Orbs of Whatever

[Hyde]

I've seen this brought up three times in as many days, so I thought I would offer my viewpoint, as a technical writer, on this.

the first spell appearing in alphabetical order is the orb of acid, and since all the other orb spells have similar effects (except force) they're printed as "like acid, but..." to save on page count.

The elemental orb spells are identical except for the elemental subtype and the effect (both the "effect" line and description text). The effect lines all read "one orb of x" where x is the appropriate element, so it doesn't produce an orb of acid that somehow does fire or cold or whatever damage (Though I'm pretty sure Psyren was joking about that to begin with).

Then there's the orb of Force, which seems to have bewildered pretty much everyone with it's lack of "like acid" descriptors.

Well, that's because it doesn't behave at all like the acid version. It has a different range (medium) lower damage cap (10d6) and no secondary effect (and by extension, no saving throw).

In this instance, writing out all of the "like acid except..." would actually take up more space on the page than just writing a new entry from scratch, which is what they did.


I hope this has helped clear up some confusion.

[Eldan]

The confusion mainly comes from the way that, by RAW, the spells create perfectly nonmagical orbs of elements that stick together in a spherical shape even when the magic no longer applies.
Furthermore, it is never explained what exactly happens to the nonmagical, permanently created orb of ice, fire or whatever that gets created in the case it is deflected, caught, etc.

[Lapak]

People are not - as far as I can tell - confused because Orb of Force is written differently or has different statistics. I haven't seen the specific posts you're talking about, but in my experience here people are confused because it is, like all the Orb of X spells, an Instantaneous Conjuration.

It doesn't make MUCH sense that a damage-variable-by-caster-level, magically-projected, cohesive ball of source-less, fuel-less fire is a nonmagical construct that survives passing through an Antimagic Field while a Fireball is not, but it can be rationalized if need be. (It's plasma drawn from Elemental Plane of Fire, or the sun, or whatever.)

But what, exactly, is an Orb of Force made of? It's an instantaneous conjuration of... pure magical force? That is somehow 'realer' than other instances of magical force, like a Magic Missile?

That's the confusion about Orb of Force as I understand it.

[Psyren]

My preferred fluff explanation is that the "orbs" are in fact low-sentience, spherical, highly volatile elementals, created locally and programmed to suicidally charge the caster's target/transfer all their energy on impact.

This explanation covers most of the orb attributes:

- Ranged touch attack: The caster isn't "throwing" the orb, merely directing it, so all they have to do is point. Therefore, only a RTA is needed.
- Ignoring SR: An elemental's slam wouldn't interact with SR either, despite elementals being made of magical {element} themselves.
- Ignoring AMF: As with the slam, elementals are made of magic yet can exist (and fight) unimpeded in antimagic. And once assembled, no magic is maintaining them, hence there is nothing to suppress.
- Lack of duration: There are other conjured creatures with "instantaneous" duration, that can disappear or dissipate when their job is done - e.g. the Planar Ally line. This removes the problem of lingering/snatched orbs.
- Subtypes: There is precedence for Conjuration (Creation) spells creating creatures, e.g. the Midnight Construct line from MoI, or Astral Construct for a psionic take.

Thinking about them in this way causes orbs to make much more sense, at least for me, and fits the RAW just fine.

[GenghisDon]

The orb spells disgust me. All save for fire & acid I ban.

The others could be invocation spells, although not breeching SR, they are probably not good choices for their level.

[Dusk Eclipse]

The orb spells disgust me. All save for fire & acid I ban.

The others could be evocation spells, although not breeching SR, they are probably not good choices for their level.

Fixed that for you, invocation refers to spell like abilities gained by the warlock or Dragonfire Adept classes

[lsfreak]

The orb spells disgust me. All save for fire & acid I ban.

I'd like to know your reasoning here, since it doesn't seem related to the power of the spells (fire is one of the best, acid probably the worst).

[Gnorman]

I'd like to know your reasoning here, since it doesn't seem related to the power of the spells (fire is one of the best, acid probably the worst).

His father was killed by an orb of cold, his mother by an orb of electricity.

He dated an orb of force once, but it ended very badly.

