Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-13-04, 11:00 AM	From the SRD: Acid Fog Acid fog creates a billowing mass of misty vapors similar to that produced by a solid fog spell. In addition to slowing creatures down and obscuring sight, this spell’s vapors are highly acidic. Each round on your turn, starting when you cast the spell, the fog deals 2d6 points of acid damage to each creature and object within it. I see no reason why this wouldn't include a Wizard's spell component pouch, or his backpack. I imagine 2d6 is enough to burn through leather. Given that there's no save or SR....:eek: What are your takes on this?
tarkin 04-13-04, 11:02 AM	Spells like that do not affect attended objects unless they specify ATTENDED objects. It would however dmage an un-attended object. Note, Acid Fog is a killer spell, unless the targets have the ability to teleport or move through walls.
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-13-04, 01:16 PM	Spells like that do not affect attended objects unless they specify ATTENDED objects. It would however dmage an un-attended object. Note, Acid Fog is a killer spell, unless the targets have the ability to teleport or move through walls. I've never read any such rule...care to provide me with a quote?
Nerhesi 04-13-04, 02:45 PM	I did read the rule about anything on "a person" is only damaged if that person's save is a 1. (or should only make saves themselves if the player rolls a 1 on his save) Regardless.. not sure how that affects spells with no save and so on.. However, it probably won't do much to components, thinking of it in a realistic manner, it's a cloud of acid that does 2d6 damage a turn to "creatures" or "players" or what have you, possibly because that is what is exposed/weakly protected. If you're assuming it's doing 2d6 points of damage because it's eating through everything, then why is the mage only taking 2d6 while the fighter is also taking 2d6 in his full armor? If so, then isn't the acid affecting the spell compents, craptacular cloth, etc just as fast as it's effecting full plate? hence armor become useless or even dangerous to the wearer just as fast spell components? Sam W.
Beamup 04-13-04, 03:01 PM	Originally posted by Nerhesi I did read the rule about anything on "a person" is only damaged if that person's save is a 1. (or should only make saves themselves if the player rolls a 1 on his save) Regardless.. not sure how that affects spells with no save and so on.. If there's no save to roll, they can hardly roll a 1 on their save. So the items can't be damaged.
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-13-04, 03:05 PM	If you're assuming it's doing 2d6 points of damage because it's eating through everything, then why is the mage only taking 2d6 while the fighter is also taking 2d6 in his full armor? If so, then isn't the acid affecting the spell compents, craptacular cloth, etc just as fast as it's effecting full plate? hence armor become useless or even dangerous to the wearer just as fast spell components? That's kinda my point. It does damage to all objects in the area. Which means weapons and armors and the like. The only difference is that those things have a fairly good chance of surviving (most weapons have 10 hp or so). I would guess that a spell component pouch has 2, maybe 3 hp. I believe the "items save only on a 1" rule applies to area affects that allow a save. This one doesn't....seems to me all items are automatically affected.
Nerhesi 04-13-04, 03:05 PM	Oh yes. I forget sometimes. D20 D&D WoTC system. Logic for the win. Cuthroat semantics get you through :) Thanks btw :) Sam W.
Seeker95 04-13-04, 03:09 PM	Remember, each and every time you argue for "logic" and "realism" in a fantasy game setting you run two risks: 1. Logic wins and Fun loses. 2. Logic wins and your DM uses the same rule against you.
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-13-04, 03:24 PM	I'm a little confused. I'm not so much presenting this because I wish to use it as an uber-tactic to lame out my DM. Rather I want to know if this is in fact what the designers had intended when they designed the spell. As-is, it seems overpowered. Was my original post confusing? I apologize for not completely understanding your posts (this goes to the previous posters). I'm writing all this from work with a bad cold, so it's kinda hard for me to focus. ;)
Beamup 04-13-04, 03:44 PM	Originally posted by Goreg Skullcrusher I'm not so much presenting this because I wish to use it as an uber-tactic to lame out my DM. Rather I want to know if this is in fact what the designers had intended when they designed the spell. As-is, it seems overpowered. I doubt they intended it to harm equipment, since as you note, that would be exceedingly powerful.
primemover003 04-13-04, 04:49 PM	Gorag consider equipment in the possession of any character as part of the character... any unattended object is an object and will take damage... My armor, weapons, magic items however are part of me for the purpose of the spell... My hp's take the damage, not my gear.
