Incorporeal Creatures Carrying Objects

[Caliburn101]

The absence of an *exception* to a rule, however, is a sound basis. The general rule is that creatures can carry objects. If there is nothing to contradict that for a partcular creature, the general rule applies. This is how the rules are constructed, explicitly.No, there is a significant difference. We have a general rule that creatures can carry objects. There is no general rule about what can be carried through a wall when incorporeal.

There are a lot of ways to look at this and you can decide what you want to do in your game. I stand by my statements above.

There is no general rule that creatures can carry objects, only rules covering the consequences of interactions with objects carried. Don't conflate the two.

It's a reasonable assumption made by all people that a physical creature can carry physical things. There is no rule that this be extended to incorporeal creatures - and it becomes obvious if you consider whether a ghost could loot you body and wear your armour...

… not many people would think that was ok. Why should picking things up with insubstantial hands be any different?

 

[jgsugden]

There is no general rule that creatures can carry objects...

See the Strength rules.

 

[Caliburn101]

See the Strength rules.

Read my post again, the second half of the same sentence.

 

[jgsugden]

Read my post again, the second half of the same sentence.

Errr....

Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry

This is explicitly a rule stating what you can carry in weight if you have a strength score. Creatures have strength scores. All of these incorporeal creatures have strength scores.

If you want to try to parse these rules so that they mean something else, be my guest.

 

[Caliburn101]

Errr....This is explicitly a rule stating what you can carry in weight if you have a strength score. Creatures have strength scores. All of these incorporeal creatures have strength scores.

If you want to try to parse these rules so that they mean something else, be my guest.

I will.

The relevant rules clearly state how MUCH you can carry, not tacking the issue of IF you can carry things. No 'parsing' is required. YOU have added this meaning to it - conflating this rule with your personal take on what you choose to expand it to include.

You interpretation is what you feel is implicit in the rule - my literal summation of it deals strictly with what is explicit in the rule.

Having a Strength score in no way guarantees you the ability to carry anything, but if you can, this is how much - that is what the rules shows. Nowhere does it say, 'If you have a Strength score, you can carry things'.

I understand your confusion on this, but both grammatically and logically you have not pointed out any rule guaranteeing the ability to carry things with a Strength score.

I hope that clears up what I am saying and where I contend the flaw in your argument lies.

 

[jasper]

Unseen Servant, Invisible Stalker (especially from older editions), Poltergeist, Living Unseen Servant, all can carry something. .

Nowhere does it say, 'If you have a Strength score, you can carry things'.,,,,SUDDENLY THROUGH OUT THE REALMS ADVENTURES WERE CRUSHED TO DEATH BY THE WEIGHT OF THEIR ARMOUR OR LOOT. WEAPONS, ARCANA FOCUSES, MATERIAL COMPONENTS FELL TO EARTH. BECAUSE NOWHERE DOES IT STATE ADVENTURERS CAN CARRY THINGS!

 

[jasper]

At least among the undead that have Incorporeal Movement their attacks do necrotic or force damage. It's not explicitly stated, but to me that indicates that they don't have a 'physical' attack in the usual sense. Is there an example of a creature that has Incorporeal Movement and an attack that does bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage?



Looking at the spell description, I don't see the word 'incorporeal'.



Is there a creature that does not have a strength score? I don't know of any, but I might have missed something.

Avatar of Death does 7 (1d8+3) slashing damage, has incorporeal movement. Medium undead. Str is 16 aka +3

 

[Dausuul]

Note that there is an incorporeal undead which explicitly lacks the ability to move objects: The will-o'-wisp has an "Ephemeral" trait which states that it can't wear or carry anything. It's the only creature with this trait.

This strongly suggests that RAI matches RAW in this case, and incorporeal undead are supposed to be able to move objects unless specified otherwise. (I would not allow such an object to pass through a physical barrier, but that is my personal ruling and I don't think it is the cleanest interpretation of RAW.)

 

[jgsugden]

I will.

The relevant rules clearly state how MUCH you can carry, not tacking the issue of IF you can carry things. No 'parsing' is required. YOU have added this meaning to it - conflating this rule with your personal take on what you choose to expand it to include.

You interpretation is what you feel is implicit in the rule - my literal summation of it deals strictly with what is explicit in the rule.

Having a Strength score in no way guarantees you the ability to carry anything, but if you can, this is how much - that is what the rules shows. Nowhere does it say, 'If you have a Strength score, you can carry things'.

I understand your confusion on this, but both grammatically and logically you have not pointed out any rule guaranteeing the ability to carry things with a Strength score.

I hope that clears up what I am saying and where I contend the flaw in your argument lies.

I got what you're saying, but your PCs must have very short adventures.

There are rules covering when you run out of breath if you have to hold it, but no rules saying that they can take in a breath in the first place in non-suffocation situations.

The rule section said you can carry weight as determined by your strength score. It did not say, "Hey, Bud, like if you can carry stuff, this is the amount you can carry." It said the strength score limits the weight you can carry. As long as a strength score is specified - they can carry weight.

You're free to rule as you please. My comment above, about you being free to parse the rules as you see fit, was meant to convey that you can go off and make a contrary ruling. However, RAW, I'm secure in y understanding that incorporeal creatures with a strength score can lift things.

Dausuul's comments on the Wisp further suport this understanding.

 

[5ekyu]

I will.

The relevant rules clearly state how MUCH you can carry, not tacking the issue of IF you can carry things. No 'parsing' is required. YOU have added this meaning to it - conflating this rule with your personal take on what you choose to expand it to include.

You interpretation is what you feel is implicit in the rule - my literal summation of it deals strictly with what is explicit in the rule.

Having a Strength score in no way guarantees you the ability to carry anything, but if you can, this is how much - that is what the rules shows. Nowhere does it say, 'If you have a Strength score, you can carry things'.

I understand your confusion on this, but both grammatically and logically you have not pointed out any rule guaranteeing the ability to carry things with a Strength score.

I hope that clears up what I am saying and where I contend the flaw in your argument lies.

"The relevant rules clearly state how MUCH you can carry, not tacking the issue of IF you can carry things. "

Actually no it says specifically "you can carry". It is permissive, not just descriptive.

"The following terms define what you can lift or carry."

Note that the word "what" is used there, not how much.

There is no mention of needing some other place to allow you because that is allowing.

Similar language is used for speed, where you are allowed to move up yo your speed, speed as how much, but no other section is needed to say "you can move."

If you have z speed, you can move it barring rules yo the vontrary.
If you have strength, you can carry unless specific rules to contrary.

To approach these rules without that sense is gonna be very problematic because it's a presentation they repeated quite a bit.

Gms of course, can do whstdver.