Animated Liquids? Gasses? Quintessence?

[unseenmage]

Say I have a pool of Quintessance, can it be animated with Animate Objects?

Say I have a pool of water, can it drown enemies?

What about Acid? Black Lotus Extract? Green Slime? Lamp Oil?

What Special Attack would an animated pool attack with?

Should non-solid animated objects be allowed to flow through keyholes, under doors, or up slopes/walls?


Bonus: Same questions only for Choking Cloud effects or noxious gasses in general?

Thread TLDR Edit:
Without hp values grains, powders, liquids, gasses, and fires aren't objects in that sense. They're more what you reduce objects to when you attack them.

Quintessence has no magic aura and therefore probably doesn't count as a magic substance. But, unlike gasses, liquids, etc it CAN be held and manipulated as an object.

[MeiLeTeng]

Due to a severely lax definition of what an object is in the first place it appears it'll be one of those "ask your DM" questions (as far as I can tell nothing really precludes liquids from being valid targets but many DMs would probably consider it anti RAI.) However considering that according to the SRD at least, the spell just makes the thing an animated object creature (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/animatedObject.htm) I'm not sure it'd have the efficacy you're after anyway.

[unseenmage]

You know, it just occured to me that maybe what would work best is a new version of Animate Objects that specifically animates liquids and gasses.

Perhaps it gives them Elemental traits but the Construct type. Maybe it would just enable some more Special Attack options along the lines of what I'm looking for.

Any ideas out there on which would be more appropriate or less exploitable?

[Crasical]

Can't we just extrapolate from what a Water Elemental can do?

[NevinPL]

Bonus: Same questions only for Choking Cloud effects or noxious gasses in general?
There's the series of: "Living Spells" articles on WotC website. Maybe that will help you.

[Spuddles]

Quintessence might not count as a "nonmagical material", thus disqualifying itself from being an animated object.

Liquids would probably get a swim speed and constrict. I'd give it an improved grab, too. But it wouldn't have any hardness.

[Thrudd]

Quintessence might not count as a "nonmagical material", thus disqualifying itself from being an animated object.

Liquids would probably get a swim speed and constrict. I'd give it an improved grab, too. But it wouldn't have any hardness.

When was the last time water grabbed anything? As soon as it left the container that was holding it, the animated water would spread out into a thin film and sink through the cracks in the floor or be absorbed by the dirt. At best, it could splash up over the edge of the pool and get someone wet. If it was a colossal or gargantuan pool of water maybe it could knock somebody down and hurt them by pressure if you could get it to spill out of something, or rock back and forth and create a wave. I would rule that an animated object can't do anything that the materials it is made out of can't do naturally. It is a construct, not an elemental with magical properties. Have you ever heard of a water golem? Probably a reason for that. It doesn't tend to hold together in a shape very well :smallwink: Now if you animated a big bathtub that had water in it, and it had some type of metal arms or a shower curtain it could grab someone and hold them under the water and drown them, maybe. lol If you animated a puddle of acid, it could splash up and burn somebody, because it's acid. But it wouldn't be good for much more than one attack, then it dispurses and seeps into the ground, like any liquid without a container. If you want a constricting, grabbing, swimming blob of living water, you need to summon an elemental.

[Spuddles]

When was the last time a rope moved on its own?

[Thrudd]

When was the last time a rope moved on its own?

An animated object can move on its own, but it is still composed of whatever material it is made of. A rope can choke someone, it can wrap around someone and tie them up, it can whip and smack somebody, so an animated rope can do all that stuff. A rope is in a solid state and maintains its shape as a rope in most conditions. Animated water I would say could move on its own, like a living being. But water conforms to the shape of whatever vessel it is in, and if it leaves its vessel it won't be able to do a whole lot. It can splash and crash as a wave if it is big enough. But it isn't being held together by any sort of magic field, it is just animated. If an animated cupboard gets broken, does it magically come back together into it's original form? No, it stays broken. The animated water still obeys the physical properties of normal water, it just moves around with a semblance of intelligence. Honestly, I don't think a liquid should be considered an object for the purpose of this spell at all. It has no defineable shape or real size, no hardness. An object implies a solid thing, not a liquid or a gas. The rules of the spell don't address non-solids, so I don't believe it is meant to affect them, or if it is possible it is basically useless to do so. Of course, any DM's ruling may vary. That's just how I would rule it.

[Spuddles]

Fires are considered "objects" for the shrink item spell....

