- This spell has a duration of permanent.
- If it covers someone's eyes, they are effectively blind.
- If it can be any size, that means you can make it cover 2,5, 100 or even a thousand people's eyes with a single casting.
- And the description does not say the "spot" needs to be round, so you can make it an odd shape that covers all your enemies, but not your friends.
Suddenly, this spell is no longer a cantrip. Sounds more like a 9th level spell, if not Epic?
The strength of a magic ability often depends not on what it does, but on the restrictions placed on it. You can take almost any spell, no matter how weak, and upgrade it to Epic level, maintaining core features. And that is why "creative" uses of spells has to closely watched.
A solid question to ask yourself is, “if I were to rewrite the spell description, expressly encouraging what the PC wants to do, would I think about changing the level?” For example: A common mistake people think is legal is the "Shrink Item on my enemies Helmet, crushing their Brains, instant death. Yeah!" Is a save or die spell appropriate at 5th level, even with the relatively minor requirement of requiring the victim to be wearing a non-magical object? Well, Balefull Polymorph is a 5th level combat oriented spell that expressly states if used to do save/die it gets a +4 bonus.
And Shrink Item is at heart not a combat spell. So clearly, attempting to rule that this non-combat spell is better at combat than a combat spell is foolish. Note, the +4 bonus for Balefull Polymorph should NOT be taken as an indication that "Hey, Shrink Item can do this, but it needs the same +4 bonus to a save." Balefull Polymorph is at heart a combat spell, Shrink Item is not, so it should be allowed to attack in this manner at all. Thus, we know to follow the example found in Enlarge Person, and rule that the spell cannot be used to crush a creature by changing the size of objects.
The power of a spell is set by the SPELL LEVEL The description can not allow it to do something beyond the power of the spell level.
Which is why in the last wizards-based game I designed, your spellcasting DCs were determined by what you wanted to *achieve* with your magic, not the actual spell effect.
Step 1: Read spell description
Step 2: Consider the players desired effect upon using that spell
Step 3: Compare that effect to other spells of similar level
If there are no level 3 death effects then No, you cannot make one through Shrink Item. Easy peasy.
"The strength of a magic ability often depends not on what it does, but on the restrictions placed on it"
"The power of a spell is set by the SPELL LEVEL"
So pick one. Either spell power is determined by the restrictions OR by the spell level. You're contradicting yourself.
"A common mistake people think is legal is the "Shrink Item on my enemies Helmet, crushing their Brains, instant death. Yeah!"
No it isn't? In fact, it is the first time I see this 'trick'. But since players are free to interpret the rules as they like as long as the group thinks It’s ok, I can imagine a DM who allows this use of the spell. Using it the 'wrong' way is hardly going to be a problem, because the tactic is so cheesy, allowing it MUST be a conscious choice :P
I agree with Kingly__Mage.
A magma mephit uses its magma form to change into magma. The 1st-level sorcerer wants to use mage hand to pull a bit of the magma apart, damaging the mephit. Mage hand can exert 5 lbs. of force, and a magma mephit weighs 30 lbs., so the DM rules that 1/6 of its body is torn off, forcing a "system shock" Fortitude save vs. death.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how creativity buys you a 0-level save-or-die spell.
...
True story, I promise. I tried to stop it, oh how I tried, but she was adamant. I pointed out that the mephit was a CR 3 outsider that really didn't deserve to die like that. I pointed out that the most damage that any 0-level spell did was 1d6 (disrupt undead) and only against a single creature type.
I don't play with those people anymore.
The text says that it has 5 pounds of force, well my friend Ken argues that it takes less then 3 pounds of force to remove a human ear. So does that mean Mage hand can rip someone’s ear off? When I DM, HELL NO... when I PC, sure if I can get away with it.
Now then, how about 1st level spells, if I grease on a ledge and the person falls down a pit and dies, that doesn't make grease a save or die spell does it?
There is a 1st level (Force) spell from Magic of Faerun that does a bullrush and damage, and I as a PC pushed a bad guy wizard back through a gate he had opened into the elemental plane of fire, where he died.
I had a PC who charmed kill a fellow PC with a 1st level spell. It allows you to switch places with people, he said he cast it, and asked if the other PC resisted. When he said no he pointed out he was hovering over a pit that he then fell in. The other PCs didn't know I had the guy charmed, but a 10th level character (4th fight 5th rouge 1ECL) died. Now having said that, it still isn't an open and shut case, everything has to be a case by case thing.
The spot example makes no sense. If it can permanently blind without a save, then it is not a cantrip, period. Using a shapeable permanent any-range no-save blinding spell to blind your opponents is common sense. It does not qualify as 'creative use of the spell', because you specifically designed the spell with this hyperbole in mind.
