Healing Animated Objects with Wall of Stone?

[RoboEmperor]

Animated Objects are creatures. However once the spell ends they return to becoming a statue, an object, meaning you can cast Wall of Stone over every crack and hole in the object before reanimation, which means...

1. De-animating and Re-animating an object fully heals it because the rules say a damaged object is still an object able to be animated, there are no rules saying damaged objects reduce the hp of the animated objects, and there are no rules saying any hp damage done to the animated object damages the actual object

2. Each casting of Wall of Stone will heal 15hp x thickness(inch) x casterlevel of the animated object. So at level 10 a Wall of Stone will heal the statue for 15 x 2 x 10 = 300hp, fully healing it. If there are cracks and holes are all over the place, doesn't matter because wall of stone merges with existing rock, so you just create the wall embedded into the object, or the object embedded into the wall. In either case all holes and cracks are filled, and then you simply use stone shape to remove the object from the wall, or the wall from the object. This would also mean that if the animated object is destroyed, you can fully repair the object with 1 casting of wall of stone by re-assembling the object by hand and gluing it all together with wall of stone. I like to emphasize that you can only heal your animated object if it is NOT animated, which means you can't do it in combat, or heal a permanently animated object with wall of stone.

or

3. Some other combination of rules.

Which is it? I think 2 is correct by RAI and 1 is correct by RAW.

Also...

A house created from secure shelter is a gargantuan object, which means you can animate it with animate objects.

A gargantuan stone house built by hand or wall of stone is a gargantuan object which means you can animate it with animate objects.

If a gargantuan stone house has a hole, can you use wall of stone to repair it?

Answer is yes.

End of discussion.

[Psyren]

Did you mean a different spell here? I'm not seeing where Wall of Stone can be cast on another object - it creates a wall out of thin air. A shapeable one, certainly, but each individual dimension of it can't be smaller than a 5ft. cube, so not really seeing how it can be used to fill in cracks and the like.

[RoboEmperor]

individual dimension of it can't be smaller than a 5ft. cube, so not really seeing how it can be used to fill in cracks and the like.


A wall of stone is 1 inch thick per four caster levels and composed of up to one 5-foot square per level.

The rules say there is no minimum size of the wall, only a maximum. So it can be really, really, really small. I don't see any text saying there is minimum size of the wall. Maybe you're looking at pathfinder? Because there's also no mention of the wall of stone needing to be a cube either in d20srd.

There is a text in the rule that is slightly problematic


The wall cannot be conjured so that it occupies the same space as a creature or another object.

But by changing perspectives so that the Object is the terrain and the wall merges into the terrain (object) I don't see why this rule prevents what I'm attempting, after all, boulders are objects too and this spell can merge into boulders.

To make things easier, lets consider a statue that is gargantuan or colossal. Massive objects that can arguably be terrain.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by someonenoone11
But by changing perspectives so that the Object is the terrain and the wall merges into the terrain (object) I don't see why this rule prevents what I'm attempting, after all, boulders are objects too and this spell can merge into boulders.

This is one of those extremely slantwise readings of the rules which most DMs would probably not go along with.

The line you quoted from the SRD seems to support the notion that the sections of wall come in five-foot lengths. The same line also directly specifies a minimum thickness of one inch, so that argues against the “really, really, really small” approach.

Even if a DM was willing to go along with this, it would be reasonable to require a high Spellcraft check for that sort of fine work, if not a feat like Sculpt Spell. And beyond this, there’s the issue of what type of stone it is. If I have a long cut in my arm, and I carefully stuff it with extremely thin slices of sushi, that doesn’t mean my arm and the sushi will automatically become a functioning whole.

Maybe not the best parallel, but as a DM I would be extremely leery of this approach.


Originally Posted by someonenoone11
Massive objects that can arguably be terrain.

And I doubt many DMs would buy this reasoning either. Objects aren’t terrain.

