Couldnt Find this one - Orb Change - Evocation to Conjuration [Archive] - Wizards Community

Couldnt Find this one - Orb Change - Evocation to Conjuration [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Brand_X
07-20-05, 11:34 PM I just went through the Complete Arcane and realised that the Orb Spells had been changed from Evocation to Conjuration. Might anyone want to enlighten me as to WHY?

Magic Missile is still considered an Evocation spell. Though Orb of Force is considered Conjuration. On a quick glance at the Conjuration School this sounds like it is a correct move but if read closer this is a wrong change.

Conjuration is the bring forth of something to do your bidding or otherwise be under your control. Whereas Evocation brings into being energy to attack or damage an enemy or object. Spells like Magic Missile, Fireball and Lightning bolt are as the books says Representative of Evocation. How is it that the ORBs are not? Example of this is Orbs of Electricity are Conjuration but Lightning Bolt is Evocation.

It seems to me that this is a mistake on WoTCs part.

If there is Errata that I missed changing them back I appreciate someone pointing to it. Otherwise I think WoTC needs to really look closer at the spells and the schools they placed them in when they put out Complete Arcane.

Brand

Playing AD&D/D&D since 1975 and loving it.
Realms Rule
was_fired
07-20-05, 11:57 PM There is no errata since they intended to have these spells as conjuration in 3.5. That doesn't mean they didn't make a mistake in doing so however.

Note: I am biased in this regard and have banned all of the 3.5 orb spells as they seem illogical given their school and level.
runestar
07-20-05, 11:57 PM From my (limited) understanding, evocation directly manipulates the energy around you to produce the effect like magic missile or fireball, the various orb spells bring the element directly into existance from somewhere else. The distinction may seem overly fine, I admit, but it seems that is the rationale why they ignore sr and are not cancelled out by AMF.
d_nychus
07-21-05, 12:59 AM They are conjuration in the same way that acid arrow is conjuration. Sometimes magic effects seem to overlap into two or more schools. False life, for instance, seems like it could fall under transmutation as well as necromancy. Shield seems like it could be abjuration, evocation, or even conjuration.

Conjuration (creation) and evocation share a lot of similar ground. They both produce effects out of seemingly nothing. In fact, the only real reason I can find for the difference between the two is straight mechanics. Evocation spells allow for SR, usually have a save, and typically either require no attack roll or are ray spells (there are some obvious exceptions like shocking grasp, but usually they are evocation for other reasons). Conjuration (creation) spells that mirror evocation spells typically do not allow SR, have no save, and almost always require an attack roll (sleet storm being a good exception).

Usually, the most important factor is the SR. If a spell is supposed to bypass SR and still deal direct damage, it usually is going to be a conjuration (creation) effect. According to WotC concept of magic, this is because evocation-wrought energy damage is still being fueled by the spell even as it hits the creatures, meaning that a spell resistant creature can shrug off the damage along with the spell. A conjuration (creation) spell has the magic 'going' only for the first instant of the spell, such as creating a glob of non-magical acid with a high velocity directed at a given target. The downside to this is the usually smaller area of effect, lesser effect, or the possibility of missing the target.

And just on the game-impact side, I, for one, am glad to see conjurers having more than grease and obscuring mist at their disposal in low level combats, and actually have a little more use from Spell Focus (conjuration) at high levels.
Vallah
07-21-05, 01:37 AM From my (limited) understanding, evocation directly manipulates the energy around you to produce the effect like magic missile or fireball, the various orb spells bring the element directly into existance from somewhere else. The distinction may seem overly fine, I admit, but it seems that is the rationale why they ignore sr and are not cancelled out by AMF.
Yes its the no SR thats the key thing here.
I'm in 100% agreement with this. Gold stars all round. :)
The Abominable Darkling
07-21-05, 01:41 AM They made them conjuration so that they could justify allowing them to bypass spell resistance (since they "create" something instead of affecting a creature directly). I would never allow a player in my game to get away with this, and I still won't--no matter what Richard Baker thinks.
Vaelan
07-21-05, 02:31 AM The difference between Conjuration and Evocation is that Conjuration produces real things while Evocation harnesses magical energies (the four elements and force).

