combined spells to alter effects?

[death390]

is there any way to alter spells by overlaying them on one another to alter them?

for example grease + fire spell would set the grease on fire, which makes sense (just deals campfire damage while in it), or using a frost spell to turn water into ice making a "grease" spell. those are forms of spells affecting the enviroment, this is not what i am looking for.

i am more looking for the idea of combineing invisibility and silent image using a casing of each, where the silent image can make parts of its illusion invisible. for example take wall bordering a hallway and making a "window" of sorts that looks like a open door. the wall is still there you can just see out of it. or combining Persistent blade and silent image so make it so that a "summoned" creature deal damage.

the persistent blade is a auto-attacking dagger, the silent image merely makes it look like its something else.

thoughts? i'll be back got to go to class.

[flappeercraft]

is there any way to alter spells by overlaying them on one another to alter them?

for example grease + fire spell would set the grease on fire, which makes sense (just deals campfire damage while in it), or using a frost spell to turn water into ice making a "grease" spell. those are forms of spells affecting the enviroment, this is not what i am looking for.

i am more looking for the idea of combineing invisibility and silent image using a casing of each, where the silent image can make parts of its illusion invisible. for example take wall bordering a hallway and making a "window" of sorts that looks like a open door. the wall is still there you can just see out of it. or combining Persistent blade and silent image so make it so that a "summoned" creature deal damage.

the persistent blade is a auto-attacking dagger, the silent image merely makes it look like its something else.

thoughts? i'll be back got to go to class.

Just a quick note, Grease isn't flammable. There is literally a 2nd level version of it made to be flammable, PHB2 or SpC IIRC

[Tainted_Scholar]

Just a quick note, Grease isn't flammable. There is literally a 2nd level version of it made to be flammable, PHB2 or SpC IIRC

I just checked and I can't find it in either of those books.

[Nifft]

Incendiary Slime is a Grease-like spell in Complete Mage.

It does interact with fire.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Incendiary Slime is a Grease-like spell in Complete Mage.

It does interact with fire.

Ah, thank you.

[flappeercraft]

I just checked and I can't find it in either of those books.

I just checked, it's incendary slime from CM.

Edit: Ninja'd

[Tainted_Scholar]

Normal rulings for grease flammability have it act like regular oil: burns for 2 rounds dealing 1d3 points of damage.

Then incendiary slime came out and everyone thought that because the spell specified "highly flammable," that meant grease must be fire-proof, even though incendiary slime's much more energetic than the traditional interpretation.

Is there any real reason to assume that Grease is flammable?

[Nifft]

Is there any real reason to assume that Grease is flammable?

Merely that grease can be flammable, and grease is spelled the same as grease.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Merely that grease can be flammable, and grease is spelled the same as grease.

Seems like rather flimsy reasoning.

[Nifft]

Seems like rather flimsy reasoning. Well, we're talking about D&D.

Using reason at all is a slippery slope.

[Tainted_Scholar]

You said it yourself: grease can be flammable. What burns and what does not has always been up to DM discretion due to that book I mentioned never existing.

Still, it's magic grease so I really don't think we can apply normal grease properties to it.

Also, I'll have to add The Players Guide to Stuff that Burns to the list of 3.5 books that I wish existed, along side of Complete Time Traveler and Tome of Medicine.

[Nifft]

Personally I quite like the flask-of-oil equivalent -- 1d3 fire damage seems like a reasonable reward for moderate PC cleverness.

[Tainted_Scholar]

First: Please cite where in any book it says the DM cannot apply properties of normal objects to things created by magic. Where is that forbidden?

Second: I do not think you understand the complaint. It is not that grease must be flammable. It is that the existence of incendiary slime does not mean that grease must be fire-proof.

First: I never said the DM couldn't.

Second: I never said that Incendiary Slime automatically made Grease fire-proof.

I merely see no evidence to support the idea that Grease is flammable.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Yes, you did.

No, I didn't, I was pointing out that the trying to argue that grease should be flammable because it creates grease isn't logically sound. I never said that the DM couldn't make grease flammable.


Then why are arguing with me?

Because you were putting words in my mouth.

[Tainted_Scholar]

SNIP

Okay, it's clear that this argument has mostly resulted from miscommunication, I think we both agree that each group decides on their own whether grease is flammable since the rules don't say one way or the other, and the rules explicitly give the DM the ability to decide what does and does not burn.

[Mike Miller]

There isn't.

In a strange design decision, 3.5 opts to give DMs the ability to adjudicate how things act beyond what the rules dictate, such as determining just what is flammable. The Players Guide to Stuff that Burns was never published.

Isn't that rule #1? Everything burns

[Tainted_Scholar]

Isn't that rule #1? Everything burns

Even water?

[Mike Miller]

Even water?

Rule 1: Everything burns.
Rule 2: If something does not burn, consult rule 1.

Yes, even water.

[Nifft]

Okay, it's clear that this argument has mostly resulted from miscommunication, I think we both agree that each group decides on their own whether grease is flammable since the rules don't say one way or the other, and the rules explicitly give the DM the ability to decide what does and does not burn. It looked to me like you accused Deophaun of putting words in your mouth.

There may also have been miscommunication, but that's a thing which you did.



Even water?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioxygen_difluoride
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine_trifluoride

Yes, water.

Everything burns.

[Deophaun]

The issue is resolved. Let us return to the actual topic of getting your magical chocolate into someone else's arcane peanut butter.

I like combining explosive runes with summon monster I to summon fiendish hawks (which have an Int of 3 and so can read) and turning them into guided missiles.

[death390]

obviously should have avoided the grease statement. is there a way to just delete this thread? at this point it is so off the rails no one will mess with it.

[Hellpyre]

I've always been fond of using the Shambler spell from a scroll and then spending a few days lobbing lightning at it as much as possible before sending in a 400-500 constitution megatank to crash through fortified positions. Bonus points if you manage to get it swinging a Hammer of Earth somehow.

[Deophaun]

obviously should have avoided the grease statement. is there a way to just delete this thread? at this point it is so off the rails no one will mess with it.
I deleted mine. If the other side of the conversation deletes, there should be no problem.

[Thurbane]

Just a quick sidenote: I'm pretty sure in earlier editions (1E and/or 2E), Grease was specifically flammable. This may be the source of some confusion with the 3E version.

[Nifft]

The issue is resolved. Let us return to the actual topic of getting your magical chocolate into someone else's arcane peanut butter. Thought I might have been able to help explain. Oh well.


I like combining explosive runes with summon monster I to summon fiendish hawks (which have an Int of 3 and so can read) and turning them into guided missiles. Hmm, what about explosive runes + animal messenger?

That relies on the other side picking up the message, but it's not like they're going to live long enough to alert others about the underhanded tactic.


Tenser's Floating Disk 'maintains a constant distance of 5 feet' away from you, so if you insert a 6 foot pole between yourself and the disc, and procure a means of levitation or a sufficiently fast bicycle, you ought to be able to reach an arbitrary speed before the spell expires (after 1 hour/level).

[atemu1234]

Hmm, what about explosive runes + animal messenger?

Better idea, Charm Animal and Explosive Runes on its back. Have it run up to a (literate) opponent, and you suddenly have the D&D equivalent of Soviet Tank Dogs.

[Crake]

Pathfinders words of power could potentially let you achieve something like what the OP wants, though generally most of the things you could want either already exist, or can be achieved through metamagic, using things like linked spell or the like.

[frogglesmash]

i am more looking for the idea of combineing invisibility and silent image using a casing of each, where the silent image can make parts of its illusion invisible. for example take wall bordering a hallway and making a "window" of sorts that looks like a open door. the wall is still there you can just see out of it.

Isn't silent image capable of doing this already? I guess in your scenario you would have a 100% accurate depiction of what's on the other side, but I don't know if that would be worth the use of a second spell slot.

Edit: I now realize you could use it as a poor man's scrying spell.

[Deophaun]

Isn't silent image capable of doing this already?
The best silent image could do on its own is play with forced perspective to make it appear as if there is a window at first glance. But moving would quickly throw it off. Silent image is not a glamer, so it cannot change the appearance of something that already exists.