[RoboEmperor]

This is one of those extremely slantwise readings of the rules which most DMs would probably not go along with.

Slantwise reading is not required. I just said that to help illustrate the point I'm trying to make. As Psyren said the wall is created from thin air. Terrain is not required. The point I was trying to make was that making the wall within the holes of an object does not make it occupy the same space.


The line you quoted from the SRD seems to support the notion that the sections of wall come in five-foot lengths. The same line also directly specifies a minimum thickness of one inch, so that argues against the “really, really, really small” approach.

It does not directly specify a minimum thickness of one inch. The rules directly say you can halve the wall's thickness to double its area meaning you can keep halving the thickness until it's as thin as it could be without collapsing on itself, which is arguably 1hp so 1/15 inch thickness would be the inferred minimum.

In any case a minimum size of 1inch is not a problem when dealing with large animated objects. If the crack/hole is small than 1 inch then it really shouldn't matter at all.

[Ashtagon]

Wall of stone is not a repairing spell. You don't end up with a repaired object. You end up with a damaged object that is now also embedded into a wall of stone.

[RoboEmperor]

Wall of stone is not a repairing spell. You don't end up with a repaired object. You end up with a damaged object that is now also embedded into a wall of stone.

Or a wall of stone embedded in the object. This is not any object we're talking about, we're talking about a crudely shaped stone object. If I can create a gargantuan humanoid statue by casting wall of stone on top of wall of stones, then filling in holes inside a stone statue shouldn't be a problem.

So it's not a question of whether I can or can't, it's a question of how the rules work if you use wall of stone this way.

The rules are incredibly iffy here because Animated Object Hp =/= Object hp. Object hp is significantly bigger/smaller/unclear than the resulting animated object's hp so I'm really asking how the two are related.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by someonenoone11
Or a wall of stone embedded in the object.

In either case, the stone isn’t the object, and can’t count as “healing.” You’re just forcing a foreign substance into the damaged portion of the object.

[magicalmagicman]

OP you're using the wrong examples.

A house created from secure shelter is a gargantuan object, which means you can animate it with animate objects.

A gargantuan stone house built by hand or wall of stone is a gargantuan object which means you can animate it with animate objects.

If a gargantuan stone house has a hole, can you use wall of stone to repair it?

Answer is yes.

End of discussion.

At our table we rule 2.

[Malimar]

Why not bypass the whole rules debate and just use stone shape instead? It's lower level anyway, and can much more plausibly be interpreted to do what you want it to.

[RoboEmperor]

OP you're using the wrong examples.

A house created from secure shelter is a gargantuan object, which means you can animate it with animate objects.

A gargantuan stone house built by hand or wall of stone is a gargantuan object which means you can animate it with animate objects.

If a gargantuan stone house has a hole, can you use wall of stone to repair it?

Answer is yes.

End of discussion.

At our table we rule 2.

I need to take public speaking classes from you!


Why not bypass the whole rules debate and just use stone shape instead? It's lower level anyway, and can much more plausibly be interpreted to do what you want it to.

Except stone shape doesn't create mass, so you'd be filling the holes in by making the structure thinner. But yes I did intend to use stone shape and wall of stone together to make a nice smooth surface. Wall of stone to create mass and stone shape to make it beautiful-ish.

[Ashtagon]

Or a wall of stone embedded in the object. This is not any object we're talking about, we're talking about a crudely shaped stone object. If I can create a gargantuan humanoid statue by casting wall of stone on top of wall of stones, then filling in holes inside a stone statue shouldn't be a problem.

So it's not a question of whether I can or can't, it's a question of how the rules work if you use wall of stone this way.

The rules are incredibly iffy here because Animated Object Hp =/= Object hp. Object hp is significantly bigger/smaller/unclear than the resulting animated object's hp so I'm really asking how the two are related.