There are a few conclusions we can draw from this difference.

Things that are conjured act normally. This is why, for example, Melf's Acid Arrow does damage every round.

Energies that are evoked, on the other hand, do not act normally. For example, a Lightning Bolt will pass through several different objects/creatures before reaching the end of its range and dissipating. This is definitely not the way normal electricity interacts with its surroundings.

The Orb spells do not act as the element in question normally would, save for in the case of Acid. Thus, my houserule is that the Cold, Electricity, Fire, and Force orbs are Evocation spells and are subject to Spell Resistance.
journeyman777
07-21-05, 02:47 AM Mechanics wise, a damaging spell that affects multiple targets is almost always evocation. Since evocation already has most of the damaging spells and the orbs only target a single creature, it makes for better game balance to have them in a different school. Conjuration makes the most sense as an alternate school for damaging spells. So, they are conjuration. Personally, I am glad to see that evocation no longer has such a stranglehold over the potential to deal damage. After all, when is the last time you saw someone take evocation as a prohibited school? Rest assured, evocation has not lost its supremacy when it comes to damage.
Jaid
07-21-05, 02:46 PM i dunno... i can see some of them (for example, orb of acid is fine), but i mean...

sonic orb? how exactly does that work? what, you just conjured an orb of damaging sound from somewhere and threw it at someone.... riiii-iiight... 'cause you know, them things is lyin' around all over the place. why, just the other day i saw three of 'em sittin' on my front lawn, just waitin' ta get conjured. you know, right next to the orb of non-magical force dispensing machine. not to mention the non-magical orbs containing a non-solid (non-magical) material at near absolute 0 my neighbour has. they make such beautiful lawn ornaments.

i mean, really... that's just pushing it a little, don't you think? i'll buy "non-magical fire", but non-magical orb of sound that could destroy your average door and then some? (although i have yet to hear a good explanation why it stays in sphere shape or why it simply disappears afterwards... i mean, it's not magical right? so where does it go after you've used it?)

i just don't see some of these things happening.
The Abominable Darkling
07-22-05, 04:14 PM Me neither. Even orb of fire makes little sense. When we say fire, we mean the light and heat given off by a particular class of exothermic chemical reactions. This isn't a tangible thing, and thus you shouldn't be able to conjure it. Orb of magma would be fine, orb of fire is ludicrous.
was_fired
07-22-05, 04:37 PM Heh it's nice to see people agree with me that they don't make sense. To further add to the illogic consider that every other conjuration spell does one of the following: they act upon a material objects or have a duration which allows their magic to continue to manipulate imaterial objects. An example of the second case alone is fire seeds. An example of the first case alone is wall of iron. An example of both of these cases can be found in melf's acid arrow and summon spells. These spells break the logic which forms the conjuration school (actually the acid orb is fine) and thus should not be used.
Error 401
07-22-05, 05:02 PM Even the acid orb does a lot more damage than non-magical acid usually does, although it's within the bounds of possibility. Orb of fire could possibly work as orb of lava, or orb of plasma. Orb of electricity - not so much. Orb of cold, maaaybe if it you think of it as superchilled liquid. Orb of sound? That doesn't really make sense. And Orb of Force? WTF were they thinking? Non-magical force?! Naturally occuring force?!
green_yawgmoth
07-22-05, 05:27 PM sonic orb? how exactly does that work? what, you just conjured an orb of damaging sound from somewhere and threw it at someone.... riiii-iiight... 'cause you know, them things is lyin' around all over the place. why, just the other day i saw three of 'em sittin' on my front lawn, just waitin' ta get conjured. you know, right next to the orb of non-magical force dispensing machine. not to mention the non-magical orbs containing a non-solid (non-magical) material at near absolute 0 my neighbour has. they make such beautiful lawn ornaments.
This is going in my sig.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
A Man In Black
07-22-05, 09:36 PM And Orb of Force? WTF were they thinking? Non-magical force?! Naturally occuring force?!
Mage Armor is Conjuration. It's not unheard of for force effects to be Conjuration.