That was exactly the point he was making! An apparently harmless spell -- putting a colored spot on something -- becomes way too powerful when applied in a way the writer didn't expect. How many times have you seen someone try to make a fire trap by igniting grease? Disable a male opponent by using mage hand on their privates? Dancing Lights to blind someone, like Flare? Open/Close on someone's belt buckle? Your argument breaks down to "But they can't do that because they can't do that".
"The strength of a magic ability often depends not on what it does, but on the restrictions placed on it"
"The power of a spell is set by the SPELL LEVEL"
So pick one. Either spell power is determined by the restrictions OR by the spell level. You're contradicting yourself.
Tell me you don't really think that way. He's saying the spell's allowable power limit is based on spell level--its potential, if you will; for example, if I declare I'm making a 3rd level spell, with no other information it should not exceed the bounds of other 3rd level spells. The power of what the specific description allows is based on the limitations placed on it; for example, spot-on-the-wall has been insufficiently limited to make it a 0 level spell. It needs a size limit on the spot and either an inability to target creatures or a caveat that it takes on the transparency of the surface it appears on.
In short, if the spell is being used to accomplish effects outside its power level, it has been incompletely or improperly restricted.
That, and my players rapidly learn that the creative use of spells is by far not limited to just the PCs. You'd be surprised how many players argue against you for trying to stop their creativity, but when you start making smart NPCs come up with likewise creative tactics, their tune quickly changes.
Ok, well going with Mage Hand...
The text says that it has 5 pounds of force, well my friend Ken argues that it takes less then 3 pounds of force to remove a human ear. So does that mean Mage hand can rip someone’s ear off? When I DM, HELL NO... when I PC, sure if I can get away with it.
The text also says it effects only one nonmagical, unattended object. So even if it was 5 pounds of force (which it is not) you still couldn't rip off an ear.
Now then, how about 1st level spells, if I grease on a ledge and the person falls down a pit and dies, that doesn't make grease a save or die spell does it?
Of course not grease didn't kill the creature the fall (well the sudden stop at the bottom) killed it. That's what is called creative use of spells.
There is a 1st level (Force) spell from Magic of Faerun that does a bullrush and damage, and I as a PC pushed a bad guy wizard back through a gate he had opened into the elemental plane of fire, where he died.
I had a PC who charmed kill a fellow PC with a 1st level spell. It allows you to switch places with people, he said he cast it, and asked if the other PC resisted. When he said no he pointed out he was hovering over a pit that he then fell in. The other PCs didn't know I had the guy charmed, but a 10th level character (4th fight 5th rouge 1ECL) died. Now having said that, it still isn't an open and shut case, everything has to be a case by case thing.
I agree it is a case by case basis.
Now then, how about 1st level spells, if I grease on a ledge and the person falls down a pit and dies, that doesn't make grease a save or die spell does it?
There is a 1st level (Force) spell from Magic of Faerun that does a bullrush and damage, and I as a PC pushed a bad guy wizard back through a gate he had opened into the elemental plane of fire, where he died.
I had a PC who charmed kill a fellow PC with a 1st level spell. It allows you to switch places with people, he said he cast it, and asked if the other PC resisted. When he said no he pointed out he was hovering over a pit that he then fell in. The other PCs didn't know I had the guy charmed, but a 10th level character (4th fight 5th rouge 1ECL) died. Now having said that, it still isn't an open and shut case, everything has to be a case by case thing.
The first example did not exactly take place in a CR1 environment, did it? The Grease allowed the caster to take advantage of an extremely hazardous situation that had nothing to do with the spell. I'm pretty sure a trip would be just as fatal.
The second example involves a Gate, for goodness' sake. Hardly a first-level spell. So the wizard baddie let the caster create a Gate behind him and then waited another round for the Force to push him in? Deserves what he gets, I say.
The third example involves essentially a 1st-level double-teleport spell. What can be said about a spell that is arguably more powerful than Dimension Door?
b.
A magma mephit uses its magma form to change into magma. The 1st-level sorcerer wants to use mage hand to pull a bit of the magma apart, damaging the mephit. Mage hand can exert 5 lbs. of force, and a magma mephit weighs 30 lbs., so the DM rules that 1/6 of its body is torn off, forcing a "system shock" Fortitude save vs. death.
Ignoring parts of a spell's description does not equal creative spell use. Mage Hand can exert up to 5 lbs of force to move an object. It cannot tear away part of an object, and it cannot target creatures. Just because someone doesn't read their spell descriptions, doesn't mean that "creative spell use" results in overpowered-ness.
There is a 1st level (Force) spell from Magic of Faerun that does a bullrush and damage, and I as a PC pushed a bad guy wizard back through a gate he had opened into the elemental plane of fire, where he died.
