Natural [Force]

[Melcar]

I wanted to ask a question about force. The reason I do this (and it might have been asked before) is because I find it interesting to find out the nature of force. Now I’m not talking about “the force”, but about [force] effects – any spell or ability with a force describer. I know that this maybe is too nerdy of me, but somehow feed that it’s a weird element.

So onto the question:

Does force exist in a natural state, which is not inherently magical? What I mean is, could one find naturally occurring force, which have not been placed by some spell, spell-like ability or supernatural ability?

Thanks in advance

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I wanted to ask a question about force. The reason I do this (and it might have been asked before) is because I find it interesting to find out the nature of force. Now I’m not talking about “the force”, but about [force] effects – any spell or ability with a force describer. I know that this maybe is too nerdy of me, but somehow feed that it’s a weird element.

So onto the question:

Does force exist in a natural state, which is not inherently magical? What I mean is, could one find naturally occurring force, which have not been placed by some spell, spell-like ability or supernatural ability?

Thanks in advanceTechnically, psionics are psi-like, so they don't fall under the auspices of spells, spell-likes, and supernaturals, but I doubt that's what you're talking about.

There should be alchemical items that cause [force] damage, as we can produce the effects of a concussive blast with chemical reactions (such as through a concussive grenade), but I'm not aware of any in-game effects that do this nonmagically. There might be some sort of pseudo-elemental plane of force out there which could produce force effects; if nothing else, a demiplane created via the genesis spell might be able to do so, but it would be something one would have to talk to one's DM about.

In Ravenloft: Legacy of the Blood, there are nonmagical items that produce nonmagical versions of magical effects: devices. A device that emulates a [force] spell could do what you want, but that's kind of cheating.

[Bakkan]

The (lesser) Orb of <Energy> spells are conjuration, and, if I recall correctly, work by summoning some nonmagical stuff and flinging it at something. Since there is an Orb of Force, the spell must be summoning Force from somewhere in the cosmology to throw. Hence, Force does exist in a "natural", nonmagical state. Somewhere.

[JeenLeen]

The (lesser) Orb of <Energy> spells are conjuration, and, if I recall correctly, work by summoning some nonmagical stuff and flinging it at something. Since there is an Orb of Force, the spell must be summoning Force from somewhere in the cosmology to throw. Hence, Force does exist in a "natural", nonmagical state. Somewhere.

I think the big thrust of the question would be if the spell *creates* the material or if the spell *summons* the material. If it creates it from nothing, then that doesn't hint that it exists anywhere beforehand. I'm away from books, but I imagine someone here knows the slight metaphysical distinction between a Conjuration spell of the Creation subtype vs. others and which subtype the Orbs are.

As a semi-related note: this earlier thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?229784-uhh-so-Orb-of-Force) may have some useful comments, although the main question is different than the one here. I tried Googling the Orb spells a bit for some insight and found it.

[icefractal]

The Orb series doesn't make a lot of sense from a conceptual standpoint. The best explanation I've seen was that it was summoning very volatile, very short duration elementals. And even that has some holes in it.

The existance of the Force Dragon does lend some support toward "force as an existing element", but there's no first-party Plane of Force, AFAIK.

[Necroticplague]

Given that Force effect can cross the material-ethereal planar boundry, and interact solidly with both incorporeal and normal subjects, it's likely that force has these qualities in its raw form. So a sword made of solid Force would be somewhat like a ghost touch weapon (trading the ability to go through material objects to hit things on the ethereal).

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Given that Force effect can cross the material-ethereal planar boundry, and interact solidly with both incorporeal and normal subjects, it's likely that force has these qualities in its raw form. So a sword made of solid Force would be somewhat like a ghost touch weapon (trading the ability to go through material objects to hit things on the ethereal).Riverine is made from planes of force made via something similar to the Wall of Force spell. Since WoF does what you say, a sword of riverine should affect ghosts just fine, and riverine armor and shields should protect against ghostly touch attacks, as well.