[Psyren]

I'd like to know your reasoning here, since it doesn't seem related to the power of the spells (fire is one of the best, acid probably the worst).

It may have a weak secondary effect, but acid is useful for other reasons, e.g. cancelling regeneration. Fire can do this too, but is more commonly resisted, particularly from spells/items (Sandstorm notwithstanding.)

[nedz]

Fixed that for you, invocation refers to spell like abilities gained by the warlock or Dragonfire Adept classes

The full name of the school is Evocation/Invocation, well it used to be anyway.

[GenghisDon]

I'd like to know your reasoning here, since it doesn't seem related to the power of the spells (fire is one of the best, acid probably the worst).

I can't see how one can "conjure" a chunk of "force", or cold/sound that would be of any use in the way the spell functions. Conjuring cold would be more like a hole to the arctic IMHO...a large scale AOE chill temperature effect. A chunk of ice ought be B/P or S damage, and not much at that. I'd guess the very best result would be something like "conjure a beaker/globe of liquid nitrogen". I'd give it a flat effect, not standard scaling spell damage. If one HAD places like the elemental plane of force, plane of acoustics, ect, then I guess they COULD make more sense. I'm not for them.

On reflection, electricity might be ok also. I really don't like the line's design much, however.

It certainly wasn't about power, save indirectly, in that it's cheap handing to conjurers every attack form SR free. I don't like the premise/handling of the spells. Conjure a brick, a puff of campfire flame, a blob of lava, a chunk of ice, a vial or flask of acid, a pianno, a bear, a lion or a tiger, oh my! Conjure...as in bringing/exchanging/sending something from/to somewhere else.

Not reclassified evocation spells


The full name of the school is Evocation/Invocation, well it used to be anyway.

Yeah, I'm old. Invoker will pop out sometimes too.

[Knaight]

I can't see how one can "conjure" a chunk of "force", or cold/sound that would be of any use in the way the spell functions. Conjuring cold would be more like a hole to the arctic IMHO...a large scale AOE chill temperature effect. A chunk of ice ought be B/P or S damage, and not much at that. I'd guess the very best result would be something like "conjure a beaker/globe of liquid nitrogen". I'd give it a flat effect, not standard scaling spell damage. If one HAD places like the elemental plane of force, plane of acoustics, ect, then I guess they COULD make more sense. I'm not for them.

Force is just weird, but cold makes sense - you need something at a very low temperature, with a fairly high density, fairly high specific heat, and a high thermal conductivity. High density extremely cold metals are probably the best bet here, given that supermetals are already a thing within D&D and metals usually have decent density*. As for sonic, it's a physical wave of sound propagating from a source outside the AMF for a while, that spreads like any other sound wave. It just needs to be at the resonant frequency of some sort of tissue - maybe bone marrow.

*Something like a super-mercury could work very well. The melting point of mercury is at about -40 degrees, which means we are looking at both specific heat and latent heat of fusion drawing energy off someone. It is also very dense. The issue is that mercury has a very low specific heat, and isn't exactly impressive when it comes to thermal conductivity. Hence, super metals.

[nedz]

Except that you can catch them, and put them in bottles (though not Force Orbs, we think).:smallconfused:

[INoKnowNames]

I don't see what at all is confusing about the Orb attacks, especially the Orb of Force. Aren't they supposed to work like this? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONVVdoMgehk)

[Knaight]

Except that you can catch them, and put them in bottles (though not Force Orbs, we think).:smallconfused:

That is a bit weird. Though by strict RAW, all of them but Force Orbs are technically balls of acid, it's just that many of them do other types of damage. Most of them even make sense within the context of a chemical reaction, and could be bottled - this does make sonic really odd though.

[nedz]

Several are quite strange.
Drinking a bottled Orb of Electricity can leave you entangled.:smallconfused:

[SiuiS]

Fixed that for you, invocation refers to spell like abilities gained by the warlock or Dragonfire Adept classes

Or older editions ;)


Several are quite strange.
Drinking a bottled Orb of Electricity can leave you entangled.:smallconfused:

Well yeah. You're drinking a substance which hits you with continuous, low grade shocks, making you twitch, convulse and seize.