Sancus 04-13-04, 05:16 PM	Attended objects are never affected by a spell unless it specifically says that they are affected. SRD3.5, Magic Overview Items Surviving after a Saving Throw: Unless the descriptive text for the spell specifies otherwise, all items carried or worn by a creature are assumed to survive a magical attack. If the spell allows a saving throw, a magical item can possibly be affected if you roll a 1, but when there is no saving throw this chance does not exist.
Al2902 04-14-04, 06:39 AM	I love Acid Fog in combination with Dimensional Lock and Forcecage :)
Boondoggle 04-14-04, 08:23 AM	Actually, even if the spell was intended to damage attended items (which it's obviously not), armor would not be affected. You cannot attack a creature's armor and no where are stats given for hardness/hp of armor. The system is designed so that armor can't be damaged. There are a few creatures that can destroy armor completely, but armor cannot be damaged.
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-14-04, 10:06 AM	From the SRD, under Bebilith: Rend Armor (Ex): If a bebilith hits with both claw attacks, it pulls apart any armor worn by its foe. This attack deals 4d6+18 points of damage to the opponent’s armor. Creatures not wearing armor are unaffected by this special attack. Armor reduced to 0 hit points is destroyed. Damaged armor may be repaired with a successful Craft (armorsmithing) check. You can damage armor, just not with your standard Sunder or typical wear from battles. Besides, I'd be more worried about magic items. I mean, how much hp does an Amulet of Health or a Bag of Holding have? Heh, thanks to those that pointed out the relevent passages. My mind is set at ease. :D
Malben 04-14-04, 02:26 PM	Originally posted by Boondoggle You cannot attack a creature's armor and no where are stats given for hardness/hp of armor. The system is designed so that armor can't be damaged. There are a few creatures that can destroy armor completely, but armor cannot be damaged. This is not true. Armor hardness is material-based. Armor hitpoints are to be found in the Player's Handbook 3.5, p. 158, in table 8-8. The same information is also available on p. 166, in a variety of much better tables which also give you the means of calculating the AC of a worn object -- like armor. Doing so is an attack action against an AC of 10+the object's size modifier+the wearer's Dex bonus to AC (if any). Thus, a suit of +1 full plate worn by a human fighter with Dex 13 would have an AC of 11, Hardness 12, and 55 hp. If you're playing in 3.0, these same rules apply, but you'd need a +1 or better weapon to deal damage to +1 armor. In 3.5, this is not the case. If you have an adamantine weapon in 3.5, you have the additional benefit of ignoring the armor's hardness. Note also that the 3.5 rules on this issue are completely idiotic, because it means that it's a very simple matter for anyone with a good Str score, a two-handed weapon, and Power Attack to crack a knight's armor like the shell off of a lobster. A level 10 fighter with a +1 greatsword, Str 16, Dex 13, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and a belt of strength +2 can charge at an identical foe take a -8 penalty to hit, roll anything better than a natural 1 on his d20, and deal 2d6+24 damage. Since the average damage per hit works out to 21 (after hardness), he'll demolish anything that offers less AC than scale mail in a single hit. +1 full plate will last a whopping 2 to 3 rounds. Make the greatsword out of adamantine instead of making it +1, and it'll take only 2 rounds to wreck anything with less than a +1 enhancement bonus.
Goreg Skullcrusher 04-14-04, 02:31 PM	Malben, as I just mentioned in the previous post, you cannot Sunder armor. It's specifically forbidden in the description. Your other points are bang-on though.
