Clarification on incorporeality [Archive] - Wizards Community

Clarification on incorporeality [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
KnH
07-28-07, 09:24 PM I just wanted to check something about the effect of spells on incorporeal creatures, since its often difficult to understand.

In the PHB it says that:

They can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, +1 or better magic weapons, spells, spell-like effects, or supernatural effects. Even when struck by spells, magical effects, or magic weapons, however, they have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source. ....

... but deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against them.

So, incorporeal creatures have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from spells other than [force] spells. But what about spells that don't do damage? Do they still have a 50% failure chance, or is that only damage spells.

So, for example, if someone tried to cast a targeted Dispel Magic on an incorporeal creature, would it always affect them, affect them 50% of the time, or not affect them at all.

(not sure why it wouldn't affect them, but there may be some reason why you can't)

Thanks for any help.
Zarreth_Nessad
07-28-07, 09:50 PM So, incorporeal creatures have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from spells other than [force] spells. But what about spells that don't do damage? Do they still have a 50% failure chance, or is that only damage spells.

So, for example, if someone tried to cast a targeted Dispel Magic on an incorporeal creature, would it always affect them, affect them 50% of the time, or not affect them at all.

(not sure why it wouldn't affect them, but there may be some reason why you can't)

Thanks for any help.

Dispel Magic does not have a "corporeal" effect to it, so it would not be subject to the 50% "miss" chance. You still have to have LoE to the incorporeal creature, though. As an example of a spell with a corporeal effect, look at spells such as fireball, lightning, the Orb spells, etc. Probably the main spells that would be argued about would be the ray spells (spells with Effect: Ray). It could be argued that the ray itself is a "corporeal" effect, and thus subject to the miss chance. To be honest, I haven't tried looking that up.
SilentOne
07-28-07, 10:03 PM A fireball has a 50% chance, a phantasmal killer has a 50% chance. It all depends on one thing: damage. If the spell deals damage, then there's a 50% chance it's ignored. The source, in these cases, isn't the spell, but the mage casting them. If the spellcaster turns incorporeal, their spells are likewise, and thus won't suffer any "miss chance" against a similarly incorporeal foe.

However, any effect that doesn't do damage (bull's strength, enervation, entangle) could still affect the incorporeal creature.

Of course, as usual, DM's are allowed to houserule that effects like entangle couldn't, since the "effect" is coming from the moving plants affected by the spell, but per RAW, it's the spell's effect that doesn't do damage, and thus isn't ignored.
KnH
07-28-07, 10:41 PM Wait, SilentOne, that doesn't quite make sense. I think either you used a bad example, or the rules are a bit weird, or both.

Phantasmal Killer is a bad example, because it doesn't do damage. It either kills or it doesn't. So since it doesn't do damage, theres no 50% chance to be ignored, right? Otherwise, other targeted save or lose would also have a 50% failure.

What about a spell like Solid Fog? It doesn't do damage, but does it still have the same effect on incorporeal creatures? Common sense says no- since they're incorporeal, the fog doesn't stop them at all.

Zarreth_Nessad, what your saying makes sense intuitively, but the problem is that it leads to a huge amount of spells in which the DM has to decide whether the effect is corporeal or not. I'd rather it be a bit more concrete.

What I'd like is for some easy to follow, reliable guidelines that can be applied on all spells, with exceptions added as they come up.
The only thing I can really see working right at this minute is that all spells have a 50% chance to not affect incorporeal creatures, unless they:
Have the [force] descriptor,
Is a "Target: xxx" or "Targets: xxx" spell,
Is an "Area: xxx Creatures" or "Area: xxx Objects" spell.

Do you think this would work? From a quick think over spells that jump into my mind, this seems to describe all the spells that would seem to affect incorporeal creatures.
Zarreth_Nessad
07-28-07, 10:48 PM I'm aware of that, but on the same note, the DM always has to make a huge number of choices. If he keeps up with things, he'll have a list of what his PC's can do, what spells, etc, and make his decisions beforehand, if he decides (or if one of the PC's can make happen) that incorporeal creatures will be an issue per game session.

As far as Phantasmal Killer, there would not be any 50% chance unless he failed the Will save, then made the Fort save. Before that, there is no actual damage, just a save or die.