Wall of stone is a shapeable spell. That means you can manipulate its area, but its smallest dimension must still be at least ten feet. Good like just filling the cracks that way. That 10-foot minimum isn't even enough resolution to create a gargantuan humanoid statue btw.

[Psyren]

The rules say there is no minimum size of the wall, only a maximum.

Sure they do. SRD:


Wall of Stone
...
Effect: Stone wall whose area is up to one 5-ft. square/level (S)



(S) Shapeable

If an Area or Effect entry ends with "(S)," you can shape the spell. A shaped effect or area can have no dimension smaller than 10 feet. Many effects or areas are given as cubes to make it easy to model irregular shapes. Three-dimensional volumes are most often needed to define aerial or underwater effects and areas.

So it's actually worse than I thought - you need 10x10x10 dimensions rather than 5x5x5.

[RoboEmperor]

So it's actually worse than I thought - you need 10x10x10 dimensions rather than 5x5x5.

You are incorrect. The wall's thickness is 1inch per 4 caster levels and you can reduce its thickness by half to increase its area. By your reasoning no one can cast wall of stone without 10 x 12 / 4 = caster level 30 to drop a 10x10x10 cube. So that rule does not apply here or is overruled by this spell's text.

If we argue the dimensions have to be at least 10x10 ignoring thickness then we can either

1. create a 10x10 wall in front of the object, with a BRIDGE of stone that goes into the hole in the object and fill it in. Kind of like what you see in plastic build your own toy models. After casting simply snap the bridge off. Use Stone Shape if you have to.
2. create a hole in the object that is 10x10 wide and cast wall of stone in it.
3. Create a 10x10 wall where the hole/crack is, and use stone shape to snap off the excess stone. In other words you embed the object into the wall then use stone shape to un-embed the object. Or for larger objects like Gargantuan Objects, embed the wall into the object then stone shape the protruding parts off.

and plenty of other shenanigans.

[ericgrau]

Animated Objects are creatures. However once the spell ends they return to becoming a statue, an object, meaning you can cast Wall of Stone over every crack and hole in the object before reanimation, which means...

1. De-animating and Re-animating an object fully heals it because the rules say a damaged object is still an object able to be animated, there are no rules saying damaged objects reduce the hp of the animated objects, and there are no rules saying any hp damage done to the animated object damages the actual object
No rule saying it doesn't. There's just no rule period.

I think you need to use RAI here because there is no RAW.

The big part that's in limbo is how damage to the animated object translates to damage to the object. RAI is that it's > 0 but less than what it takes to totally pulverize the object. RAW is ??????

I think the closest that you can get out of RAW is that the object is damaged, but we're not sure how much. By RAW and RAI make whole works on medium or smaller objects to remove all damage. Most large objects too. Huge objects are iffy without some other means or an epic caster level.

There's also no RAW nor RAI that filling in gaps in a stone object repairs it. The wall of stone does merge to existing stone, but doesn't necessarily fill cracks. The spell shaping rules limit any areas to 10 foot squares minimum. Wall of stone has some exceptions to those rules, but still only allows crude shapes. There's no RAW that this repairs an object at all, nor RAI that it's precise enough to fix it.

[Bayar]

Why not use a spell from the repair x damage line of spells when the animated object is an animated object ?

I'd also go with #1. There's no rule in the spell description or the animate object monster description (at least in the SRD) that says damage is persistent between de-animation and re-animation. For all intents and purposes, the animated object of every casting is it's own creature regardless of how many times it's been animated before.

[RoboEmperor]

Why not use a spell from the repair x damage line of spells when the animated object is an animated object ?

Clerics don't have that line of spell, and needs to use Domains to get access. I am playing a cleric.

[Nifft]

You are incorrect. The wall's thickness is 1inch per 4 caster levels and you can reduce its thickness by half to increase its area. By your reasoning no one can cast wall of stone without 10 x 12 / 4 = caster level 30 to drop a 10x10x10 cube. So that rule does not apply here or is overruled by this spell's text.

