Can One Cast Spells Underwater? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can One Cast Spells Underwater? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
drizzt420
02-21-07, 04:06 PM I have read the DMG 3.5 regarding underwater combat and can not find any reference to casting spells underwater. Can PC's do this? I would assume verbal spells would have a chance of failure or just fail outright? Would somantic spells have a chance of failing because movement is hampered?

I would assume a Spellcraft check would be required to do it but I was wondering regardless.

If I am just not looking in the right place I would appreciate a point in the right direction...
bonethug0108
02-21-07, 04:09 PM I know the answer is yes. I was sure it'd be in the dmg, but check the magic section in the phb.

It affects fire spells, though. That is in the same section.
Loki5654
02-21-07, 04:14 PM From Underwater Combat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#underwaterCombat):
Fire
Nonmagical fire (including alchemist’s fire) does not burn underwater. Spells or spell-like effects with the fire descriptor are ineffective underwater unless the caster makes a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level). If the check succeeds, the spell creates a bubble of steam instead of its usual fiery effect, but otherwise the spell works as described. A supernatural fire effect is ineffective underwater unless its description states otherwise. The surface of a body of water blocks line of effect for any fire spell. If the caster has made a Spellcraft check to make the fire spell usable underwater, the surface still blocks the spell’s line of effect.
bonethug0108
02-21-07, 04:17 PM Well, that's the fire one. It's also proof that you can cast underwater.

I thought there was another passage that talked about casting underwater in general, though I could be wrong.:confused:
Ryusage
02-21-07, 04:19 PM Could there be a problem with the somatic/verbal components involved?
bonethug0108
02-21-07, 04:24 PM Could there be a problem with the somatic/verbal components involved?

I wouldn't think it would affect somantic.

Now I'm sure they had another passage somewhere.

I also remember something(non water related) that said that if you can't speak, you can't cast a spell with a verbal component unless you have the silent spell feat applied. I believe that's from the rules for grapple.

Now whether you allow "speech" underwater is another matter.
Gwenfloor
02-21-07, 04:32 PM When underwater, metamagic feats are your best friend.
Zankue
02-21-07, 04:35 PM I think that somatic components would still be ok... as for verbal... I don't really know. I would not allow verbal unless they can breathe under water, because the creatures that live underwater don't swim to the top every time that they want to have a conversation. So that's how I would rule it. Or you could let them try with a high spell failure chance (more than 50% I'd say) and they would also get a penalty on holding their breathe.
bonethug0108
02-21-07, 04:45 PM Maybe the same penalty for deafness, as water makes it harder to speak and here.

That would make it reasonable that you may not say it right because you can't hear it right.

Seems reasonable.

What is the penalty for deafness?
Matthew77
02-21-07, 05:02 PM Deafened is a 20% spell failure chance for spells with verbal components.

I think that sounds like a very fair and reasonable ruling for underwater casting.
bonethug0108
02-21-07, 05:04 PM Deafened is a 20% spell failure chance for spells with verbal components.

I think that sounds like a very fair and reasonable ruling for underwater casting.

Yeah. But I'm almost sure that underwater casting was somewhere.:shifty: Where could it be?:confused:
drizzt420
02-21-07, 05:13 PM I must be looking in the wrong spot...

I too can not find it anywhere.
drizzt420
02-22-07, 11:35 AM :bump:
Comus
02-22-07, 12:11 PM It'd probably be covered in Stormwrack... though I don't have access to that at the moment. I'll look it up later tonight if no one gets to it before I do.
_SIN_
02-22-07, 12:36 PM Maybe the same penalty for deafness, as water makes it harder to speak and hear

Doesn't sound travel better/further in water than in 'air'?
Mnky
02-22-07, 12:44 PM According to the Seafarer's handbook: Spells with verbal components require a concentration check unless you can breath underwater, and spells with material components vulnerable to water don't work at all.

Can I give more detail than that without aggravating anyone?
bonethug0108
02-23-07, 11:22 AM Doesn't sound travel better/further in water than in 'air'?

It may travel better, but words are harder to make out. So the exact words are harder to hear. It will sound more like muffled sounds.
Solian
02-23-07, 11:33 AM and water hampers movement, it's really hard to move your hands intricately underwater, so i'd say it gives soemthing like a 5% Arcane Spell Failure chance or something. Just what i think though.
Comus
02-23-07, 11:37 AM Looked through Stormwrack - nothin'. I thought that'd have something... But it just reprinted the stuff on fire spells and line of effect. I guess it's left to the DM.
bonethug0108
02-23-07, 11:53 AM and water hampers movement, it's really hard to move your hands intricately underwater, so i'd say it gives soemthing like a 5% Arcane Spell Failure chance or something. Just what i think though.