[Thrudd]

Would you let someone animate a fire as part of the animate object spell? Or air, or any gas for that matter? I wouldn't. Fire is not an object, it is the energy output of a chemical reaction that is affecting an object or a material. A fire has no form, no hardness. You can animate a giant log that is on fire, and it can roll around and crush people and catch them on fire, too. But the fire itself isn't an a object. Getting living flame will require summoning an elemental, just like with water or air.

[unseenmage]

Quintessence might not count as a "nonmagical material", thus disqualifying itself from being an animated object.

Liquids would probably get a swim speed and constrict. I'd give it an improved grab, too. But it wouldn't have any hardness.

Agreed. Those were my initial thoughts as well.
I wonder though, do we have a comparable example elsewhere in the game? Would material created by any spell qualify as magical material?
What about that steel that will trap your soul if you die touching it?

Would Quintessence be more like the soul-stealing steel or more like the result of a Major Creation spell? Or neither?


Would you let someone animate a fire as part of the animate object spell? Or air, or any gas for that matter? I wouldn't. Fire is not an object, it is the energy output of a chemical reaction that is affecting an object or a material. A fire has no form, no hardness. You can animate a giant log that is on fire, and it can roll around and crush people and catch them on fire, too. But the fire itself isn't an a object. Getting living flame will require summoning an elemental, just like with water or air.

In the D&D game, despite how the idea may break suspension of disbelief for you personally, anything that is not a creature by virtue of the rules is in fact an object.

The animate fire and water spells are in the Oriental Adventures books IIRC. But they give you little Elementals instead of Animated Objects and they're of an embarrassingly low level comparatively.


To more address your examples, what about a pile of salt or sand? Would it become an Animated Object or would it just uselessly slide sideways? How about mud? Wetter mud? Even wetter mud than that?

I respect your opinion that animated water or gas seems silly, even if it is RAW or merely RAW-like. But I do disagree; as the limits you're applying don't seem to have a rules supported boundary. Remember, the D&D 3.x gameworld is a world where magic exists and the unrealistic is commonplace.

One mans idea of silly might be another mans idea of fun.

[Thrudd]

Agreed. Those were my initial thoughts as well.
I wonder though, do we have a comparable example elsewhere in the game? Would material created by any spell qualify as magical material?
What about that steel that will trap your soul if you die touching it?

Would Quintessence be more like the soul-stealing steel or more like the result of a Major Creation spell? Or neither?



In the D&D game, despite how the idea may break suspension of disbelief for you personally, anything that is not a creature by virtue of the rules is in fact an object.

The animate fire and water spells are in the Oriental Adventures books IIRC. But they give you little Elementals instead of Animated Objects and they're of an embarrassingly low level comparatively.


To more address your examples, what about a pile of salt or sand? Would it become an Animated Object or would it just uselessly slide sideways? How about mud? Wetter mud? Even wetter mud than that?

I respect your opinion that animated water or gas seems silly, even if it is RAW or merely RAW-like. But I do disagree; as the limits you're applying don't seem to have a rules supported boundary. Remember, the D&D 3.x gameworld is a world where magic exists and the unrealistic is commonplace.

One mans idea of silly might be another mans idea of fun.

That's totally fair. I just gave what my ruling would be and my rationalle for it. As you said, in Oriental Adventures, animate fire and water are separate spells from animate object, and create little elementals. To me, that is in support of my argument not against it. I'm totally fine with that, the spells specify the substance they are animating. The boundary for the animate object spell which I would use to define "object", would basically be something you can actually hold in your hands/arms (or something a sufficiently large person/giant could hold in its hands). Water? without a vessel, you can't hold it. Air? nope. Fire? nope. I would say the exact same thing about a pile of salt or sand or dirt or wet mud. If it can't hold together of its own volition, it shouldn't count as an object for the purpose of this animate spell. Partly because there would be no way to gauge its actual size or strength or hardness. Or if I did allow the spell to be cast on an area of such a substance, it's usefulness would be quite limited, as I described with the water. Maybe a pick pile of sand could swallow somebody up, and they would have to struggle to keep their head above the sand. But nothing would stop them from just wading through it, like a sand dune. It would probably be more annoying than anything else, except under very specific conditions. But you guys do whatever you think is fun, I agree. Maybe there could be a different spell, or rename the spell, call it "animate substance", and have specific rules about what a few different substances can do, turning it into some kind of ooze-like construct with guidelines for strength by volume, etc.