Malben 04-14-04, 02:56 PM	Yes, Goreg. You're right, that's what the rule says. I was mistaken about the substance of my argument over sundering armor; the rule says explicitly that armor worn by another character is off limits. It's also an utterly nonsensical rule, since it amounts to a rule that says "you can sunder anything that someone is wearing -- except armor, because armor is different." But armor is not substantially different. It doesn't even have the benefit of game balance on its side, since armor is not substantially more expensive than, say, bracers of armor that grant equivalent bonuses. +1 scale mail costs you 1200gp. Bracers of armor +5 give you the same AC bonus, cost 25000gp, and can be sundered pretty much on a whim since they have minuscule hardness and hit point totals. So you get a nasty little quandary -- it's really relatively easy to go through a level 20 wizard's gear like a buzzsaw, but it basically takes a twinned, maximized rusting grasp to carve through a fighter's +1 fullplate. The wizard has to spend a good deal of effort keeping out of melee combat to avoid this problem. I think this is a balance problem, myself. I'd actually be inclined to allow people to sunder armor, as a house rule, but I'd also want to keep 3.0's limitation -- sunder probably ought still to require that you have a weapon with an equal or better enhancement bonus for success. This would have the added effect of making it worthwhile to have a weapon that was more than a +1 enhancement with lots of special powers added. Currently, one can expect a fighter to have a +1 adamantine wounding weapon at high levels, as a given. That's what really works, in 3.5, since otherwise you tend to get your weapons sundered right out of your hands, and since wounding is overall a very useful ability against more or less anything that has a Con score and can be subjected to critical hits. I'm currently running a cleric in 3.5 rules, and the DM has literally had to throw out a +5 corrosive metalline wounding warhammer (i. e. it mimics any metal I wish, on command) to make me even consider giving up my old +1 flaming wounding adamantine hammer. It's a high-level game (18 is average level now), so I keep +1 cold iron and +1 alchemical silver hammers on hand, too, in case I have to fight a demon or devil. But really, there's no good reason for me to use anything but adamantine, otherwise. It makes sunder too powerful for me to pass it up, especially since a melee person in 3.5 without adamantine weaponry is shortly a person without ANY weaponry. To jump back onto topic, I pretty much agree with Tarkin and Sancus -- they have it spot-on as far as the question of whether acid fog would destroy a character's gear. It won't, ordinarily. Acid fog is a pretty nasty way to mess someone up via disarm actions, though. I disagree with Tarkin most vehemently, though, in his assertion that it's otherwise a killer spell. Cloudkill is better against . . . pretty much anything that isn't undead or a construct. If he can explain what makes a 2d6/round spell "killer," I'd personally like to hear it. I could be missing something, I guess. It's certainly a great spell if you spend much time fighting against whole armies, since it'll easily turn the average foot soldier into a pile of sizzling goo, but against anyone who can cast and usually prepared resist elements, it's not a big deal. And lots of people do that.
Finwe 04-14-04, 03:05 PM	Originally posted by tarkin Spells like that do not affect attended objects unless they specify ATTENDED objects. It would however dmage an un-attended object. Note, Acid Fog is a killer spell, unless the targets have the ability to teleport or move through walls. or unless they have a protection form ele3mnts or like spell prepared...
Boondoggle 04-14-04, 07:23 PM	Goreg & Malben, thanks for pointing out that the rules now do allow armor to be damaged. This is a change from 3E where armor didn't have HP (and bebiliths just destroyed armor outright).
Dymo 04-15-04, 02:10 PM	A follow- up question on this one. A wizard, unprepared at the time, is caught in the 20 x 20ft. cloud. He has his back to a wall and his comrades block his way left and right, going forward to avoid the cloud would land him within the enemies melee reach(bad). For him to cast a spell of his own, say 'protection from acid' what would the concentration check be each round? 10+caster level(min. 6)+damage taken(average of 2d6)?
Malben 04-15-04, 02:35 PM	You can move through squares occupied by allies. But if we're to assume that he's in between a couple of rocks or something, then the DC would be 10+spell level+1/2 the most recent damage taken. Average DC to cast the spell in question while being damaged by acid fog would then be about 17. Which is very modest, at the levels which are likely to involve dealing with acid fog. The main thing you get out of acid fog if it's cast straight out of the book, is that it slows people down. It makes them unable to see much, keeps them from moving normally, and annoys them a bit until they can cast spells to keep the acid damage at bay. In other words, the spell is a serious nuisance because it forces the characters or monsters in the affected area to waste a lot of time blundering around and countering the damage. 2d6 acid per round is not horrifically bad, unless you try to keep fighting as normal while suffering from it. The best thing to do is leave the area of effect. If you can't, then the next best is to cast resist elements. If, for some reason, you can't do either one of those, then you will probably be looking at some 20d6 or more acid damage over the couse of 10 rounds. But that's a good-sized if, unless you're dealing with someone who's prepared to cast multiple wall of ____ spells to corral you. Personally, I'd just as soon cast 4-5 fireballs, since it'll be about as effective without chewing through all my high-level spells.
Dymo 04-15-04, 02:50 PM	Thanks for the reply. I should have said they were in a narrow hallway. :)
Finwe 04-15-04, 03:44 PM	Originally posted by Malben You can move through squares occupied by allies. But if we're to assume that he's in between a couple of rocks or something, then the DC would be 10+spell level+1/2 the most recent damage taken. Average DC to cast the spell in question while being damaged by acid fog would then be about 17. Which is very modest, at the levels which are likely to involve dealing with acid fog. The main thing you get out of acid fog if it's cast straight out of the book, is that it slows people down. It makes them unable to see much, keeps them from moving normally, and annoys them a bit until they can cast spells to keep the acid damage at bay. In other words, the spell is a serious nuisance because it forces the characters or monsters in the affected area to waste a lot of time blundering around and countering the damage. 2d6 acid per round is not horrifically bad, unless you try to keep fighting as normal while suffering from it. The best thing to do is leave the area of effect. If you can't, then the next best is to cast resist elements. If, for some reason, you can't do either one of those, then you will probably be looking at some 20d6 or more acid damage over the couse of 10 rounds. But that's a good-sized if, unless you're dealing with someone who's prepared to cast multiple wall of ____ spells to corral you. Personally, I'd just as soon cast 4-5 fireballs, since it'll be about as effective without chewing through all my high-level spells. One word: forcecage....