As far as Solid Fog: by RAW, ignoring the flavor text of "is so thick" etc, it would fully affect the incorporeal creature. By common sense, you could argue about for ages and not have a definitive answer (observation based on other threads I've read where some people have skulls that thick...)
zorgling25
07-28-07, 10:52 PM The only thing I can really see working right at this minute is that all spells have a 50% chance to not affect incorporeal creatures, unless they:
Have the [force] descriptor,
Is a "Target: xxx" or "Targets: xxx" spell,
Is an "Area: xxx Creatures" or "Area: xxx Objects" spell.

Do you think this would work? From a quick think over spells that jump into my mind, this seems to describe all the spells that would seem to affect incorporeal creatures.

That doesn't work, because it means that Shocking Grasp voids the 50% miss chance, while IMO it should have it (it is a Target: xxx spell that makes touch attacks).
Its also important to note that Positive and Negative energy effects always void the 50% miss chance.
bigbythewise
07-29-07, 01:26 AM Zarreth_Nessad, what your saying makes sense intuitively, but the problem is that it leads to a huge amount of spells in which the DM has to decide whether the effect is corporeal or not. I'd rather it be a bit more concrete.
I always thought that a *source* mean the caster, not the spell.
zorgling25
07-29-07, 01:41 AM I always thought that a *source* mean the caster, not the spell.

Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it has a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source (except for positive energy, negative energy, force effects such as magic missile, or attacks made with ghost touch weapons).

Taken from the SRD entry on Incorporeal Traits.

I've taken the way this is worded to mean that "positive energy, negative energy, force effects, and attacks made with ghost touch weapons" are types of sources.
bigbythewise
07-29-07, 03:44 AM Taken from the SRD entry on Incorporeal Traits.

I've taken the way this is worded to mean that "positive energy, negative energy, force effects, and attacks made with ghost touch weapons" are types of sources.

It seems so. :)
So all the other types are corporeal then.
zorgling25
07-29-07, 11:30 AM It seems so. :)
So all the other types are corporeal then.

No, those listed are all corporeal sources that are exceptions to the incorporeal sources only rule. An example of an incorporeal source would be an attack made by an incorporeal attacker.
Part-Human2
07-29-07, 10:08 PM Nondamaging spell effects affect incorporeal creatures normally unless they require corporeal targets to function (such as implosion) or they create a corporeal effect that incorporeal creatures would normally be unaffected by (such as a web or wall of stone spell).

Does that help?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
KnH 07-28-07, 09:24 PM	I just wanted to check something about the effect of spells on incorporeal creatures, since its often difficult to understand. In the PHB it says that: They can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, +1 or better magic weapons, spells, spell-like effects, or supernatural effects. Even when struck by spells, magical effects, or magic weapons, however, they have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source. .... ... but deflection bonuses and force effects (such as mage armor) work normally against them. So, incorporeal creatures have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from spells other than [force] spells. But what about spells that don't do damage? Do they still have a 50% failure chance, or is that only damage spells. So, for example, if someone tried to cast a targeted Dispel Magic on an incorporeal creature, would it always affect them, affect them 50% of the time, or not affect them at all. (not sure why it wouldn't affect them, but there may be some reason why you can't) Thanks for any help.
Zarreth_Nessad 07-28-07, 09:50 PM	So, incorporeal creatures have a 50% chance to ignore any damage from spells other than [force] spells. But what about spells that don't do damage? Do they still have a 50% failure chance, or is that only damage spells. So, for example, if someone tried to cast a targeted Dispel Magic on an incorporeal creature, would it always affect them, affect them 50% of the time, or not affect them at all. (not sure why it wouldn't affect them, but there may be some reason why you can't) Thanks for any help. Dispel Magic does not have a "corporeal" effect to it, so it would not be subject to the 50% "miss" chance. You still have to have LoE to the incorporeal creature, though. As an example of a spell with a corporeal effect, look at spells such as fireball, lightning, the Orb spells, etc. Probably the main spells that would be argued about would be the ray spells (spells with Effect: Ray). It could be argued that the ray itself is a "corporeal" effect, and thus subject to the miss chance. To be honest, I haven't tried looking that up.
SilentOne 07-28-07, 10:03 PM	A fireball has a 50% chance, a phantasmal killer has a 50% chance. It all depends on one thing: damage. If the spell deals damage, then there's a 50% chance it's ignored. The source, in these cases, isn't the spell, but the mage casting them. If the spellcaster turns incorporeal, their spells are likewise, and thus won't suffer any "miss chance" against a similarly incorporeal foe. However, any effect that doesn't do damage (bull's strength, enervation, entangle) could still affect the incorporeal creature. Of course, as usual, DM's are allowed to houserule that effects like entangle couldn't, since the "effect" is coming from the moving plants affected by the spell, but per RAW, it's the spell's effect that doesn't do damage, and thus isn't ignored.
KnH 07-28-07, 10:41 PM	Wait, SilentOne, that doesn't quite make sense. I think either you used a bad example, or the rules are a bit weird, or both. Phantasmal Killer is a bad example, because it doesn't do damage. It either kills or it doesn't. So since it doesn't do damage, theres no 50% chance to be ignored, right? Otherwise, other targeted save or lose would also have a 50% failure. What about a spell like Solid Fog? It doesn't do damage, but does it still have the same effect on incorporeal creatures? Common sense says no- since they're incorporeal, the fog doesn't stop them at all. Zarreth_Nessad, what your saying makes sense intuitively, but the problem is that it leads to a huge amount of spells in which the DM has to decide whether the effect is corporeal or not. I'd rather it be a bit more concrete. What I'd like is for some easy to follow, reliable guidelines that can be applied on all spells, with exceptions added as they come up. The only thing I can really see working right at this minute is that all spells have a 50% chance to not affect incorporeal creatures, unless they: Have the [force] descriptor, Is a "Target: xxx" or "Targets: xxx" spell, Is an "Area: xxx Creatures" or "Area: xxx Objects" spell. Do you think this would work? From a quick think over spells that jump into my mind, this seems to describe all the spells that would seem to affect incorporeal creatures.
Zarreth_Nessad 07-28-07, 10:48 PM	I'm aware of that, but on the same note, the DM always has to make a huge number of choices. If he keeps up with things, he'll have a list of what his PC's can do, what spells, etc, and make his decisions beforehand, if he decides (or if one of the PC's can make happen) that incorporeal creatures will be an issue per game session. As far as Phantasmal Killer, there would not be any 50% chance unless he failed the Will save, then made the Fort save. Before that, there is no actual damage, just a save or die. As far as Solid Fog: by RAW, ignoring the flavor text of "is so thick" etc, it would fully affect the incorporeal creature. By common sense, you could argue about for ages and not have a definitive answer (observation based on other threads I've read where some people have skulls that thick...)
zorgling25 07-28-07, 10:52 PM	The only thing I can really see working right at this minute is that all spells have a 50% chance to not affect incorporeal creatures, unless they: Have the [force] descriptor, Is a "Target: xxx" or "Targets: xxx" spell, Is an "Area: xxx Creatures" or "Area: xxx Objects" spell. Do you think this would work? From a quick think over spells that jump into my mind, this seems to describe all the spells that would seem to affect incorporeal creatures. That doesn't work, because it means that Shocking Grasp voids the 50% miss chance, while IMO it should have it (it is a Target: xxx spell that makes touch attacks). Its also important to note that Positive and Negative energy effects always void the 50% miss chance.
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 01:26 AM	Zarreth_Nessad, what your saying makes sense intuitively, but the problem is that it leads to a huge amount of spells in which the DM has to decide whether the effect is corporeal or not. I'd rather it be a bit more concrete. I always thought that a source mean the caster, not the spell.
zorgling25 07-29-07, 01:41 AM	I always thought that a source mean the caster, not the spell. Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it has a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source (except for positive energy, negative energy, force effects such as magic missile, or attacks made with ghost touch weapons). Taken from the SRD entry on Incorporeal Traits. I've taken the way this is worded to mean that "positive energy, negative energy, force effects, and attacks made with ghost touch weapons" are types of sources.
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 03:44 AM	Taken from the SRD entry on Incorporeal Traits. I've taken the way this is worded to mean that "positive energy, negative energy, force effects, and attacks made with ghost touch weapons" are types of sources. It seems so. :) So all the other types are corporeal then.
zorgling25 07-29-07, 11:30 AM	It seems so. :) So all the other types are corporeal then. No, those listed are all corporeal sources that are exceptions to the incorporeal sources only rule. An example of an incorporeal source would be an attack made by an incorporeal attacker.
Part-Human2 07-29-07, 10:08 PM	Nondamaging spell effects affect incorporeal creatures normally unless they require corporeal targets to function (such as implosion) or they create a corporeal effect that incorporeal creatures would normally be unaffected by (such as a web or wall of stone spell). Does that help?