Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shadow Conjuration and non-offensive spells
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tzarevitch" data-source="post: 1527296" data-attributes="member: 1792"><p>I disagree. As I look at the 3.5 SRD, for <em>Shadow Evocation</em>, "Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers they have NO EFFECT." (Emphasis added.) "Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell." </p><p></p><p>Igniting oil does not cause the oil to "take damage", it causes it to catch on fire. That is a special condition. The flaming oil has the capacity to inflict damage in and of itself to other creatures or objects but it does not take damage from the spell therefore the oil is not affected. </p><p></p><p>Hmm. They seem to have fixed some of the problems with the spell in 3.5 when I wasn't looking. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, now that I look at the 3.5 version of the spell it does not say that 20% is real, it only says that it does 20% of the damage. That change in wording means a lot because it doesn't leave that question of what is the 80% that is "not real"?</p><p></p><p>I should've read the 3.5 version more closely. They seem to have fixed some of the horrible problems with the Shadow Magic spells by removing the words to the effect of __% real and changed them to "___% effective" or "___ likely to occur". That removes the stupid problem of "real vs. not real" that the old version had. Now it is all "real" it is only that it is __% as powerful in general as the imitated spell. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This part of these spells is still problematic. If a mechanical trap (an object) swings a sword (also an object) at your armor it automatically disbelieves the effect because it is an object and therefore ignores it completely. Yet if I swing the same sword (an object) somehow the fact that I can think means that I somehow can make the spell real for a weapon that has no ability to think and should automatically be able to ignore it. That part of the Shadow magic spells it still stupid. I must admit however, they seem to have fixed enough of the problems with these spells that I may actually permit them back into my game. </p><p></p><p>Tzarevitch</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tzarevitch, post: 1527296, member: 1792"] I disagree. As I look at the 3.5 SRD, for [I]Shadow Evocation[/I], "Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers they have NO EFFECT." (Emphasis added.) "Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell." Igniting oil does not cause the oil to "take damage", it causes it to catch on fire. That is a special condition. The flaming oil has the capacity to inflict damage in and of itself to other creatures or objects but it does not take damage from the spell therefore the oil is not affected. Hmm. They seem to have fixed some of the problems with the spell in 3.5 when I wasn't looking. Actually, now that I look at the 3.5 version of the spell it does not say that 20% is real, it only says that it does 20% of the damage. That change in wording means a lot because it doesn't leave that question of what is the 80% that is "not real"? I should've read the 3.5 version more closely. They seem to have fixed some of the horrible problems with the Shadow Magic spells by removing the words to the effect of __% real and changed them to "___% effective" or "___ likely to occur". That removes the stupid problem of "real vs. not real" that the old version had. Now it is all "real" it is only that it is __% as powerful in general as the imitated spell. This part of these spells is still problematic. If a mechanical trap (an object) swings a sword (also an object) at your armor it automatically disbelieves the effect because it is an object and therefore ignores it completely. Yet if I swing the same sword (an object) somehow the fact that I can think means that I somehow can make the spell real for a weapon that has no ability to think and should automatically be able to ignore it. That part of the Shadow magic spells it still stupid. I must admit however, they seem to have fixed enough of the problems with these spells that I may actually permit them back into my game. Tzarevitch [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shadow Conjuration and non-offensive spells
Top