Yeah, I guess that depends on how you handle somantics, though. If they have to be fast, then I would give a penalty, but if it just has to be done, without to much regard for speed, then it wouldn't matter much.
bonethug0108
02-23-07, 11:56 AM Looked through Stormwrack - nothin'. I thought that'd have something... But it just reprinted the stuff on fire spells and line of effect. I guess it's left to the DM.

Well then I guess we have to go with the comapny line. If it isn't in the rules, then it has no effect(or something like that) or make it up.
RavingDork
02-23-07, 12:28 PM I read from somewhere (I think a 3.0 book) that you can cast spells underwater just fine so long as the spell (1) didn't have a verbal component or (2) you could breath water.
danielinthewolvesden
02-23-07, 03:19 PM There is nothing in the rules to say you can not, so you can. In fact the rules for Fire spells indicate strongly that you can.

The Seafarer's handbook is not a WotC 3.5 publication.
drizzt420
02-26-07, 10:56 AM These are the tentative rules I am using for underwater spellcasting.

Somantic: Spellcraft check DC 15+spell level or the spell has a 25% chance of failure unless you have freedom of movement or a similar effect.

Verbal: Concentration check DC 15+spell level or the spell has a 25% chance of failure unless you can breath underwater.

Material: All spells with materials vulnerable to H2O, fail.

Do you think the DC is too high? Maybe it should be DC 10+spell level. Perhaps, 15 is right, for some reason it seems better to me than 10. Ten seems too easy....

Any feedback on these house rules would be cool. My rational for the rules is as follows:

