Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Trollgarden 01-17-04, 12:48 PM	I just want to know why one cannot use Enlarge to make a string into a serviceable rope. Or Reduce a door so it no longer fits in the doorway in order to open it. Or just about any other snifty idea you can come up with? Why has this useful spell been nerfed into a solely combat spell? Does anyone have any experience of abuse with this use of the previous versions of Enlarge Person?
farscapesg1 01-17-04, 01:08 PM	Why, because WOTC is against spells with multiple uses. Not to mention spells that could be used both for Combat and outside of combat. Personally, I find this to be one of the biggest travesties of 3.X in that they want to seperate all the spells. :sad: In 2e, Enlarge and Reduce were the same spell and they broke that up in 3.0 (as with a lot of other multiple spells combined together). This was a move that I was not real fond of.:mad: 3.5 expanded on this idea with spells like Enlarge Person. Not only did they take out the option of enlarging objects (one of the most useful features of the spell in my opinion), but also the ability to enlarge creatures. Now the spell only works on people (I.E., humanoids). Honestly, I don't understand the purpose of this change. My opinion is that a lot of people complained that the spell was not combat-intensive enough. Of course, for some reason everything has to revolve around combat in the rules :( Further, to make a comparable spell that would only work on objects would make it a 0-level spell. With the bonuses that Enlarge Person gives and the huge size increase, a comparable spell designed for objects that would be worth a 1st level spell slot would have to increase sizes past the +50% limit of the 3.0 version. Something that continued to improve at 10% per spellcaster level with a limit of 200% percent. Personally, I would like it to also work both ways, subject to the caster's will when casting the spell.
Trollgarden 01-18-04, 11:46 AM	We are seeing eye to eye on this. I did not mind that they made enlarge and reduce two separate spells. In retrospect I thought that reducing a door might be out of line as it could replace the 2nd lvl spell knock. But if one rules that the door is part of the building you would need to be of sufficient level to affect the enire building. Or the door gets weaker and easier to break but won't shrink in a way that allows it to swing free of its latch. One of the things I like about playing a mage is not the firepower but the innovative ways one can use their spells to help them on their quest. I would take a 1st lvl spell slot to affect objects. The ability to affect ones enviroment is most useful. If WOTC feels the need to separate all the multi use spells why did they not include a version that was for non-combat?
farscapesg1 01-20-04, 01:52 PM	They didn't include an option to affect objects because it appears (at least in my opinion) that WOTC is driving the DnD game more towards a "CRPG-like" atmosphere. In otherwords, more and more of it revolves around combat, so more and more of the spells that cannot be used directly in combat will slowly dissappear from the game system as it evolves.
kreynolds 01-20-04, 02:25 PM	Odd. In my experience, 95% of the time Enlarge was used on objects was specifically _for_ combat purposes anyway.
Zherog 01-20-04, 02:46 PM	There is still a 3rd level spell Shrink Item for making things smaller. While there is no equivelant spell for making them larger, as a DM I would allow you to make one. It seems a natural extension of the existing spell.