chonjurer 04-15-04, 03:52 PM	Originally posted by Finwe One word: forcecage.... Too bad it wouldn't work... for so many reasons. You guys sure love your forcecages, with their 1,500gp material component, blocked line of effect and Teleport/DD escape methods.
Malben 04-15-04, 07:59 PM	Originally posted by Finwe One word: forcecage.... I'll repeat myself. Acid fog is a killer spell, if you are prepared to expend massive amounts of resources for comparatively little gain. To corral someone via forcecage, you first have to hit him or her with dimensional anchor, and then expend, as chonjurer has so rightly pointed out, a 1500gp material component and a level 7 spell slot. So basically, in order to use acid fog to deal 20d6 acid damage, no save, versus an opponent of the same level as oneself, you need the following things to happen: 1. The opponent must not have resist elements prepared, since a level 14 caster of that spell will be immune to acid fog even if it's maximized. 2. You must expend at least a level 4 slot (for one opponent) or a level 8 slot (for multiple opponents). The spells involved here are dimensional anchor and dimensional lock, respectively. Otherwise, your opponent can pretty easily teleport loose. 3. Your opponent must not have prepared either wind walk or gaseous form, because those spells let people float right out of a forcecage. 4. You must be prepared to expend a 1500gp material component, and at least a level 7 spell slot. If all of this sounds like a good deal to you, then I'm afraid I'm out of arguments. But a level 8 spell slot provides you with access to something like horrid wilting, for 1d6 damage/level, Fort for half. A level 7 slot gets you a nice quickened fireball. For that matter, the level 6 slot you'd spend on acid fog offers options like Otiluke's freezing sphere, chain lightning, and maximized fireball. All of these options, even on a successful save for half damage, deal more damage than acid fog. A lot more. If I were a level 14 wizard who wanted to kill things, I'd be a LOT more interested in casting an empowered chain lightning, followed by a nice quickened fireball. Even assuming that all the victims save against both, that's an average of 54 damage to everyone but the rogues and monks. Since the idea of combat is generally to hurt the other side as much as possible as soon as possible, and thereby render them unable to hurt you, acid fog is generally not a winner unless you have some sort of distinctive advantage in terms of the existing terrain, or you're fighting lots of peons who're likely to be significantly harmed by 4d6 acid damage (if they can survive more than two rounds, and the terrain isn't seriously on your side, they'll just move out of the way).
Korhal_IV 04-15-04, 08:05 PM	You only need the dimensional spells if you're fighting a wizard. The average blackguard probably won't have a ring of teleportation on him, and his gear is likely to vastly exceed the cost of the 1500 gp component.
lanilifar 04-15-04, 09:51 PM	This spell must have been overpowered, as it was nerfed in 3.5. :) Acid Fog had its uses in 3.0 when it had a radius of 30', and limited most medium creatures to moving 3 feet per round. You could take a few enemies out of the fight for several rounds, and soften them up a little. Now it is just a divide and conquer spell, so you are better off just using solid fog. Escape will only take 4 rounds at most, which IMO is not worth a 6th level slot.
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-15-04, 11:29 PM	Originally posted by Dymo For him to cast a spell of his own, say 'protection from acid' what would the concentration check be each round? 10+caster level(min. 6)+damage taken(average of 2d6)? Concentration check to cast a spell while taking damage from another spell is: 10 + SL + 1/2 of damage taken during that round. Against acid fog, the Concentration DC to cast a spell is equal to 10 + (level of spell you're casting) + (2d6/2). I.e. If you take 8 points of acid damage and you're trying to cast dimension door (4th-level spell), the Concentration DC would be 18 (10 + SL 4 + damage 4). Protection from energy (3rd) would require a check against DC 13 + 1/2 damage.
