Force Orb versus Object

[Rashak Mani]

I had a neat idea... carry an orange or other fruit around.

Use Mage Hand (minor action) to position it where I most want it... and the blast it with Force Orb ! Ally gets fruit juice on him... enemies get force splinters.

 

[PHGraves]

I think allowing it in a non-reasonable fashion as you suggest as an option is not worth talking about. I doubt that there are many DMs that would allow such a unbalancing option, so why discuss it?

It is just as reasonable as declaring the earth a medium-sized object so that you can shoehorn it into the rules of the spell.

Declaring the ground an object, whether the square is occupied or not, is equivalent to changing the target description to "Enemy or Square".

 

[KarinsDad]

It is just as reasonable as declaring the earth a medium-sized object so that you can shoehorn it into the rules of the spell.

Declaring the ground an object, whether the square is occupied or not, is equivalent to changing the target description to "Enemy or Square".

If you think going down that particular rabbit hole is a reasonable conversation, that's fine. I just don't think it is reasonable or worthwhile, so I won't be going down it.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Adjacent = squares next to.
If there's a chair the PC is sitting on, target it with force orb, and splash everyone around.
Will not target the PC.
No problem.
A pebble might have a much higher DC to hit, though.

 

[amysrevenge]

If not, what would be your argument against this (outside of "because it's stupid')?

But... but...

"Because it's stupid" is my number 1 trump card.

Although, visions or "I cast Force Orb at the ground - what's the Ref of every peasant on the planet?" are dancing through my head for day one of the new campaign... Think of all the dead minions!!!1!111

 

[Danceofmasks]

Oh man ... I got this image of a Wizard and an Artificer in a war machine ... and the Wizard force orbs it from the inside to hurt everything adjacent to it.

 

[yu gnomi]

I have sent a short list of questions to Cust Serv regarding what constitutes on object for Force Orb. I will post responses when I get them.

 

[Ximenes088]

Why bother targeting the ground beneath the ally- target the square above him. Unless you want to argue that you can't fire Force Orb at an empty square, that'll serve your purpose perfectly well. The game does exist in three dimensions, even if the mapboard may not cooperate well in showing that.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Isn't the whole purpose to avoid hitting the ally?

 

[yu gnomi]

This is what I sent to Cust Serv:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is some confusion on what constitutes an object, when a wizard uses Force Orb to target an object. I hope you can answer some questions for me.

1. Can the entire planet the PC's are standing on be considered an object for purposes of targeting this spell?

2. Can walls or buildings be considered objects for purposes of targeting this spell?

3. Can any of the following be considered objects for purposes of targeting this spell: Wagons; Siege Engines; Boulders or Statues with a base greater than 5' by 5'

4. Can a 5' by 5' patch of ground be considered an object for purposes of targeting this spell?

5. If yes to question 4, does it make any game difference if an ally occupies that square?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Reply from Cody:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
An object is anything physical that is not a creature. Your DM probably wouldn't let you target the planet as a whole, but a single square of it, sure. Just follow the normal rules for targeting a square. If an ally occupies it, nothing changes. Allies don't grant cover to targets, and the spell specifies only enemies are targeted by the secondary attack.

Basically, it's up to your DM to determine what you can and can't target as an object.

Good gaming!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried unsuccessfully to login to my Wizards account and ask more questions, like if 'adjacent' includes being inside of something. Although I suspect they would only give more DM's discretion advice.

Edit: Discovered I was mis-spelling my own wizards acoount password. Have sent another query regarding whether being inside a hollow object, means you are adjacent to it.