If we argue the dimensions have to be at least 10x10 ignoring thickness then we can either

1. create a 10x10 wall in front of the object, with a BRIDGE of stone that goes into the hole in the object and fill it in. Kind of like what you see in plastic build your own toy models. After casting simply snap the bridge off. Use Stone Shape if you have to.
2. create a hole in the object that is 10x10 wide and cast wall of stone in it.

and plenty of other shenanigans.

Indeed, an overly-literal reading of (S)hapable renders wall spells dysfunctional.

Therefore that reading is bad.


What you say about stone shape seems valid, though I have to ask -- if you have stone shape, why are you even casting wall of stone at all? It seems to me that stone shape is just all-around better as a repair spell.

Well, unless there's no stone around, but if there were no stone around you couldn't cast wall of stone either.

[RoboEmperor]

Indeed, an overly-literal reading of (S)hapable renders wall spells dysfunctional.

Therefore that reading is bad.


What you say about stone shape seems valid, though I have to ask -- if you have stone shape, why are you even casting wall of stone at all? It seems to me that stone shape is just all-around better as a repair spell.

Well, unless there's no stone around, but if there were no stone around you couldn't cast wall of stone either.

The gargantuan stone object in this scenario is the "solidly supported by existing stone" so you can cast wall of stone on/in the object.

I am not sure whether stone shape can merge two separate pieces of stone together, which is why I'm fiddling around with wall of stone. Wall of stone clearly merges, but stone shape only affects 1 stone object...

[Nifft]

The gargantuan stone object in this scenario is the "solidly supported by existing stone" so you can cast wall of stone on/in the object.

I am not sure whether stone shape can merge two separate pieces of stone together, which is why I'm fiddling around with wall of stone. Wall of stone clearly merges, but stone shape only affects 1 stone object...

Ah! That totally make sense, the merging thing is a feature of the Wall.

Cool.

[magicalmagicman]

You can also wrap the 10x10 wall into a cylinder, so that your object is embedded into a cylinder not a wall. Then you can make the cylinder oddly shaped so that it fills in every hole and crack, and then finally stone shape the object out of the cylinder, or stone shape the cylinder parts off of the object.

Also don't deal with hp. Be general. If the animated object has less than half hp, just say it has full of cracks, use wall of stone to fix all the cracks, the end. I think this thread proved without a doubt that 1 casting of wall of stone and maybe 1 casting of stone shape will fix a gargantuan stone object right up.

[RoboEmperor]

There's also no RAW nor RAI that filling in gaps in a stone object repairs it. The wall of stone does merge to existing stone, but doesn't necessarily fill cracks. The spell shaping rules limit any areas to 10 foot squares minimum. Wall of stone has some exceptions to those rules, but still only allows crude shapes. There's no RAW that this repairs an object at all, nor RAI that it's precise enough to fix it.

You edited your post!

The current method we discussed in this thread is instead of precision, you just overlap. Slap a wall of stone right on the stone object if it's large. So in the gargantuan stone house example, we make the wall of stone grow out from the stone house.

So like if the stone chimney is cracked, we create a wall of stone embedded onto the chimney like we just glued a 10x10 sheet of rock right onto the chimney. Because the wall of stone merges, if it merges with the side of the chimney with the cracks, the cracks are merged with the wall and fixed, and you just stone shape the protruding wall parts off the chimney by shaping the wall in a way so that the undesired parts are connected to the chimney by a really thin bridge of stone which snaps off by its own weight.

If all 4 sides of the chimney is cracked, as magicalmagicman suggested we bend and fold the 10x10 stone wall in a way that all 4 sides of the chimney is part of the wall of stone. All cracks are filled and merged.

[magicalmagicman]

If all 4 sides of the chimney is cracked, as magicalmagicman suggested we bend and fold the 10x10 stone wall in a way that all 4 sides of the chimney is part of the wall of stone. All cracks are filled and merged.