For those who are banning the Orb spells because of SR: No, do bear in mind that these spells aren't very strong, being level 4 single-target spells and all. This is the same level as Enervation and Otiluke's Resilient Sphere and Phantasmal Killer and Polymorph. They're not even very much stronger than Burning Ray.
runestar
07-22-05, 11:10 PM Me neither. Even orb of fire makes little sense. When we say fire, we mean the light and heat given off by a particular class of exothermic chemical reactions. This isn't a tangible thing, and thus you shouldn't be able to conjure it. Orb of magma would be fine, orb of fire is ludicrous.

Rule1 of dnd: attempting to reconcile dnd mechanics with real-life physics is a sure-fire recipe for inducing migraines. So don't even bother. You are going by the definition of fire in your world, but who is to say that the definition of fire in the dnd world IS the orangey thingy that is produced when a pile of wood is set ablaze?
Bopple
07-22-05, 11:45 PM Well, there should be similarities to real world and internal consistency.
And the rule covers many things based on real-world physics and omits their details.
'Mundane' 'orb' of fire/force/ect doesn't make any sense, especially when you have to roll a save on a secondary effect.

But I decided to see it as mundane fire/ect, encapsulated in magical orb.
That means it ceases to fly and goes off on it, on entering AMF or dead-magic-zone.
But then again, 'mundane' force still makes me frown.
journeyman777
07-23-05, 08:53 AM But I decided to see it as mundane fire/ect, encapsulated in magical orb.So you are conjuring the highly damaging equivalent of water baloons? Yeah, that actually seems to be the most reasonable way to think of these things. (No sarcasm intended this time; I actually like this explanation the best.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Brand_X 07-20-05, 11:34 PM	I just went through the Complete Arcane and realised that the Orb Spells had been changed from Evocation to Conjuration. Might anyone want to enlighten me as to WHY? Magic Missile is still considered an Evocation spell. Though Orb of Force is considered Conjuration. On a quick glance at the Conjuration School this sounds like it is a correct move but if read closer this is a wrong change. Conjuration is the bring forth of something to do your bidding or otherwise be under your control. Whereas Evocation brings into being energy to attack or damage an enemy or object. Spells like Magic Missile, Fireball and Lightning bolt are as the books says Representative of Evocation. How is it that the ORBs are not? Example of this is Orbs of Electricity are Conjuration but Lightning Bolt is Evocation. It seems to me that this is a mistake on WoTCs part. If there is Errata that I missed changing them back I appreciate someone pointing to it. Otherwise I think WoTC needs to really look closer at the spells and the schools they placed them in when they put out Complete Arcane. Brand Playing AD&D/D&D since 1975 and loving it. Realms Rule
was_fired 07-20-05, 11:57 PM	There is no errata since they intended to have these spells as conjuration in 3.5. That doesn't mean they didn't make a mistake in doing so however. Note: I am biased in this regard and have banned all of the 3.5 orb spells as they seem illogical given their school and level.
runestar 07-20-05, 11:57 PM	From my (limited) understanding, evocation directly manipulates the energy around you to produce the effect like magic missile or fireball, the various orb spells bring the element directly into existance from somewhere else. The distinction may seem overly fine, I admit, but it seems that is the rationale why they ignore sr and are not cancelled out by AMF.
