| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Naroon Shimmerflow |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 06:27:31
This is the dilemma:
Once our characters met this stone giants and the stone giants strated to throw rocks at us, BIG suprise , anyway, the wizard in the groupe cast a Enlarge on the rock in the hope of that the rock would slow it`s decent and fall to the ground earlier, because of the weight differnce. ( it logic is`nt it?)
but the DM (who is very good in math) calculated that the rock did not slow down and still would hit the , yep, the poor wizard and this time it was 100% bigger and heavier funny story, but are this right, can anyone of the Great Sages of Candlekeep or travelers of the realm enough math to give us a second opinion?
All the players agree that the logical solution is that the rock would fall to the ground earlier because of the weight differnce, but we are no great sages of knowledge.
|
| 21 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 28 Jan 2004 : 16:14:07
quote:
Originally posted by kahonen
Perhaps we should agree to disagree 
No, I'd have to disagree. Er, waitaminute . . . .  |
| kahonen |
Posted - 28 Jan 2004 : 13:16:08
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Well, I should have looked at the 3.5e description for the light spell, but I didn't since I only have that in electronic form. I just happened to spot this a little while ago:
quote:
Excerpt from the Light spell, 3.5 Edition
This spell causes an object to glow like a torch, shedding bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for an additional 20 feet) from the point you touch.
If I'd checked that first, then I could have supported my argument more solidly. It would appear I'm right in this.
...
Indeed it would, providing, of course that we are all using 3.5 edition rules. I'm not and nor do I intend to (having much better things to do with my money than throw large chunks of it at Hasbro every couple of months). I'll probably buy the 7th edition rules when they appear (later this year going off past performance)*
On a more serious note, it appears that what has happened is that the 3.5 edition rules have "swept up" a variety of house rules which were being used due to the shortcomings of the 2nd edition rules. The spell description you give is almost an exact word-for-word copy of a house rule which is in one of the net books available at many other, (and of course, inferior), websites. The issue with the effect of a light spell has been one of many such issues which have plagued DM's for longer than I care to remember. It appears that some effort is now being made to solve these issues - this, at least, is a good thing.
Perhaps we should agree to disagree
* Sorry, cynicism creeping in again.
|
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 28 Jan 2004 : 05:09:22
Well, I should have looked at the 3.5e description for the light spell, but I didn't since I only have that in electronic form. I just happened to spot this a little while ago:
quote:
Excerpt from the Light spell, 3.5 Edition
This spell causes an object to glow like a torch, shedding bright light in a 20-foot radius (and dim light for an additional 20 feet) from the point you touch.
If I'd checked that first, then I could have supported my argument more solidly. It would appear I'm right in this. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 22 Jan 2004 : 04:31:12
It wasn't a quote. Note the lack of anything to suggest anything at all besides emphasis (meaning the italics). It was a logical conclusion based on the fact that characters with Low-Light Vision can see twice as far as those without under any "conditions of poor illumination." |
| kahonen |
Posted - 20 Jan 2004 : 22:17:44
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
Now, as for the light question: I hate to say it, but you're thinking too hard, Kahonen. The light only illuminates an area to the degree that all details are easily shown. Remember, a character with Low Light Vision can see twice as far; so the light doesn't stop.
Think of it like an ordinary light. You have to move your flashlight or lamp a bit to illuminate exactly what you want, right? But if that light doesn't reach more than 30 feet (which I think might be standard for a lamp, but that's a guess) that doesn't mean that the light physically stops at exactly 30 feet. Light falls off at the inverse square of the distance, after all.
The rules for such are, I think, slightly too arbitrary. I think that what should be used instead is like a range increment, where every thirty feet (or other amount, depending on the description) you suffer a -4 penalty on Spot checks, cumulative with the normal distance penalty. A character with Low Light Vision would treat all increments as double the amount.
Now, no more science-doesn't-work-in-the-Realms talk.
Sorry, Bookwyrm, I have to disagree.
A look at the Light spell in 3rd edition shows that the "spell causes an object to glow like a torch, shedding light in a 20 foot radius from the point you touch". I'd maintain that in the case of the spell, the light does exactly what the description says it does - illuminates a 20 foot radius and then stops. If you can give me the source of your quote "The light only illuminates an area to the degree that all details are easily shown" it may, perhaps, give more credence to your argument.
As for your suggestion to "think of it like an ordinary light", clearly that's irrelevant since this is not an ordinary light.
You are perfectly welcome to interpret the description in whatever way you choose. I'll continue to do the same  |
| Naroon Shimmerflow |
Posted - 20 Jan 2004 : 14:43:34
A very good point Lina. I`ll make sure to tell him what you said
|
| Lina |
Posted - 20 Jan 2004 : 14:10:12
quote:
Originally posted by Naroon Shimmerflow
This is the dilemma:
Once our characters met this stone giants and the stone giants strated to throw rocks at us, BIG suprise, anyway, the wizard in the groupe cast a Enlarge on the rock in the hope of that the rock would slow it`s decent and fall to the ground earlier, because of the weight differnce. ( it logic is`nt it?)
but the DM (who is very good in math) calculated that the rock did not slow down and still would hit the , yep, the poor wizard and this time it was 100% bigger and heavier funny story, but are this right, can anyone of the Great Sages of Candlekeep or travelers of the realm enough math to give us a second opinion?