Right you can also fold it!

Lets consider an action figure and a sheet of gift wrapping paper. You can wrap the paper around the action figure so it covers every inch of the action figure.

Likewise you get a sheet of stone wall and wrap it completely on top of the animated object. When I mean on top I mean overlapping and merged with the object.

All cracks and holes filled, the end.

[Psyren]

You are incorrect. The wall's thickness is 1inch per 4 caster levels and you can reduce its thickness by half to increase its area. By your reasoning no one can cast wall of stone without 10 x 12 / 4 = caster level 30 to drop a 10x10x10 cube. So that rule does not apply here or is overruled by this spell's text.

You're correct, it wouldn't be a 10x10x10 cube because the specific provision about thickness trumps the general one about shapeable spells - but the wall of stone actually says "area" in the effect line rather than volume, followed by a specific line about the thickness of the wall, so the shapeable dimensions in question must be the other two (height and width) by process of elimination. So whether you consider those needing to be 5ft. or 10ft., it's still rather difficult to spackle a crack in something with a wall, unless as you mentioned elsewhere the gap in question is itself 5 or 10 ft high/wide.

But that then runs you into minimum caster level - as a 5th-level spell, the minimum CL for Wall of Stone is 9, and you can't get it any lower than that. That gives you considerably more "wall" than you would need to fill in a hole, even a 5ft. one.

And there is another rule getting in your way after all of that - Wall of Stone is a (Creation) effect, which prevents you from dropping it inside of other objects to begin with:


A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object, nor can it appear floating in an empty space. It must arrive in an open location on a surface capable of supporting it.

[unseenmage]

Read the thread, didnt see where anybody else caught the erroneous contention in the OP... unless I'm missing something.

After an Animate Objects spell ends the, now clearly damaged, object can be reanimated into a new Animated Object at full Construct hp.

Animating a sword and animating a cracked sword gets you the exact same Animated Object.

Now an Animated Object that has been "destroyed" might be a different issue but really you could tie it back together with string and so long as the knotting is secure enough to make the pieces count as a single contiguous object the spell can reanimate an Animated Object's destroyed remains just fine.

Sorry if this isnt Wall of Stone debate material. Just thought I'd point out that the Construct's hp and the mundane object it is animated from's hp are completely divorced by RAW to the best of my knowledge.


FYI Living Metal from one of the Faerun books is a mundane special material that heals hp damage if you're looking for a mundane object that repairs itself.

[RoboEmperor]

You're correct, it wouldn't be a 10x10x10 cube because the specific provision about thickness trumps the general one about shapeable spells - but the wall of stone actually says "area" in the effect line rather than volume, followed by a specific line about the thickness of the wall, so the shapeable dimensions in question must be the other two (height and width) by process of elimination. So whether you consider those needing to be 5ft. or 10ft., it's still rather difficult to spackle a crack in something with a wall, unless as you mentioned elsewhere the gap in question is itself 5 or 10 ft high/wide.

But that then runs you into minimum caster level - as a 5th-level spell, the minimum CL for Wall of Stone is 9, and you can't get it any lower than that. That gives you considerably more "wall" than you would need to fill in a hole, even a 5ft. one.

There is no minimum caster level for spells. I can get a CL 2 wall of stone with Sublime Chord. Bard9/Wizard1 add sublime chord to wizard levels to get a CL2 wall of stone.


And there is another rule getting in your way after all of that - Wall of Stone is a (Creation) effect, which prevents you from dropping it inside of other objects to begin with:

All d&d rules fall apart when you start getting really specific. Technically entire planet is an object. Keep that in mind.

But lets consider the gargantuan or colossal stone house example. Can you cast Wall of Stone on top of a stone house so that the wall of stone merges with the stone house? Be it its roof, floor, or sides? I believe the answer is yes. Note that my entire argument hinges on this fact, if you believe the answer is no here then this is where we will have to agree to disagree.