And, what? You're saying the spell shouldn't've been able to do that? If so, you've got to be kidding.
There is a 1st level (Force) spell from Magic of Faerun that does a bullrush and damage, and I as a PC pushed a bad guy wizard back through a gate he had opened into the elemental plane of fire, where he died.
Well, to be perfectly fair, this seems to be an intended effect of the spell. See, a bull rush doesn't do much besides move a creature from point 'a' to point 'b'. Say you've cast this spell on a wizard standing in the middle of an otherwise empty hallway. Bravo: you've moved your opponent back 'x' number of feet. The primary use of the bull rush effect is, in fact, to push foes off of precarious surfaces. Heck, you probably could've done it just by rushing the sod and shoving him to his fiery demise all on your lonesome.
A magma mephit uses its magma form to change into magma. The 1st-level sorcerer wants to use mage hand to pull a bit of the magma apart, damaging the mephit. Mage hand can exert 5 lbs. of force, and a magma mephit weighs 30 lbs., so the DM rules that 1/6 of its body is torn off, forcing a "system shock" Fortitude save vs. death.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is how creativity buys you a 0-level save-or-die spell.
...
True story, I promise. I tried to stop it, oh how I tried, but she was adamant. I pointed out that the mephit was a CR 3 outsider that really didn't deserve to die like that. I pointed out that the most damage that any 0-level spell did was 1d6 (disrupt undead) and only against a single creature type.
I don't play with those people anymore.
The 30 lbs isn't how much it can take before breaking apart, it is just how much it weighs. So the spell could be used to pull the mephit in any direction (for 15 feet) at one-sixth falling speed-not exactly likely to do much damage.
For example, (and in this example I will be using an actual SRD spell instead of just making it up as I go), Mage Hand. I weep at the abuse people inflict with this spell. The spell descriptor alone rules out half the crazy nonsense everyone loves to do with this spell. The most important thing to note is the fact that the target of the spell is "One nonmagical, unattended object weighing up to 5 lb." That makes it officially impossible to, say, pick up part of a living creature that happens to be a puddle or a gas.
What I'm getting at, is that spells aren't limited by the imagination of players, but those brutal, crushing "facts" found throughout the player's handbook. Just because everyone wants to use mage hand to kill things, and open doors, and Lord knows what else, does NOT mean that it can. As for this spot on a wall, if I remember my Piers Anthony, it was suppose to represent the lowest person on the magic food chain. It was supposed to be a useless magical talent. I have my doubts that he really meant that this random commoner had the power to blind all of Xanth.
For Players, listen up...
1) Read the spell description.
2) Check if the desired effect is possible within the parameters of the spell. If this is ambiguous, ask the DM/another (experienced) player.
3) Cast as desired.
Honestly, this clears up most problems. Let's look at Mage Hand.
1) OK, Can exert 5lbs of force on an object.
2) Cannot use it to directly damage someone.
3) Invalid choice.
I'm sorry, but the entire premise of this thread is false. First, any mildly sane DM would never allow a cantrip to permanently blind an entire country.
You've successfully agreed with the author.
No, no sane GM would allow such a silly thing as a "spot on the wall" blinding a village. But equally silly "creative spell uses" show up over and over; just see the Magma Mephit thing above for a prefect example.
The point of the article is not "hey, look what I can do with a cantrip"; it's to point out the silliness of allowing a spell to do anything that the text doesn't explicitly restrict! That's what Tarkin was saying -- the DM should consider the spell's level when players start coming up with unintended uses.
Create Water in the lungs, drowning them.
Light on someone's eyeball, blinding them.
Open/Close somebody's belt buckle, dropping their pants (or their armor straps, or weapon sheathes, etc)
Message to scream in someone's ear and deafen them from a distance.
Acid Splash to melt the floor under them.
I'm not saying all of these work via the rules, but they're things players might try. You don't think to think about the logic of allowing them (via real physics and such forth), just think about the effect vs the resource spent. A no-save, you-die cantrip simply shouldn't exist. Casting Light on people's eyeballs clearly isn't the intention of the spell. Even if the rules don't explicitly say anything against it, common sense should prevail.
...just see the Magma Mephit thing above for a prefect example.
The point of the article is not "hey, look what I can do with a cantrip"; it's to point out the silliness of allowing a spell to do anything that the text doesn't explicitly restrict! That's what Tarkin was saying -- the DM should consider the spell's level when players start coming up with unintended uses.
I already showed why that's not an error with the system, or the spell. It was an error with the players. I’ll repost since you missed it the first time:
Ignoring parts of a spell's description does not equal creative spell use. Mage Hand can exert up to 5 lbs of force to move an object. It cannot tear away part of an object, and it cannot target creatures. Just because someone doesn't read their spell descriptions, doesn't mean that "creative spell use" results in overpowered-ness.
