Spider Climb

[Radiating Gnome]

I just got back from a game session -- someone else was DM. And there was a very weird ruling at the table. I don't mean to be petulent, and I accepted it gracefully at the time under the Rule 0 plan, but it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

So, here's the thing. Our low level party came upon a large goblin warparty besieging a mountain outpost, and engaged the war party from the rear. My Halfing rogue/illusionist chugged down a potion of spider climb, used the climbing ability provided by the spell to climb to a good sniping position, and prepared to try to shower the goblins with arrows.

BUT I was told that my halfling would not be able to shoot or throw anything, because the same spell effect that allowed me to climb walls -- a stickyness on my hands and feet -- made it impossible for me to let go of objects I pick up -- so the arrow would never leave my fingers when I tried to shoot it.

Is that some sort of holdover from 2nd edition (which I never played)? Is there some mention of this effect I just haven't seen? Are there readers out there to whom this makes sense, who might be able to explain it to me?

-rg

 

[hong]

Your DM was being an idiot. IIRC even in 2E there was no rule about things sticking to your hands if you didn't want them to; in 3E it's doubly egregious because spider climb leaves its mechanism unstated.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Actually - it is just a literal reading of the spider climb spell. It states that you must have bare hands and feet to climb accordingly.

Now - if you had gloves - I see absolutely no problem at all. If you didn't - I could see your GM's point. Thing is, gloves are much harder than boots to "presume" that you have on hand.

 

[hong]

Actually - it is just a literal reading of the spider climb spell. It states that you must have bare hands and feet to climb accordingly.

This word, "literal": I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

This word, "literal": I do not think it means what you think it means.

Yeah. A literal reading leaves no indication of how the climbing ability is achieved. One possible interpretation of the text might be that it makes the subject's hands and feet sticky, but that is not literally in the spell description.

But there isn't enough there, in the desciption of the spell, to justify that interpreation. This is as much a stretch of an interpretation as it would be to argue that expeditious retreat doubles your movement rate, so you always move twice as far as you want to -- sending young wizards careening around the dungeon like kids on rollerscates, bouncing off walls because they can't control how fast they're going. After all, the E.R. spell description doesn't explicitly say that the user has complete control over the new burst of speed . . .

-rg

 

[Crothian]

Perhaps you thought of something the DM wasn't ready for and thus found a way to not make it happen? It's an unusual ruling. Spider climb lasts for a while so having it basically neutralize ranged weapons for theat amount of time would have been in the text.

 

[chilibean]

In one of the older editions, I can't remember which, it stated that while subject to the spell the wizard can't cast spells with somantic components.

The idea that you can't voluntarily have the "stickiness" stop being sticky is just illogical. Then how do you walk up the wall? The moment you have the spell cast on you, you are super-glued to the floor in place. You could never lift your leg to take a single step.

But you can walk ... so therefore you can pick up and drop something, or shoot and arrow, or whatever.

A great combination is a rung of jumping and boots of spider climbing. Jump up and "land" on the ceiling or wall. You can also tightrope walk on the underside of a rope with no chance of falling off (or on the side of the rope for that matter, but the rope would probably just twist and you would be walking under it again.)

 

[Magus_Jerel]

After doing a bit of digging - this WAS the way things were in the 1e and some versions of the 2e of the game - so your suspicion was correct - it is a holdover from previous editions. The "restrictive" text is no longer present - so I have to reverse my previous statement.

In any event, I do think that doing this in the middle of the combat was bad form - and I personally would have let you do it. If I was a "stickler" for this point and wanted to keep the spell as it was in previous editions - I would have just ruled you had gloves as part of your "outfit" and had to put them on once you got where you wanted to be (a partial action) before you could fire.

The fact that the spell is not dismissable - makes me think that the GM wasn't anticipating this course of action - and abused rule 0

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Funny, I don't remember Spiderman ever having that problem.

Although I guess a DM may use rule 0 to make rulings like this, the spell does not work this way. If it did, it would say so. The spell does what it says, nothing more. Why did your DM do this? Did he give a reason? Was he afraid you were going to snipe the entire warparty?

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Here is an excerpt from the 2e version of the spell for anyone interested.

During the course of the spell, the recipient cannot handle objects that weigh less than a dagger (one pound), for such objects stick to his hands and feet. Thus, a wizard will find it virtually impossible to cast spells if under a spider climb spell.