE). My comments were that somebody who intelligently thinks, "hey, I wonder if that spellcaster is casting the spell that causes it to rain stones again. I better step under this roof here" will be protected from the spell BEFORE IT IS EVEN CAST (assuming he moves while the caster is still pulling threads). Because (in my opinion) if it is cast on him the stones will just bounce off the roof of the building he just moved into. So once again, the caster can see him, but he has a roof over his head to protect him from falling stones.
Also, Stone Rain does not require a cloud (death rain requires cloud cover, stone rain does not). The only time the sky is mentioned in the spell description is the short summary at the beginning - "Earth. This spell showers fist-sized stones from the sky... If successful, affected targets are struck by falling stones." So a truly literal reading of the rules could allow one (incorrectly in my view) to rule that a person hundreds of feet underground in a locked room could cast "Stone Rain", and rocks would rain from the sky, somehow find their way into the locked room hundreds of feet underground and strike the target. I therefor feel that the literal reading of the rules is the wrong way to do it.
I think that a major consideration in how people answer this question is how much of the spell they look at. Do they look at the entire spell with all of it's fluffy text? Or do they only look at the words "2 yard radius" and " If successful, affected targets are struck by falling stones"? If you think that those two phrases are the only important ones and the rest is just fluff to be ignored, then you see a spell that moves through astral space towards a target and manifests as rocks directly above his head.
However if you look at all the text of the spell, you might think of a spell that moves through astral space to a target, then moves up several hundred feet and (after adjusting for windage), manifests a bunch of rocks that will fall out of the sky onto the guys head. But only if there is a way for a rock falling from the sky to hit the guy. The spell as written seems to be capable of bank shots, ricochets and careens, to hit people with partial overhead cover. However I don't see anything to make me think that the falling rocks should somehow phase through a roof (or several hundred feet of earth) in order to strike their target. I think the spell, as written has a built in limitation. It only effects people who are in a place where they can be struck by stones falling out of the sky.
Now I can see somebody might say "from the sky" is just fluff text, and should be ignored. And I can see some people might say that the stones should phase through the roof, because "hey, it's magic". I can see how some might think it is a huge can of worms (1000 variations of what ifs). I see a spell that has limitations. It does not affect people with 100% overhead cover. It is just written with that limitation.
Lets go back to fireball. The book describes how the caster summons a flame, which travels to the point of impact and that it is the size of a beach ball when it explodes doing damage to all within a 4 yard radius. Now lets say you have two possible targets that happen to be on opposite sides of a stone wall that is more than 5 yards high and 10 yards long. The two targets are 1 yard away from the wall, so the caster (on top of the wall) can see them both, but he can only send his beachball to one side of the wall or the other, however he can explode the beachball within 3 yards of both targets. however to reach one of the targets, the blast would have to travel through a wall 1 yard thick and 5 yards high. One school of thought is that "it's magic - the blast effects both sides of the wall". However I would say that the magic is creating a blast at the beachball. That is the magic. outside of the beachball, it is just a blast, and a one yard think stone wall will stop that blast. No effect on the other side of the wall.
So once again, I agree with almost all of your statements, except your conclusions.
Magic does not abide by physics or modern-day logic (agreed). Magic is magic (agreed). The Fireball spell manifests a massive explosion of fire at a spot visible to the magician within range of the spell (agreed). Not on a thing that is flammable - midair is perfectly fine (agreed). Not conditional on having a clear path equal to the diameter of the sphere - viewing through a keyhole is just fine (assuming you meet the other casting requirements) (Not so certain about - The magician conjures a small flame and places one of his hands to the side of the fire, waving it in a circular motion over the top of the flame ... If successful, a small globe of fire erupts from his hand, which quickly expands to the size of a beach ball, before exploding in an intense gout of flame at the point of impact - So it seems you need an opening big enough for both an eyeball and a handful of flame - Because the spell description actually does matter, and you need to meet all the conditions described in the spell description. And since this spell specifically says the flame is conjured in the casters hand and travels to the target, I would say a crystal wall or other thing that prevents the flame from reaching it's target point might block the spell. Because the spell descriptions matter and the specific overrides the general.).
And for the big conclusion, I can see how somebody could feel that the magic is contained in the entire 4 yard radius, and that the magic always sees to it that the entire radius is filled up, no matter what might be blocking it. However I can also see that maybe the magic is just contained in the area the size of a beachball, and everything else in the 4 yard radius is just a fairly mundane blast effect - easily blocked by a stone wall or a lake.
So again I have to say that I don't think that it is too much of a slippery slope, nor too deep into the weeds of science and logic to state that huge amounts of water provides protection against fire, nor that a roof provides protection against rain.
Anybody who rules that fireball effects will pass through stone walls DESERVES to have all the spellcasters in their campaign fireballing every door and wall just to soften up whatever might happen to be behind. THAT sounds like a slippery slope and a can of worms!