All the players agree that the logical solution is that the rock would fall to the ground earlier because of the weight differnce, but we are no great sages of knowledge.
I know this may sound a little harsh but sounds to me that mage was somewhat unprepared. If he knows he's going to run into hostile people/monsters why didn't he use deflection spells like shields and instead of enlarging the boulder why didn't he use it on himself or shrink the boulder instead? The damage would have been lessened considerably. Especially if your a huge giant, and if there were trees around, he could have done some bating practice. |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 17 Jan 2004 : 19:36:55
Yes. I was assuming that . . . but the thing is, if it happened in midair, then the air resistance would have very little time to take effect.
Admittedly, it would depend on when the spell was cast, how far the boulder had to travel in the first place, and what the actual shape of the boulder was before enlarged. The angle of the throw would be needed as well . . . perhaps it had enough speed to actually bounce/roll onto the wizard.
Please note that while I don't like the idea of "no science in a fantasy" there is such a thing as too much science.  |
| Zacas |
Posted - 17 Jan 2004 : 19:20:01
hmm... even tho this part of the discussion is over... was thinking to add my 2-cents worth on the enlarging the boulder... to me it'd make sense that enlarging it would, in effect, make it drop sooner...
Making an object bigger, increases the surface area... with that increases the change for more air resistance/drag... which would slow it down, especially if the wind is blowing, in any way, against the thrown boulder... :P but then... that's just how my sense works... it would originally move with the same speed through the air despite the changed size... it would just meet more resistance by the air (and any wind) with a larger size... |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 17 Jan 2004 : 18:51:50
I didn't know if anyone would take that seriously, and try to use it . . . . If you do, then likely you'd need to either increase the penalty, change it to concealment (likely), or make the increments smaller. I just said by 30s (or whatever the number is in the description) because it wasn't necessary to go into more of it.
Perhaps I ought to dig up the old "Alternate Rules" scroll that died a while back. |
| Bayne |
Posted - 17 Jan 2004 : 13:43:52
quote:
Originally posted by Bookwyrm
If the rock was enlarged before thrown, then it would depend on the strength of the giant and the weight of the rock. However, if it was already thrown, then by the laws of physics would mean that the velocity and trajectory of the rock wouldn't be changed.
Of course, that's assuming the extra mass materializes with exact relation to the original amount, which I figure it would have to. (After all, if you enlarge a person, who is always in motion if (s)he is alive, then you have to assume that the extra mass is given the same motion as the mass it's attatched to. Or else you'd end up with something really ugly.
Now, as for the light question: I hate to say it, but you're thinking too hard, Kahonen. The light only illuminates an area to the degree that all details are easily shown. Remember, a character with Low Light Vision can see twice as far; so the light doesn't stop.
Think of it like an ordinary light. You have to move your flashlight or lamp a bit to illuminate exactly what you want, right? But if that light doesn't reach more than 30 feet (which I think might be standard for a lamp, but that's a guess) that doesn't mean that the light physically stops at exactly 30 feet. Light falls off at the inverse square of the distance, after all.
The rules for such are, I think, slightly too arbitrary. I think that what should be used instead is like a range increment, where every thirty feet (or other amount, depending on the description) you suffer a -4 penalty on Spot checks, cumulative with the normal distance penalty. A character with Low Light Vision would treat all increments as double the amount.
Now, no more science-doesn't-work-in-the-Realms talk.
I agree that it should be in increments...I'll speak with my DM on that |
| Bookwyrm |
Posted - 17 Jan 2004 : 07:11:56
If the rock was enlarged before thrown, then it would depend on the strength of the giant and the weight of the rock. However, if it was already thrown, then by the laws of physics would mean that the velocity and trajectory of the rock wouldn't be changed.
Of course, that's assuming the extra mass materializes with exact relation to the original amount, which I figure it would have to. (After all, if you enlarge a person, who is always in motion if (s)he is alive, then you have to assume that the extra mass is given the same motion as the mass it's attatched to. Or else you'd end up with something really ugly.
Now, as for the light question: I hate to say it, but you're thinking too hard, Kahonen. The light only illuminates an area to the degree that all details are easily shown. Remember, a character with Low Light Vision can see twice as far; so the light doesn't stop.
Think of it like an ordinary light. You have to move your flashlight or lamp a bit to illuminate exactly what you want, right? But if that light doesn't reach more than 30 feet (which I think might be standard for a lamp, but that's a guess) that doesn't mean that the light physically stops at exactly 30 feet. Light falls off at the inverse square of the distance, after all.
The rules for such are, I think, slightly too arbitrary. I think that what should be used instead is like a range increment, where every thirty feet (or other amount, depending on the description) you suffer a -4 penalty on Spot checks, cumulative with the normal distance penalty. A character with Low Light Vision would treat all increments as double the amount.