Myst 04-15-04, 11:58 PM	Originally posted by Al2902 I love Acid Fog in combination with Dimensional Lock and Forcecage :) 3.5 cloudkill is ,IMO, a better choice over acid fog with the dimensional anchor/lock & forcecage(windowless cell) because it does con damage every round, minimum of 1 and you can stack it using timestop and casting it multiple times after the forcecage. :devil:
Malben 04-16-04, 12:29 AM	Originally posted by Korhal_IV You only need the dimensional spells if you're fighting a wizard. The average blackguard probably won't have a ring of teleportation on him, and his gear is likely to vastly exceed the cost of the 1500 gp component. Clerics also get access to some rather nice planar-travel spells, in fact. Dimensional lock and dimensional anchor are not just useful for keeping wizards from scuttling about. Demons, devils, celestials, and other outsiders, as well as clerics, bards, monks, and shadowdancers, are all commonly able to make use of teleport-like abilities. Really, about the only classes that you can safely assume will not require a dimension lock are the barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers. Everybody else is pretty well able to get access to relatively cheap magic that'll get them loose from a forcecage.
da chicken 04-16-04, 12:49 AM	Originally posted by Myst 3.5 cloudkill is ,IMO, a better choice over acid fog with the dimensional anchor/lock & forcecage(windowless cell) because it does con damage every round, minimum of 1 and you can stack it using timestop and casting it multiple times after the forcecage. :devil: You can't do that. Nnot unless you're inside the cage as well. The windowless cell of the forcecage will block the line-of-effect required to cast cloudkill inside. You'd need to cast the cloudkills before the forcecage unless you use the barred cell... but then the cloudkill will drift right through the other side of the cage (unlike acid fog, which is stationary).
Necron 04-16-04, 05:56 AM	Originally posted by Korhal_IV You only need the dimensional spells if you're fighting a wizard. The average blackguard probably won't have a ring of teleportation on him, and his gear is likely to vastly exceed the cost of the 1500 gp component. Nope .. since after the death of the blackguard his belongings become unattended :angel:
Ellone 04-16-04, 08:58 AM	I still think forcecage + antimagic field is a better combo.
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-16-04, 10:18 AM	Originally posted by Necron Nope .. since after the death of the blackguard his belongings become unattended :angel: Let me guess your 'DM alignment': True Evil? :devil:
chonjurer 04-16-04, 04:19 PM	Originally posted by Malben Really, about the only classes that you can safely assume will not require a dimension lock are the barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers. Everybody else is pretty well able to get access to relatively cheap magic that'll get them loose from a forcecage. You have contradicted yourself here. A Helm of Teleportation or Cape of the Mounteback are cheap for 15+ level characters, and any smart (N)PC will have one, at the very least, stowed in a backpack. (for escaping cave-ins, traps, etc.) Forcecage is a really lame spell.
Malben 04-16-04, 06:50 PM	It's cheap for a level 15+ character, sure. On the other hand, most other classes can use a scroll of some kind of travel spell even more cheaply. I don't see where I contradicted myself, so much as I used a different definition of "cheap." A cape of the mountebank or a helm of teleportation is cheap relative to the overall wealth of a standard level 15 character, but expensive relative to some of the limited-use options out there, which are not readily available unless you either have the spells in question on your spell list, or have Use Magic Device as a class skill.
chonjurer 04-16-04, 08:57 PM	Then you are mistaken on the relative cost of unlimited usage items vs. limited usage items. Cape of mounteback: 10,800 gp DDoor Scroll: 700gp You only have to use the cape 8 times, and then you can resell it for 1/2 price and be up cash. Scrolls are a really poor option here - your facts are skewed.
Korhal IV 04-16-04, 09:00 PM	Originally posted by Necron Nope .. since after the death of the blackguard his belongings become unattended :angel: Well, his magic weapons and armor survive. That's good enough.