d_nychus 07-21-05, 12:59 AM	They are conjuration in the same way that acid arrow is conjuration. Sometimes magic effects seem to overlap into two or more schools. False life, for instance, seems like it could fall under transmutation as well as necromancy. Shield seems like it could be abjuration, evocation, or even conjuration. Conjuration (creation) and evocation share a lot of similar ground. They both produce effects out of seemingly nothing. In fact, the only real reason I can find for the difference between the two is straight mechanics. Evocation spells allow for SR, usually have a save, and typically either require no attack roll or are ray spells (there are some obvious exceptions like shocking grasp, but usually they are evocation for other reasons). Conjuration (creation) spells that mirror evocation spells typically do not allow SR, have no save, and almost always require an attack roll (sleet storm being a good exception). Usually, the most important factor is the SR. If a spell is supposed to bypass SR and still deal direct damage, it usually is going to be a conjuration (creation) effect. According to WotC concept of magic, this is because evocation-wrought energy damage is still being fueled by the spell even as it hits the creatures, meaning that a spell resistant creature can shrug off the damage along with the spell. A conjuration (creation) spell has the magic 'going' only for the first instant of the spell, such as creating a glob of non-magical acid with a high velocity directed at a given target. The downside to this is the usually smaller area of effect, lesser effect, or the possibility of missing the target. And just on the game-impact side, I, for one, am glad to see conjurers having more than grease and obscuring mist at their disposal in low level combats, and actually have a little more use from Spell Focus (conjuration) at high levels.
Vallah 07-21-05, 01:37 AM	From my (limited) understanding, evocation directly manipulates the energy around you to produce the effect like magic missile or fireball, the various orb spells bring the element directly into existance from somewhere else. The distinction may seem overly fine, I admit, but it seems that is the rationale why they ignore sr and are not cancelled out by AMF. Yes its the no SR thats the key thing here. I'm in 100% agreement with this. Gold stars all round. :)
The Abominable Darkling 07-21-05, 01:41 AM	They made them conjuration so that they could justify allowing them to bypass spell resistance (since they "create" something instead of affecting a creature directly). I would never allow a player in my game to get away with this, and I still won't--no matter what Richard Baker thinks.
Vaelan 07-21-05, 02:31 AM	The difference between Conjuration and Evocation is that Conjuration produces real things while Evocation harnesses magical energies (the four elements and force). There are a few conclusions we can draw from this difference. Things that are conjured act normally. This is why, for example, Melf's Acid Arrow does damage every round. Energies that are evoked, on the other hand, do not act normally. For example, a Lightning Bolt will pass through several different objects/creatures before reaching the end of its range and dissipating. This is definitely not the way normal electricity interacts with its surroundings. The Orb spells do not act as the element in question normally would, save for in the case of Acid. Thus, my houserule is that the Cold, Electricity, Fire, and Force orbs are Evocation spells and are subject to Spell Resistance.
journeyman777 07-21-05, 02:47 AM	Mechanics wise, a damaging spell that affects multiple targets is almost always evocation. Since evocation already has most of the damaging spells and the orbs only target a single creature, it makes for better game balance to have them in a different school. Conjuration makes the most sense as an alternate school for damaging spells. So, they are conjuration. Personally, I am glad to see that evocation no longer has such a stranglehold over the potential to deal damage. After all, when is the last time you saw someone take evocation as a prohibited school? Rest assured, evocation has not lost its supremacy when it comes to damage.
Jaid 07-21-05, 02:46 PM	i dunno... i can see some of them (for example, orb of acid is fine), but i mean... sonic orb? how exactly does that work? what, you just conjured an orb of damaging sound from somewhere and threw it at someone.... riiii-iiight... 'cause you know, them things is lyin' around all over the place. why, just the other day i saw three of 'em sittin' on my front lawn, just waitin' ta get conjured. you know, right next to the orb of non-magical force dispensing machine. not to mention the non-magical orbs containing a non-solid (non-magical) material at near absolute 0 my neighbour has. they make such beautiful lawn ornaments. i mean, really... that's just pushing it a little, don't you think? i'll buy "non-magical fire", but non-magical orb of sound that could destroy your average door and then some? (although i have yet to hear a good explanation why it stays in sphere shape or why it simply disappears afterwards... i mean, it's not magical right? so where does it go after you've used it?) i just don't see some of these things happening.