[ThiagoMartell]

My preferred fluff explanation is that the "orbs" are in fact low-sentience, spherical, highly volatile elementals, created locally and programmed to suicidally charge the caster's target/transfer all their energy on impact.

This explanation covers most of the orb attributes:

- Ranged touch attack: The caster isn't "throwing" the orb, merely directing it, so all they have to do is point. Therefore, only a RTA is needed.
- Ignoring SR: An elemental's slam wouldn't interact with SR either, despite elementals being made of magical {element} themselves.
- Ignoring AMF: As with the slam, elementals are made of magic yet can exist (and fight) unimpeded in antimagic. And once assembled, no magic is maintaining them, hence there is nothing to suppress.
- Lack of duration: There are other conjured creatures with "instantaneous" duration, that can disappear or dissipate when their job is done - e.g. the Planar Ally line. This removes the problem of lingering/snatched orbs.
- Subtypes: There is precedence for Conjuration (Creation) spells creating creatures, e.g. the Midnight Construct line from MoI, or Astral Construct for a psionic take.

Thinking about them in this way causes orbs to make much more sense, at least for me, and fits the RAW just fine.
This is the best refluff ever posted in the GitP forums. Ever. Beyond time and space.

[ima donkey]

There are so many other things in d&d that make no sense. They can almost all be explained by one simple thing, it's magic.

[Venusaur]

There are so many other things in d&d that make no sense. They can almost all be explained by one simple thing, it's magic.

It can exist in an anti-magic field. It isn't magic.

[VGLordR2]

It can exist in an anti-magic field. It isn't magic.

Sure it is. It's anti anti-magic magic.

[Deophaun]

It can exist in an anti-magic field. It isn't magic.
Summoned monsters can also exist in anti-magic fields. Are they not magic?

[Zaq]

I've seen this brought up three times in as many days, so I thought I would offer my viewpoint, as a technical writer, on this.

the first spell appearing in alphabetical order is the orb of acid, and since all the other orb spells have similar effects (except force) they're printed as "like acid, but..." to save on page count.

The elemental orb spells are identical except for the elemental subtype and the effect (both the "effect" line and description text). The effect lines all read "one orb of x" where x is the appropriate element, so it doesn't produce an orb of acid that somehow does fire or cold or whatever damage (Though I'm pretty sure Psyren was joking about that to begin with).

Then there's the orb of Force, which seems to have bewildered pretty much everyone with it's lack of "like acid" descriptors.

Well, that's because it doesn't behave at all like the acid version. It has a different range (medium) lower damage cap (10d6) and no secondary effect (and by extension, no saving throw).

In this instance, writing out all of the "like acid except..." would actually take up more space on the page than just writing a new entry from scratch, which is what they did.


I hope this has helped clear up some confusion.

See, here's the thing. While, on the surface, I agree with you that the writers probably didn't intend to make the Orbs all actually orbs of acid that just have different flavors, once you think about it for a while, I feel like it makes more sense than the likely intended alternative. Obviously, "it's magic" comes into play somewhere, but I have an easier time saying "this is a ball of acid that actually does cold damage because it's magic" than I do saying "this is a ball of conjured coldness because it's magic."

It's brilliant in that it's totally unintended, but it still makes more sense than what IS intended, all while being RAW. It's one of the very few such examples I can think of offhand, actually.

[TuggyNE]

Summoned monsters can also exist in anti-magic fields. Are they not magic?

No, they cannot.
Summoned creatures of any type and incorporeal undead wink out if they enter an antimagic field.

[Deophaun]

No, they cannot.
Keep reading...

If you cast antimagic field in an area occupied by a summoned creature that has spell resistance, you must make a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against the creature’s spell resistance to make it wink out.
So yes, they can.

[Knaight]

Keep reading...

So yes, they can.

SR applies to dismissal effects. That is the area that rule fits in.

[Deophaun]

SR applies to dismissal effects. That is the area that rule fits in.
Great. How does that change the fact that I can have an antimagic field with a summoned monster in it?

[The Random NPC]

Great. How does that change the fact that I can have an antimagic field with a summoned monster in it?

Because the general rule is summoned monsters can't exist in an AMF. The specific rule is AMF is subject to SR. Called creatures, however, can exist just fine in an AMF.