I have yet to see any "creative," legal use of a cantrip that resulted in anything remotely resembling game mechanic abuse or overpowering.
PS: The spot-on-the-wall example is a tainted analogy, since the OP specifically left the parameters open for abuse. The cantrips in D&D have specific restrictions that prevent such ridiculousness.
Using Grease to let a climbing creature fall down to save time--that's creative use.
Using Baleful Transposition as a 2nd-level save or die spell (well, there's a solid 10-foot pole between us, the one I'm holding)—that’s abusing the spell in a way it should not be able to be used.
I already showed why that's not an error with the system, or the spell. It was an error with the players. I’ll repost since you missed it the first time:
Uh, yes. And that is exactly what Keenath said. Why do you insist on telling people they're wrong and then repeating what they just said? To quote Keenath, in the text YOU JUST QUOTED:
...the DM should consider the spell's level when players start coming up with unintended uses.
How exactly are you disagreeing with this?!
There's a lot more cantrip abuse I can think up easily; Some of which is specifically disallowed by the spells themselves, some of which isn't, all of which any sane DM should instantly disallow.
Create Water in the lungs, drowning them.
Light on someone's eyeball, blinding them.
Open/Close somebody's belt buckle, dropping their pants (or their armor straps, or weapon sheathes, etc)
Message to scream in someone's ear and deafen them from a distance.
Acid Splash to melt the floor under them.
I'm not saying all of these work via the rules, but they're things players might try. You don't think to think about the logic of allowing them (via real physics and such forth), just think about the effect vs the resource spent. A no-save, you-die cantrip simply shouldn't exist. Casting Light on people's eyeballs clearly isn't the intention of the spell. Even if the rules don't explicitly say anything against it, common sense should prevail.
Create Water - LOE
Light - Target: Object
Open/Close - Very creative, but a belt buckle is hardly a container or a portal.
Message - The spell says you WHISPER. Screaming in someone’s ear when standing next to them wouldn't deafen them (in D&D), so even if Message would deliver screams, it still wouldn't deafen someone.
Acid Splash - Did you read the amount of hitpoints/inch materials have? Really, take a look.
You say "I'm not saying all of these work via the rules." I say NONE of those work via the rules. You are trying to find a solution to a problem that does not exist.
Of course, by the rules it is not allowed, but her point is silly. Also, changing into magma is changing into half-solid, half-molten rock...it's not any softer then flesh, and likely a lot harder. How could it pull him apart? 5 lbs of force is not much force.
===Aelryinth
There is very little that is truly "abusive" about cantrips. Summon Instrument can be used to drop a piano on someone, maybe, if you're big enough
You can't summon the piano into the air or on someone.The bard can summon the piano into his hand and use it as improved weapon,but he would make more damage with a real weapon.
A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space.
This instrument appears in your hands or at your feet (your choice).
I have yet to see any "creative," legal use of a cantrip that resulted in anything remotely resembling game mechanic abuse or overpowering.
I nudged a table covered in volatile fluids in the middle of an encounter... Level 0 Cantrip turned into combined grease/ stinking cloud/fog cloud
The scenario gave effects for what single items if grabbed could do I flipped that whole chart on its head. :D
To use your basic example (one that I have dealt with on the table before) the Shrink Item spell. Now thats a 3rd level spell. Fireball is a 3rd level spell... I feel I could reasonably give my player a 1d6 per caster level of "constriction damage" plus an "entangle (standard DC) effect" if they target a suit of armor.. especially considering the spell requires touch unlike fireball. Its a result of equivalent level power and! does not result in instadeath. Something 3rd level spells don't do... except for massive damage (CL 10 Fireball vs Ice Elemental...)
Furthermore .. according to the spell description the spell could literally destroy the armor seeing as it allows you to transform the object into cloth as well as shrink it. (ooh it also effects ephemeral objects like fire!) Oh an another thing... you can't target a helmet (by RAW) as it is a part of the larger "Armor Item" ... just mentioning.
Like I said.. I think your on to something here.. could be a very interesting piece regarding how to gauge spell power and level.. but shrink item is a bad example.. and you are offering no solutions.
Always important to offer solutions.
In a related note: I have often used Prestidigitation to act as a third arm for my arcane casters. It gives you a 1lb lift.. daggers are 1/2lb. The strength isn't there to attack with the spell, but with a little leeway it can act as a quickdraw. As well as quickdraw for scrolls, wands, and etc light items.
Drop vials of acid, alchemic fire or something nastier over your enemies. Since they are alchemical substances inside completely mundane containers, it's perfectly legal.