Conjuration VS. Evocation [Archive] - Wizards Community

Conjuration VS. Evocation [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
DemonDragonJ
10-14-05, 02:12 PM I know that conjuration and evocation are two different schools of magic, but there are many spells in these schools that seem to be similar to each other.

For example: the orb spells from Complete Arcane are conjuration (creation) spells, yet they seem to me to be more akin to evocation spells such as fireball or lightning bolt.

Could someone please explain this to me?
IMarvinTPA
10-14-05, 02:15 PM Take a d6, if it rolls even, it's Conjuration. If it rolls odd it's Evocation.

If you want more logic than that, I wish you the best of luck on this unrecognizable corpse of a topic (Although DNA analysis on the remains suggest it was a horse.).

IMarv
Dragonsblood
10-14-05, 02:17 PM There is already a discussion on this currently taking place here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=518236)

But for the most part the orb subject is a dead horse. Most people agree with you.
Rake
10-14-05, 02:18 PM Misconception.

If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration.

If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation.
DemonDragonJ
10-14-05, 02:22 PM Misconception.

If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration.

If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation.

Now I am starting to understand. Thank you very much.

(Wow! What fast responses this thread received!)
Marshall
10-14-05, 02:30 PM Misconception.

If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration.

Yes. Conjuration(Summoning) or (Calling)

If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation.

No. Then its Conjuration(creation).

Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc.
Kaboth
10-14-05, 03:04 PM You are going to get a two sided arguement on this topic of a dead horse.

All the wizard/sorceror Evokers are screaming foul because something does good damage other than that particular school and if they specialize they usually do not take conjuration summoning and as such can not take those spells.

Other people are going to say its fair game because magic is magic and if thats how they explain something should work then thats how it should be.

1 part jealousy + 1 part justification = Dead horse arguement.

In other words, follow the rules as is or make house rules for your gaming group. Either way it's what lets you have fun is the ultimate answer.
Nephlite
10-14-05, 03:08 PM Yes. Conjuration(Summoning) or (Calling)

No. Then its Conjuration(creation).

Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc.
Nuh uh, you aren't touching my Energy (Acid) Melf's Acid arrow, it stays Conjuration, thank you very much!

And while in our world we don't count acid as a energy: in D&D it is.
Purkake
10-14-05, 04:06 PM I'd say that the difference is that evocation creates things out of magic and doesn't summon them from anywhere. Just look at Wall of Ice, it is magical and thus allows SR. Now wall of iron is conjured from err. somewhere and totally non-magical. Soi f the bowling ball was made of pure energy then it would be evocation.
Kaboth
10-14-05, 04:15 PM OK but here is the catch...

Summoning a Fire Elemental from the Elemental plane of fire is what? What is to say you could not summon a ball of fire from the same plane and hurl it? There are para-elemental planes as well.... I am sure there is a plane of force energy too.... That is what makes the spells conjuration/summoning... I can completely see the rational and logic behind the spells.

FYI- I am not even an arcane caster, I am merely here for the debate. One campaign I play a warlock and in the other I play a Paladin... So I am arguing from a non-biased point... There is only one spell I think that is broken and I forget the name.... its from Frostburn and does 3d6 dex damage...
Purkake
10-14-05, 05:16 PM It's not that you "summon" the energy, but you create it with magic. If you created lasting and physical things(as minor creation) then it would be conjuration. Summoning a fire elemental is just that *summoning* it and thus Conjuration(summoning).

It's all here:

Evocation

Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects, and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage.
Kaboth
10-14-05, 05:27 PM It's not that you "summon" the energy, but you create it with magic. If you created lasting and physical things(as minor creation) then it would be conjuration. Summoning a fire elemental is just that *summoning* it and thus Conjuration(summoning).

