How much is too much? (Related to Encumbrance thread)

[Greenfield]

I can see your point.

I'm not the DM, at least not the only one. I didn't impose the house rule, it was done by group vote. I can't change the house rule, at least not unilaterally.

All of that being said, I could talk about what makes a pipe bomb a bomb, but that's a pointless side trip, a rationalization of an idea you've already rejected. By the same token you could argue that the spell ends gradually, an idea not supported by the rules anywhere.

Rationalizations aside though, we saw it as a choice between the spell being used to stockpile kaboom spells days ahead of time, or being subject to indefinite extension. We voted away from the combat option. Rather like the text of Enlarge Person that indicates that you can't use it to crush opponents by enlarging them in a tight space. It's not supposed to be a spell with direct damage potential.

So I appreciate your position that the question should never have arisen in the first place, but it has and I/we have to be able to deal with it in a reasonable and fair manner, hopefully with at least a modicum of support from the rule book, somehow, someplace.

 

[Dandu]

As a first pass ruling, which ever object has the lower hardness breaks. Then if the container still lacked the volumn to contain the now powdered whatever, the container would split on its weakest point and leak whatever it contained. In the case of being contained in a pocket, this is fairly easy. Cloth has hardness zero, and will be ripped by almost any object, which will then fall to the floor beside the PC.

In general, the force is steady but not explosive. You could use this to create crushing traps - a pipe filled with shrunk 'gravel' would become a potentially crushing pile of rocks - but you couldn't create a pipe bomb. The pipe would simply break and the pieces would land on the outside, relatively harmless compared to the thousands of pounds of rocks potentially landed on someone. Of course, even this would require a bit of planning. A 1" diameter pipe would create a hazard only 16" high. I might allow some amount of shrapnel in the case of well planned container bursting concepts, but any such plan would only create an effect inline with that available to a 3rd level spell. And, since there are already spells of this sort available in my homebrew game - for example rock burst and shrapnel blast - it would be very easy to flex to a 'stunt' if that was required. There would be no need at all to calculate pressure. I'd just transform the 'shrink object' into a sand burst, rock burst, or shrapnel blast at a cost of being a couple of caster levels below the caster level of the shrink object spell.

That seems fairly reasonable. I have to say, when you said you'd have chosen door number one, you supported the "pipe bomb" interpretation.

My original question stands, though: At what point is using the spell to stockpile and transport mundane tools and equipment an abuse? How much is too much?

Don't use it to replace the Fireball spell via physics that likely don't exist in the campaign setting.

 

[Celebrim]

That seems fairly reasonable. I have to say, when you said you'd have chosen door number one, you supported the "pipe bomb" interpretation.

I'm not sure I support the "pipe bomb" interpretation, but neither am I opposed to it. I leave room in my response for a player to talk me into the idea that their plan is a clever one and would work, and even have a mechanic for resolving it picked out. But I don't see it as a necessity either, in that nothing requires the expansion to occur at a constant pace or a literally instantaneous time. If the rate of expansion is 30 feet per second, then it would drive the fragments of the now ruptured container away at say 20 mph. That's fast enough that a shrunken object would seem to grow to full size "in the blink of an eye" but not so fast that the fragments would be spraying around like bullets. I wouldn't necessarily want to get hit by a piece of broken glass or a bit of jagged iron travelling at 20 mph, but compared to some of the threats PC's manage to survive, this isn't particularly deadly.

But I do like players being clever, and if they could come up with a reasonably good plan that seemed very sound (possibly involving a craft skill check to make the 'bomb'), then I'd be willing to reward that with some sort of success.

 

[Dandu]

In the Enlarge Person spell, the resolution for enlarging someone too large to fit in the room/compartment/container his that the player gets a strength check to burst the room - and that's it. So that would favor the "burst" interpretation.

Of course, Shrink Item is a different spell and it's a lot simpler to assume if it's not stated, it doesn't happen.

 

[Greenfield]

Let's look at the full text of Enlarge Person, if we're going to cite it as a valid reference.

Enlarge Person
Transmutation
Level: Sor/Wiz 1, Strength 1
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One humanoid creature
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
This spell causes instant growth of a humanoid creature, doubling its height and multiplying its weight by 8. This increase changes the creature’s size category to the next larger one. The target gains a +2 size bonus to Strength, a –2 size penalty to Dexterity (to a minimum of 1), and a –1 penalty on attack rolls and AC due to its increased size.
A humanoid creature whose size increases to Large has a space of 10 feet and a natural reach of 10 feet. This spell does not change the target’s speed.
If insufficient room is available for the desired growth, the creature attains the maximum possible size and may make a Strength check (using its increased Strength) to burst any enclosures in the process. If it fails, it is constrained without harm by the materials enclosing it—the spell cannot be used to crush a creature by increasing its size.
All equipment worn or carried by a creature is similarly enlarged by the spell. Melee and projectile weapons affected by this spell deal more damage (see Table 2–2 in the Dungeon Master’s Guide). Other magical properties are not affected by this spell. Any enlarged item that leaves an enlarged creature’s possession (including a projectile or thrown weapon) instantly returns to its normal size. This means that thrown weapons deal their normal damage, and projectiles deal damage based on the size of the weapon that fired them.
Magical properties of enlarged items are not increased by this spell—an enlarged +1 sword still has only a +1 enhancement bonus, a staff-sized wand is still only capable of its normal functions, a giant sized potion merely requires a greater fluid intake to make its magical effects operate, and so on.
Multiple magical effects that increase size do not stack, which means (among other things) that you can’t use a second casting of this spell to further increase the size of a humanoid that’s still under the effect of the first casting.
Enlarge person counters and dispels reduce person.
Enlarge person can be made permanent with a permanency spell.
Material Component: A pinch of powdered iron.

I highlighted the paragraph we've both been snipping from.

Yes, it says a creature (and presumably an object) may make a Strength check to burst any enclosure.

My problem with that is that I have no idea how to roll a Strength check for an inanimate object. It can't even try, since it has no actions. (Note the "may" in the sentence.)

If it could/did, then the "Pipe bomb" model might apply, since it explicitly talks about bursting it's confinements.

As for crushing the contents: It also says that the spell does no damage to the target, that you can't crush a creature by enlarging it beyond available space.

So if we use that as the model (and it is the only example in the rules of something enlarging in confined space), the growth stops when it hits the limits of available space. It doesn't get crushed, and it doesn't "burst" free.

Now I can see some argument here to limit the use. Objects in Shrink Item are effectively frozen in time. Spell durations will expire, but other than that hot items stay hot and cold items stay cold, campfires and torches stay lit, etc.

It would be reasonable to say that that "time stop" aspect expires when the spell does, even if it can't resume full size. Food spoils, fires go out, things get cold.

That will limit some of what's being done.

The main objection, at least as voiced here, isn't the few items that depend on the stasis though. Its the extending the duration of the size/weight reduction, the existence of this tweak in the first place.

As a DM I can make an arbitrary ruling, but I hate doing that. It's an approved house rule, voted on by the players/DMs. Moreover, I really am a rules guy: I like to have a hard rule I can point to to back up such rulings. It may not always be right, but if it's in writing at least it's inarguable.

And, for the record, the Wiz with this utility belt list is mine. So I can limit, or even drop the use completely, from my character sheet. That won't necessarily affect anyone else's use/abuse of the spell.

I came up with the list as a lark, then pushed it a bit just to test it in play. It hasn't caused any actual play issues, just a DM who's uncomfortable.

When he voiced that discomfort I offered to just drop the list, rather than cause a disruption. He said it was okay, but I could tell he didn't like it.

Hence, me coming here and asking, "How much is too much".

 

[Dandu]

If it could/did, then the "Pipe bomb" model might apply, since it explicitly talks about bursting it's confinements.

The lack of any way to calculate damage would imply it's not the explosive kind of bursting.

 

[Greenfield]

Agreed. You could probably rate it at one dice per two cubic feet of reduced object, max. That would match the idea of one dice per caster level, capping at ten of course, as is standard for 3rd level spells.

But like you, we decided that it wasn't supposed to be a damage spell, so no pipe bombs. What would be the area of effect, anyway?

 

[Dandu]

This is where we involve physics, and believe me when I say that you do not want to involve physics in D&D.

 

[Celebrim]

Agreed. You could probably rate it at one dice per two cubic feet of reduced object, max. That would match the idea of one dice per caster level, capping at ten of course, as is standard for 3rd level spells.

That's excessively generous and out of line with typical D20 grenade like effects. D20 Modern grenades top out at about 6d6. The effect has to be inline with an effect that bypasses both spell resistance and energy resistance - attributes that are extremely valuable to a spellcaster.

I'd typically rate the damage like my homebrew 'rock burst' spell.

All targets in a 20' burst are subject to a ranged touch attack with an attack bonus of +5 plus 1/caster level (max +15). Damage is 1d6 plus 1/ 3 casters levels (max +5). Owing to the number of missiles, this spell may deal damage to swarms which are not normally subject to damage from physical attacks. In the spell version, the rocks are treated as magic for the purpose of overcoming DR. Like the spell version, the stunt version bypasses spell resistance. If improvised, I would not allow this unless the container was itself enchanted.

On the whole, I feel this is actually generous. Nothing in the spell suggests that the rate of expansion has to be so fast that it throws shards at a very high rate of speed. As I noted above, even a rate of expansion that allows objects to return to full size in a fraction of a second (much less a fraction of a round) and are thus 'instantaneous' for game purposes does not necessarily imply a velocity faster than a slowly tossed object.

For an exceptionally well prepared plan, such as an exceptionally well crafted scored metal container (requiring a masterwork metalworking craft check) completely filled by a well sized shrunken stone rod (implying the original mass of the stone was very high, and consequently difficult and expensive to craft), I'd probably allow 'shrink item' to replicate the effects of a 3rd level 'Shrapnel Blast' spell, which is similar to 'Rock Burst' above but does 3d8 damage over a 20' burst. The spell version treats the shards as being magic cold iron weapons for the purpose of overcoming DR, but again, I wouldn't allow this in the improvised version unless the container was magical cold iron. Like the spell version, the stunt version would bypass spell resistance.

In both cases, I'd tend to have the effective caster level of the stunt version penalized to less than the caster level, such that in either case the spell itself would have been more effective.

 

[Greenfield]

I was basing the damage not on D20 Modern grenades, but on D&D spell standards: 3rd level AoE damage spells do 1 D6 per caster level, max 10D6. But, this being a makeshift AoE I agree that the damage shouldn't match an actual damage spell

As for your Rockburst spell: Interesting spell. I look at spells like Avalanche or Comet Fall (I think that was the name) that do AoE physical damage. They allow Saves, rather than depending on a Touch Attack, as yours does. Eh, To-may-toe To-mah-toe. Still rock and roll to me.

As for Shrink Item, we took the easy way: No pipe bombs, so no need to calculate damage or area or Save DCs or touch attack bonus or anything else.

Instead we have to deal with troublesome players like me.