[Twilightwyrm]

I haven't actually run into it as of yet, but I can see the issue.
"Force", as it were, seems to be functionally equivalent to being hit by a highly concentrated shock wave, like the kind you get from a high-powered explosion, but with all the kinetic energy focused to a single point (the magic missile, the breath weapon, etc.). How this can be "conjured", I have no clue, but then again I was never much a fan of the "Orb" spells being in the school of conjuration.

[nedz]

I haven't actually run into it as of yet, but I can see the issue.
"Force", as it were, seems to be functionally equivalent to being hit by a highly concentrated shock wave, like the kind you get from a high-powered explosion, but with all the kinetic energy focused to a single point (the magic missile, the breath weapon, etc.). How this can be "conjured", I have no clue, but then again I was never much a fan of the "Orb" spells being in the school of conjuration.

How is this stranger than Wall of Force ?

[Psyren]

It can exist in an anti-magic field. It isn't magic.

But if you think about it, Antimagic itself shouldn't exist. After all, the centerpoint of the emanation (i.e. the caster) is always contained inside the fied. By its own rules, it should be wholly suppressed for the duration.

[Deophaun]

Because the general rule is summoned monsters can't exist in an AMF. The specific rule is AMF is subject to SR. Called creatures, however, can exist just fine in an AMF.
So, if I summon a colossal fiendish monstrous centipede (SR 29), and a wizard that's next to it casts AMF, and he botches his roll and doesn't overcome the SR, then I'm not seeing a summoned monster in an AMF at that time? The CFMC somehow becomes a called creature? Is that what you're saying?

[Venusaur]

So, if I summon a colossal fiendish monstrous centipede (SR 29), and a wizard that's next to it casts AMF, and he botches his roll and doesn't overcome the SR, then I'm not seeing a summoned monster in an AMF at that time? The CFMC somehow becomes a called creature? Is that what you're saying?

No, the centipede resists the antimagic field with its innate ability to block magic.

[Deophaun]

No, the centipede resists the antimagic field with its innate ability to block magic.
I understand that. I'm not sure if the people I'm asking do, however. They're the ones telling me that the CFMC can't exist in the AMF because the rule that lets them isn't a general rule, but an exception. I'm trying to understand the logic of it, because that's a complete non sequitur as it stands.

[Hyde]

I dunno, an orb of force ignoring the **** out of AMF seems perfectly reasonable to me, since wall of force does the same thing.

Sonic has got to be the least plausible.

I do like Psyren's "they're tiny elementals" explanation.
though that assumes there's a plane of elemental sound...

It's a place you can only speak if someone else beatboxes.

eh, why not.

[Zombimode]

My preferred fluff explanation is that the "orbs" are in fact low-sentience, spherical, highly volatile elementals, created locally and programmed to suicidally charge the caster's target/transfer all their energy on impact.

This explanation covers most of the orb attributes:

- Ranged touch attack: The caster isn't "throwing" the orb, merely directing it, so all they have to do is point. Therefore, only a RTA is needed.
- Ignoring SR: An elemental's slam wouldn't interact with SR either, despite elementals being made of magical {element} themselves.
- Ignoring AMF: As with the slam, elementals are made of magic yet can exist (and fight) unimpeded in antimagic. And once assembled, no magic is maintaining them, hence there is nothing to suppress.
- Lack of duration: There are other conjured creatures with "instantaneous" duration, that can disappear or dissipate when their job is done - e.g. the Planar Ally line. This removes the problem of lingering/snatched orbs.
- Subtypes: There is precedence for Conjuration (Creation) spells creating creatures, e.g. the Midnight Construct line from MoI, or Astral Construct for a psionic take.

Thinking about them in this way causes orbs to make much more sense, at least for me, and fits the RAW just fine.

While this solves the problems with the original Orb-spells, it does so on the price of creating new inconsistencies. Mainly that these "creatures" do not obey the rules normally applied to all other creatures. Effects that normally would affect elemental creatures do not affect these orb creatures.

[Hyde]

While this solves the problems with the original Orb-spells, it does so on the price of creating new inconsistencies. Mainly that these "creatures" do not obey the rules normally applied to all other creatures. Effects that normally would affect elemental creatures do not affect these orb creatures.