It's all here:

As said before I can see the line of logic that made these line of spells. The use the term "creation" which completely falls in line witht he spell. IN ADDITION, if you look look at fire seeds which is a divine spell, it has no SR as well and it is a 6th level spell and guess what school it is... Conjuration and add the fact the damage is ranged touch AND can do up to 20d6 damage. I guess no one looked at that spell... Why is there not a big uproar about this spell?
Purkake
10-14-05, 05:51 PM As said before I can see the line of logic that made these line of spells. The use the term "creation" which completely falls in line witht he spell. IN ADDITION, if you look look at fire seeds which is a divine spell, it has no SR as well and it is a 6th level spell and guess what school it is... Conjuration and add the fact the damage is ranged touch AND can do up to 20d6 damage. I guess no one looked at that spell... Why is there not a big uproar about this spell?

First of all there has been an uproar just about everything(and there are a couple every week about some things *cough*orb spells*cough*)

Second it is a druid and domain only spell. And as long as it fits the damage caps it doesn't matter if it is conjuration or necromancy or whatever.
MysteryGilgamesh
10-14-05, 05:55 PM Why is there not a big uproar about this spell?

Because WotC sends ninjas to break the kneecaps of anyone who doesn't share their fanatical love for overpowering the divine casting classes while the arcane are usually an utter joke when compared to them? ^_~
Purkake
10-14-05, 06:04 PM Also fire seeds is the LAST thing to blame the Druids for, who wants to do puny fire damage when you can just turn into some cool prehistoric mommoth things(Frostburn)
Kaboth
10-14-05, 06:06 PM Also fire seeds is the LAST thing to blame the Druids for, who wants to do puny fire damage when you can just turn into some cool prehistoric mommoth things(Frostburn)

Its not just a druid spell FYI, its also fire and sun domain too... Clerics of Pelor rejoice....
Purkake
10-14-05, 06:10 PM Clerics of Pelor are undead-killing wussies anyway, once a day fire seeds isn't going to make them unbalanced. And who takes the Fire domain? Ugh

well divine>arcane unfortunatly, but psionics are cooler anyway :cool:
Mystic Mouse
10-14-05, 09:16 PM removed
Rake
10-14-05, 10:46 PM No. Then its Conjuration(creation).

Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc.

True, bowling ball was a bad example. Let me rephrase:

If it summons ordinary fire from another plane (or this one), it's conjuration.

If it makes magical fire, it's evocation.

Melf's is conjuration because it's calling a perfectly ordinary nettle of acid from [wherever]. No spell resistance.. the spell just calls the acid and hurls it. After that it's just a thrown glob of acid. If you -threw- acid at someone, they wouldn't get spell resistance, after all.

Whereas fireball creates fire that is magical in nature. Thus it is evocation, and SR applies.
Marshall
10-15-05, 04:08 AM True, bowling ball was a bad example. Let me rephrase:

If it summons ordinary fire from another plane (or this one), it's conjuration.

No. You're still manipulating energy, its Evocation.

If it makes magical fire, it's evocation.

Melf's is conjuration because it's calling a perfectly ordinary nettle of acid from [wherever]. No spell resistance.. the spell just calls the acid and hurls it. After that it's just a thrown glob of acid. If you -threw- acid at someone, they wouldn't get spell resistance, after all.

Maybe, fine line here. Conjuration is the manipulation of Matter, Evocation is the manipulation of Energy. If D&D is going to consider Acid 'energy' than its an Evocation spell. If its a material, than its Conj. I dont care one way or the other, just pick one.

Whereas fireball creates fire that is magical in nature. Thus it is evocation, and SR applies.

No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for)

Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport)
Quirriff
10-15-05, 04:47 AM This is all Bullsquash, every Mage knows that matter is energy in a different form.
Kaboth
10-15-05, 05:10 AM Well technically even solid matter is comprised of energy. In fact I think physics explains all things are made up of energy...
Purkake
10-15-05, 08:27 AM No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for)

Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport)

No, it is not there because the designers put it there. There are rules for that, if the fire is MAGICAL then SPELL resistance applies, because SR works for magical stuff. Are you saying that since my candle does energy(fire) damage it would have to go past my SR?