Malben 04-16-04, 09:56 PM	Originally posted by chonjurer Then you are mistaken on the relative cost of unlimited usage items vs. limited usage items. Cape of mounteback: 10,800 gp DDoor Scroll: 700gp You only have to use the cape 8 times, and then you can resell it for 1/2 price and be up cash. Scrolls are a really poor option here - your facts are skewed. I'm speaking as someone who's outfitting NPCs, not as someone who's outfitting a PC. Unless I'm dealing with a major, recurring villain or a PC, a dimension door scroll makes more sense. I wish you'd ask what assumptions I'm using first, rather than make a preemptive assumption that I'm talking about a PC, and proceed to call my facts skewed. Especially if you're using the gear values for PCs and NPCs in the DMG, this approach is useful in a campaign that involves lots of NPC/PC fights rather than monsters -- you avoid inflating the PCs' wealth by setting up NPCs with single-use items, and having the NPCs use them. Besides, as I discussed earlier in the thread, it's really not reasonable for the use of forcecage and a gas spell to be common, because it's so inefficient in terms of translating spell levels and costly material components into damage dice. I guess I could have an NPC spend 10,800 gp on a cape of the mountebank, but it's probably more efficient for me, as a DM to use that money to improve something else about the character, since NPCs are not nearly so wealthy as PCs. I don't think my facts are skewed at all. I think we're simply failing to speak to the same set of assumptions about what makes for good choices about gear, and for whom. For any PC or for a villain or other adversarial NPC whom I expect to reappear often . . . yes, of course an unlimited use item is better. For me to keep my players from routinely using cheesy tactics against less important NPC adversaries, unlimited use items become prohibitively expensive unless I just want something that can run away nicely.
Myst 04-16-04, 10:20 PM	Originally posted by da chicken You can't do that. Nnot unless you're inside the cage as well. The windowless cell of the forcecage will block the line-of-effect required to cast cloudkill inside. You'd need to cast the cloudkills before the forcecage unless you use the barred cell... but then the cloudkill will drift right through the other side of the cage (unlike acid fog, which is stationary). you are incorrect, sir chicken. on page 233 of the 3.5PHB, under the spell description for forcecage, it states "this powerful spell brings into being an immobile, invisible cubical prison composed of either bars of force or solid walls of force (your choice)." and at the bottom of the decription: "windowless cell this version of the spell produces a 10 ft cube with no way and no way out. Solid walls of force form its 6 sides." Also, under the Wall of Force description: "a wall of force creates an invisible wall of force." therefore... you can cast forcecage then cloudkill and con drain them to death (a fun thing to do on the party fighters) :schemes:. this spell does not break line of sight to the target, as i have already highlighted for your convenience. :teach:
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-17-04, 12:07 AM	Originally posted by Myst you are incorrect, sir chicken. on page 233 of the 3.5PHB, under the spell description for forcecage, it states "this powerful spell brings into being an immobile, invisible cubical prison composed of either bars of force or solid walls of force (your choice)." and at the bottom of the decription: "windowless cell this version of the spell produces a 10 ft cube with no way and no way out. Solid walls of force form its 6 sides." Also, under the Wall of Force description: "a wall of force creates an invisible wall of force." therefore... you can cast forcecage then cloudkill and con drain them to death (a fun thing to do on the party fighters) :schemes:. this spell does not break line of sight to the target, as i have already highlighted for your convenience. :teach: You are incorrect, Sir Myst. From the 3.5 PHB, p. 176: Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can effect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. [...] You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect (such as conjuring a monster [or a cloud of CON-draining gas -- HMB]). [...] An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect. Emphasis mine. Unless you've created a hole in your forcecage effect, those walls (as you clearly pointed out) are "solid walls of force". Ergo, they block the line of effect, meaning that the target in the cage cannot be targeted by any spells requiring line of sight (spells such as cloudkill) while it's in the cage. :teach:
Myst 04-17-04, 12:33 AM	Originally posted by Heron_Marked_Blade You are incorrect, Sir Myst. Emphasis mine. Unless you've created a hole in your forcecage effect, those walls (as you clearly pointed out) are "solid walls of force". Ergo, they block the line of effect, meaning that the target in the cage cannot be targeted by any spells requiring line of sight (spells such as cloudkill) while it's in the cage. :teach: ok, ok. i concede that point, though you can still cast cloudkill, then forcecage during the timestop so that way it is legal.