[Lord Haart]

My five bones: there are "Anímate water" and "Animate fire" spells in Complete Arcane. They are of the first circle and on a Wu'Jen's spell list (i don't remember whether they also are on sor/wiz spell list, though).

[unseenmage]

That's totally fair. I just gave what my ruling would be and my rationalle for it. As you said, in Oriental Adventures, animate fire and water are separate spells from animate object, and create little elementals. To me, that is in support of my argument not against it. I'm totally fine with that, the spells specify the substance they are animating. The boundary for the animate object spell which I would use to define "object", would basically be something you can actually hold in your hands/arms (or something a sufficiently large person/giant could hold in its hands). Water? without a vessel, you can't hold it. Air? nope. Fire? nope. I would say the exact same thing about a pile of salt or sand or dirt or wet mud. If it can't hold together of its own volition, it shouldn't count as an object for the purpose of this animate spell. Partly because there would be no way to gauge its actual size or strength or hardness. Or if I did allow the spell to be cast on an area of such a substance, it's usefulness would be quite limited, as I described with the water. Maybe a pick pile of sand could swallow somebody up, and they would have to struggle to keep their head above the sand. But nothing would stop them from just wading through it, like a sand dune. It would probably be more annoying than anything else, except under very specific conditions. But you guys do whatever you think is fun, I agree. Maybe there could be a different spell, or rename the spell, call it "animate substance", and have specific rules about what a few different substances can do, turning it into some kind of ooze-like construct with guidelines for strength by volume, etc.

Understood. I didn't mean to come across as harsh in any way, I just try to be as specific as possible when I can :smallsmile:

Your response did give me an idea for the parameters of defining viable objects for the Animate Objects spell with rules precedent. Someone mentioned earlier that animated water wouldn't have hardness and it occurs to me that one of the in-game definitions of objects is that they have hit points.

When you attack an object you're trying to break it into it's component parts via reducing the hit points of it's current form. A substance that is irreducible becomes a non-object with this definition.
Sure if we pollute our game-world with real-world physics we could make the case that every smaller substance should have a new hp value so it can be further reduced but that's not what our game rules say so it's probably irrelevant.

(I kinda like the image of RL science as a pollutant in game-worlds, a dark force that threatens to unravel all suspension of disbelief everywhere if the heroes don't stop it. :smallbiggrin: )

So, Animate Objects applied to "stuff".
- If it has hp it's an object? Probably.
- If it doesn't have Hardness? Glass is Hardness 1 or 0, as is paper. So Hardness is a poor metric.
- If it's nonsenical? In a game of magic nonsensical has little to no meaning. So another poor metric.
- Is it exploitable? By RAW, no. As Animated Objects are clearly defined albeit limited in their available options.

- Should a legal target of the Animate Objects spell be part of something bigger? Could you animate the only one of a set of gears in a larger machine? Only part of the sand on the beach or water in the sea? Only part of the dungeon wall.

I'm unsure on this one. I always kinda liked that there was a spell that could make the Demon Wall from videogames a possibility. Wall sections have Hardness, hp, and a mass to be measured within the limits of the spell. They'd get a move speed of -- but I always figured they could be animated.

So yeah, long story sort, I can understand the inability of the Animate Objects spell to animate things without an hp value as things without an hp value wouldn't seem to classify as objects. They can't be attacked to any effect, they don't have a Hardness whether it matters or not, and they could have some difficulty being viable combatants.

A stronger magic would seem to be needed. Perhaps a +1 spell level version of Animate Objects which specifically animates energetic reactions like fire or perhaps even lights, gasses, liquids, and powders and granules. And lava. Animated lava is a must.
Such a spell would use the Animate elemental spell line from OA SC (thanks Lord Haart) as a baseline but would result in creatures with the construct type.
It would also have to specifically call out that it is usable against substances and define what a "substance" is when compared to an "object".
Possibly disallow admixed substances, that or define specifically that a vial of poison poured into a pool of water does not give you a larger poison creature.

Does our new Animate Substance spell need anything else, besides statting up that is?


Additionally an Animate Magical Effect spell could be pretty awesome. Animated Wall of Force, animated Hallow, animated Energy Transformation Field. The possibilities are endless. Would have to be made distinct from the Living Spell template though. It would necessarily need to employ similar language to the proposed Animate Substance spell.

And I still am not convinced whether Quintessence is more like soul-stealing steel or more like the flame of an Everburning Torch. :smallannoyed:
Edit: Does Quintessence give off a magic Aura? My knowledge of the Psionics/Magic Transparency is limited here.

