Shrinking treasure ?

[Evilhalfling]

Shrink Item
Target: One touched object of up to 2 cu. ft./level

You are able to shrink one nonmagical item (if it is within the size limit) to 1/16 of its normal size in each dimension (to about 1/4,000 the original volume and mass). This change effectively reduces the object’s size by four categories. Optionally, you can also change its now shrunken composition to a clothlike one. Objects changed by a shrink item spell can be returned to normal composition and size merely by tossing them onto any solid surface or by a word of command from the original caster. Even a burning fire and its fuel can be shrunk by this spell. Restoring the shrunken object to its normal size and composition ends the spell.

What is one item?
Is a chest full of coins considered a single item?
what about one filled with misc art? (statues, ornemental weapons, & jewlery + coins)

Is there a rule on swallowed items expanding? (I was thinking 1d6 dmg per caster level, fortitude for half but shrink isnt based on caster level.)
Its only a 3rd level spell but it will take a lot of work to get the dragon to eat the bait...

frustratingly clever/inventive players want to know!

 

[KarinsDad]

Is there a rule on swallowed items expanding? (I was thinking 1d6 dmg per caster level, fortitude for half but shrink isnt based on caster level.)
Its only a 3rd level spell but it will take a lot of work to get the dragon to eat the bait...

Objects changed by a shrink item spell can be returned to normal composition and size merely by tossing them onto any solid surface

So if the dragon tosses the "bait" around in his mouth and it hits a solid surface tooth, that means that the item expands in his mouth and he can easily spit it out, right?

frustratingly clever/inventive players want to know!

frustratingly clever/inventive DMs want to know!

 

[Patlin]

If you can shrink a fire and its fuel, you ought to be able to shrink a chest full of coins. Both are basically sets of objects rather than individual objects.

 

[KarinsDad]

Another point on this. Once ingested, a given DM could rule that the item can no longer "hear" the command word of the caster. In less than 5+ days, the item will come back out of the dragon again.

Personally, I would not allow the caster to do weird things with this spell like put a massive boulder as a pebble into the brim of a hat, send the hat to an enemy and then scry on the enemy and when he puts on the hat, say the command word from across the continent.

To me, command word requires that the sound waves of the command reach the object, but there are no rules on this per se.

 

[Infiniti2000]

What is one item?

A very hard question, probably more difficult that discussing "immobile." Since neither item nor object are given a spot in the glossary, we can only go to the dictionary. The problem with that, however, as that it leaves room for finagling by DM/player when the dictionary definition is attempted to be converted to game mechanics. Essentially, it's up the DM and the actual use of the word should probably change to reflect the abuse (or lack thereof) found in the conversion to game mechanics. In other words, at first I would rule the chest full o' stuff to be one item. But if there's some exploit where that could be abusive, I'd change my definition so that that wasn't possible. It's a similar issue (not same) with polymorph any object.

One problem with shrink item and your plan is that the word of command will not penetrate the total cover from being inside the dragon. You need line of effect to the object. Another problem is that nothing is stated about it causing any damage, so it shouldn't. The DM has just as much right as saying the object is shunted off to a random plane (i.e. never to be found again most likely) or is outright destroyed.

 

[KarinsDad]

One problem with shrink item and your plan is that the word of command will not penetrate the total cover from being inside the dragon.

I'm not sure this is necessarily true. Command Words are activation methods. I'm not sure there are any rules that activation methods need Line of Effect. In this case, the spell is already cast and you are effectively dismissing it with a Command Word. You are not creating a spell effect, you are getting rid of one.

Granted, this is how I too would rule, but I'm not sure the rules explicitly support this.

Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It’s like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it’s not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.

You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect.

Using the Similar Rule rule of dismissing the spell effect implies that you merely have to be within range to command the end of the effect:

(D) Dismissible: If the Duration line ends with “(D),” you can dismiss the spell at will. You must be within range of the spell’s effect and must speak words of dismissal, which are usually a modified form of the spell’s verbal component.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Using the Similar Rule rule of dismissing the spell effect implies that you merely have to be within range to command the end of the effect:

If we use that rule, then it definitely doesn't work because the Range of shrink item is Touch.

It's also interesting that shrink item doesn't even have (D) on it so perhaps it doesn't even follow any rules on dismissing. The only rule we have "Objects changed by a shrink item spell can be returned to normal composition and size merely by tossing them onto any solid surface or by a word of command from the original caster." Ignoring the "tossing them" approach, we have little game rules on "word of command." Sure, we have command word activation, but that's not the same thing. A command word item requires 'the holder' to speak it. A treasure chest in a dragon's belly clearly does not make the original caster the holder.

So, maybe you're right. Nothing explicitly requires line of effect for dismissing spells, just that you be within range.

 

[mvincent]

Is a chest full of coins considered a single item?
what about one filled with misc art? (statues, ornemental weapons, & jewlery + coins)

Yes to both.

Is there a rule on swallowed items expanding?

Yes. The expanding item does not cause damage while exanding. If this means the item cannot expand, then it does not expand. This is a standard rule for D&D, and is true for similar spells (enlarge, shapechange, summonings, etc.), unless they specifically say they cause damage when expanding (like an instant fortress for example).

When in doubt, the rules for Enlarge person are suitable guidelines:
"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."
(note: inanimate objects do not make str checks)

 

[Pyrex]

Note that that has the side effect of (effectively) changing the duration from 1day/level to Permanent-Until-Discharged.

1) Put stuff in a big box.
2) Cast Shrink Item on the big box.
3) Put the now-shrunk big box in a small box and close it.

Result >> When the duration ends the shrunken box can't expand w/o damaging the outer box so it remains shrunk until removed from the outer box.

4) Carry the two boxes into an AMF

Result >> ???

 

[Evilhalfling]

Thanks
The consensus and the rules quote by mvincent came out just exactly opposite from my inclinations - So I'll tell them that they can use shrinking to get the treasure home - but not kill the dragon.

Story details -
In the game I disallowed shrinking the chest, but remained silent on the belly bomber plan - the PCs discussed it for a while (mostly IC) but couldnt figure out how to get anything inside the dragon.

I figured that if they could manage it I would reward thier ingenuity, with some damage but not explosive death. Thier other strategy was to make a bolo from large boulders and a chain, and place it over the dragons back, before unshrinking it - this worked like a huge bolo (trip attempt at +8) which the dragon won.

The dragon then killed both clerics, and flew away. If not for a 79 hp critical - it would have finished the job.