Eh, they're proto-elementals. only smart enough to hold their body together and smack something at which point they die spectacular deaths. They're probably as self-aware as plants, or else anyone who casts these spells is probably one of the most prolific murderers of the age.

[Knaight]

Eh, they're proto-elementals. only smart enough to hold their body together and smack something at which point they die spectacular deaths. They're probably as self-aware as plants, or else anyone who casts these spells is probably one of the most prolific murderers of the age.
Given what these spells are used for, that is probably already the case.

[Zombimode]

Eh, they're proto-elementals. only smart enough to hold their body together and smack something at which point they die spectacular deaths. They're probably as self-aware as plants, or else anyone who casts these spells is probably one of the most prolific murderers of the age.

This does not address my point of them not behaving (rules-wise) in the way like other creatures.

[Venusaur]

So, if I summon a colossal fiendish monstrous centipede (SR 29), and a wizard that's next to it casts AMF, and he botches his roll and doesn't overcome the SR, then I'm not seeing a summoned monster in an AMF at that time? The CFMC somehow becomes a called creature? Is that what you're saying?

The rule is that summon monsters cannot enter anti-magic fields. However, if the field is cast on top of them, then they can roll SR to prevent being dismissed.
In D&D, specific rules always trump general. For example, under the trip maneuver, it says that a trip requires a touch attack and provokes an AoO. However, if you have the trip (ex) ability, such as a wolf, you do not need a touch attack, nor do you provoke an AoO.

[The Random NPC]

I understand that. I'm not sure if the people I'm asking do, however. They're the ones telling me that the CFMC can't exist in the AMF because the rule that lets them isn't a general rule, but an exception. I'm trying to understand the logic of it, because that's a complete non sequitur as it stands.

It's because we are talking about generalities, and you're the one guy going, "Ha, that isn't true in this one specific instance!" Obviously a creature that is hard to affect with magic can exist in a magical magic suppressing field. But in general magical things cannot exist in a AMF.

[Deophaun]

The rule is that summon monsters cannot enter anti-magic fields. However, if the field is cast on top of them, then they can roll SR to prevent being dismissed.
In D&D, specific rules always trump general. For example, under the trip maneuver, it says that a trip requires a touch attack and provokes an AoO. However, if you have the trip (ex) ability, such as a wolf, you do not need a touch attack, nor do you provoke an AoO.
This is all wonderful information. Please tell me how it relates to anything I've posted, or how this means that the monster in my example is either not magically summoned or not existing in an AMF. That's all I want.

It's because we are talking about generalities...
No, we aren't. We are in a thread talking about the quirks of the orb spells. That is most definitely not talking about generalities. Get a clue, please.

[The Random NPC]

This is all wonderful information. Please tell me how it relates to anything I've posted, or how this means that the monster in my example is either not magically summoned or not existing in an AMF. That's all I want.

No, we aren't. We are in a thread talking about the quirks of the orb spells. That is most definitely not talking about generalities. Get a clue, please.

There are currently two conversations going on in this thread, the first is a conversation about the quirks of the orb spells (and has evolved into a discussion on the merits of treating the orbs as proto-elementals) and the second is a conversation on the interaction of AMF with other magics, with specific focus on summoned monsters. So you are correct, we aren't talking about generalities. To clarify my earlier post about the called creatures, generally a summoned monster can not exist in an AMF. If however, the summoned monster has SR, the AMF may fail to affect it, resulting in a summoned monster in an AMF. Furthermore, called creatures are unaffected by AMFs (in regards to existance.)
Addendum: I apologize for rudeness you may have experienced from my posts. It has been a long night, and I've yet to eat, which always makes me cranky.

[Deophaun]

There are currently two conversations going on in this thread, the first is a conversation about the quirks of the orb spells (and has evolved into a discussion on the merits of treating the orbs as proto-elementals) and the second is a conversation on the interaction of AMF with other magics, with specific focus on summoned monsters.
But take a look at how this second conversation came about.

