Quick question; does the spell Knock 'open' force fields?
I had that come up in a game once. The player said yes, because relativly speaking the force field that was deployed in the middle of a hall was a door. In my opinion its a wall, not a door.
Even if the force field is emitter is located central to the hall and is a fixed attachment; its no diffrent then deploying a wall of force into a doorway. It just blocks the path, creating a temporary wall and not specifically a door.
So are force fields doors and subject to knock, or are they deployable walls/barricades and not affected?
Maybe a spell that disrupts energy, don't know if one exists or not in d20 modern/future/arcana, would work to disable the force field.
But I did agree that I would look into it for future sessions for the player. Which is why I decided to poll the general opinion of players and gm's alike.
So more or less, the ruling stands. They are walls; because much like a light bridge or a personal force field you can't just cast knock to drop all your enemies into a chasam or disable an enemy's shield system.
*Shrugs*
I would rule that it doesn't work. A force-field (IMO) is a man-man wall. Unless the spell allows you to open a hole in a cinderblock/steel wall (perhaps a version of Passwall), I would rule that it doesn't work.
I disagree. A force field is not something (except in the most extreme sci-fi settings with near infinite power sources where energy use is a non-issue) that is a permanent fixture like a wall. It is something designed to be activated and deactivated, much like a door can be locked or unlocked. So while a knock spell would not put a hole in the field, I think it would deactivate it.
I disagree. A force field is not something (except in the most extreme sci-fi settings with near infinite power sources where energy use is a non-issue) that is a permanent fixture like a wall. It is something designed to be activated and deactivated, much like a door can be locked or unlocked. So while a knock spell would not put a hole in the field, I think it would deactivate it.
Yeah, that's pretty convincing. Anything that can be "opened" or "unlocked" is fair game for a Knock spell. You get into trouble if someone tries to use Knock on a planetary defence shield or something, but GMs should be able to handle that kind of thing on a case-by-case.
It does put me in mind, though, of a whole different kind of "magic," call it "Physiomancy," that actually does obey the laws of physics. Think how differently you'd have to write the spells? And how powerful they'd be to someone who really knows how to manipulate them? Ignition could be extraordinarily powerful if you use it in just the right (or wrong!) circumstances.
That's a topic for a different thread, though.
that a Force field is unlike a fixed wall,
in that the field can be activated and deactivated, making it door-like:
A barred gate is also unlike a fixed wall,
in that the the barred gate can be raised and lowered, making IT door-like.
www.12tomidnight.com/d20modernsrd/FXSpel...
... Knock does not raise barred gates or similar impediments ...
The Modern knock text (pasted above from msrd 12tomidnight) says No to knocking the barred impedement that can be raised.
Even the command verb for sheilds/forcefields is "raise" and "lower" the sheilds,
not Close Shields / Open Shields.
Is it because the cultural distinction between gate and door; if so then would it open the 'gate' to a garden, which is more a victorian era inspired door built into a wall that leads from one yard to the next? its considered a gate, but it has all the look and functions of a door.
Or is it, since the spell specifically lists raising gates, that it doesn't work on objects that open vertically as opposed to horizantly or in a swinging manner; if so would knock open a gate to a white picket fence in the same manner as the door to your house?
And if the distinction is caused by the to the letter raise/lower spectrum, then would the spell fail to open sealed blast-doors since they open and close in the manner of our barred gate? And they are't a standard door being that they are directly designed to bar access to a specific door located behind it. So is the distinction really based on perception of what a door/wall/gate really are; or is based on the manner of which the object opens, closes or doesn't based on its exact nature?
If its based on perception, then whose? If its society as a general concept then names of objects are highly relevent and determine the exact means in which the spell functions. If its based on the casters, then the spell becomes wildly out of control. Look at Red Mage from 8-Bit Theatre. He used pseudo-logic to justify the skill open lock to be used for the skills 'bluff, sleight of hand, sense motive' and the like.
So how is a door actually determined? What qualities does a door have that defines it as such? In essence what difreniates our friend the door from a wall, and the raise/lowering barred gate? So what is the essential diffrence between what the spell effects and doesn't?
When does a door stop being a door and thus stops being affected.
And what are shields...?
The distinction exists purely for game purposes. It "unlocks doors." That's what Knock is designed to do, and nothing more. The GM has to decide what constitutes a "door" to unlock. Trying to make it rationally consistent will only drive you crazy.
You're looking at this all wrong. Don't think of it in literal terms, logical terms. It isn't a logical problem.
The distinction exists purely for game purposes. It "unlocks doors." That's what Knock is designed to do, and nothing more. The GM has to decide what constitutes a "door" to unlock. Trying to make it rationally consistent will only drive you crazy.
Oh that long winded response above? Posted purely for the sake of discussion and intellectual pursuit. Nothing more.