This is not about school balance, but about logic(yay, it is used somewhere). So if the spell says that it creates a nonmagical ball of acid that you throw, then it is a nonmagical ball of acid.
Joanem
10-15-05, 10:10 AM This might help:
pg 172 of the PHB states; "Each conjuration belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures or some form of energy to you (the summoning sub school), actually transport creatures from another plane of existance to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport people or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation)."

While pg 173 states; "Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing."

So since the Orb spells summon alredy existing energy then they are conjuration.
Marshall
10-15-05, 01:56 PM No, it is not there because the designers put it there. There are rules for that, if the fire is MAGICAL then SPELL resistance applies, because SR works for magical stuff. Are you saying that since my candle does energy(fire) damage it would have to go past my SR?

Uh, no. One, there is no spell. Two, Its energy damage which should ignore SR to start with.

This is not about school balance, but about logic(yay, it is used somewhere). So if the spell says that it creates a nonmagical ball of acid that you throw, then it is a nonmagical ball of acid.

Thats the problem, it IS about school balance. Logic is left on the side of the road when you come up with non-magical balls of SOUND(or fire/electricity/cold) that you can throw.

So since the Orb spells summon alredy existing energy then they are conjuration.

Uh, huh. And what about tapping an "unseen source of power" precludes Evoc from bringing in outside energy.
OTOH, "they create something out of nothing" is either Conj(creation) or Trans, not Evoc.

If your're going to have Schools, and have mechanical effects based on those schools, then you need to actually make those schools consistent and consistently valueable.
Banpai
10-15-05, 03:31 PM No. You're still manipulating energy, its Evocation.

I dissagree you don´t manipulate the energy it´s more like it´s a calling spell from the elemental planes (acid actually comes from the elemental plain of earth, lighting is catchet in a strom on the elemental plain of air, fire (now thats obvious), ice elemental plain of water.
And hurls it toward the target though a spell that lets the acid apear above the target (ref save!) is certanlry conjuration. On the other hand a ray of acid that springs from your hands and hits the cest of several targets is in my book evocation.

Maybe, fine line here. Conjuration is the manipulation of Matter, Evocation is the manipulation of Energy. If D&D is going to consider Acid 'energy' than its an Evocation spell. If its a material, than its Conj. I dont care one way or the other, just pick one.

Conjuration can malipulate Matter (air into something else, IIRC matter can´t be destroyed only changed, but disintegrate does the very same thing (something into dust) and is not conjuration ...right? :)

No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for)

That is a valid stance and there are quite some game designers who state the very same, to remove the SR on energy spells to make them more usefull and to increase the worth of energy resistance.

Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport)

Evocation is not a bad school it´s great for blasting stuff(and contingencies and other nice spells) but compaired to illusion it lacks versatility (though true seeing makes illusions rather useless too).
Marshall
10-15-05, 09:26 PM I dissagree you don´t manipulate the energy it´s more like it´s a calling spell from the elemental planes (acid actually comes from the elemental plain of earth, lighting is catchet in a strom on the elemental plain of air, fire (now thats obvious), ice elemental plain of water.
And hurls it toward the target though a spell that lets the acid apear above the target (ref save!) is certanlry conjuration. On the other hand a ray of acid that springs from your hands and hits the cest of several targets is in my book evocation.

Theres also nothing to say that the Evocation effect of a Fireball isnt opening a small Gate to the elemental plane of fire that fills the 20'r sphere with flame. You could also say that Fireball instantly changes the air in the AOE into flame. That would make Fireball a Transmutation. Even arguing that Fireball creates flames in the area would dictate that its a Conj(Creation) spell now.
Or you could just say that its an 'energy manipulation' spell and leave it an Evoc.

Conjuration can malipulate Matter (air into something else, IIRC matter can´t be destroyed only changed, but disintegrate does the very same thing (something into dust) and is not conjuration ...right?