So if a gargantuan stone house is an "existing stone" than can merge with and solidly support the wall of stone, then you can create a wall of stone of any shape that is merged with the house. A house is a gargantuan object that can be animated by animate objects, therefore you can create a wall of stone that is on top of, under neath, or completely merged with any other gargantuan stone object.

So the only question is, how big does a stone object have to be to be an "existing stone" that can merge with and solidly support a wall of stone? I think Huge since large creatures, although they take up 10x10 area, they are actually smaller than that area.

Again if you disagree that a gargantuan stone house is not an "existing stone" that can merge with and solidly support the wall of stone, this is where we have to agree to disagree.

Keep in mind we're not talking about any object here, we're talking specifically about massive stone objects that can merge with walls of stone.


Read the thread, didnt see where anybody else caught the erroneous contention in the OP... unless I'm missing something.

After an Animate Objects spell ends the, now clearly damaged, object can be reanimated into a new Animated Object at full Construct hp.

Animating a sword and animating a cracked sword gets you the exact same Animated Object.

Now an Animated Object that has been "destroyed" might be a different issue but really you could tie it back together with string and so long as the knotting is secure enough to make the pieces count as a single contiguous object the spell can reanimate an Animated Object's destroyed remains just fine.

Sorry if this isnt Wall of Stone debate material. Just thought I'd point out that the Construct's hp and the mundane object it is animated from's hp are completely divorced by RAW to the best of my knowledge.

This is how I believe RAW works which is why I posted it as a possible ruling #1, but RAI DMs I think would not rule this way because they think it's abusing rules or something.

[unseenmage]

...

This is how I believe RAW works which is why I posted it as a possible ruling #1, but RAI DMs I think would not rule this way because they think it's abusing rules or something.
My apologies, I must've missed that bit.

And no belief necessary, that's just the spell working as intended.

However, there is also the fact that mundane objects affected by an Animated Objects spell are still capable as mundane objects. Meaning, rope still gets sliced by knives, cloth still burns, a knife still has an edge, etc.

With that in mind a GM would likely be within their rights to track the object's mundane object hp alongside its Construct hp in extreme cases of damage or environmental stress.
An animated ice sculpture in a volcano or a rope sculpture fighting a razor-wire elemental or somesuch.
But by RAW the above would still be a houserule, a reasonable one but a houserule nonetheless.

[Psyren]

There is no minimum caster level for spells.

*glances at all the past threads debating this*

Yeah, I'm not touching that one. Godspeed.

[RoboEmperor]

*glances at all the past threads debating this*

Yeah, I'm not touching that one. Godspeed.

Glad you aren't. I've experienced this argument mainly in early access versatile spellcaster threads and it was brutal.

[Nifft]

Glad you aren't. I've experienced this argument mainly in early access versatile spellcaster threads and it was brutal.
The caster-level-access argument seemed pretty solid, last time I read it.

Is there a thread I could read with an unequivocal counter-argument?

[RoboEmperor]

The caster-level-access argument seemed pretty solid, last time I read it.

Is there a thread I could read with an unequivocal counter-argument?

Those threads are very, very long with new people entering the argument and arguing a while before they get caught up to speed, and people from both sides of the argument just get tired of repeating and yelling over each other so they stop posting, so i wouldn't recommend it.

Anyways the arguments are mainly

No Caster Level requirement
1. Not a single piece of RAW that says each spell has a caster level requirement unique to each class.
2. Minimum Caster level is tied to the character not class
3. Accelerated spellcasting progression PrCs are proof. CL2 level 5 spells via sublime chord is the most extreme one. CL2 is the minimum CL to cast level 5 spells for this specific character, not all sublime chords in the world.
4. Therefore using Versatile Spellcaster to cast higher level known spells is legal, RAW, and there is no minimum CL requirement for spells that stops you from getting early access to higher level spells. There's only a minimum ability score requirement for spells, not caster level.
5. Minimum Caster Level rules only apply to item creation and intentionally weaker spells, not whether can you cast it at a lower level or not.