First, it was stated that orbs can exist in an AMF by RAW, which is silly, so how do we make sense of this?
Second, the answer was put forward that we use the old "it's magic" defense.
Third, Venusaur said (well I infered, but I think it's fair given his choice of quotation) that if it can exist in an AMF, we can't use the "it's magic" defense.
Fourth, I bring up magical summoned monsters existing in an AMF as proof that magic can, indeed, exist in an AMF
Fifth, people start hemming and hawing over it being a specific rule.

It's that leap from fourth to fifth that I am trying to comprehend. It's doesn't fit in the line of argumentation.

You will note that in this second conversation, I'm the only one on the other side. I'm the one that you have been responding to this entire time. You haven't quoted Venusaur or addressed him directly, nor has Venusaur done that to you, nor have either of you talked to Knaight. So, we have this strange conversation that is apparently not about the post that started it, and not about what the person who's consistently been quoted is saying. Can you understand my position?

Addendum: I apologize for rudeness you may have experienced from my posts. It has been a long night, and I've yet to eat, which always makes me cranky.
Apologies for my rudeness, as well.

[Psyren]

This does not address my point of them not behaving (rules-wise) in the way like other creatures.

There's some precedent for that too, though. Spells can summon/create very specialized versions of creatures, e.g. Mage's Faithful Hound, Unseen Servant, and Phantom Steed. (Perhaps not-so-coincidentally, these are all themselves Conjuration (Creation) spells, not that that matters.) And going outside core can result in stranger examples.

[The Random NPC]

But take a look at how this second conversation came about.

First, it was stated that orbs can exist in an AMF by RAW, which is silly, so how do we make sense of this?
Second, the answer was put forward that we use the old "it's magic" defense.
Third, Venusaur said (well I infered, but I think it's fair given his choice of quotation) that if it can exist in an AMF, we can't use the "it's magic" defense.
Fourth, I bring up magical summoned monsters existing in an AMF as proof that magic can, indeed, exist in an AMF
Fifth, people start hemming and hawing over it being a specific rule.

It's that leap from fourth to fifth that I am trying to comprehend. It's doesn't fit in the line of argumentation.

You will note that in this second conversation, I'm the only one on the other side. I'm the one that you have been responding to this entire time.

I can honestly say that until my last post, I hadn't noticed that.

You haven't quoted Venusaur or addressed him directly, nor has Venusaur done that to you, nor have either of you talked to Knaight. So, we have this strange conversation that is apparently not about the post that started it, and not about what the person who's consistently been quoted is saying. Can you understand my position?

Apologies for my rudeness, as well.

I can't seem to understand you, the sentences make sense, but not the conversation as a whole. I'm going to try taking a nap and coming back at this after.

[Starbuck_II]

I dunno, an orb of force ignoring the **** out of AMF seems perfectly reasonable to me, since wall of force does the same thing.

Sonic has got to be the least plausible.

I do like Psyren's "they're tiny elementals" explanation.
though that assumes there's a plane of elemental sound...

It's a place you can only speak if someone else beatboxes.

eh, why not.

Shouldn't Ring of Force Shield not be suppressed as it is a mini-wall of Force?

[nedz]

Under the standard interpretation the orbs are made of elemental matter.

Electric = Air
Acid = Earth
Fire = Fire
Cold = Water

but

Sonic = ?

Is there some 5th element we've discovered here ?

[Downysole]

I haven't actually run into it as of yet, but I can see the issue.
"Force", as it were, seems to be functionally equivalent to being hit by a highly concentrated shock wave, like the kind you get from a high-powered explosion, but with all the kinetic energy focused to a single point (the magic missile, the breath weapon, etc.). How this can be "conjured", I have no clue, but then again I was never much a fan of the "Orb" spells being in the school of conjuration.

It's not like you can "conjure" fire either really. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0423.html

[Hyde]

This does not address my point of them not behaving (rules-wise) in the way like other creatures.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

They're not creatures at all.

They're plants. they're elemental plants, like a gourd or pumpkin. That's how they hold their shape, and why they're not affected like creatures.

It's the old "Disintegrate vs Trees" problem.

[GenghisDon]

I'd guess we can handle 2 related conversations at once.

[nedz]

I'd guess we can handle 2 related conversations at once.

Ironic, since this thread was started after we derailed a previous one into discussing Orbs. We're not very good at this thread thing are we. Bugger, another derail.:smallbiggrin: