Minor Conjuration: Use and Abuse.

[Slipperychicken]

Minor Conjuration is a class feature in the PHB, available to Conjurer Wizards (wizards who choose the "School of Conjuration" tradition) at 2nd level. The power is quite open-ended, and if I remember anything from my 3.X days, it's that open-ended powers can be quite powerful and fun.

Since I'm too scared to post an exact copy-paste of the ability, I'll list some relevant highlights:

Conjures one object.
The object must take the form of a non-magical item which the wizard has seen before.
The object is "visibly magical".
The object radiates dim light to 5ft.
The object's weight cannot exceed 10 pounds.
The object's dimensions must not exceed 3 feet on a side.
The object must be inanimate.
Takes one action to use.
Must be summoned into the wizard's hand, or onto the ground in a visible unoccupied space up to 10ft away.
Disappears after 1 hour.
Disappears if it takes damage, or if the wizard uses this ability again.
At-will, no usage limitation or resource expenditure.


What can we do with this? Broken or benign, utilitarian or useless, amusing or amazing: Anything you can think of. I have some ideas of my own, and I may post them later, but for now I want to see what you folks come up with.

[hawklost]

If the Wizard only has to see something once to perfectly duplicate it (even without studying it carefully), here are a few things that work.

- A Map
- A Secret letter (he can look at it once, destroy the original and then when he gets to the location to give it, use Minor Conjuration to reproduce it, no chance of it getting stolen)
- A Key (Get out of Jail, into homes)
- A Small Boat (Ok, more like a plank of light wood to hold onto in the water but still)
- A Sled!
- Food/water ( but he gets hungry again an hour later :smallbiggrin:)
- Most Artisan Tools
- Glowing Cloths (he can be a fashion thief!)
Depending on the definition of 'takes damage' then a weapon or even armor (since they never 'take damage' when you are using them in combat, DM call though)

[TheOOB]

If the Wizard only has to see something once to perfectly duplicate it (even without studying it carefully), here are a few things that work.

- A Map
- A Secret letter (he can look at it once, destroy the original and then when he gets to the location to give it, use Minor Conjuration to reproduce it, no chance of it getting stolen)
- A Key (Get out of Jail, into homes)
- A Small Boat (Ok, more like a plank of light wood to hold onto in the water but still)
- A Sled!
- Food/water ( but he gets hungry again an hour later :smallbiggrin:)
- Most Artisan Tools
- Glowing Cloths (he can be a fashion thief!)
Depending on the definition of 'takes damage' then a weapon or even armor (since they never 'take damage' when you are using them in combat, DM call though)

It never says anything about the object being a perfect replica, and it's doubtful it could make a map or document with words you haven't read.

[Graustein]

I think with a suitable (possibly high) Int check after having studied it long enough, a Wizard should be able to reproduce a map or secret letter or the like, although if it's a message they could probably just memorise it anyway? And I'd say Minor Illusion can probably do a similar thing. Such a usage would make the Keen Mind feat extremely useful, though.

[Callin]

Any Poison
Any Alchemical Item

[illyrus]

A "magical" gold ring for scamming people.

Pretty much anything in the PHB. Summon a rope, a cup, etc.

Use to set a trap, cause the object to disappear and the trap goes off (hook holding something heavy up, part of the floor disappears into a pit etc).

Summon clothing on top of what you were wearing before, commit a crime, turn the corner, and will it to cease to exist.

Use it to pass messages (create magical ink, write a message with it and it is gone within the hour).

[EvilAnagram]

Conjure a boulder that sits on a steep incline above your enemies.

Conjure caltrops.

Conjure poison inside someone's muffin.

[Scirocco]

Does it say anything about the value of the conjured item? If not you could use it for spell components.

[TheOOB]

Conjure a boulder that sits on a steep incline above your enemies.

Conjure caltrops.

Conjure poison inside someone's muffin.

Caltrops are many items, not one.

[foobar1969]

Agree with the others; powerful mundane substances (including components) are the best use for this. But if I were the DM, I'd require a knowledge check to get the elemental composition right (easy for wood or stone, very difficult for unusual chemicals).


Conjure a boulder that sits on a steep incline above your enemies.
A 10 pound rock, in your hand or sitting in front of you.

Conjure caltrops.
A single caltrop, instantly spotted because it's glowing with light.

Conjure poison inside someone's muffin.
Aaaand the trifecta! Zero for three on reading the description.

[DrLemniscate]

Caltrops are many items, not one.

Conjure a caltrop inside someone's muffin.

[Mr.Moron]

Conjure the juiciest, yummiest brain ever to distract that pesky Intellect Devourer everyone is flialing about over.

[squashmaster]

If the Wizard only has to see something once to perfectly duplicate it (even without studying it carefully), here are a few things that work.

- A Map
- A Secret letter (he can look at it once, destroy the original and then when he gets to the location to give it, use Minor Conjuration to reproduce it, no chance of it getting stolen)
- A Key (Get out of Jail, into homes)

See, this kind of scenario breaking stuff would have to be limited.

As a DM, I'd say, to conjure anything complex like an entire map or letter or the grooves of a key that can actually be useful, I'd say they would had to have been previously memorized by the caster, and that'd be at least a DC 10-15 (maybe even more depending on complexity and importance of item) intellect check to memorize them in the first place, when they had the real thing in hand.

[TheOOB]

See, this kind of scenario breaking stuff would have to be limited.

As a DM, I'd say, to conjure anything complex like an entire map or letter or the grooves of a key that can actually be useful, I'd say they would had to have been previously memorized by the caster, and that'd be at least a DC 10-15 (maybe even more depending on complexity and importance of item) intellect check to memorize them in the first place, when they had the real thing in hand.

I think it's fair to say that if the character can't visualize the object in their head, they can't create it.

[Simian]

If the Wizard only has to see something once to perfectly duplicate it (even without studying it carefully), here are a few things that work.