[Melcar]

The (lesser) Orb of <Energy> spells are conjuration, and, if I recall correctly, work by summoning some nonmagical stuff and flinging it at something. Since there is an Orb of Force, the spell must be summoning Force from somewhere in the cosmology to throw. Hence, Force does exist in a "natural", nonmagical state. Somewhere.

Indeed that spell does exist, and for that exact reason I'm asking my question. Because that particular orb would then affect someone in a antimagic zone, and even though might look at feel like magic missile, itsnot magical. One can of course deduct that since that spell exist so too must a plane of force, but I have never read about that plane.


I think the big thrust of the question would be if the spell *creates* the material or if the spell *summons* the material. If it creates it from nothing, then that doesn't hint that it exists anywhere beforehand. I'm away from books, but I imagine someone here knows the slight metaphysical distinction between a Conjuration spell of the Creation subtype vs. others and which subtype the Orbs are.

Other conjuration (creations) spells as I have understood it only pulls/summons/calls the matter to the plane you’re on, and then it exists due to being real non-magical fire - for example.
But again that would demand that there is somewhere to summon/pull said energy.

Another thing, which I find strange is that spells like magic missile is evocation [force] – thus magic, can be seen with detect magic, and has SR: Yes. But then there are spells like Force Ladder, which is evocation [force] – thus magic, can be seen with detect magic (one should think), but has SR: no. Why? That’s seems weird to me. Would it not be logic that it had SR: Yes? Forcecage is the same thing! But if it has SR: No, then the energy is not magical and then one cannot see it with detect magic. (And dispel does not work) Like a conjuration (creation) spell.

So is there a logic to this “inconsistency” that I’m not seeing or am I missing something?
Or is it simply that the inconsistency stems from a hoard of designers, throughout the editions, who did not really care for logic consistence throughout the spells? - and I’m over analyzing this?

Edit: And how does the Forceward spell interact with these different versions of force spells?

[Necroticplague]

Indeed that spell does exist, and for that exact reason I'm asking my question. Because that particular orb would then affect someone in a antimagic zone, and even though might look at feel like magic missile, itsnot magical. One can of course deduct that since that spell exist so too must a plane of force, but I have never read about that plane.



Other conjuration (creations) spells as I have understood it only pulls/summons/calls the matter to the plane you’re on, and then it exists due to being real non-magical fire - for example.
But again that would demand that there is somewhere to summon/pull said energy.

Another thing, which I find strange is that spells like magic missile is evocation [force] – thus magic, can be seen with detect magic, and has SR: Yes. But then there are spells like Force Ladder, which is evocation [force] – thus magic, can be seen with detect magic (one should think), but has SR: no. Why? That’s seems weird to me. Would it not be logic that it had SR: Yes? Forcecage is the same thing! But if it has SR: No, then the energy is not magical and then one cannot see it with detect magic. (And dispel does not work) Like a conjuration (creation) spell.

So is there a logic to this “inconsistency” that I’m not seeing or am I missing something?
Or is it simply that the inconsistency stems from a hoard of designers, throughout the editions, who did not really care for logic consistence throughout the spells? - and I’m over analyzing this?

SR:No doesn't mean it's not magic. That's actually determined by duration and school. Instantaneous conjurations create real things. That Orb of Fire is real fire (contrasted to a fireball, which is actually fire energy, despite appearances). Conjurations with durations or evocations are constructs of magic.

SR is a measure of whether the spell directly effects someone enough that resistance to magic can protect you. Wall of Force doesn't directly effect you, it just makes a wall. Force Ladder doesn't effect a creature, it makes a ladder. Magic Missile directly effects a creature with a short-lived magic construct . Orb of X doesn't directly effect you magically, it creates a nonmagical ball of some substance that then is flung at you (which is no more SR allowing than using Fabricate to make a bunch of Alchemist's fire and flinging it, the Orbs are just more specialized).