Al2902 04-17-04, 07:23 AM	Originally posted by Malben I'm speaking as someone who's outfitting NPCs, not as someone who's outfitting a PC. Unless I'm dealing with a major, recurring villain or a PC, a dimension door scroll makes more sense. I wish you'd ask what assumptions I'm using first, rather than make a preemptive assumption that I'm talking about a PC, and proceed to call my facts skewed. Especially if you're using the gear values for PCs and NPCs in the DMG, this approach is useful in a campaign that involves lots of NPC/PC fights rather than monsters -- you avoid inflating the PCs' wealth by setting up NPCs with single-use items, and having the NPCs use them. Besides, as I discussed earlier in the thread, it's really not reasonable for the use of forcecage and a gas spell to be common, because it's so inefficient in terms of translating spell levels and costly material components into damage dice. I guess I could have an NPC spend 10,800 gp on a cape of the mountebank, but it's probably more efficient for me, as a DM to use that money to improve something else about the character, since NPCs are not nearly so wealthy as PCs. I don't think my facts are skewed at all. I think we're simply failing to speak to the same set of assumptions about what makes for good choices about gear, and for whom. For any PC or for a villain or other adversarial NPC whom I expect to reappear often . . . yes, of course an unlimited use item is better. For me to keep my players from routinely using cheesy tactics against less important NPC adversaries, unlimited use items become prohibitively expensive unless I just want something that can run away nicely. With respect, that's called metagaming. The DM knows that the NPC is likely only to face one encounter before the PCs defeat him, but the NPC doesn't know that (or certainly doesn't expect it!). The rational NPC therefore buys an unlimited-use item rather than limited-use ones, particularly one that is useful to his everyday life. An NPC emissary/diplomat I created spent a lot of her disposable wealth on Boots of Teleportation, in spite of their short-term inferiority to Teleport scrolls (i.e. she only needed two in encountering the PCs). NPCs ought to be equipped in the context of their broader existence, not just kitted out to make them specific opponents to the PCs. Sure, perhaps an NPC would have a teleport scroll back-up in case confronted, particularly sedentary wizards in towers, but an NPC who regularly teleports/DDs around would likely invest in an unlimited-use item.
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-17-04, 10:25 AM	Originally posted by Al2902 With respect, that's called metagaming. Lol, that's what DMs do. You have to constantly keep the PCs' wealth level in mind, and create encounters that increase PCs' wealth according to the DMG. If PCs keep encountering and killing NPCs that are outfitted like PCs, their wealth goes out the roof. I have no problem with giving NPCs scrolls or charged items. It makes PC wealth much more controllable.
Malben 04-17-04, 02:26 PM	Quite. If you like to use lots of NPCs, you get a choice -- you have level 10 characters with a couple potions and a masterwork weapon, or you use lots of charged/single-use items. Besides, how is it metagaming? The NPC knows he's got only so much money. He or she will choose (or be given) a selection of gear that covers as many likelihoods as possible, with as little expense as possible. If I'm running a rog5/rng3/asn5, for example, he's going to get the obligatory +1 studded leather, a pair of boots of elvenkind, and a cloak of elvenkind, and probably also a +1 longsword or something. And probably I'll also want to give him a ranged weapon, so there's a +1 composite longbow, too. And to go with all this, I'm quite likely to throw in about a dozen really NICE magical arrows, with exactly the best enhancements to mess up the PCs as much as possible in as little time as possible. Since you can craft arrows one at a time in 3.5, this makes sense both in and out of character, since an assassin will always want to use the most effective weapon possible versus a given mark, without having to blow enormous amounts of cash on it. A little research into his marks, a visit to a crooked wizard, and a week later, and he's got 10-15 +1 unholy/holy/axiomatic/anarchic(choose the appropriate option for your party) *whatever*-bane arrows. It's not metagaming for this to happen. It's common sense. The gear values for NPCs leave them extremely weak in comparison to the PCs, unless they're set up using assumptions like this. The reason I give preference to single-use items for getaway devices is that assassins and other folks who are out to kill the PCs are highly likely to go into combat 1) planning to win, and 2) ready to deal with the fairly dim possibility of having to retreat. High-powered assassins probably do not run away often. The whole point of assassinating people as the PrC is set up to do it is to kill them quickly and quietly, preferably by cheating as much as possible so that they don't have a fair chance. Most of the time, the victim ought to be dead before he or she even knows the assassin is there. The PCs do not count as "most of the time," but the assassin doesn't know that. If the assassin knew that . . . he or she wouldn't take the contract in the first place.
Myst 04-18-04, 01:11 AM	Originally posted by Heron_Marked_Blade Lol, that's what DMs do. You have to constantly keep the PCs' wealth level in mind, and create encounters that increase PCs' wealth according to the DMG. If PCs keep encountering and killing NPCs that are outfitted like PCs, their wealth goes out the roof. I have no problem with giving NPCs scrolls or charged items. It makes PC wealth much more controllable. true, it does make the PC wealth more controllable, but the charts for PC wealth in the DMG are only suggested guidelines to use for PC wealth by lvl, they are not rules. there is nothing wrong with players having alot of money, just make NPC's and stuff with alot of starting treasure to match the PC's, or throw some no treasure encounters at them for a while. PC wealth really is determined by the campaign, not the DMG charts.