Good point. Conjuration should concentrate on the manipulation of matter from point to point; Calling, Summoning, Teleporting; not its shaping/reshaping/deshaping. Its not Conj(creation) its Trans(creation).

Evocation is not a bad school it´s great for blasting stuff(and contingencies and other nice spells) but compaired to illusion it lacks versatility (though true seeing makes illusions rather useless too).

True. But blasting stuff is a generally weak option, and once you let other schools have good blasting options you devalue Evoc to the point that it becomes a dump option.
Arcanix
10-16-05, 02:08 AM Another alternate criteria to distinguish between the two schools is spell duration. IMO evocation is magical not just because it creates energy, but much more so because it evokes effect that are here and gone in the blink of an eye; most energy evocation spells are of instantaneous duration. In other words their energy cannot exist or last without magic.

By contrast conjuration energy spells; including but not limited to the various orb spells; tend to create energy effects whose existence is not dependent upon the magic that summoned them; and most of the 4th level orb spells do have secondary effects that do last at least the round.

Delivery channels also matter; most evocations, being magically aimed, automatically hit, but allow saves for half if the target somehow resists the damage. Conjurations being manually or mundanely aimed instead require ranged touch attacks, but allow no save. If they hit and affect; they hit so accurately damage cannot be reduced by the target's actions at that point. The long ranges of most evocations and close ranges of most conjurations point to this as well.