I used the percentage chance coupled with the spellcraft/concentration DC to mimic my impression that Wizards/Sorcerors can indeed cast spells underwater fairly effectively - albeit there is a chance of failure. Even if they fail the spellcraft/concentration check they still have a 75% chance get the spell off. After all, this is what they day in and day out - cast spells. I am a graphic artist, that is my job. I draw often and think that if I were making complex gestures underwater (drawing) I would still have a fairly high chance of succeeding at the intended subject matter I was trying to illustrate - same thing if I were a singer. Things sound muffled underwater but sounds does indeed travel easier. I feel a singer could achieve whatever vocal range a spellcaster would need to succeed in accomplishing the casting of a spell.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
drizzt420 02-21-07, 04:06 PM	I have read the DMG 3.5 regarding underwater combat and can not find any reference to casting spells underwater. Can PC's do this? I would assume verbal spells would have a chance of failure or just fail outright? Would somantic spells have a chance of failing because movement is hampered? I would assume a Spellcraft check would be required to do it but I was wondering regardless. If I am just not looking in the right place I would appreciate a point in the right direction...
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 04:09 PM	I know the answer is yes. I was sure it'd be in the dmg, but check the magic section in the phb. It affects fire spells, though. That is in the same section.
Loki5654 02-21-07, 04:14 PM	From Underwater Combat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/wilderness.htm#underwaterCombat): Fire Nonmagical fire (including alchemist’s fire) does not burn underwater. Spells or spell-like effects with the fire descriptor are ineffective underwater unless the caster makes a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + spell level). If the check succeeds, the spell creates a bubble of steam instead of its usual fiery effect, but otherwise the spell works as described. A supernatural fire effect is ineffective underwater unless its description states otherwise. The surface of a body of water blocks line of effect for any fire spell. If the caster has made a Spellcraft check to make the fire spell usable underwater, the surface still blocks the spell’s line of effect.
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 04:17 PM	Well, that's the fire one. It's also proof that you can cast underwater. I thought there was another passage that talked about casting underwater in general, though I could be wrong.:confused:
Ryusage 02-21-07, 04:19 PM	Could there be a problem with the somatic/verbal components involved?
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 04:24 PM	Could there be a problem with the somatic/verbal components involved? I wouldn't think it would affect somantic. Now I'm sure they had another passage somewhere. I also remember something(non water related) that said that if you can't speak, you can't cast a spell with a verbal component unless you have the silent spell feat applied. I believe that's from the rules for grapple. Now whether you allow "speech" underwater is another matter.
Gwenfloor 02-21-07, 04:32 PM	When underwater, metamagic feats are your best friend.
Zankue 02-21-07, 04:35 PM	I think that somatic components would still be ok... as for verbal... I don't really know. I would not allow verbal unless they can breathe under water, because the creatures that live underwater don't swim to the top every time that they want to have a conversation. So that's how I would rule it. Or you could let them try with a high spell failure chance (more than 50% I'd say) and they would also get a penalty on holding their breathe.
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 04:45 PM	Maybe the same penalty for deafness, as water makes it harder to speak and here. That would make it reasonable that you may not say it right because you can't hear it right. Seems reasonable. What is the penalty for deafness?
Matthew77 02-21-07, 05:02 PM	Deafened is a 20% spell failure chance for spells with verbal components. I think that sounds like a very fair and reasonable ruling for underwater casting.
bonethug0108 02-21-07, 05:04 PM	Deafened is a 20% spell failure chance for spells with verbal components. I think that sounds like a very fair and reasonable ruling for underwater casting. Yeah. But I'm almost sure that underwater casting was somewhere.:shifty: Where could it be?:confused:
drizzt420 02-21-07, 05:13 PM	I must be looking in the wrong spot... I too can not find it anywhere.
drizzt420 02-22-07, 11:35 AM	:bump:
Comus 02-22-07, 12:11 PM	It'd probably be covered in Stormwrack... though I don't have access to that at the moment. I'll look it up later tonight if no one gets to it before I do.
_SIN_ 02-22-07, 12:36 PM	Maybe the same penalty for deafness, as water makes it harder to speak and hear Doesn't sound travel better/further in water than in 'air'?
Mnky 02-22-07, 12:44 PM	According to the Seafarer's handbook: Spells with verbal components require a concentration check unless you can breath underwater, and spells with material components vulnerable to water don't work at all. Can I give more detail than that without aggravating anyone?
bonethug0108 02-23-07, 11:22 AM	Doesn't sound travel better/further in water than in 'air'? It may travel better, but words are harder to make out. So the exact words are harder to hear. It will sound more like muffled sounds.
Solian 02-23-07, 11:33 AM	and water hampers movement, it's really hard to move your hands intricately underwater, so i'd say it gives soemthing like a 5% Arcane Spell Failure chance or something. Just what i think though.
Comus 02-23-07, 11:37 AM	Looked through Stormwrack - nothin'. I thought that'd have something... But it just reprinted the stuff on fire spells and line of effect. I guess it's left to the DM.
bonethug0108 02-23-07, 11:53 AM	and water hampers movement, it's really hard to move your hands intricately underwater, so i'd say it gives soemthing like a 5% Arcane Spell Failure chance or something. Just what i think though. Yeah, I guess that depends on how you handle somantics, though. If they have to be fast, then I would give a penalty, but if it just has to be done, without to much regard for speed, then it wouldn't matter much.
bonethug0108 02-23-07, 11:56 AM	Looked through Stormwrack - nothin'. I thought that'd have something... But it just reprinted the stuff on fire spells and line of effect. I guess it's left to the DM. Well then I guess we have to go with the comapny line. If it isn't in the rules, then it has no effect(or something like that) or make it up.
RavingDork 02-23-07, 12:28 PM	I read from somewhere (I think a 3.0 book) that you can cast spells underwater just fine so long as the spell (1) didn't have a verbal component or (2) you could breath water.
danielinthewolvesden 02-23-07, 03:19 PM	There is nothing in the rules to say you can not, so you can. In fact the rules for Fire spells indicate strongly that you can. The Seafarer's handbook is not a WotC 3.5 publication.
drizzt420 02-26-07, 10:56 AM	These are the tentative rules I am using for underwater spellcasting. Somantic: Spellcraft check DC 15+spell level or the spell has a 25% chance of failure unless you have freedom of movement or a similar effect. Verbal: Concentration check DC 15+spell level or the spell has a 25% chance of failure unless you can breath underwater. Material: All spells with materials vulnerable to H2O, fail. Do you think the DC is too high? Maybe it should be DC 10+spell level. Perhaps, 15 is right, for some reason it seems better to me than 10. Ten seems too easy.... Any feedback on these house rules would be cool. My rational for the rules is as follows: I used the percentage chance coupled with the spellcraft/concentration DC to mimic my impression that Wizards/Sorcerors can indeed cast spells underwater fairly effectively - albeit there is a chance of failure. Even if they fail the spellcraft/concentration check they still have a 75% chance get the spell off. After all, this is what they day in and day out - cast spells. I am a graphic artist, that is my job. I draw often and think that if I were making complex gestures underwater (drawing) I would still have a fairly high chance of succeeding at the intended subject matter I was trying to illustrate - same thing if I were a singer. Things sound muffled underwater but sounds does indeed travel easier. I feel a singer could achieve whatever vocal range a spellcaster would need to succeed in accomplishing the casting of a spell.