Answered in the Q&A by RAW thread. I love those guys/gals.
Protip: No aura. Not sure yet if that makes it animatable though I would argue that without a magic aura it can't be a magic substance.

[Darth Stabber]

Animated quintessence you say?

Sounds like a great base from which to build weeping angels (from Dr. Who), or at least an intriguing variation of swallow whole.

[NeoPhoenix0]

I would just like to chime in with something that definitively defines quintessence as an object(s). this is from the nonabilities section.


Charisma

Any creature capable of telling the difference between itself and things that are not itself has at least 1 point of Charisma. Anything with no Charisma score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Charisma score also has no Wisdom score.

Edit: covering some stuff from the RAW Q&A thread.

It is also non-magical as it isn't a magic/spionic item and it isn't part of an ongoing spell/power.

the real trick to using animate object on quintessence is defining how much of a fluid/amorphous substance is a single object. Then you can get into hilarious fights with an animated fluid that reacts like any old animated brick.

[Curmudgeon]

I would just like to chime in with something that definitively defines quintessence as an object(s).
No, that just defines any thing which isn't a creature as an object.

Now you need to prove that some random quantity of quintessence constitutes a "thing". Is a milliliter of air, unconfined, a thing? How about a billion liters? Ditto for quintessence.

[NeoPhoenix0]

No, that just defines any thing which isn't a creature as an object.

Now you need to prove that some random quantity of quintessence constitutes a "thing". Is a milliliter of air, unconfined, a thing? How about a billion liters? Ditto for quintessence.

This isn't a productive area of argument as "thing" has so many definitions as to encompass ideas, qualities, details, etc. So yes all of your inquiries are things and all the subjects of your inquiries are things.

[Invader]

Water would have a hardness of 0. Remember there's a difference between no hardness and 0 hardness.

[unseenmage]

No, that just defines any thing which isn't a creature as an object.

Now you need to prove that some random quantity of quintessence constitutes a "thing". Is a milliliter of air, unconfined, a thing? How about a billion liters? Ditto for quintessence.


This isn't a productive area of argument as "thing" has so many definitions as to encompass ideas, qualities, details, etc. So yes all of you inquiries are things and all the subjects of your inquiries are things.

Would another hallmark of an object be that it can be manipulated in the game rules by the characters?

Meaning you would need to be able to make a Dex or Str check to perform an action within the game using an object.

Just an alternative potential definition.

[Thrudd]

Your response did give me an idea for the parameters of defining viable objects for the Animate Objects spell with rules precedent. Someone mentioned earlier that animated water wouldn't have hardness and it occurs to me that one of the in-game definitions of objects is that they have hit points.

When you attack an object you're trying to break it into it's component parts via reducing the hit points of it's current form. A substance that is irreducible becomes a non-object with this definition.
Sure if we pollute our game-world with real-world physics we could make the case that every smaller substance should have a new hp value so it can be further reduced but that's not what our game rules say so it's probably irrelevant.

(I kinda like the image of RL science as a pollutant in game-worlds, a dark force that threatens to unravel all suspension of disbelief everywhere if the heroes don't stop it. :smallbiggrin: )

So, Animate Objects applied to "stuff".
- If it has hp it's an object? Probably.
- If it doesn't have Hardness? Glass is Hardness 1 or 0, as is paper. So Hardness is a poor metric.
- If it's nonsenical? In a game of magic nonsensical has little to no meaning. So another poor metric.
- Is it exploitable? By RAW, no. As Animated Objects are clearly defined albeit limited in their available options.

- Should a legal target of the Animate Objects spell be part of something bigger? Could you animate the only one of a set of gears in a larger machine? Only part of the sand on the beach or water in the sea? Only part of the dungeon wall.

I'm unsure on this one. I always kinda liked that there was a spell that could make the Demon Wall from videogames a possibility. Wall sections have Hardness, hp, and a mass to be measured within the limits of the spell. They'd get a move speed of -- but I always figured they could be animated.

So yeah, long story sort, I can understand the inability of the Animate Objects spell to animate things without an hp value as things without an hp value wouldn't seem to classify as objects. They can't be attacked to any effect, they don't have a Hardness whether it matters or not, and they could have some difficulty being viable combatants.

A stronger magic would seem to be needed. Perhaps a +1 spell level version of Animate Objects which specifically animates energetic reactions like fire or perhaps even lights, gasses, liquids, and powders and granules. And lava. Animated lava is a must.
Such a spell would use the Animate elemental spell line from OA SC (thanks Lord Haart) as a baseline but would result in creatures with the construct type.
It would also have to specifically call out that it is usable against substances and define what a "substance" is when compared to an "object".
Possibly disallow admixed substances, that or define specifically that a vial of poison poured into a pool of water does not give you a larger poison creature.

Does our new Animate Substance spell need anything else, besides statting up that is?


Additionally an Animate Magical Effect spell could be pretty awesome. Animated Wall of Force, animated Hallow, animated Energy Transformation Field. The possibilities are endless. Would have to be made distinct from the Living Spell template though. It would necessarily need to employ similar language to the proposed Animate Substance spell.

And I still am not convinced whether Quintessence is more like soul-stealing steel or more like the flame of an Everburning Torch. :smallannoyed:
Edit: Does Quintessence give off a magic Aura? My knowledge of the Psionics/Magic Transparency is limited here.

Answered in the Q&A by RAW thread. I love those guys/gals.
Protip: No aura. Not sure yet if that makes it animatable though I would argue that without a magic aura it can't be a magic substance.

RE Animating a section of wall - sure, as long as the animated section isn't load bearing...:smallwink: It wobbles around a little, and the whole place comes crashing down

You have a point about real world physics in the game world. If we strictly adhered to real physics, most of what happens in the game wouldn't be possible. But even if it isn't real physics, some kind of rational behavior has to apply for the game to make sense. It's easier for me to think in terms of real physics for the way materials behave than it is to invent a whole new set of physics. Also, although I want to encourage imaginitive use of spells, I do not want to give the wizard carte blanche to create powerful constructs out of everything and anything they lay their eyes on with no real guidelines from the rules. So I'd be fine with a spell that layed out exactly how animated liquid works, or an animated surface, etc, so there is no argument about what the construct can and cannot do.
I do have some trepidation about allowing such a spell at all, just because I feel like wizards already can animate, conjure/summon, evoke, and construct quite a lot of things, do they really need one more way to turn any and every environment into a deadly foe to their enemies? I can hear it now: "You said it's raining out, right? so I am going to animate 200 cubic meters of rain and have it attack them by going straight into their noses and down their throats..."
"I animate the dessert! The sand will go up their noses and choke them all to death!"
"I animate the blood inside his body! That's a liquid substance, right? It all rushes out of his orifices and he's dead!"

And do we really need animated lava?

As long as it's fairly strict a out what substances can be affected, the abilities of the animated substances is clearly laid out and well limited...and it specifically forbids blood and other organic substances...

[Spuddles]

My five bones: there are "Anímate water" and "Animate fire" spells in Complete Arcane. They are of the first circle and on a Wu'Jen's spell list (i don't remember whether they also are on sor/wiz spell list, though).

They are also reprinted in SpC as druid spells:
Animate Wood (animates a wooden object as an animated object)
Animate Fire & Animate Water (animates a small campfire/body of water into a small fire elemental or a small water elemental)


And do we really need animated lava?

Yes.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

When was the last time water grabbed anything?

The last time I saw an animated liquid monster in any form of fiction. Seriously like every water/liquid monster does this.

[Zubrowka74]

On the topic of what animated water could or could not do : anyone remember Hydro-Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Man), a villain from the Spider-Man comics ? He's ususally quite stupid and limits the use of his powers to simple, brutish applications. Now go read West Coast Avengers Vol. 2, #59. Loki boosts his intellect and now you have him ussing his hydro-form in really cunning ways.

I can imagine that an intelligent wizard might be able to do the same rather than just wetting the ground.

[unseenmage]

You have a point about real world physics in the game world. If we strictly adhered to real physics, most of what happens in the game wouldn't be possible. But even if it isn't real physics, some kind of rational behavior has to apply for the game to make sense. It's easier for me to think in terms of real physics for the way materials behave than it is to invent a whole new set of physics.