Caster Level requirement
Honesty I don't remember too clearly but it had to do with quoting various passages in the books and inferring the minimum CL requirement per class instead of per character, or something.

Anyways I think Psyren mentioned the minimum CL thing to say that the minimum sized wall of stone you can create is 9 5x5 squares, where I disagree and the smallest size you can create is either 5x5 or 10x10, or whatever the line rules Psyren said applies here instead of shaping rules thanks to the word "upto" in the spell description. My brain needs a small break before I start rule diving.


With that in mind a GM would likely be within their rights to track the object's mundane object hp alongside its Construct hp in extreme cases of damage or environmental stress.
An animated ice sculpture in a volcano or a rope sculpture fighting a razor-wire elemental or somesuch.

So the question we need answered is how much mundane hp is resulted from animated object hp loss? There are no rules for this so i believe the answer is 0. The object remains at full integrity until the animated object is destroyed or its limbs are intentionally sundered. But you know, in case some DMs don't like this it's always nice to have backup plans.

[ericgrau]

You edited your post!

The current method we discussed in this thread is instead of precision, you just overlap. Slap a wall of stone right on the stone object if it's large. So in the gargantuan stone house example, we make the wall of stone grow out from the stone house.

So like if the stone chimney is cracked, we create a wall of stone embedded onto the chimney like we just glued a 10x10 sheet of rock right onto the chimney. Because the wall of stone merges, if it merges with the side of the chimney with the cracks, the cracks are merged with the wall and fixed, and you just stone shape the protruding wall parts off the chimney by shaping the wall in a way so that the undesired parts are connected to the chimney by a really thin bridge of stone which snaps off by its own weight.

If all 4 sides of the chimney is cracked, as magicalmagicman suggested we bend and fold the 10x10 stone wall in a way that all 4 sides of the chimney is part of the wall of stone. All cracks are filled and merged.
That's a funny definition of "merge".

[RoboEmperor]

That's a funny definition of "merge".

I don't see a problem with this "merge". If we're talking about 3D models in a 3d modeling program, overlaping 2 shapes and then merging the 2 shapes into 1 shape is what I'm talking about. If the cracks and holes are in the overlapped area, they are fixed when the two shapes merge. But of course, like any debater, I might have tunnel vision or stubborn vision so... please elaborate :P

[ericgrau]

Besides funny wording that sounds like a joke book explanation, make whole, repair object and so on are a lot easier than wall of stone, several hours and a chisel.

[RoboEmperor]

Besides funny wording that sounds like a joke book explanation, make whole, repair object and so on are a lot easier than wall of stone, several hours and a chisel.

I finally understood what you meant! Make whole is a spell! Cleric exclusive too! But like all these types of spells, if the target requires to be an entire object instead of an area, it doesn't work with Gargantuan objects.


Target: One object of up to 10 cu. ft./ level

seems to suggest the object has to be smaller than 10 cu. ft./level to be affected by this spell. Gargantuan objects are arguably at least 4,000 cft... 8,000cft if you're not using squeezing rules.

can't find "Repair Object". If you mean repair damage I am playing a cleric and don't have access to those spells without using a domain slot, which i don't want to.

[Nifft]

Those threads are very, very long with new people entering the argument and arguing a while before they get caught up to speed, and people from both sides of the argument just get tired of repeating and yelling over each other so they stop posting, so i wouldn't recommend it.

Anyways the arguments are mainly

No Caster Level requirement
1. Not a single piece of RAW that says each spell has a caster level requirement unique to each class.
2. Minimum Caster level is tied to the character not class
3. Accelerated spellcasting progression PrCs are proof. CL2 level 5 spells via sublime chord is the most extreme one. CL2 is the minimum CL to cast level 5 spells for this specific character, not all sublime chords in the world.
4. Therefore using Versatile Spellcaster to cast higher level known spells is legal, RAW, and there is no minimum CL requirement for spells that stops you from getting early access to higher level spells. There's only a minimum ability score requirement for spells, not caster level.
5. Minimum Caster Level rules only apply to item creation and intentionally weaker spells, not whether can you cast it at a lower level or not.