- A Map
- A Secret letter (he can look at it once, destroy the original and then when he gets to the location to give it, use Minor Conjuration to reproduce it, no chance of it getting stolen)
- A Key (Get out of Jail, into homes)
- A Small Boat (Ok, more like a plank of light wood to hold onto in the water but still)
- A Sled!
- Food/water ( but he gets hungry again an hour later :smallbiggrin:)
- Most Artisan Tools
- Glowing Cloths (he can be a fashion thief!)
Depending on the definition of 'takes damage' then a weapon or even armor (since they never 'take damage' when you are using them in combat, DM call though)

Most sets of tools would constitute many individual items. I guess it would depend on how the DM ruled it but along the same lines you could say something like "I conjure a dungeoneering pack" and that also wouldn't technically fall into the spirit or the RAW of the ability.

The best thing I've seen so far is the key. The DM might rule that each key is different in such detailed ways that this wouldn't work for a specific key, though I don't know if anything like that is mentioned in RAW. Realism wise it doesn't make sense that you would be able to exactly replicate a specific key unless you had some kind of special knowledge or experience related to key making.

You could also conjure like a ring and the fact that it was glowing magical would make it seem valuable to someone not familiar with the conjuration discipline.

If I were DM'ing my response to anyone trying to pawn off conjured goods would be:

NPC: "I used to be a conjurer like you, before I took an arrow to the knee"

Even though it's abuse able, technically it's reasonable to think you could rip people off with conjured items, so it's up to your DM if he favors realism or balance in his games.

Maybe he wouldn't let you sell it, but he would let you use it as a bartering tool as a creative way to obtain something specific to your quest from an NPC. Like trading it to a goblin for information about upcoming traps for example.

[Slipperychicken]

What do we think about creating a weapon? It would be magical ("the object is visibly magical"). Would you agree that those two qualities (being a weapon, and being magical) make it a magical weapon?



As a DM, I'd say, to conjure anything complex like an entire map or letter or the grooves of a key that can actually be useful, I'd say they would had to have been previously memorized by the caster, and that'd be at least a DC 10-15 (maybe even more depending on complexity and importance of item) intellect check to memorize them in the first place, when they had the real thing in hand.



The best thing I've seen so far is the key. The DM might rule that each key is different in such detailed ways that this wouldn't work for a specific key, though I don't know if anything like that is mentioned in RAW. Realism wise it doesn't make sense that you would be able to exactly replicate a specific key unless you had some kind of special knowledge or experience related to key making.


So what would you say about Graustein's suggestion, that the Keen Mind feat could allow a wizard to, by RAI, accurately replicate keys and maps?

[Oscredwin]

See, this kind of scenario breaking stuff would have to be limited.

As a DM, I'd say, to conjure anything complex like an entire map or letter or the grooves of a key that can actually be useful, I'd say they would had to have been previously memorized by the caster, and that'd be at least a DC 10-15 (maybe even more depending on complexity and importance of item) intellect check to memorize them in the first place, when they had the real thing in hand.

Gamist perspective: The more important an item is, the higher the DC should be. It's really helpful.

Simulationist perspective: The more important the item is (when it's seen), the lower the DC should be. The Wizard was really paying attention.

[EvilAnagram]

Agree with the others; powerful mundane substances (including components) are the best use for this. But if I were the DM, I'd require a knowledge check to get the elemental composition right (easy for wood or stone, very difficult for unusual chemicals).


A 10 pound rock, in your hand or sitting in front of you.

A single caltrop, instantly spotted because it's glowing with light.

Aaaand the trifecta! Zero for three on reading the description.

Oh noes! I forgot that this was supr serius bzness! Wow is me!

[squashmaster]

What do we think about creating a weapon? It would be magical ("the object is visibly magical"). Would you agree that those two qualities (being a weapon, and being magical) make it a magical weapon?

I'd say sure, but not one that has a +1 bonus and certainly not a very good one, it being under 10 pounds or under. But okay, conjure a dagger or quarterstaff that you can use against a monster that has nonmagical resistance or immunity.


So what would you say about Graustein's suggestion, that the Keen Mind feat could allow a wizard to, by RAI, accurately replicate keys and maps?

Can't exactly remember Keen Mind, don't have PHB in front of me, but sure, maybe, if they wanna blow a feat on Keen Mind. Feats are precious in 5e, why not let players take advantage of it.


Gamist perspective: The more important an item is, the higher the DC should be. It's really helpful.

Simulationist perspective: The more important the item is (when it's seen), the lower the DC should be. The Wizard was really paying attention.

Trudat.

[Fwiffo86]

Piton to stop up the door (wedge it shut)

Depending on how the conjuration works, put your fingers next to the lock, and let the key form INSIDE the lock, to assure its teeth match.

Pole for crossing pits

Arrow (cause no one cares if its good or not)

very flimsy Chair for being lazy

Any object for the purposes of the 5' light. Easier to hide when looking at secret documents (think mini flashlight) in the dark

Shell game with a vanishing ball.

Does anyone know if the conjured object can be inflated? If so, it has all sorts of applications then.

[BW022]

I honestly can't think of anything which might be abusive.

The fact it glows... means you can't make anything of value and scam someone. Maybe a glowing dagger and pretend it is magical... but IMO, anyone able to purchase magical weapons would know that trick.

Making mundane items is... mundane. A rope, sack, saddle, clothing, etc. is pretty tame and temporary. Even making material components is pretty limited as it only lasts an hour or as soon as you use it again. Material components (even if you don't have an arcane focus) are pretty much free, so cost savings and weight aren't critical. As best, maybe it works if you are thrown in a cell or something. It can't be used as armor and likely weapons (destroyed upon taking damage).

About the only likely use is as free temporary equipment without having to carry it, smuggling something into places, etc. However, presumably a large pack or mule can typically carry all the equipment you could dream of.

[Slipperychicken]

Even making material components is pretty limited as it only lasts an hour or as soon as you use it again. Material components (even if you don't have an arcane focus) are pretty much free, so cost savings and weight aren't critical.

One of the uses I had thought of before was to create arbitrarily-expensive diamonds and other material components, to allow for free resurrections, shapechanges, and other such spells.

[Surrealistik]

One of the uses I had thought of before was to create arbitrarily-expensive diamonds and other material components, to allow for free resurrections, shapechanges, and other such spells.

This is by far the best use of this ability.

[Eslin]

Conjure ten pounds of the sun. The wizard has definitely seen the sun before, now you have 4.5 pounds of super dense hydrogen at 15 million degrees, which would be about 27 cubic centimetres.

Obviously the wizard won't survive the ensuing explosion, but nor will anything else in the vicinity.

[Slipperychicken]

Conjure ten pounds of the sun. The wizard has definitely seen the sun before, now you have 4.5 pounds of super dense hydrogen at 15 million degrees, which would be about 27 cubic centimetres.

Obviously the wizard won't survive the ensuing explosion, but nor will anything else in the vicinity.

He could always Contingency* an Otiluke's Resilient Sphere to protect him from the blast. That requires him to be level 11 (to have access to 5th level spells), but it would be an excellent trick to nuke an area.


*(trigger: "Immediately after I use the minor conjuration class feature to conjure ten pounds of the sun")

[foobar1969]

Conjure ten pounds of the sun. The wizard has definitely seen the sun before, now you have 4.5 pounds of super dense hydrogen at 15 million degrees, which would be about 27 cubic centimetres.
Super dense whaty-what? Everyone knows the Sun is a divine magical flaming chariot that flies across the sky, from one edge of the world to the other, then returns to the heavenly stable at night.

Sheesh. Next you'll be claiming that the world is a sphere, or some other such nonsense.

But if you're going to inject RW simulationism into the game, do it scientifically. That wizard has never seen the core of the sun, only the surface (photosphere), which is about 6000°K and much less dense than air. A 3 foot cube of photosphere would give you about 200g (0.4 lbs) of hydrogen, which would immediately ignite, possibly doing a few points of fire damage to things in adjacent squares.

Much better off conjuring 10 pounds (1.6 gallons) of flammable oil (or explosives, if the wizard has seen & understood such alchemy)

[Surrealistik]

Conjure ten pounds of the sun. The wizard has definitely seen the sun before, now you have 4.5 pounds of super dense hydrogen at 15 million degrees, which would be about 27 cubic centimetres.

Obviously the wizard won't survive the ensuing explosion, but nor will anything else in the vicinity.

Illusory Reality (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18123439&postcount=13) does it better. :smalltongue:

[MaxWilson]

Making mundane items is... mundane. A rope, sack, saddle, clothing, etc. is pretty tame and temporary. Even making material components is pretty limited as it only lasts an hour or as soon as you use it again. Material components (even if you don't have an arcane focus) are pretty much free, so cost savings and weight aren't critical. As best, maybe it works if you are thrown in a cell or something. It can't be used as armor and likely weapons (destroyed upon taking damage).

Best thing I can think of is an Exotic Saddle for your druid buddy so that the Beastmaster Ranger can ride him and give him Evasion via Mounted Combatant. Convoluted, I know.

I suggest that you think of Minor Conjuration as a scaled-up variant of Prestidigitation. All the things you want to do with Prestidigitation but can't because the items must fit in your hand and last for only six seconds--that's what you use Minor Conjuration for. Flavor and convenience, not optimizing killing power.

[jaydubs]

You could use it to make some timed or remote explosives/poisons/other nasty things. I'm not a chemist, so I'll leave some of the exact formulae to someone else. But the basic idea is:

-Start with something deadly.
-Stabilize it with something you conjure.
-Place it wherever.
-It will explode/light on fire/become toxic/etc. after 1 hour, or when you use the ability again.

One formula I do know:

NaOH plus hydrochloric acid = saltwater. Start with a volume of hydrochloric acid. Conjure just enough NaOH to turn it into salt water. You can now turn it back into acid on command. I'm sure a creative player can find all sorts of uses for timed/remotely triggered acid charges.

Etc. Etc.

[Ramshack]

Best thing I can think of is an Exotic Saddle for your druid buddy so that the Beastmaster Ranger can ride him and give him Evasion via Mounted Combatant. Convoluted, I know.

I suggest that you think of Minor Conjuration as a scaled-up variant of Prestidigitation. All the things you want to do with Prestidigitation but can't because the items must fit in your hand and last for only six seconds--that's what you use Minor Conjuration for. Flavor and convenience, not optimizing killing power.

I agree with this, If I was DMing I would't allow anyone to make anything Alchemical, no poisons, no potions, no foods, no spell components etc. The description says it takes the form of an object, not you summon that object.

I picture this like having Green Lanterns Ring but only the diet coke version. The obviously magical and glowing line really sells this for me. I didn't actually make a Diamond that can be used for Revivify, I only have this green glowing creation that looks like a diamond.

Applications I would allow this for, making a 1 handed weapon or a shield, making tools IE hammer, saw, wrench, axe, shovel, oar, crowbar making mundane items, hooks, pullys, wheels, chests, chairs, shelves, or some more creative options like manacles, spyglass, saddle, pots and pans when cooking on the road.

[edge2054]

I can't take credit for this but someone mentioned in another thread using Keen Mind and Minor Conjuration to summon your spellbook if it was ever taken away. To go a step further you could have a master spellbook that you only use to copy spells into. Once a month you study this spellbook. The rest of the time you use Minor Conjuration.

[themaque]

I think it's fair to say that if the character can't visualize the object in their head, they can't create it.

Did we just find a great use for the Keen Mind feat?

"Oh you need that key? I caught a glance of that. Here you go!"

[Cambrian]

So what would you say about Graustein's suggestion, that the Keen Mind feat could allow a wizard to, by RAI, accurately replicate keys and maps?I'd say if a character with Keen Mind had studied such a map or key within the time period stated in Keen Mind's rules then yes they absolutely could. That's a really clever use of abilities, and deserves to be rewarded.

A character that is not familiar with a particular map can make a map, but it wouldn't necessarily be a map of anything in particular. If a character is semi-familiar I'd probably rule they could make the map, and then every time they read a specific detail I'd require a hidden Int check to see if they got that particular detail right-- If they fail the check then they are mislead by the map.

[WickerNipple]

A resplendent robe you gift to the emperor an hour before his coronation march.

A pillow for later that night in jail.

[Suichimo]

Your money that you just paid to a shop? I realize gold doesn't go as far as it used to, but it still has its uses.

[Eslin]

Still loving the create part of the sun idea, there's gotta be a way to see the center of the sun if your DM rules you can only create the 6000C outside because that's what you've seen. Scrying maybe, teleporting in and then having someone true resurrect you would probably work.

[Easy_Lee]

Still loving the create part of the sun idea, there's gotta be a way to see the center of the sun if your DM rules you can only create the 6000C outside because that's what you've seen. Scrying maybe, teleporting in and then having someone true resurrect you would probably work.

It would probably require polymorphing into a fire elemental to ensure the success. Perhaps an enterprising wizard could summon a fire elemental servant, cast some spell on it that lets him see through its eyes, then teleport it into the sun. Afterwards, he'll need a cleric to restore his eyes. He'll also want the keen mind feat so he can clearly remember what he saw. But yeah, after that it'd be pretty clearly RAW, if not RAI.

Though that assumes the FR sun is our sun and not a giant portal to the plane of fire (as the ocean contains portals to the plane of water, and clouds likely portals to the plane of air, and probably portals to the plane of earth deep underground).

[Eslin]

It would probably require polymorphing into a fire elemental to ensure the success. Perhaps an enterprising wizard could summon a fire elemental servant, cast some spell on it that lets him see through its eyes, then teleport it into the sun. Afterwards, he'll need a cleric to restore his eyes. He'll also want the keen mind feat so he can clearly remember what he saw. But yeah, after that it'd be pretty clearly RAW, if not RAI.

Though that assumes the FR sun is our sun and not a giant portal to the plane of fire (as the ocean contains portals to the plane of water, and clouds likely portals to the plane of air, and probably portals to the plane of earth deep underground).

It doesn't really make sense as a portal to the plane of fire, there's nothing in the plane of fire described as being anywhere near as hot as the sun.

The part of it I like is how over the top it is, I am trying to think of a situation where nuking yourself and the surrounding countryside is a proportionate response.

[Leviting]

It doesn't really make sense as a portal to the plane of fire, there's nothing in the plane of fire described as being anywhere near as hot as the sun.

The part of it I like is how over the top it is, I am trying to think of a situation where nuking yourself and the surrounding countryside is a proportionate response.

perhaps there are a million intellect devourers, and they all happen to be in the above stated surrounding countryside.

[XmonkTad]

I know it can only conjure one object, but what about an object that can easily break into smaller, functional, objects (the kit-kat principle)? Could you use that to then summon a large ball made of caltrops and water? Conjure the ball 10 feet away, the water flows away and leaves behind a pile of caltrops!
Of course, you would have had to see one first, and it would still glow, but hey, that's what are illusions are for!

I think the kit-kat principle could be used to make things like:
A bunch of arrows in a ball of water.
Tin foil for your tin foil hat collection.
Mr. Potato Head.
Any toolkit in a ball of water (toss the one you have in the lake for inspiration).

Using a ball of water is important because the object disappears if it takes damage. Water should just flow away naturally without fuss. I'm sure other "connector" materials work as well, but water is clear and widely available so making "demo objects" that are conjured later is easy.

[INDYSTAR188]

What do we think about creating a weapon? It would be magical ("the object is visibly magical"). Would you agree that those two qualities (being a weapon, and being magical) make it a magical weapon?

So what would you say about Graustein's suggestion, that the Keen Mind feat could allow a wizard to, by RAI, accurately replicate keys and maps?

1. Yes I would consider that a magical weapon. It's a fantastic use for this class feature since magic weapons are necessary to fighting lots of baddies. Let's the conjuror feel like their class and specialty has an impact.

2. If a player cares enough to invest in a feat I'm going to do everything I can to reasonably accomodate them. Keen Mind seems like a good 'in-game' opportunity to allow for that kinda advanced use of the feature.

[Stealthscout]

::reasonablenesscheck::
I just got off of another posting where the debate became a heated fight between either it creates what you know of an object (and therefore crossbows don't work) or it brings the object to you (and therefore the queen's diary can be yours on demand, but she can erase/destroy it too). Others wanted something in between but couldn't beat the lawyers at that game.

Save yourself the angst up front - this is a DM's call thing. But you are open to share your table's view on it, but it won't work until you have that talk and it may change even then once you get going.

As a DM, I think the 3.5 psionic power 'Call Item' is a perfect thing to point at to keep it realistic. They make some good limits without ruining the effect:

GP limit depending on your level (10-1000 gp at 5th level there)
Only items you can buy in books, but they can be a 'set' of related itemes (ex. caltrop bag, a tool set)
You only call an item of a type, not a specific item. So you could get a steel sword vs. adamantium sword, but not a particular looking one or with/without gems. So, getting 'that key' is laughably hard and you can get a generic book but not a specific one. (arguably, replace with 'not a spellbook' and 'you have to have read it' would be better)

There was also no size limitation (I liked calling small houses for sudden protection or blockades) but arguably that should be a real spell, not an at-will thing.
::/reasonablenesscheck::


As a player, I want to get fun. :smallbiggrin:


The thing limiting most rock gnome builds is a lack of power. enter conjuring a wound spring or pressurized steam/box/etc. to fill the gap. Potato guns are deadly when they shoot hundreds of caltrops, necrotic mucus, or crates of bolts.
More simple would be working with a sniper and giving him a poisoned arrow every round.
Talk to a craftsman and create something unique. A spring-loaded pop-up wall is on top of my list - instant cover which can be brought back on demand after being destroyed (over and over).
Obstacles for one square - rattan chairs work here or wet cork bundles (fireproof). Better if you are small due to size issues
First strike options for using alchemist fire flasks. If the DM balks that the flask is destroyed and therefore disappears just fill a flask you buy/make in off time and throw
Lazy intimidation. A few boards can over a pit trap and threaten to take the chair away on a prisoner. Extra points for re-conjuring smaller and smaller chairs/boards
For fall lovers - a bonfire covered with wet leaves. 2 rounds and everyone will leave the room.
Another intimidation one - give the person only conjured water, then dispel it. Repeat.

[Ramshack]

This ability reads like your green lantern creating obviously fake glowing magical versions of items. I think people trying to create spell components, alchemical reactions (poisons, potions etc) are really far off of what was intended with the ability. All you'd really create is a magical glowing shape of a diamond, or a shape of a vial with liquid. No where does it say you actually create the items it states it takes the forms of objects. You may summon what looks like a chunk of the sun but it isn't going to be hot or have the same properties.

Possible uses I'd allow at my table are: making a 1 handed weapon or a shield, making tools IE hammer, saw, wrench, axe, shovel, oar, crowbar making mundane items, hooks, pullys, wheels, chests, chairs, shelves, or some more creative options like manacles, spyglass, saddle, pots and pans when cooking on the road. I'd allow things like unique keys etc if they had the keen mind feat.

Things I wouldn't allow: Spell Components, Alchemical solutions, poisons, potions, etc , food, complex contraptions,

[PracticalM]

One of the problems with conjuring weapons and some tools like hammers is that it disappears if damaged. Can you use a weapon to do damage that doesn't take some damage in return? Same with a hammer or even a spike to wedge a door, it would seem like those would take some damage in their use.

[Shining Wrath]

RAW contradiction: the object conjured must not BE magical, but once conjured is visibly magical. So obviously, you can't conjure a +1 weapon, because that would BE magical, but you can conjure any weapon under 10 pounds, which would be ... obviously magical.

What they are aiming for is you can't conjure up a wand of fireballs that you saw once, or a +3 Sword of Extra Powerful Smites.

What you can do is conjure a glowing weapon of magical origin which grants no benefits except that it is of magical origin. I'd say that's good enough to qualify as a magic weapon.

But it disappears if it takes damage, so if your blow is blocked by armor, or parried, does that destroy the weapon? I'd have to think about it, but my DM-fu says this smacks of cheese, and that limiting the utility of your at-will magic weapon is probably the right way to go. The item conjured is intended to be fragile.

[MaxWilson]

One of the problems with conjuring weapons and some tools like hammers is that it disappears if damaged. Can you use a weapon to do damage that doesn't take some damage in return? Same with a hammer or even a spike to wedge a door, it would seem like those would take some damage in their use.

This should be possible as long as your material has a higher Mohs scale rating than whatever you're trying to damage. Diamonds can cut rock without being affected by the rock, AFAIK.

[Easy_Lee]

This should be possible as long as your material has a higher Mohs scale rating than whatever you're trying to damage. Diamonds can cut rock without being affected by the rock, AFAIK.

Interesting use: can conjurers conjure adamantine stuff?

[CubeB]

Interesting use: can conjurers conjure adamantine stuff?

Well, creation can do that explicitly, but it's a much higher level spell rather than an at will ability.

[INDYSTAR188]

Possible uses I'd allow at my table are: making a 1 handed weapon or a shield, making tools IE hammer, saw, wrench, axe, shovel, oar, crowbar making mundane items, hooks, pullys, wheels, chests, chairs, shelves, or some more creative options like manacles, spyglass, saddle, pots and pans when cooking on the road. I'd allow things like unique keys etc if they had the keen mind feat.

Things I wouldn't allow: Spell Components, Alchemical solutions, poisons, potions, etc , food, complex contraptions,

Absolutely agree. Keep it flexible and useful but within reason. Want your conjured arrow to be covered in poison? Better use a real poison on the conjured arrow.



One of the problems with conjuring weapons and some tools like hammers is that it disappears if damaged. Can you use a weapon to do damage that doesn't take some damage in return? Same with a hammer or even a spike to wedge a door, it would seem like those would take some damage in their use.

I think you have to walk a fine line here. A hammer, spike, shield, and sword are all designed and created to withstand the damage from their use. My interpretation? Using the hammer doesn't cause it to disappear but an enemy shooting a crossbow bolt at the hammer to prevent me from using it to [whatever's appropriate] does.

Key points:

1. Is the player getting to use his ability and have fun?

2. Are the other players being overshadowed by my and the player's interpretation?

[XmonkTad]

1. Is the player getting to use his ability and have fun?

2. Are the other players being overshadowed by my and the player's interpretation?

Bah, that's too reasonable! We're looking to abuse RAW here!

People have mentioned that when combined with Keen Mind you can reproduce books (being able to accurately recall them and such). I've seen people argue that Keen Mind alone does not let you memorize your entire spellbook, or at least, you can't study your own mind instead of a spellbook each to prepare spells. Perhaps with Minor Conjuration you could reproduce the spellbook that you've seen (just happens to be your own spellbook). It lasts for an hour which is enough time to study from it.

The point this could become broken is scribing spells into your spellbook. If you capture a spellbook, you could read the spell in it, and (since you have now seen a book with that spell scribed in it and can recall it accurately) then just use minor conjuration to summon a book with that spell in it to study from. No 50gp per spell level for you!

[AgentPaper]

I think the kit-kat principle could be used to make things like:
A bunch of arrows in a ball of water.
Tin foil for your tin foil hat collection.
Mr. Potato Head.
Any toolkit in a ball of water (toss the one you have in the lake for inspiration)

Why summon it in a ball of water when you could summon it in a ball of glowy magical air?

[Logosloki]

Still loving the create part of the sun idea, there's gotta be a way to see the center of the sun if your DM rules you can only create the 6000C outside because that's what you've seen. Scrying maybe, teleporting in and then having someone true resurrect you would probably work.

Background custom that you have seen a solar eclipse, or just assume you have seen this rather common phenomenon. Solar eclipse reveals the corona of the sun. The corona is 1M Kelvin in temperature. take some corona instead.

To add to the discussion in general: if you have seen the key before and held it in your hand then you should be able to minor conjure that particular key.

[JoeJ]

In the FR, the sun is not a portal to the Plane of Fire, but there are hundreds of such portals on the surface. The temperature is high enough to overcome any known protective magic; it is simply impossible for any creature from the Prime Material Plane to survive even an instant there. Personally, I think that's idiotic, but it is official.

Also, the FR stars are all portals to the Plane of Radiance.

[Eslin]

In the FR, the sun is not a portal to the Plane of Fire, but there are hundreds of such portals on the surface. The temperature is high enough to overcome any known protective magic; it is simply impossible for any creature from the Prime Material Plane to survive even an instant there. Personally, I think that's idiotic, but it is official.

Also, the FR stars are all portals to the Plane of Radiance.

That's fine, just scry or go ethereal.

[JoeJ]

That's fine, just scry or go ethereal.

You can't Scry a place. It has to be a creature. However, according to Realmspace, there has never been any communication between the inhabitants of the sun and and the rest of the system, and probably never will be. Given the number of curious wizards in the FR, this strongly implies that scrying and going ethereal don't work.

Also, going strictly by the rules, Minor Conjuration conjures AN object, not part of an object. So you have to take the entire sun, which is only possible if it's no more than 10 pounds and 3 feet on a side.

[Eslin]

You can't Scry a place. It has to be a creature. However, according to Realmspace, there has never been any communication between the inhabitants of the sun and and the rest of the system, and probably never will be. Given the number of curious wizards in the FR, this strongly implies that scrying and going ethereal don't work.

Also, going strictly by the rules, Minor Conjuration conjures AN object, not part of an object. So you have to take the entire sun, which is only possible if it's no more than 10 pounds and 3 feet on a side.

But what then is an object? There is no single object on a base level, particles themselves are just a name for clouds of amplitude in a configuration space, an object is just a large factor in the wave function. There is no such thing as a single or partial object because on a fundamental level there is no such thing as an object - so if you can summon anything at all, you should be able to summon parts of things since a part of a thing is a thing.

[MaxWilson]

But what then is an object? There is no single object on a base level, particles themselves are just a name for clouds of amplitude in a configuration space, an object is just a large factor in the wave function. There is no such thing as a single or partial object because on a fundamental level there is no such thing as an object - so if you can summon anything at all, you should be able to summon parts of things since a part of a thing is a thing.

Plato would disagree.

[Eslin]

Plato would disagree.

He would, but fortunately the physics of his era, named after his student, are a by-word for being completely wrong.

[Fra Antonio]

Gosh, people don't care about catgirls at all these days...

[MaxWilson]

He would, but fortunately the physics of his era, named after his student, are a by-word for being completely wrong.

In D&D they're probably not wrong. In some (A)D&D settings, phlogiston is real. In most D&D settings, Aristotelian elements are real (earth/air/fire/water) as opposed to Mendeleevian elements (antimony/arsenic/aluminum/selenium/etc.).

Anyway, I didn't mean to argue, I was mostly just attempting humor about platonic ideals.

P.S. My favorite quote about Aristotle comes from Dr. Science. "Aristotle was a genius. He knew everything there was to know in his day, which wasn't much, and it was all wrong." Probably unfair to Aristotle but it makes me chuckle anyway.

[Eslin]

Which was done very well in the strip this site's about, I loved Redcloak's use of titanium elementals.

[JoeJ]

But what then is an object? There is no single object on a base level, particles themselves are just a name for clouds of amplitude in a configuration space, an object is just a large factor in the wave function. There is no such thing as a single or partial object because on a fundamental level there is no such thing as an object - so if you can summon anything at all, you should be able to summon parts of things since a part of a thing is a thing.

What are these "particles" you speak of? The only waves I see are the ones in the ocean, and the only clouds are in the sky. Neither of them has anything to do with what it means to conjure an "object."

A part of the sun wouldn't be an "object", it would be a bunch of fire. Objects and elements are not the same in magic, and the PHB doesn't say you can conjure an element. Personally, though, I'd probably allow it. I don't think it breaks anything if you conjure a 3' cube of fire, since you can't have it appear in another character's space.

[Eslin]

What are these "particles" you speak of? The only waves I see are the ones in the ocean, and the only clouds are in the sky. Neither of them has anything to do with what it means to conjure an "object."

A part of the sun wouldn't be an "object", it would be a bunch of fire. Objects and elements are not the same in magic, and the PHB doesn't say you can conjure an element. Personally, though, I'd probably allow it. I don't think it breaks anything if you conjure a 3' cube of fire, since you can't have it appear in another character's space.

The sun's core 15,700,000 degrees and is incredibly dense - 10 pounds of material would be about 30 cubic centimetres, which would be a ball maybe a little less than 4cm across.

That hydrogen would then expand or disperse, which is a term better probably described in this instance as an explosion. One that would level the surrounding countryside.

[Fra Antonio]

The sun's core 15,700,000 degrees and is incredibly dense - 10 pounds of material would be about 30 cubic centimetres, which would be a ball maybe a little less than 4cm across.

That hydrogen would then expand or disperse, which is a term better probably described in this instance as an explosion. One that would level the surrounding countryside.

For all I know, the sun in my fantasy world may be a cycling illusory disc created by gods to provide light. Illusions can't emit real light and heat, you say? Well, you know, shadow magic (I like the irony), and they are gods.

[Eslin]

Then where's the energy coming from? Where is it in relation to the planet? For that matter what's the planet orbiting, and how do seasons work?

[Fra Antonio]

Then where's the energy coming from? Where is it in relation to the planet? For that matter what's the planet orbiting, and how do seasons work?

Gods? A Positive Energy Plane portal? Maybe it's a finite universe there, and the energy mostly circulates within its borders, so the sun is an energy condenser that collects it and then sends back to the planet? Is there even a planet? Maybe it's a giant pizza on a sleeping space hamster's back? Possibilities are endless.

I mean, must we automatically assume that fantasy worlds work in the same way our world does? Because it definitely doesn't in many, many ways.

[Eslin]

Gods? A Positive Energy Plane portal? Maybe it's a finite universe there, and the energy mostly circulates within its borders, so the sun is an energy condenser that collects it and then sends back to the planet? Is there even a planet? Maybe it's a giant pizza on a sleeping space hamster's back? Possibilities are endless.

I mean, must we automatically assume that fantasy worlds work in the same way our world does? Because it definitely doesn't in many, many ways.

Actually, it doesn't in only a few ways. The laws of physics clearly still apply to the rest of the game, so it's reasonable to assume that you're on a planet with a regular orbit in the Goldilocks zone of a medium sized sun in the same way that's it's reasonable to assume the planet's core is hot and the same way that it's reasonable to assume things fall down when you drop them.

[Easy_Lee]

The laws of physics clearly still apply to the rest of the game

You sure about that?

[JoeJ]

The sun's core 15,700,000 degrees and is incredibly dense - 10 pounds of material would be about 30 cubic centimetres, which would be a ball maybe a little less than 4cm across.

That hydrogen would then expand or disperse, which is a term better probably described in this instance as an explosion. One that would level the surrounding countryside.

It is hot, but unless you have a source I'm unaware of, nothing has ever been stated about the density of the FR sun. Most fire worlds have almost no density; they're like air, and if you were immune to the heat you could easily fly right through the center.

[Spriteless]

I like the key, I would rule in favor of it especially if the Wizard mentioned studying the key. While I wouldn't allow spell books or scrolls or anything that takes magic and days to copy normally, I could see making a magic copy of another document, that could be copied by a skilled forger. After all, someone practiced in visualizing things in enough detail to recreate them has practiced everything except the eye-hand coordination to forge things themselves.

Are plants animate? What about psychic plants from Mars?

Also lots of shiny jewelry.

[JoeJ]

I like the key, I would rule in favor of it especially if the Wizard mentioned studying the key. While I wouldn't allow spell books or scrolls or anything that takes magic and days to copy normally, I could see making a magic copy of another document, that could be copied by a skilled forger. After all, someone practiced in visualizing things in enough detail to recreate them has practiced everything except the eye-hand coordination to forge things themselves.

Are plants animate? What about psychic plants from Mars?

Also lots of shiny jewelry.

I would allow books, but the writing in them is only as complete as the wizard can remember, so they would have to have read it many times, or have read it very recently and have the Keen Mind feat. Spellbooks are a creative idea, but I wouldn't call something nonmagical if you can use it to prepare spells.

Poison, acid, ammunition (not very efficient because it requires an action for each shot, but if that's all you have it could be a lifesaver), artisan's tools are a set of many objects, but you'd usually only need them one at a time, so that should work, a gnomish gadget that the wizard has been able to closely examine.

The description of the ability doesn't sound to me like the wizard is teleporting an actual object to their hand. More like creating a temporary duplicate that glows - like a Green Lantern's creations, as was mentioned upthread.

[silveralen]

Actually, it doesn't in only a few ways. The laws of physics clearly still apply to the rest of the game, so it's reasonable to assume that you're on a planet with a regular orbit in the Goldilocks zone of a medium sized sun in the same way that's it's reasonable to assume the planet's core is hot and the same way that it's reasonable to assume things fall down when you drop them.

Conservation of mass and energy are both clearly violated by magic on a routine basis (indeed, minor creation itself violates at least one) and those are some of the more fundemental laws.

Not to mention that in at least some campaigns some of these assumptions are wrong. Constellations in dragonlance will disappear when the god comes to earth, making their similarity to our stars unlikely at best.

So yeah, these are all awful assumptions that should never be made in a fantasy setting, and if you try to break the game using them any halfway decent DM will laugh in your face.

[Eslin]

Conservation of mass and energy are both clearly violated by magic on a routine basis (indeed, minor creation itself violates at least one) and those are some of the more fundemental laws.

Not to mention that in at least some campaigns some of these assumptions are wrong. Constellations in dragonlance will disappear when the god comes to earth, making their similarity to our stars unlikely at best.

So yeah, these are all awful assumptions that should never be made in a fantasy setting, and if you try to break the game using them any halfway decent DM will laugh in your face.

Not necessarily. The energy could be coming from somewhere else, and assuming things work in the most logical manner is not an awful assumption. Everything does work like it does in real life, with the exceptions being what defines the setting. Plants photosynthesise, people break down carbohydrates for energy, objects attract other objects based on mass, light travels very fast - and unless it's a defining part of the setting that things are different, you can expect to be on a big ball of rock orbiting a massive ball of hydrogen.

This is why I liked Eragon - the storytelling may have been crap, but everything clearly made sense.

[JoeJ]

Not necessarily. The energy could be coming from somewhere else, and assuming things work in the most logical manner is not an awful assumption. Everything does work like it does in real life, with the exceptions being what defines the setting. Plants photosynthesise, people break down carbohydrates for energy, objects attract other objects based on mass, light travels very fast - and unless it's a defining part of the setting that things are different, you can expect to be on a big ball of rock orbiting a massive ball of hydrogen.

One of those is definitely false: objects do not attract other objects based on mass. An object's gravity is completely unrelated to its mass or size. A small ship or even an individual creature has the same gravity as a large planet, although it may take a different shape: in most ships, for example, the force of gravity is directed toward a plane rather than toward a point. That's the reason why objects leaving a planet's atmosphere take an air envelope with them; it's held there by the object's gravity. If it were not for this, space travel would be largely impossible for anybody who needs to breathe.

Although every object has gravity, you won't typically notice this on a planet's surface because when two gravity fields intersect, the field of the smaller object realigns to match that of the larger - a phenomenon that is sometimes useful in space combat. There are also some objects, including the very largest objects known to exist, which have no gravity at all. Sages have not yet discovered why this is the case.

If you're trying to apply the physics of our world to D&D, I'm afraid that ship sailed back in 1989.

[silveralen]

Not necessarily. The energy could be coming from somewhere else, and assuming things work in the most logical manner is not an awful assumption. Everything does work like it does in real life, with the exceptions being what defines the setting. Plants photosynthesise, people break down carbohydrates for energy, objects attract other objects based on mass, light travels very fast - and unless it's a defining part of the setting that things are different, you can expect to be on a big ball of rock orbiting a massive ball of hydrogen.

This is why I liked Eragon - the storytelling may have been crap, but everything clearly made sense.

The thing is, energy doesn't just come from "somewhere" in the real world. That's not how it works. Just like how the sun in a setting may be a literal god, or just a bright shiny light in the sky which orbits a disk that sits on the back or a turtle. Maybe the light doesn't move as fast as our light either, maybe it takes it's time, and the seasons are caused by the whim of the gods.

That's the point. The worlds we are talking about clearly aren't the same as ours, assuming they are bound by the same laws or function in the same manner is laughable. There is absolutely no reason to think that, nor is it reasonable to assume that the worlds orbit the sun, or the sun is made of hydrogen, or anything else. Those are all baseless assumptions in settings where so many other things true in our world don't hold up.

[MaxWilson]

One of those is definitely false: objects do not attract other objects based on mass. An object's gravity is completely unrelated to its mass or size... If you're trying to apply the physics of our world to D&D, I'm afraid that ship sailed back in 1989.

Much as I love Spelljammer, 2nd edition rules aren't canonical in 5th edition. It would be more correct to say "an object's gravity might be unrelated to its mass". In 5E, we just don't know.

[Eslin]

The thing is, energy doesn't just come from "somewhere" in the real world. That's not how it works. Just like how the sun in a setting may be a literal god, or just a bright shiny light in the sky which orbits a disk that sits on the back or a turtle. Maybe the light doesn't move as fast as our light either, maybe it takes it's time, and the seasons are caused by the whim of the gods.

That's the point. The worlds we are talking about clearly aren't the same as ours, assuming they are bound by the same laws or function in the same manner is laughable. There is absolutely no reason to think that, nor is it reasonable to assume that the worlds orbit the sun, or the sun is made of hydrogen, or anything else. Those are all baseless assumptions in settings where so many other things true in our world don't hold up.

They're not baseless assumptions. The worlds aren't completely different - they're all describable with 'it's like our world, but'. Pretty much every setting functions identically to real life except for specific aspects.

[silveralen]

They're not baseless assumptions. The worlds aren't completely different - they're all describable with 'it's like our world, but'. Pretty much every setting functions identically to real life except for specific aspects.

Except we don't know that. Never once has gravity or the sun canonically been established to function as it does on earth, we merely know that the end results are the same (light/heat from the sun, people grounded to the earth). The why and how have never been explored in most settings, and the few exceptions typically show how these things occur for a different reason than they would on our world. You say spelljammer isn't canon in 5e, but neither is normal real world gravity. In fact, spelljammer has a better claim since it at one time worked across multiple settings and has never been directly refuted. All that is canon is that something like gravity exists, the specifics are unknown.

[Easy_Lee]

Two things I'd like to add to this thread to hopefully get us back on topic:

If it's not in the book, it doesn't matter. Just because you don't think it works doesn't mean it won't. That's up to the DM, and the only person who can say something doesn't work because "X reason that is not in the book" is the DM
This thread does not have a DM

So, for anyone who says this or that doesn't work, please adhere to the following suggested rules:

Reasons why a tactic does not work must come from the PHB or a similar source
Provide the source and page-number of the relevant passage when explaining why a tactic does not work

Everyone here is wise enough to know that we'll have to clear our legitimate strategies delicious cheese tactics with the DM. Arguing about it here does no good and derails the thread.

[JoeJ]

Much as I love Spelljammer, 2nd edition rules aren't canonical in 5th edition. It would be more correct to say "an object's gravity might be unrelated to its mass". In 5E, we just don't know.

Alternatively, Spelljammer physics continues to be canon until something contradicting it is published.

[Slipperychicken]

Everyone here is wise enough to know that we'll have to clear our legitimate strategies delicious cheese tactics with the DM. Arguing about it here does no good and derails the thread.

Agreed. I really don't understand why people feel the need to bring it up in 5e threads and drag them out for 2d4 pages longer than they needed to be.

In the 3.5/PF board, we would usually respond to these issues with "ask to your DM about it", and that would be the end of it*. This subforum is going to need to learn how to do that, or else go up in flames every time a rules ambiguity comes up.


*Unless it was an alignment thread. I hated alignment threads.

[silveralen]

Two things I'd like to add to this thread to hopefully get us back on topic:

If it's not in the book, it doesn't matter. Just because you don't think it works doesn't mean it won't. That's up to the DM, and the only person who can say something doesn't work because "X reason that is not in the book" is the DM
This thread does not have a DM

So, for anyone who says this or that doesn't work, please adhere to the following suggested rules:

Reasons why a tactic does not work must come from the PHB or a similar source
Provide the source and page-number of the relevant passage when explaining why a tactic does not work

Everyone here is wise enough to know that we'll have to clear our legitimate strategies delicious cheese tactics with the DM. Arguing about it here does no good and derails the thread.

Everything in 5e is basically up to DM fiat. The system practically runs on it. There is barely any topic to get back onto. If we go by your rules threads like this should be auto locked and then deleted, as the entire premise is pointless.

[Edgerunner]

Resurrecting this thread to see if anything New can be added.

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: Closed for Thread Necromancy.