Evard's Black Tentacles and DR

[jcfiala]

Would an empowered wall of iron do more damage if pushed over onto someone?

I wouldn't think so. I don't think the 10d6 damage is from any part of the spell so much as it's from having a lot of iron drop on you. Empower spell wouldn't make more iron in the wall, so I don't see how it would make the wall more heavy.

 

[Hypersmurf]

How would you interpret this line?: "If a telekinesed creature is hurled against a solid surface, it takes damage as if it had fallen 10 feet (1d6 points)."

Earlier in the thread, I mentioned "It means that one needs to decide whether the damage dice quoted in the Shillelagh spell are a definition or a repetition."

I think in the case of both Telekinesis and Fly, the d6s are a repetition of rules defined elsewhere (falling), rather than a definition; Telekinesis directly references "as if falling", and the Fly spell states that you fall.

Wall of Iron is a definition; the damage for a wall of iron falling on you is not defined elsewhere, so it can't be a repetition.

Transmute Rock to Mud is iffy. You've proposed that it could be a repetition of the avalanche rules; I'm not sure that there's enough similarity to support that.

And in any event, the distinction really only matters if I'm applying my 'rule of thumb' that dice defined in a spell description are Empowerable, while those defined elsewhere are not. Which I find to be a handy rule, but not one that's stated anywhere... and one that has its own problems, as were seeing here

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Would an empowered wall of iron do more damage if pushed over onto someone?

Or a maximized Wall of Iron deal 60? I'm having a hard time seeing a reason why it wouldn't... it's a variable numeric effect of the spell.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

Or a maximized Wall of Iron deal 60? I'm having a hard time seeing a reason why it wouldn't...

Really? That surprises me of you*. That interpretation would also seem to imply that a falling iron wall ignores DR, which also doesn't make sense to me.

How would you interpret this line?: "If a telekinesed creature is hurled against a solid surface, it takes damage as if it had fallen 10 feet (1d6 points)."

Or how about this from the fly spell?:
"Should the spell duration expire while the subject is still aloft, the magic fails slowly. The subject floats downward 60 feet per round for 1d6 rounds. If it reaches the ground in that amount of time, it lands safely. If not, it falls the rest of the distance, taking 1d6 points of damage per 10 feet of fall."

*To clarify: that is a compliment

 

[mvincent]

Or a maximized Wall of Iron deal 60? I'm having a hard time seeing a reason why it wouldn't...

Some different points:
1) The damage of the falling wall seems loosely based on the rules for damage from falling items.
2) The wall of iron spell is "Duration: Instantaneous". Once made, the wall is mundane, and should not be able to do DR penetrating, spell equivalent damage years later if dropped on someone*.

* or else demons and devils might want to save them up for use in the Bloodwars.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Some different points:
1) The damage of the falling wall seems loosely based on the rules for damage from falling items.

Falling object rules are based on weight and distance. The weight of a Wall of Iron will be severely impacted by the thickness and area, both of which are determined by the caster; the damage dealt by the falling wall is independent of the size of the wall, and thus unrelated to weight.

I can't see the connection, even a 'loosely based' one, to the falling object rules.

2) The wall of iron spell is "Duration: Instantaneous".

So is Orb of Force...

Once made, the wall is mundane, and should not be able to do DR penetrating, spell equivalent damage years later if dropped on someone.

I agree... and I don't think it can. When you create the wall, it's either free-standing, or it isn't. If it's free-standing, it falls immediately... either randomly, or in the direction it's pushed. That's when it deals damage. If you pick it up and drop it again subesequent to that, you'd use the falling object rules, not the rules for when a freestanding Wall of Iron falls upon completion of the spell.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

When you create the wall, it's either free-standing, or it isn't. If it's free-standing, it falls immediately... either randomly, or in the direction it's pushed. That's when it deals damage. If you pick it up and drop it again subesequent to that, you'd use the falling object rules, not the rules for when a freestanding Wall of Iron falls upon completion of the spell.

Good points. I believe I can agree that your's is a completely valid interpretation. Thank you for clarifying it for me.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I believe I can agree that yours is a completely valid interpretation.

Except for 'subesequent', of course. What was I thinking!?

-Hyp.