I've already made my decision on the functionality of knock in regards to the original question. Force Fields, Shields and what not by any other name will be considered walls or barricades in that regard, and will not be subject to the spell Knock.
This is for numerous reasons I don't yet fully feel like listing out, but for a small dash of reasoning include, that apart from shutting down whatever is generating the force field it doesn't technically open. Second to prevent attempted player abuse by "opening" an extended light bridge and dropping an entire enemy group to their deaths.
I know the opening of a light bridge seems kind of silly; but you would understand if you knew the players I have(Though I'd tell them no, ONE of my players would have to take the time to explain why he feels it should work, and why I should let it work.). Trust me. One of them in particular will do ANYTHING in his ability to break the game and become godly. I honestly have to sit over his shoulder and check everything he does on his character sheet, to make sure he isn't going crazy with it.
Now what’s worse is that he makes characters BY THE BOOK, and he doesn't cheat. But he once managed to make a total organ replacement cyborg that ended up with over +20 to strength. His final strength score was somewhere between 32 and 36(Before using a classes ability to grant a bonus to strength) and he was large size. His second character found a means of increasing his effective combat range with a gun to over two miles. Worse, a spell that grants a +20 to attack and phasing bullets made it where he didn't miss. All legal, but it did unbalance the game and make it VERY unfun for everyone else.
So now whenever he rolls up a character I have to sit there and check every little action he takes to make sure that he isn't going to be a power gaming crunch-muncher.
So my questions from above still stands simply for the sake of discussion and conversation; when does an object you pass through cease to be a door, and begin to be something else? (Again purely for discussion)
Oh, the other thing to throw in people's faces in that moment is to inform them that the burden of proof is on the player and not the GM. The GM's word is presumed to be official unless someone convinces the GM, respectfully, without cajoling or whining, that the GM should change his or her mind. The "don't be a whiney little prick" rule covers a lot of bases.
Though the issue with the burden of proof isn't because I'd ever let him open a light bridge; its that that one player would lock the game up for thirty minutes to an hour trying to explain all the points in his logic.
Hence why door or not, to prevent another fourty-five minute game delay(about how long it took for him to agree he can't open the force field) I've decided to stick to my orignal decision to NOT allow force fields to open, on the grounds they are 'walls' by my definition.
Sometimes its good to be the GM. Lol.
Its just a little annoying sometimes when I have to delay the game to give him his due.
Although I think it would not be unreasonable to rule that the control panel/field projector/whatever has to be within range of the spell for it to function, not just the field itself.
And in regards to the spell not opening a door; its description simply says that the door opens. At least in all its terms for the spell it uses open. It never states specifically if the door opens, and each instance of knock disables two means of preventing passage per door.
on that logic I am inclined to believe that the door itself doesn't open. On the other end they use the terms open to describe what the door does, and they go as far as to use the term tunlock instead of closes.
So whats popular opinion? Does it just unlock the door, or does it cause it to open as well?
Knock Spel Text (msrd)
The knock spell opens stuck, barred, locked, or magically held or sealed doors. It opens secret doors, as well as locked or trick-opening boxes or chests. It also loosens welds, shackles, or chains (provided they serve to hold closures shut). In all other cases, the door does not relock itself or become stuck again on its own. Knock does not raise barred gates or similar impediments, nor does it affect ropes, vines, and the like. Note that the effect is limited by the area. Each spell can undo up to two means of preventing egress.
it not just unlocks the door,
it forcibly moves STUCK doors ... AND UnWELDS!!
(remember the Strength check to open stuck doors in oldschool D&D?
) When in a submarine,
you oughtta be carfeul when Knocking a welded hatch open,
lest ye open a welded section of hull plate as well
Its just a little annoying sometimes when I have to delay the game to give him his due.
Sure, but there's giving him his due and then there's wasting everyone's time. I try to just make a call in-game and move on, and then outside of game time, you can all read the text and have a conversation about it over email. I've had players get resentful when it's (in their minds) a game-changing rule call, and they seem to enjoy the "victory" of convincing me more than actually playing the game, but if someone foists a supposedly brilliant way to use a spell in-game and at the last minute instead of checking with you first, then they have to take what they can get. Sometimes I suspect that players do that in order to put you in that very position; if you rule against them, everybody hates you, so why would you do that? If it's all kosher, they should check with you beforehand. If they think they're playing against the GM, then they've got bigger problems than trying to "unlock" a forcefield.
html_removed
So whats popular opinion? Does it just unlock the door, or does it cause it to open as well?
My sense is that it makes the lock mechanism itself pop so that you could open the door, and in the case of a mundane door, you could describe the door also swinging open, just for the sake of narrating in full colour, but that's not something that it suddenly "does" because of the rules. That's just a descriptive flourish. That said, if you were to allow Knock to affect a force-field, then unlocking it and opening it would be the same thing.