Entangle Question
- Thread starter Wippit Guud
- Start date
Golandrinel
First Post
Even in an area devoid of "plants" .. lets say a ploughed field, I would still allow this spell. You can always use roots to bind your foes. I would also employ this in natural tunnels (dependent on the environment ... ie NOT in a lava tube....)
Wippit Guud
First Post
Ok, current arguement: Burning hands should be evocation, not transmutation.
New arguement: Entangle should be conjuration, not transmutation.
Why does burning hands have to be the wrongly-labelled one?
New arguement: Entangle should be conjuration, not transmutation.
Why does burning hands have to be the wrongly-labelled one?
Golandrinel
First Post
Wippit Guud said:
Entangle uses flora that is already present in the area of effect, it does not "conjure" new flora into the area.
Wippit Guud
First Post
But what in the spell description says it uses existing flora?
Golandrinel
First Post
Ahh, sorry, I see.
When in doubt I always take a look at the 2e description ... when they had time and space to explain properly
"By means of this spell, the caster is able to cause plants in the area of effect to entangle creatures within the area. The grasses, weeds, bushes, and even trees wrap, twist, and entwine about the creatures, holding them fast for the duration of the spell. Any creature entering the area is subject to this effect. A creature that rolls a successful saving throw vs. spell can escape the area, moving at only 10 feet per round until out of the area. Exceptionally large (gargantuan) or strong creatures may suffer little or no distress from this spell, at the DM's option, based on the strength of the entangling plants.
The material component is the caster's holy symbol."
Now I know you're gonna say .... but that was 2e ... but I'd say that it was a pretty good guide.
When in doubt I always take a look at the 2e description ... when they had time and space to explain properly
"By means of this spell, the caster is able to cause plants in the area of effect to entangle creatures within the area. The grasses, weeds, bushes, and even trees wrap, twist, and entwine about the creatures, holding them fast for the duration of the spell. Any creature entering the area is subject to this effect. A creature that rolls a successful saving throw vs. spell can escape the area, moving at only 10 feet per round until out of the area. Exceptionally large (gargantuan) or strong creatures may suffer little or no distress from this spell, at the DM's option, based on the strength of the entangling plants.
The material component is the caster's holy symbol."
Now I know you're gonna say .... but that was 2e ... but I'd say that it was a pretty good guide.
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
Wippit Guud said:
Because if entangle is able to create plants in the AoE, it's vastly overpowered for a first-level effect. Burning hands is not vastly overpowered as a first-level effect if it creates flames in the AoE; in fact, if it doesn't create flames, it's utterly useless. That's why.
Daniel
Murrdox
First Post
As to the whole Burning Hands/Evocation argument (I'm fine with Entangle being Transmutation... it only affects plants in the area... doesn't create new ones... seeds don't work).
I've always been confused as to exactly why "Burning Hands" is a transmutation spell as well... I've just kind of taken it as a given... and considered that it might just be a Transmution spell for BALANCE issues.
I mean, 1st level evocation already has Magic Missle... they might have just made it transmutation to give Transmuters a good 1st level combat spell.
BTW... do any DMs out there rule that Fireball sets characters on fire? As a DM, I've always ruled that Fireball doesn't set anything on fire that isn't VERY flammable - since it's a very brief, although large explosion. It generally singes everything, and immolates things like paper.
However, I DO rule that Burning Hands sets characters on fire, because I view it more as a sustained burst of flames from one's hands... like a flamethrower.
And BTW.... Burning Hands doesn't AUTOMATICALLY set characters on fire... I make my players make a second RFL save to avoid being set on fire after they save for the damage from the spell.
I've always been confused as to exactly why "Burning Hands" is a transmutation spell as well... I've just kind of taken it as a given... and considered that it might just be a Transmution spell for BALANCE issues.
I mean, 1st level evocation already has Magic Missle... they might have just made it transmutation to give Transmuters a good 1st level combat spell.
BTW... do any DMs out there rule that Fireball sets characters on fire? As a DM, I've always ruled that Fireball doesn't set anything on fire that isn't VERY flammable - since it's a very brief, although large explosion. It generally singes everything, and immolates things like paper.
However, I DO rule that Burning Hands sets characters on fire, because I view it more as a sustained burst of flames from one's hands... like a flamethrower.
And BTW.... Burning Hands doesn't AUTOMATICALLY set characters on fire... I make my players make a second RFL save to avoid being set on fire after they save for the damage from the spell.
Golandrinel
First Post
mooby said:
Surely they'd have to cast PLant Growth (or enlarge) for it to be effective ... or carry a tree around with them ...
Bag of Holding anyone ... or maybe a portable hole....
Similar Threads
