Animate Objects as a Wizard Spell

Garnfellow

Visitor
Several months ago -- I think during a debate on the merits of 3.5 -- someone made the very astute observation that animate object really ought to be a wizard spell. Consider the example of Mickey Mouse in Fantasia.

At the time, I thought this was brilliant. In over 20 years of playing different incarnations of D&D, this oversight had never once occurred to me -- but it's been nagging at the back of my mind ever since.

So now I've got a high level wizard NPC who like to make constructs. It seems like animate objects would be a natural addition to his repertoire.

Does anyone see any hidden problems with making animate objects a 6th-level wizard spell?
 

LGodamus

Visitor
I have had the same thoughts myself....I havent seen any balance issues with it. I havent seen many clerics make use of it anyway, so its not stepping on their toes conceptually , either.
 

Garnfellow

Visitor
BUMP

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

On a related track, why was animate objects ever a cleric spell? Is there a fictional or mythical precedent?
 

psychognome

Visitor
Garnfellow said:
BUMP

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

On a related track, why was animate objects ever a cleric spell? Is there a fictional or mythical precedent?
No reason other than the fact that the spell apparently uses positive energy to animate the object. But then again, many Wizard spells from the school of Necromancy use negative energy, so why shouldn't Wizards be capable of using positive energy too?
 

herald

Visitor
I will be alowing it in future games. SO count me in for liking it.

Otherwise, how would you explain Mickey animating all those mops in Fantasia? :D
 

Deadguy

Visitor
I suspect (and in good role-player fashion, without ANY supporting evidence!), that the reason it's a Clerical spell is that it's hung up on the "Animate" term. Since the only other use of animation is with the undead, then it's a Positive/Negative energy thing. Now Wizards are allowed access to Animate Dead, mostly for reasons of fulfilling the "evil necromancer" trope, but Clerics were always better at it. Since objects are in a "never alive" category I can see why the thought is Positive Energy to imbue them with lifeforce, and that sounds like the Clerical specialism. Just like Fantasia the objects animated have a life of their own.

However, all that said, I can see no reason not to allow it to the Wizard. If I wanted to distinguish the two versions I might let the Wizard use Negative Energy instead, effectively putting minor spirits into the objects, rather than granting them a life of their own.
 

Advertisement

Top