Now, no more science-doesn't-work-in-the-Realms talk. |
| RogueAssassin |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 22:50:16
Hes squished.
-Rogue |
| kahonen |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 20:32:39
I don't have a rule book to hand, but I'd suggest you use the damage for a bolt thrower or similar. I should imagine an arrow would possibly be enlarged by roughly that amount. I would also look at the potential for massive damage (or whatever it's called in this week's set of rules*)
* Oops, sorry, a little bit of cynicism creeping in there |
| Bayne |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 20:20:58
quote:
Originally posted by kahonen
I have to agree with Rad and answering as a DM, I'd say that if there was any doubt about the rock hitting the party I'd have ruled that it missed simply to reward the unusual use of the spell.
I have found in the past, however, that trying to use Maths and Physics in D&D simply doesn't work. We are, after all, talking about a world where magic works which (I assume) indicates some fundamental differences in the way the physical world actually works.
Think, for a moment, about a globe of light (radius 30') which only allows the people within it to see 30'. Can people outside who are further away than 30' see it? If they can, it indicates that the radius must actually be greater than 30' because the light must have travelled further than 30' to be seen (so why can't the people inside see further?). Arguing about things like this will simply cause your head to cave in and require a simple decision to be made. How good your DM is at Maths is largely irrelevant.
If your DM wishes to rule this way, fine. Accept it. He must realise, however, that rulings such as this go both ways. The next time you are in a combat situation have the mage in the party cast enlarge on a throwing axe (after it's been thrown), or an arrow (after it's been fired) and ask your DM how he intends to calculate damage on the target.
If your DM insists on making unilateral decisions (ie decisions without discussion with the party members) simply look for ways to turn those decisions to your advantage and then use them.
I have a question regarding that...what would the damage be, if the arrow was enlarged after impact? Of course this depends upon the area that was hit, and the damage the arrow created before being enlarged, but I was just wondering if you all could figure this out for me? |
| Naroon Shimmerflow |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 17:59:00
well I guess you are right. We play in a fantasy world, why bother with to much science, it will only halt the game flow.
Even if the mage wont agree it became a heavy rock and it did hurt
Kahonen you have some good points there
|
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 14:52:15
Excellent point on the light spell, kahonen! Id never actually thought about that but youre quite right!! |
| kahonen |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 12:31:49
I have to agree with Rad and answering as a DM, I'd say that if there was any doubt about the rock hitting the party I'd have ruled that it missed simply to reward the unusual use of the spell.
I have found in the past, however, that trying to use Maths and Physics in D&D simply doesn't work. We are, after all, talking about a world where magic works which (I assume) indicates some fundamental differences in the way the physical world actually works.
Think, for a moment, about a globe of light (radius 30') which only allows the people within it to see 30'. Can people outside who are further away than 30' see it? If they can, it indicates that the radius must actually be greater than 30' because the light must have travelled further than 30' to be seen (so why can't the people inside see further?). Arguing about things like this will simply cause your head to cave in and require a simple decision to be made. How good your DM is at Maths is largely irrelevant.
If your DM wishes to rule this way, fine. Accept it. He must realise, however, that rulings such as this go both ways. The next time you are in a combat situation have the mage in the party cast enlarge on a throwing axe (after it's been thrown), or an arrow (after it's been fired) and ask your DM how he intends to calculate damage on the target.
If your DM insists on making unilateral decisions (ie decisions without discussion with the party members) simply look for ways to turn those decisions to your advantage and then use them. |
| mr.lee |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 12:30:10
Yea, I agree with you, Garen Thal. It seems obvious to me that the rock was just enlarged, the speed would be the same, because the air-resistance wouldn't affect the dirty great, heavy rock, would it? Besides - The Forgotten Realms™ (if that was what you were playing) isn't on earth, is it? So the air-resistance may be different there!
I wouldn't know - ask Wizards of the Coast! |
| Garen Thal |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 11:59:56
Barring resistance from the air, physics dictate that all objects fall at the same rate: 9.8m/s˛ That is, 9.8 meters per second squared (so an object would fall at 9.8 m/s after 1 second, 19.8 m/s after 2 seconds, and so forth); acceleration due to gravity is constant regardless of the mass of the falling object.
However, since we're not talking about things falling in a straight line, but rather travelling in an arc, yes, an increase in mass- which is by a factor of 8, not 2- would certainly reduce the effect of the force of the throw, forcing it to fall to the ground well in advance of striking its target.
Of course, since we're no longer talking about actual physics, it may be that the rock just gets larger, losing none of its velocity. Rather than dealing with force, if we were just to deal with speed, making the rock get bigger- and 8 times as heavy- would cause it to be travelling at the same speed, but cause far more damage when it actually hit. |
| Lord Rad |
Posted - 16 Jan 2004 : 08:09:35
Well im certainly not the person to give you the formula for such, but you have my vote that the rock would have missed its target and fallen to the ground much sooner |
|
|