[Psyren]

Wherever the Maze (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/maze.htm) spell sends you seems to occur naturally, since it's a teleportation effect. (i.e. if you were conjuring it up yourself, it would probably be [Creation], so instead you're sending the target somewhere that already exists.)

[icefractal]

Incidentally, if I was going to modify it, I'd go with:
1) The Orb spells make a short-lived portal that you throw. So the projectile itself is magical (and won't go into an AMF), but the damage is non-magical. Also, they should do a small amount of splash damage (5' radius, 1 point/level, Reflex negates) since the burst of energy is unconstrained once it hits.
2) Orb of Force is deleted. There's no need for a non-magical Force spell in the game.

The Force Dragon reminds me of something though. It isn't necessary for something to be non-magical to ignore SR - it can be Supernatural rather than Spell / Spell-like. Not sure what that would imply for the Orbs - they open a portal in front of the mouth of a creature that's currently spewing an orb-shaped breath weapon?

[Melcar]

SR:No doesn't mean it's not magic. That's actually determined by duration and school. Instantaneous conjurations create real things. That Orb of Fire is real fire (contrasted to a fireball, which is actually fire energy, despite appearances). Conjurations with durations or evocations are constructs of magic.
I understand that conjuration (creation) magic are real non-magical substance, and that Evocations are construct of magic. Like Mordenkainens sword or forcecage, but then, it seems strange to be, both being planes of force that one has SR: Yes and the other; No. For instance, if a giant could pick up a wall of force and swing it like a sword, would it then become SR: Yes?



SR is a measure of whether the spell directly effects someone enough that resistance to magic can protect you. Wall of Force doesn't directly effect you, it just makes a wall. Force Ladder doesn't effect a creature, it makes a ladder. Magic Missile directly effects a creature with a short-lived magic construct . Orb of X doesn't directly effect you magically, it creates a nonmagical ball of some substance that then is flung at you (which is no more SR allowing than using Fabricate to make a bunch of Alchemist's fire and flinging it, the Orbs are just more specialized).

The strangeness is when a magical construct somehow does not affect someone when its evocation = magical energy thus not real. I mean what is inherently different in one evocation [force] spell and the other. If you determine that based on whether something is actively or passively affecting someone why if wall of fire (an evocation [fire]) not, then SR: no? Like wall of force? It seems that some evocation [force] affect the target magically and some don’t.


Wherever the Maze (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/maze.htm) spell sends you seems to occur naturally, since it's a teleportation effect. (i.e. if you were conjuring it up yourself, it would probably be [Creation], so instead you're sending the target somewhere that already exists.)
Interesting point!


Incidentally, if I was going to modify it, I'd go with:
1) The Orb spells make a short-lived portal that you throw. So the projectile itself is magical (and won't go into an AMF), but the damage is non-magical.

I’m pretty sure Orb of X will affect someone inside an AMF. As long as you create it outside. It real, not magic, as per the sub-school.


2) Orb of Force is deleted. There's no need for a non-magical Force spell in the game.
Indeed, but apparently there is, even within the same school… somehow


The Force Dragon reminds me of something though. It isn't necessary for something to be non-magical to ignore SR - it can be Supernatural rather than Spell / Spell-like. Not sure what that would imply for the Orbs - they open a portal in front of the mouth of a creature that's currently spewing an orb-shaped breath weapon?

Yes, supernatural abilities are magical but does not allow SR, which in itself in my opinion does not make sense. I guess its simply because it not spells thus not affecting [spell]resistance.

I want to say, that I don’t understand why from a mechanical (balance) point of view does not matter, but knowing the amount of inconsistencies and direct mistakes by the designers this seem to be one.

Am I wrong for saying that evocation spells are magical in all senses, thus always triggering SR: Yes, and effects like wall of force should therefore be Conjuration (creation] for it not to have SR…

Or am I loosing it`???

[Chronos]

While we're at it, orbs of force are reusable. After use, an orb of fire goes out, an orb of acid dissipates, and so on, but force is quite durable, so there's nothing that would automatically cause an orb of force to cease to be immediately after use. They'd be a handy thing for a rogue to stockpile a supply of.

[Melcar]

While we're at it, orbs of force are reusable. After use, an orb of fire goes out, an orb of acid dissipates, and so on, but force is quite durable, so there's nothing that would automatically cause an orb of force to cease to be immediately after use. They'd be a handy thing for a rogue to stockpile a supply of.

Ha ha... thats funny. Never thought about that, but indeed you seem to be right! :smallbiggrin:

[Necroticplague]

I understand that conjuration (creation) magic are real non-magical substance, and that Evocations are construct of magic. Like Mordenkainens sword or forcecage, but then, it seems strange to be, both being planes of force that one has SR: Yes and the other; No. For instance, if a giant could pick up a wall of force and swing it like a sword, would it then become SR: Yes? Mage's Sword isn't made out of physical force. it's made out of Force energy. note that it's description very specifically says how SR works with it. If it strikes something resistant to magic, the force energy it is made of can unravel, just like the Fire energy in a fireball can unravel when it tries to scorch an opponent. However, Forcecage never interacts with anything enough that it's forces can come unraveled prematurely. Think of it this way: SR: yes releases energy, which can be resisted and undone. SR: no means whatever is made only uses the energy for itself, not expending any into the environment. All the Forcecage's energy is used in having the Forcecage keep existing, while the Sword imparts energy onto this it strikes (thus why it does more damage than a regular sword).

Your comment about picking up a wall of force has a twofold answer: 1. Wall of force specifically says it can't be moved, so you can't pick it up and hit someone with it in the first place. 2. No, it would not. The Sword (and Magic Missiles) specifically impart energy on the person they hit, while all the Wall's energy is used merely to make the Wall keep existing.




The strangeness is when a magical construct somehow does not affect someone when its evocation = magical energy thus not real. I mean what is inherently different in one evocation [force] spell and the other. If you determine that based on whether something is actively or passively affecting someone why if wall of fire (an evocation [fire]) not, then SR: no? Like wall of force? It seems that some evocation [force] affect the target magically and some don’t.

Exactly. Some spells release energy onto a target, and some merely use energy to keep existing. A Wall of Fire actually emits Fire energy that can be resisted, while a Wall of Force simply uses it's energy to keep existing. Magic Missiles and Mage's Sword release Force energy actively onto the target, and Forcecage uses it's energy to merely exist. Fireball emits magical energies on those in it's area that can be resisted, while SUmmon Monster uses it's energy in keeping the summoned creatures in existence. For all the ones with non-instantaneous duration, the magical forces can be undone by Dispelling, regardless of what that force it currently doing.

[Melcar]

Mage's Sword isn't made out of physical force. it's made out of Force energy. note that it's description very specifically says how SR works with it. If it strikes something resistant to magic, the force energy it is made of can unravel, just like the Fire energy in a fireball can unravel when it tries to scorch an opponent. However, Forcecage never interacts with anything enough that it's forces can come unraveled prematurely. Think of it this way: SR: yes releases energy, which can be resisted and undone. SR: no means whatever is made only uses the energy for itself, not expending any into the environment. All the Forcecage's energy is used in having the Forcecage keep existing, while the Sword imparts energy onto this it strikes (thus why it does more damage than a regular sword).

Your comment about picking up a wall of force has a twofold answer: 1. Wall of force specifically says it can't be moved, so you can't pick it up and hit someone with it in the first place. 2. No, it would not. The Sword (and Magic Missiles) specifically impart energy on the person they hit, while all the Wall's energy is used merely to make the Wall keep existing.





Exactly. Some spells release energy onto a target, and some merely use energy to keep existing. A Wall of Fire actually emits Fire energy that can be resisted, while a Wall of Force simply uses it's energy to keep existing. Magic Missiles and Mage's Sword release Force energy actively onto the target, and Forcecage uses it's energy to merely exist. Fireball emits magical energies on those in it's area that can be resisted, while SUmmon Monster uses it's energy in keeping the summoned creatures in existence. For all the ones with non-instantaneous duration, the magical forces can be undone by Dispelling, regardless of what that force it currently doing.

I get what you are saying and it kind of makes sense. So its whether or not the energy of the force effect, is transferred as by a conductive material. And if not, this no reason for applying SR. Ok I can buy that for the most part.

My initial follow-up question would then be, The Orb of Force (the conjuration (creation) version), Does that deal damage because it delivers/transfers magical force energy onto the target, or because it is thrown with a high velocity?

Secondly I wanted to ask whether or not you have any insights whether or not this reasonable explanation is consistent throughout the [force] spells?

[Droopy McCool]

My initial follow-up question would then be, The Orb of Force (the conjuration (creation) version), Does that deal damage because it delivers/transfers magical force energy onto the target, or because it is thrown with a high velocity?

This is what I find interesting. While the other Orb of X spells state the target takes 1d6 points of X damage, Orb of Force states the target takes 1d6 points of damage. So it is implicitly stated that the orb does not deal force damage. It may deal the same amount of damage, but untyped.


While we're at it, orbs of force are reusable. After use, an orb of fire goes out, an orb of acid dissipates, and so on, but force is quite durable, so there's nothing that would automatically cause an orb of force to cease to be immediately after use. They'd be a handy thing for a rogue to stockpile a supply of.

Makes sense. Since the orb doesn't deal force damage, I see no reason why it would burst on contact. Now wizards are gonna make a bunch of these and pass 'em out.

So, good job Wizard. You just made a baseball.

McCool

[Necroticplague]

I get what you are saying and it kind of makes sense. So its whether or not the energy of the force effect, is transferred as by a conductive material. And if not, this no reason for applying SR. Ok I can buy that for the most part.

My initial follow-up question would then be, The Orb of Force (the conjuration (creation) version), Does that deal damage because it delivers/transfers magical force energy onto the target, or because it is thrown with a high velocity?

Secondly I wanted to ask whether or not you have any insights whether or not this reasonable explanation is consistent throughout the [force] spells?

It deals damage because you just got smacked with a high-velocity ball of a solid substance. The only benefit being Force does to said ball is let it smack Ethereal and Incorporeal targets.

To the best of my knowledge, it works. I don't know of any spells that can't be explained by this framework, at least in terms of SR.

[Droopy McCool]

It deals damage because you just got smacked with a high-velocity ball of a solid substance. The only benefit being Force does to said ball is let it smack Ethereal and Incorporeal targets.

The next question is whether an Orb of Force would deal its 10d6 non-Force damage again if picked up and thrown at someone else (riding on the point that it remains an orb until dispelled*). I ask because: a duration of instantaneous means the magical effect is gone as soon as the orb is created, meaning magic is not the reason for dealing damage. If the orb dealt Force damage, it would make sense to say that the orb would continue to deal damage like the first time; however a non-magical, untyped damage dealing ball that deals 10d6 damage must be getting the high damage from somewhere, right?

That hurt my head to write, and sounded better in there. But ponder it anyway.

Also, the lack of Force damage here is really puzzling me. :smallconfused:

*This comes from my understanding of the SRD:

Conjuration
Creation

A creation spell manipulates matter to create an object or creature in the place the spellcaster designates (subject to the limits noted above). If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.
Emphasis mine.

McCool

[Necroticplague]

The next question is whether an Orb of Force would deal its 10d6 non-Force damage again if picked up and thrown at someone else (riding on the point that it remains an orb until dispelled*). I ask because: a duration of instantaneous means the magical effect is gone as soon as the orb is created, meaning magic is not the reason for dealing damage. If the orb dealt Force damage, it would make sense to say that the orb would continue to deal damage like the first time; however a non-magical, untyped damage dealing ball that deals 10d6 damage must be getting the high damage from somewhere, right?
The high damage comes from the speed its launched at. Just picking it up and beaning someone with it again will use the rules for any other improvised weapon (though the undefined weight could be a problem).

[Droopy McCool]

The high damage comes from the speed its launched at. Just picking it up and beaning someone with it again will use the rules for any other improvised weapon (though the undefined weight could be a problem).

I was gonna ask how the wizard with low strength would throw it that fast, but the description just says "You create a globe of force 3 inches across, which streaks from your palm toward your target", so never mind. However, What about the non-Force damage thing? Mistake on the writer's part, or does it intentionally not deal Force damage?

McCool

[ericgrau]

The description for a force dragon and many spells suggest that force is an invisible yet tangible thing. Probably like a Star Trek forcefield.

If it exists naturally then it is probably coming from some extraordinary being or from some device continuously generating it.

[yellowrocket]

It's probably treated as ammunition so it breaks on contact as its a ranged attack that isn't a spear, javelin, or thrown sword.

[gooddragon1]

The only way I can think of this that makes sense(?) is that it's a phenomenon that has some sort of planar tie in. Shadows have an existence and a plane attached to them called the plane of shadow and ectoplasm comes from the astral plane. I think force is a phenomenon that is derived from a quality of all planes of existence. Or maybe it's something in between the ethereal and other planes?

[ace rooster]

I was gonna ask how the wizard with low strength would throw it that fast, but the description just says "You create a globe of force 3 inches across, which streaks from your palm toward your target", so never mind. However, What about the non-Force damage thing? Mistake on the writer's part, or does it intentionally not deal Force damage?

McCool

Then why is it a touch attack? Why does it have a range rather than a range increment*? I would have much less of a problem with it being SR:no if it followed the rules for a ranged attack rather than the rules for magic.

Incidently, I vaguely remember something about force being weightless, and if we take that to also mean massless (or near enough) then there are three possibilities.
Firstly: You can't randomly pick up the balls of force because they will just keep bouncing. With a confined space and some sort of trap it might be possible, but getting them to the speeds required to do damage would be impossible without the initial spell.
Secondly: They will behave a bit like a helium balloon, and the spell is required to create a path for them so that they don't just stop 3 feet from the wizards hand and start rising slowly. Again they would be useless as a throwing weapon. For either of these possibilities putting them inside a mace could make a cheap ghost touch weapon though, so not entirely useless.
Thirdly: The most likely one (consistant with wall of force) is that raw force decays on the material plane, and the orb evaporates after a particular distance. Walls of force require additional magic to keep them stable, despite being nonmagical too.

* As stated there are possible reasons for the limited range, and if these were within one ranged increment it would make no difference. For a level 20 caster it would need to be beyond 600ft to be irrelevant though (I think OoF is medium range), so should probably be included.

[Droopy McCool]

Then why is it a touch attack? Why does it have a range rather than a range increment*? I would have much less of a problem with it being SR:no if it followed the rules for a ranged attack rather than the rules for magic.

I just don't know. :smallfrown:


Incidently, I vaguely remember something about force being weightless, and if we take that to also mean massless (or near enough) then there are three possibilities.
Firstly: You can't randomly pick up the balls of force because they will just keep bouncing. With a confined space and some sort of trap it might be possible, but getting them to the speeds required to do damage would be impossible without the initial spell.
Secondly: They will behave a bit like a helium balloon, and the spell is required to create a path for them so that they don't just stop 3 feet from the wizards hand and start rising slowly. Again they would be useless as a throwing weapon. For either of these possibilities putting them inside a mace could make a cheap ghost touch weapon though, so not entirely useless.
Thirdly: The most likely one (consistant with wall of force) is that raw force decays on the material plane, and the orb evaporates after a particular distance. Walls of force require additional magic to keep them stable, despite being nonmagical too.

Just out of curiosity, where'd you get the weightless thing from? Interesting nonetheless.

McCool

[Melcar]

Walls of force require additional magic to keep them stable, despite being nonmagical too.

Since being from the evocation school, I dont think they can be non-magical... Albeit apparently they are like noble metals, not reacting, radiating or decaying in property or energy (Im no physics buff, so please excuse my ignorance), which I find it strage when comparing it to my understanding of the school of evocation. Again when that is compared to the Ord of Force spell. But if orbs of force can be created with both evocation and conjuration one might create all the force effects with cunjuration... Yes?

[Zaydos]

I just want to point out the Orb spells were Evocation when they were introduced in 3.0 and I've read somewhere that the designers said they're only Conjuration [Creation] as an excuse to make them SR: No. Which would explain why thematically they make no sense and create massive ??? Though Maze still says natural [force] should exist somewhere as do force dragons.

And I'll be out before I rant about how Conjuration [Creation] fits squarely into the D&D definition of Evocation and... I could rant at length with examples from 1e, 2e, and how specialization works.

[Melcar]

And I'll be out before I rant about how Conjuration [Creation] fits squarely into the D&D definition of Evocation and... I could rant at length with examples from 1e, 2e, and how specialization works.

I could do with a good rant! :smallbiggrin:

[Zaydos]

I could do with a good rant! :smallbiggrin:

Not in the full ranting mood at the moment but

In 1e PHB there was only one Specialist Wizard. Illusionist. It did not ban schools, instead it had a wholly customized spell list. There were a few of the spells that would become Conjuration [Creation] but they were all Evocation. Conjuration was only summoning at this point. Unearthed Arcana introduced most of the [Creation] spells that can be traced to 1e and again they were all Evocation. Because, even now, the definition for Evocation in the books includes "In effect, they create something out of nothing." It was more explicit in the older editions. Evocation's job was creation whether that was a layer of grease, a fog cloud, or a fireball.

However things changed in 2e. Specialist Wizards as we now knew them existed and you needed a greater variety of Conjuration spells than 0 to 2 a level. So they took about a third of the Evocation spells that are now Conjuration [Creation]. I'd have to go through the PHB again to see if they did this mostly at random or not, but the subschool was split.

Then comes 3.0. There are more core spells and they're more concerned with balance. They chose to add the subschool wholly to Conjuration which in a Core only game is actually necessary, there's not a school of Conjuration otherwise. There's just not enough there if you limit it to [Summoning] and [Calling] or even, as 3.5 did, throw in [Teleportation]. The only other option would actually be to do away with Conjuration, fold its other subschools into Abjuration(?) and be done with it.

However we all know Conjuration is one of the two strongest schools because it can do EVERYTHING and Evocation is one of the weakest. Spell Compendium and other sourcebooks for 3.5 give Conjuration a glut of low level [Teleportation] and additional [Summoning] spells meaning the reason for putting [Creation] into Conjuration no longer holds true and it starts to look like putting the spells that "create something out of nothing" in the school for Conjuring things instead of the school for... creating things out of nothing... was probably a mechanical choice made due to necessities as opposed to one that made a good deal of sense, nor one that truly creates a balanced game (see Conjuration being the 2nd strongest school, possibly strongest if you either play Planar Binding to the hilt or don't play around much with Polymorph).

And this is why I typically house rule [Creation] into being a subschool of Evocation instead of Conjuration. You can no longer easily ban Evocation (all the best battlefield control is [Creation]) but Conjuration hurts to ban still because of [Teleportation] and [Summoning].

But ultimately this is tangential to the topic at hand.

On the topic at hand, there really ought to be some sort of greater demiplane of force in the same way that there used to be Time, Shadow, and Dread (Time no longer exists, shadow is now a transitive plane, and Dread is also called Ravenloft), with a custom cosmology it is sort of a 5th element and actually shares some things in common with Aether/Quintessence and Void two traditional 5th elements so actually could draw from some of that for unsolidified Force.