Indeed a target that would otherwise be affected by a conjuration spell gets its defletion bonus to AC; indicating that the target is hit; but not directly enough to cause damage, again because it is delivered by the mundane force of the caster's throw, not the magical speed of an energy evocation; which a target's deflection bonus does not help in the least in avoiding the hit.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DemonDragonJ 10-14-05, 02:12 PM	I know that conjuration and evocation are two different schools of magic, but there are many spells in these schools that seem to be similar to each other. For example: the orb spells from Complete Arcane are conjuration (creation) spells, yet they seem to me to be more akin to evocation spells such as fireball or lightning bolt. Could someone please explain this to me?
IMarvinTPA 10-14-05, 02:15 PM	Take a d6, if it rolls even, it's Conjuration. If it rolls odd it's Evocation. If you want more logic than that, I wish you the best of luck on this unrecognizable corpse of a topic (Although DNA analysis on the remains suggest it was a horse.). IMarv
Dragonsblood 10-14-05, 02:17 PM	There is already a discussion on this currently taking place here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=518236) But for the most part the orb subject is a dead horse. Most people agree with you.
Rake 10-14-05, 02:18 PM	Misconception. If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration. If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation.
DemonDragonJ 10-14-05, 02:22 PM	Misconception. If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration. If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation. Now I am starting to understand. Thank you very much. (Wow! What fast responses this thread received!)
Marshall 10-14-05, 02:30 PM	Misconception. If the spell summons (or... conjures) a perfectly ordinary bowling ball from the elemental plane of almost-sprorts right above the target's head, it's conjuration. Yes. Conjuration(Summoning) or (Calling) If the spell creates a magical bowling ball out of nothing right above the target's head, it's evocation. No. Then its Conjuration(creation). Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc.
Kaboth 10-14-05, 03:04 PM	You are going to get a two sided arguement on this topic of a dead horse. All the wizard/sorceror Evokers are screaming foul because something does good damage other than that particular school and if they specialize they usually do not take conjuration summoning and as such can not take those spells. Other people are going to say its fair game because magic is magic and if thats how they explain something should work then thats how it should be. 1 part jealousy + 1 part justification = Dead horse arguement. In other words, follow the rules as is or make house rules for your gaming group. Either way it's what lets you have fun is the ultimate answer.
Nephlite 10-14-05, 03:08 PM	Yes. Conjuration(Summoning) or (Calling) No. Then its Conjuration(creation). Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc. Nuh uh, you aren't touching my Energy (Acid) Melf's Acid arrow, it stays Conjuration, thank you very much! And while in our world we don't count acid as a energy: in D&D it is.
Purkake 10-14-05, 04:06 PM	I'd say that the difference is that evocation creates things out of magic and doesn't summon them from anywhere. Just look at Wall of Ice, it is magical and thus allows SR. Now wall of iron is conjured from err. somewhere and totally non-magical. Soi f the bowling ball was made of pure energy then it would be evocation.
Kaboth 10-14-05, 04:15 PM	OK but here is the catch... Summoning a Fire Elemental from the Elemental plane of fire is what? What is to say you could not summon a ball of fire from the same plane and hurl it? There are para-elemental planes as well.... I am sure there is a plane of force energy too.... That is what makes the spells conjuration/summoning... I can completely see the rational and logic behind the spells. FYI- I am not even an arcane caster, I am merely here for the debate. One campaign I play a warlock and in the other I play a Paladin... So I am arguing from a non-biased point... There is only one spell I think that is broken and I forget the name.... its from Frostburn and does 3d6 dex damage...
Purkake 10-14-05, 05:16 PM	It's not that you "summon" the energy, but you create it with magic. If you created lasting and physical things(as minor creation) then it would be conjuration. Summoning a fire elemental is just that summoning it and thus Conjuration(summoning). It's all here: Evocation Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects, and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage.
Kaboth 10-14-05, 05:27 PM	It's not that you "summon" the energy, but you create it with magic. If you created lasting and physical things(as minor creation) then it would be conjuration. Summoning a fire elemental is just that summoning it and thus Conjuration(summoning). It's all here: As said before I can see the line of logic that made these line of spells. The use the term "creation" which completely falls in line witht he spell. IN ADDITION, if you look look at fire seeds which is a divine spell, it has no SR as well and it is a 6th level spell and guess what school it is... Conjuration and add the fact the damage is ranged touch AND can do up to 20d6 damage. I guess no one looked at that spell... Why is there not a big uproar about this spell?
Purkake 10-14-05, 05:51 PM	As said before I can see the line of logic that made these line of spells. The use the term "creation" which completely falls in line witht he spell. IN ADDITION, if you look look at fire seeds which is a divine spell, it has no SR as well and it is a 6th level spell and guess what school it is... Conjuration and add the fact the damage is ranged touch AND can do up to 20d6 damage. I guess no one looked at that spell... Why is there not a big uproar about this spell? First of all there has been an uproar just about everything(and there are a couple every week about some things coughorb spellscough) Second it is a druid and domain only spell. And as long as it fits the damage caps it doesn't matter if it is conjuration or necromancy or whatever.
MysteryGilgamesh 10-14-05, 05:55 PM	Why is there not a big uproar about this spell? Because WotC sends ninjas to break the kneecaps of anyone who doesn't share their fanatical love for overpowering the divine casting classes while the arcane are usually an utter joke when compared to them? ^_~
Purkake 10-14-05, 06:04 PM	Also fire seeds is the LAST thing to blame the Druids for, who wants to do puny fire damage when you can just turn into some cool prehistoric mommoth things(Frostburn)
Kaboth 10-14-05, 06:06 PM	Also fire seeds is the LAST thing to blame the Druids for, who wants to do puny fire damage when you can just turn into some cool prehistoric mommoth things(Frostburn) Its not just a druid spell FYI, its also fire and sun domain too... Clerics of Pelor rejoice....
Purkake 10-14-05, 06:10 PM	Clerics of Pelor are undead-killing wussies anyway, once a day fire seeds isn't going to make them unbalanced. And who takes the Fire domain? Ugh well divine>arcane unfortunatly, but psionics are cooler anyway :cool:
Mystic Mouse 10-14-05, 09:16 PM	removed
Rake 10-14-05, 10:46 PM	No. Then its Conjuration(creation). Its real easy. If the spell does Energy damage or has a Force effect, its Evocation. Please go thru ALL your book and change any spell with an Energy descriptor(excepting the Summon spells) or that creates a Force effect to Evoc. True, bowling ball was a bad example. Let me rephrase: If it summons ordinary fire from another plane (or this one), it's conjuration. If it makes magical fire, it's evocation. Melf's is conjuration because it's calling a perfectly ordinary nettle of acid from [wherever]. No spell resistance.. the spell just calls the acid and hurls it. After that it's just a thrown glob of acid. If you -threw- acid at someone, they wouldn't get spell resistance, after all. Whereas fireball creates fire that is magical in nature. Thus it is evocation, and SR applies.
Marshall 10-15-05, 04:08 AM	True, bowling ball was a bad example. Let me rephrase: If it summons ordinary fire from another plane (or this one), it's conjuration. No. You're still manipulating energy, its Evocation. If it makes magical fire, it's evocation. Melf's is conjuration because it's calling a perfectly ordinary nettle of acid from [wherever]. No spell resistance.. the spell just calls the acid and hurls it. After that it's just a thrown glob of acid. If you -threw- acid at someone, they wouldn't get spell resistance, after all. Maybe, fine line here. Conjuration is the manipulation of Matter, Evocation is the manipulation of Energy. If D&D is going to consider Acid 'energy' than its an Evocation spell. If its a material, than its Conj. I dont care one way or the other, just pick one. Whereas fireball creates fire that is magical in nature. Thus it is evocation, and SR applies. No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for) Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport)
Quirriff 10-15-05, 04:47 AM	This is all Bullsquash, every Mage knows that matter is energy in a different form.
Kaboth 10-15-05, 05:10 AM	Well technically even solid matter is comprised of energy. In fact I think physics explains all things are made up of energy...
Purkake 10-15-05, 08:27 AM	No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for) Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport) No, it is not there because the designers put it there. There are rules for that, if the fire is MAGICAL then SPELL resistance applies, because SR works for magical stuff. Are you saying that since my candle does energy(fire) damage it would have to go past my SR? This is not about school balance, but about logic(yay, it is used somewhere). So if the spell says that it creates a nonmagical ball of acid that you throw, then it is a nonmagical ball of acid.
Joanem 10-15-05, 10:10 AM	This might help: pg 172 of the PHB states; "Each conjuration belongs to one of five subschools. Conjurations bring manifestations of objects, creatures or some form of energy to you (the summoning sub school), actually transport creatures from another plane of existance to your plane (calling), heal (healing), transport people or objects over great distances (teleportation), or create objects or effects on the spot (creation)." While pg 173 states; "Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing." So since the Orb spells summon alredy existing energy then they are conjuration.
Marshall 10-15-05, 01:56 PM	No, it is not there because the designers put it there. There are rules for that, if the fire is MAGICAL then SPELL resistance applies, because SR works for magical stuff. Are you saying that since my candle does energy(fire) damage it would have to go past my SR? Uh, no. One, there is no spell. Two, Its energy damage which should ignore SR to start with. This is not about school balance, but about logic(yay, it is used somewhere). So if the spell says that it creates a nonmagical ball of acid that you throw, then it is a nonmagical ball of acid. Thats the problem, it IS about school balance. Logic is left on the side of the road when you come up with non-magical balls of SOUND(or fire/electricity/cold) that you can throw. So since the Orb spells summon alredy existing energy then they are conjuration. Uh, huh. And what about tapping an "unseen source of power" precludes Evoc from bringing in outside energy. OTOH, "they create something out of nothing" is either Conj(creation) or Trans, not Evoc. If your're going to have Schools, and have mechanical effects based on those schools, then you need to actually make those schools consistent and consistently valueable.
Banpai 10-15-05, 03:31 PM	No. You're still manipulating energy, its Evocation. I dissagree you don´t manipulate the energy it´s more like it´s a calling spell from the elemental planes (acid actually comes from the elemental plain of earth, lighting is catchet in a strom on the elemental plain of air, fire (now thats obvious), ice elemental plain of water. And hurls it toward the target though a spell that lets the acid apear above the target (ref save!) is certanlry conjuration. On the other hand a ray of acid that springs from your hands and hits the cest of several targets is in my book evocation. Maybe, fine line here. Conjuration is the manipulation of Matter, Evocation is the manipulation of Energy. If D&D is going to consider Acid 'energy' than its an Evocation spell. If its a material, than its Conj. I dont care one way or the other, just pick one. Conjuration can malipulate Matter (air into something else, IIRC matter can´t be destroyed only changed, but disintegrate does the very same thing (something into dust) and is not conjuration ...right? :) No, SR applies because the author put down SR:Yes. Whether it should or not is a different thread. (ALL Energy damage spells should be SR:No, thats what ER is for) That is a valid stance and there are quite some game designers who state the very same, to remove the SR on energy spells to make them more usefull and to increase the worth of energy resistance. Taking an obviously Evocation spell like the Orbs, or even worse Blast of Flame and Arc of Lightning, and making it Conj just to change it to SR:No does nothing except devalue an already weak school and OVERpower and already ridiculously strong school(Remember, Conj is where they dumped healing and Teleport) Evocation is not a bad school it´s great for blasting stuff(and contingencies and other nice spells) but compaired to illusion it lacks versatility (though true seeing makes illusions rather useless too).
Marshall 10-15-05, 09:26 PM	I dissagree you don´t manipulate the energy it´s more like it´s a calling spell from the elemental planes (acid actually comes from the elemental plain of earth, lighting is catchet in a strom on the elemental plain of air, fire (now thats obvious), ice elemental plain of water. And hurls it toward the target though a spell that lets the acid apear above the target (ref save!) is certanlry conjuration. On the other hand a ray of acid that springs from your hands and hits the cest of several targets is in my book evocation. Theres also nothing to say that the Evocation effect of a Fireball isnt opening a small Gate to the elemental plane of fire that fills the 20'r sphere with flame. You could also say that Fireball instantly changes the air in the AOE into flame. That would make Fireball a Transmutation. Even arguing that Fireball creates flames in the area would dictate that its a Conj(Creation) spell now. Or you could just say that its an 'energy manipulation' spell and leave it an Evoc. Conjuration can malipulate Matter (air into something else, IIRC matter can´t be destroyed only changed, but disintegrate does the very same thing (something into dust) and is not conjuration ...right? Good point. Conjuration should concentrate on the manipulation of matter from point to point; Calling, Summoning, Teleporting; not its shaping/reshaping/deshaping. Its not Conj(creation) its Trans(creation). Evocation is not a bad school it´s great for blasting stuff(and contingencies and other nice spells) but compaired to illusion it lacks versatility (though true seeing makes illusions rather useless too). True. But blasting stuff is a generally weak option, and once you let other schools have good blasting options you devalue Evoc to the point that it becomes a dump option.
Arcanix 10-16-05, 02:08 AM	Another alternate criteria to distinguish between the two schools is spell duration. IMO evocation is magical not just because it creates energy, but much more so because it evokes effect that are here and gone in the blink of an eye; most energy evocation spells are of instantaneous duration. In other words their energy cannot exist or last without magic. By contrast conjuration energy spells; including but not limited to the various orb spells; tend to create energy effects whose existence is not dependent upon the magic that summoned them; and most of the 4th level orb spells do have secondary effects that do last at least the round. Delivery channels also matter; most evocations, being magically aimed, automatically hit, but allow saves for half if the target somehow resists the damage. Conjurations being manually or mundanely aimed instead require ranged touch attacks, but allow no save. If they hit and affect; they hit so accurately damage cannot be reduced by the target's actions at that point. The long ranges of most evocations and close ranges of most conjurations point to this as well. Indeed a target that would otherwise be affected by a conjuration spell gets its defletion bonus to AC; indicating that the target is hit; but not directly enough to cause damage, again because it is delivered by the mundane force of the caster's throw, not the magical speed of an energy evocation; which a target's deflection bonus does not help in the least in avoiding the hit.