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-18-04, 02:38 AM	The problem with that is that now you have to raise the price of all the magic items in your campaign, or else you have 10th-level characters walking around with +10 weapons, +10 armor, Boots of Teleportation, Cloaks of Resistance +5, Rings of Spell Turning, Rings of Deflection +5, Daern's Instant Fortresses, Greater Metamagic Rods (despite only being able to cast 5th-level spells....), and Helms of Brilliance....and that's just for starters. I'm not saying you have to go by the DMG guidelines or you're doing it wrong. I'm saying that there's an inherent relationship between character level and character wealth that, if it's thrown out of whack, really DOES imbalance the game. I'm saying that the DMG guidelines for character wealth are actually pretty close on the money for keeping characters balanced to face specific CRs and specific levels of monsters.
meabolex 04-18-04, 03:04 AM	In my experience, acid fog is one of those "divide and conquer" movement-inhibiting fog spells, not a damage dealer. Honestly, you're getting relatively poor efficiency for acid fog's 2 levels above solid fog, the obviously superior spell for the cost. If you think acid fog is going to be used as a damage-dealer spell, it's folly. 2d6 of energy damage a round isn't going to cut it for a level 6 spell, even if it's in conjunction with the solid fog effect. The real purpose of solid fog is to neutralize ranged attackers, slow down the advance of melee attackers, and alter the overall state of the battlefield. The damage dealing acid fog gives creatures an incentive to get out of the fog. Any mage worth his salt can give anyone in a solid fog a lot of reasons to get out of the fog (fireball, cone of cold, great shout, meteor storm, etc). This spell shines against groups, as it makes their numbers irrelevant -- only those outside of the fog are really threats. Thus, it works as an excellent choke point spell -- it slows the enemy advance and effectively divides them as well. It makes sense that solid fog is an appropriately powered spell for its level, because freedom of movement is the same level. A simple 4th level spell combined with resist elements will ignore acid fog entirely. Bad trade.
Silverblade The Enchanter 04-18-04, 11:48 AM	...you all overlook the fact of *situational use*. Acid fog cast in a tight tunnel IS an evil SOB spell ;) And folk tend to have energy resistance to cold, fire and electricty prepared WAY more than acid.
chonjurer 04-18-04, 01:32 PM	Originally posted by Malben I'm speaking as someone who's outfitting NPCs, not as someone who's outfitting a PC. :rolleyes: I wish you'd ask what assumptions I'm using first I ran under the blanket assuption that you were trying to be a FAIR, REASONABLE, LOGICAL, CONSISTENT and non-metagaming DM. I apologize: the next time I won't give you the benefit of the doubt.
meabolex 04-18-04, 02:16 PM	Originally posted by Silverblade The Enchanter ...you all overlook the fact of *situational use*. Acid fog cast in a tight tunnel IS an evil SOB spell ;) And folk tend to have energy resistance to cold, fire and electricty prepared WAY more than acid. And Solid fog is also a powerful spell if cast in a tight tunnel. The only difference is that 2d6 a round, and honestly, I'd rather save my level 6 spells for something more useful. Situational use is rarely something you prepare generally. The erase spell is extremely useful given the right circumstances. But hardly anyone prepares it. This spell is just too much for the given level -- I assure you that 95% of the time, solid fog will function just as well or better. To exploit a certain situation that occasionally comes up means that you'll have to adjust your spell list to work with this spell effectively. It's not worth it -- just use solid fog.
Heron_Marked_Blade 04-18-04, 04:11 PM	Originally posted by chonjurer I ran under the blanket assuption that you were trying to be a FAIR, REASONABLE, LOGICAL, CONSISTENT and non-metagaming DM. Are you saying that you as a DM never metagame? That you never take the PCs' capabilities into account when you're planning encounters/adventures/campaigns? I find that rather surprising, and would like to ask how that works for you. I apologize: the next time I won't give you the benefit of the doubt. Must we be snide? And are you really judging another person's DMing ability/style based on the extremely limited data we are given on these boards? I hope not; I'd think that long-term posters on these boards would understand that there is no one right way to DM. Malben is suddenly "[un]FAIR, [un]REASONABLE, LOGICAL, [and in]CONSISTENT" because he outfits NPCs with single use items? There are many reasons why NPCs would have charged or single use items over use per day or unlimited items, the primary reason being a more limited budget than PCs have. How often (don't "metagame" here) does your average NPC need to teleport? [i]Boots of Teleportation: 49,000gp Scroll of Teleport: 1,125gp He'd need to teleport 44 times before the boots pay themselves off. Unless he's doing a whole lot of traveling, he'd (logically) purchase a few scrolls of teleport and spend the other 45,000gp on more useful items. :teach: