Polymorphing outsiders and undead

[Hypersmurf]

I say that such a designation must appear in its targettability.

Hmm?

Disintegrate doesn't have a Target entry. It has an Effect. It can affect objects.

Fireball doesn't have a Target entry. It has an Area. It can affect objects.

What is this "targettability" of which you speak?

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

Hmm?

Disintegrate doesn't have a Target entry. It has an Effect. It can affect objects.

Fireball doesn't have a Target entry. It has an Area. It can affect objects.

What is this "targettability" of which you speak?

He mentioned it.

He said two words "I say".

Not "the rules say". "I say".

It is an opinion not based on what the rules state.

The rules state that Polymorph Others can affect undead if the original target is undead. The rules state that the undead immunity to Fort Save spells does not apply if the spell affects objects. The rules state that Polymorph Others "affects objects" by changing their size or melding them into the targeted creature.

"immune to any effect requiring a Fort Save (unless it affects objects)"

According to Frank's opinion, this does not apply because Polymorph Other does not list objects as its targets, not because Polymorph Other cannot affect objects.

He is adding a new criteria (i.e. a new house rule). That the spell must specifically target objects as opposed to merely affecting them.

Control Winds is nearly identical to Polymorph Others in that it affects objects and has a Fort Save. However, it explicitly states in the text "Each round, a creature in the wind must make a Fortitude save or suffer the effect."

Since it does not state that objects must make a Fort Save, does this mean that objects and/or undead are not affected by Control Wind? Since it does not "target objects", does this mean that objects and/or undead are not affected by Control Wind?

Of course not. Control Winds explicitly states what it does to objects in its area of effect. Just like Polymorph Other explicitly states what it does to equipment carried by the targeted creature.

Control Winds does NOT have listed: "Saving Throw: Fortitude negates (Object)". Instead, it has "Saving Throw: Fortitude negates". If Franks targeting theory were even possibly correct, Control Winds would minimally have (Object) listed in its Saving Throw.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Karinsdad, what crawled up your butt and died? Did I do something to cause you to get so livid every time I post? Did I piss in your Cheerios? What?

I never said "I say" - and I am looking right at the rules, and I've quoted them.

All I'm asking you to do is to take your interpretation and explain to us in what way the secondary effects of Seething Eyebane are not considered "affecting objects". Once you do that, I'll be happy to debate minutiae with you.

But right now we have a loggerhead where your basic assertion is one which does not have direct backing in the rules and is something which leads to a slippery slope that I cannot accept.

So if you can draw a line somewhere where you can interpret the secondary effects of possibly changing the size of a creature's equipment when you change them being somehow fundamentally different from the secondary effects of killing someone with a Finger of Death including the destruction of their swag, then I can evaluate your argument based upon that. Right now you've got nothing.

For one thing, I am not at all convinced that a creature's equipment is considered an object for this purpose:

An item attended by a character (being grasped, touched, or worn) recieves a saving throw just as if the character herself were making the saving throw.

So for this purpose, it appears that the equipment is the character. The character is a creature - so it is not in fact an example of a spell affecting objects at all. Merely one of objects counting as part of a creature. That's not the same thing at all.

-Frank

 

[Dthamilaye]

Sheesh guys...

Well, read the Lich-template from 3.5 MM.

Immunities (Ex): Liches have immunity to cold, electricity, polymorph (though they can use polymorph effects on themselves), and mind-affecting attacks.

So if they can use polymorph effects on themselves (reads quite clearly there), I assume that the immunity can not be TOTAL immunity. Ie, they can somehow go through the immunity by themselves, which could imply that it is, after all, just like infinite SR.

Well, anyway that sentence shows that undeads can be affected by polymorph effects somehow. Take it for whatever you want.

 

[melkoriii]

KarinsDad is right.

The spell overides the rule.

 

[KarinsDad]

Karinsdad, what crawled up your butt and died? Did I do something to cause you to get so livid every time I post? Did I piss in your Cheerios? What?

I speak about you in the third person and in an uncivil manner since that is how you first started (and have continued) to address me.

I have no problem with being civil with you, but I will not do it if you will not reciprocate.

In fact, I would prefer being civil. What is your preference?

I never said "I say" - and I am looking right at the rules, and I've quoted them.

I was responding to what Hyp was responding to:

I say that such a designation must appear in its targettability, you say that it can include its secondary effects - but the rules don't address the issue in the slightest.

All I'm asking you to do is to take your interpretation and explain to us in what way the secondary effects of Seething Eyebane are not considered "affecting objects". Once you do that, I'll be happy to debate minutiae with you.

...

It blinds one creature, and causes 1d6 of acid damage to everyone within 5 feet. That can, in turn, damage objects (presumably "affecting them"). However, the spell cannot target objects, nor does it have any affect when cast upon an object.

Seems fairly clear. This acid would affect undead. Are you claiming that undead standing next to the target creature are immune to the acid even though objects are not immune? If not, are you claiming that undead cannot be the target creature?

The fact is that undead are creatures. Undead are affected by Fort Save spells that affect objects, regardless of whether the spell directly targets objects or not. Control Winds does not directly target objects, but any object in it's area of effect could be affected. Seething Eyebane does not directly target objects, but any object in it's area of effect could be affected. Hence, an undead could be targeted by Seething Eyebane.


Btw, I do not have Seething Eyebane in any of my 3E books, so I cannot actually read the entire spell. I am basing this merely off your explanation.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Seems fairly clear. This acid would affect undead.

Of course it would. For one thing, that portion of the spell has a reflex save. But the primary effect of the spell - the blowing up of the target's eyes - clearly would not. And since it dosn't do Acid damage until it has already blown up the target's eyes - it is useless if everyone in the room is undead.

Btw, I do not have Seething Eyebane in any of my 3E books, so I cannot actually read the entire spell. I am basing this merely off your explanation.

It's in the BoVD.

Well, read the Lich-template from 3.5 MM.

Polymorph Any Object is a Polymorph effect, which Liches are immune to. If they were not immune to it because it was a Polymorph Effect, they would be vulnerable to it because it is Will Negates.

Thus, since the Lich's immunity is relevent and important regardless of interpretation - the Lich is not relevent to this discussion.

-Frank

 

[ThirdWizard]

Control Winds is an odd case. It does affect objects, but they get no save, so there is no (object) listing in the saving throw line. Undead are, thus, affected, even though without reading the text, you wouldn't realize this. They do get saves, though, because they are creatures and all creatures get a save to avoid the effects of the spell.

Seething eyebane does not affect undead. Saying that a secondary effect of a spell can affect objects is different than saying a spell can affect objects. In one case, the magic of the spell can affect objects, in the other case something produced by a spell can affect them. For example, say you have a (hypothetical) spell that turns a creature into a sword. That sword can be used to kill undead. But, that doesn't mean that the spell itself can turn an undead into a sword.

 

[KarinsDad]

Of course it would. For one thing, that portion of the spell has a reflex save. But the primary effect of the spell - the blowing up of the target's eyes - clearly would not. And since it dosn't do Acid damage until it has already blown up the target's eyes - it is useless if everyone in the room is undead.

Ok, from what I can piece together, Seething Eyebane is an extremely powerful first level spell effect that:

1) Blows up the targets eyes if he does not make a Fort Save. At first level (compared to Blindness at third level)?
2) Does 1D6 acid damage to everyone in a 5 foot radius who doesn't make a Reflex save.
3) Is somehow considered balanced because it does (or might do, not sure which since I do not have the spell) 1D6 of temporary Con damage to the caster.

And this third party extremely bizarre (two different types of saves within the same spell) and unbalanced spell is what you are using to support your POV on a totally different core spell?

Sorry, but just like you consider the Liches immunity to Polymorph to be irrelevant (maybe they put this immunity in for Polymorph Any Object and maybe they put it in for Polymorph Other, and maybe they put it in for both), I consider this spell example to be totally irrelevant to Polymorph Other.

This third party spell does not indicate in any way shape or form what the core rules are. This is a rules forum based on rules, not based on strange spells from third party sources.


There is definitely a targeting rule that states that if you target the wrong sort of target, the spell fails. However, the problem with claiming that an undead is the wrong sort of target is that Polymorph Other explicitly states that an undead target is legitimate if the effect (polymorphing into an undead) is attempted. There is no rule that states that "affects objects" means "target objects" and pulling strange third party spells with special saving throw rules listed within their text in no way invalidates the rules with regard to Polymorph Other.

 

[FrankTrollman]

And this third party extremely bizarre

It's not 3rd party - it's a WotC book written by Monte Cook. And it has exactly the same kind of mechanic as Phantasmal Killer.

So it is neither bizzare, nor third party. The primary author of the entire friggin game wrote it for the company that produces the game.

-Frank