Well, there isn't much need to invent any sort of system; that's what we have the rules for. But I do understand the desire and sometimes necessity of inserting RL guidelines for the mechanisms of reality into the game to assist suspension of disbelief or fill in grey (or more likely blank!) areas the rules don't cover.
Though, I try to keep such RL reasoning to a minimum when I respond online as I just know there's going to be some rules niche that I've forgotten about that will supercede whatever RL logic I'm trying to interject. :smallsmile:



I do have some trepidation about allowing such a spell at all, just because I feel like wizards already can animate, conjure/summon, evoke, and construct quite a lot of things, do they really need one more way to turn any and every environment into a deadly foe to their enemies? I can hear it now: "You said it's raining out, right? so I am going to animate 200 cubic meters of rain and have it attack them by going straight into their noses and down their throats..."
"I animate the dessert! The sand will go up their noses and choke them all to death!"
"I animate the blood inside his body! That's a liquid substance, right? It all rushes out of his orifices and he's dead!"

snip

As long as it's fairly strict a out what substances can be affected, the abilities of the animated substances is clearly laid out and well limited...and it specifically forbids blood and other organic substances...

Well, spells that affect objects generally have a laundry list of caveats for avoiding just such abuses.
- Only unattended objects. Meaning nothing held, worn, or inside another character.
- Needs Line of Affect, if you can't see it then it's not getting animated.
- Volume limits, reduced for minerals assumedly because of their higher hardness. So the entire rainstorm wouldn't be possible probably. And as it likely contains a high quantity of melted metal lava would likely be candidate for reduced volume.
- Organic substances should be fine. You can already animate organics with Animate Objects. Putting Contingency with Animate Objects to trigger when an ally or minion dies is hilarious. The baddie lands the killing blow, minion dies, Contingency triggers and animates the now lifeless, and so an object, corpse, then fun is had.

- And finally Wizards already own reality, nothing homebrewed will ever make them more broken and OP than they already are. At least that's the case with optimized Wizards fro what I've read on these boards.

You should really go read the Animate City spell. And mind, it's not a Wizard spell at all. It's a Domain spell. My Artificer intends to build it into a city as a sort of defense system. Should be fun times.



And do we really need animated lava?

But... but, without Animated Lava how would we ever manage to have Dwarf Fortress style, all caps FUN (http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Fun)? :smallwink:

[Thrudd]

Well, there isn't much need to invent any sort of system; that's what we have the rules for. But I do understand the desire and sometimes necessity of inserting RL guidelines for the mechanisms of reality into the game to assist suspension of disbelief or fill in grey (or more likely blank!) areas the rules don't cover.
Though, I try to keep such RL reasoning to a minimum when I respond online as I just know there's going to be some rules niche that I've forgotten about that will supercede whatever RL logic I'm trying to interject. :smallsmile:



Well, spells that affect objects generally have a laundry list of caveats for avoiding just such abuses.
- Only unattended objects. Meaning nothing held, worn, or inside another character.
- Needs Line of Affect, if you can't see it then it's not getting animated.
- Volume limits, reduced for minerals assumedly because of their higher hardness. So the entire rainstorm wouldn't be possible probably. And as it likely contains a high quantity of melted metal lava would likely be candidate for reduced volume.
- Organic substances should be fine. You can already animate organics with Animate Objects. Putting Contingency with Animate Objects to trigger when an ally or minion dies is hilarious. The baddie lands the killing blow, minion dies, Contingency triggers and animates the now lifeless, and so an object, corpse, then fun is had.

- And finally Wizards already own reality, nothing homebrewed will ever make them more broken and OP than they already are. At least that's the case with optimized Wizards fro what I've read on these boards.

You should really go read the Animate City spell. And mind, it's not a Wizard spell at all. It's a Domain spell. My Artificer intends to build it into a city as a sort of defense system. Should be fun times.



But... but, without Animated Lava how would we ever manage to have Dwarf Fortress style, all caps FUN (http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Fun)? :smallwink:

Ha! Animate City. And for animating a fallen minion...isn't that "animate dead"? If there needs to be a different spell to animate a dead body, "animate object" shouldn't apply to dead bodies. Just like if there is separate "animate water" and "animate fire", those things also don't fall under "animate object". But it's nitpicky. One wizard's zombie is another wizard's construct...I guess that's how you get a flesh golem, right? Animate dead uses negative energy from the negative material plane to animate with, animate object uses "normal" magical energy to do the same.
Yes, wizards may be OP at higher levels already, but it is certainly possible to homebrew powerful spells, or interpret/ignore those rules in such a way to make it worse. *lol* It is fun, all the stuff we're talking about. Maybe as a lost magic that has animated things for the players to encounter, like the lava, and random living pools of water, acid, or whatever. Living walls and floors. But I wouldn't want my players having that stuff, unless the campaign is already high epic and the wizard is designing dungeons and magical defenses for general amusement. Lvl 12 spell: Animate Anything. Costs 50,000 gp per use and makes a construct out of anything you want that can behave in any way you want.