The Abominable Darkling 07-22-05, 04:14 PM	Me neither. Even orb of fire makes little sense. When we say fire, we mean the light and heat given off by a particular class of exothermic chemical reactions. This isn't a tangible thing, and thus you shouldn't be able to conjure it. Orb of magma would be fine, orb of fire is ludicrous.
was_fired 07-22-05, 04:37 PM	Heh it's nice to see people agree with me that they don't make sense. To further add to the illogic consider that every other conjuration spell does one of the following: they act upon a material objects or have a duration which allows their magic to continue to manipulate imaterial objects. An example of the second case alone is fire seeds. An example of the first case alone is wall of iron. An example of both of these cases can be found in melf's acid arrow and summon spells. These spells break the logic which forms the conjuration school (actually the acid orb is fine) and thus should not be used.
Error 401 07-22-05, 05:02 PM	Even the acid orb does a lot more damage than non-magical acid usually does, although it's within the bounds of possibility. Orb of fire could possibly work as orb of lava, or orb of plasma. Orb of electricity - not so much. Orb of cold, maaaybe if it you think of it as superchilled liquid. Orb of sound? That doesn't really make sense. And Orb of Force? WTF were they thinking? Non-magical force?! Naturally occuring force?!
green_yawgmoth 07-22-05, 05:27 PM	sonic orb? how exactly does that work? what, you just conjured an orb of damaging sound from somewhere and threw it at someone.... riiii-iiight... 'cause you know, them things is lyin' around all over the place. why, just the other day i saw three of 'em sittin' on my front lawn, just waitin' ta get conjured. you know, right next to the orb of non-magical force dispensing machine. not to mention the non-magical orbs containing a non-solid (non-magical) material at near absolute 0 my neighbour has. they make such beautiful lawn ornaments. This is going in my sig. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
A Man In Black 07-22-05, 09:36 PM	And Orb of Force? WTF were they thinking? Non-magical force?! Naturally occuring force?! Mage Armor is Conjuration. It's not unheard of for force effects to be Conjuration. For those who are banning the Orb spells because of SR: No, do bear in mind that these spells aren't very strong, being level 4 single-target spells and all. This is the same level as Enervation and Otiluke's Resilient Sphere and Phantasmal Killer and Polymorph. They're not even very much stronger than Burning Ray.
runestar 07-22-05, 11:10 PM	Me neither. Even orb of fire makes little sense. When we say fire, we mean the light and heat given off by a particular class of exothermic chemical reactions. This isn't a tangible thing, and thus you shouldn't be able to conjure it. Orb of magma would be fine, orb of fire is ludicrous. Rule1 of dnd: attempting to reconcile dnd mechanics with real-life physics is a sure-fire recipe for inducing migraines. So don't even bother. You are going by the definition of fire in your world, but who is to say that the definition of fire in the dnd world IS the orangey thingy that is produced when a pile of wood is set ablaze?
Bopple 07-22-05, 11:45 PM	Well, there should be similarities to real world and internal consistency. And the rule covers many things based on real-world physics and omits their details. 'Mundane' 'orb' of fire/force/ect doesn't make any sense, especially when you have to roll a save on a secondary effect. But I decided to see it as mundane fire/ect, encapsulated in magical orb. That means it ceases to fly and goes off on it, on entering AMF or dead-magic-zone. But then again, 'mundane' force still makes me frown.
journeyman777 07-23-05, 08:53 AM	But I decided to see it as mundane fire/ect, encapsulated in magical orb.So you are conjuring the highly damaging equivalent of water baloons? Yeah, that actually seems to be the most reasonable way to think of these things. (No sarcasm intended this time; I actually like this explanation the best.)