Caster Level requirement
Honesty I don't remember too clearly but it had to do with quoting various passages in the books and inferring the minimum CL requirement per class instead of per character, or something.


Here's what I could find: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#casterLevel


You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level you choose must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be based on the same caster level.

I got that from this post: http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=18106.msg327837#msg327837 which gives an even better PHB quote, which contains specific examples:



You can cast a spell at a lower caster level than normal, but the caster level must be high enough for you to cast the spell in question, and all level-dependent features must be basted on the same caster level. For Example, at 10th level, Mialee can cast fireball to a range of 800 feet for 10d6 points of damage. If she wishes, she can cast fireball that deals less damage by casting the spell at a lower caster level, but she must reduce the range according to the selected caster level, and she can't cast fireball with a caster level lower than 5th (the minimum level required for a wizard to cast fireball) Hennet, a sorcerer can't cast fireball with a caster level lower than 6th (the minimum level required for a sorcerer to cast fireball.)



In that thread, I'd been trying to use a spellwurm symbiote for early access to 2nd level spellcasting. I didn't have an answer to the caster level argument (except caster level shenanigans -- but those tend to be shenanigans, and thus make me feel unclean).

[RoboEmperor]

In that thread, I'd been trying to use a spellwurm symbiote for early access to 2nd level spellcasting. I didn't have an answer to the caster level argument (except caster level shenanigans -- but those tend to be shenanigans, and thus make me feel unclean).

Yeah, early access is one of the most biggest shenanigans in d&d, so even if you win an argument with your DM you will feel iffy and unclean. That's why I stopped trying to do early access in this game. Instead of trying to get higher level shenanigans available lower levels, I just forced myself to find a way to enjoy lower level.

If Psyren is right that the smallest wall of stone castable is 9 5x5 squares, it's not a problem.

[Crake]

Why not just use fabricate instead of wall of stone, and avoid this whole argument? Or you know, the second level spell make whole, both would work.

[RoboEmperor]

Why not just use fabricate instead of wall of stone, and avoid this whole argument? Or you know, the second level spell make whole, both would work.



Target: One object of up to 10 cu. ft./ level

Make Whole only affects whole objects, not just parts of objects, which means this spell has no hope of working on large animated objects, like Huge, Gargantuan, or Colossal.

Fabricate cast on stone is 1cft/level, so unless the entire object is only 1cft/level, it's a bit iffy whether you can fabricate a piece of stone and merge it into a different piece of stone that is bigger than 1cft/level.

I mean like if you target 1cft of stone and 9cft of stone attached to the object, can you merge the two? Or is 9cft ripped out of the object and you create a separate object that is 10cft of stone because the finished product of the spell has to be a separate individual product instead of something merged with another object?

[dhasenan]

seems to suggest the object has to be smaller than 10 cu. ft./level to be affected by this spell. Gargantuan objects are arguably at least 4,000 cft... 8,000cft if you're not using squeezing rules.

I don't see the problem? Just get to caster level 400 and you're good?

That said, the size category of an object is based on its longest dimension, if I recall. So a Wall of Stone that's five feet tall, one inch thick, and 35 feet long is Gargantuan, but only 10.5 cubic feet.

[Crake]

Make Whole only affects whole objects, not just parts of objects, which means this spell has no hope of working on large animated objects, like Huge, Gargantuan, or Colossal.

Fabricate cast on stone is 1cft/level, so unless the entire object is only 1cft/level, it's a bit iffy whether you can fabricate a piece of stone and merge it into a different piece of stone that is bigger than 1cft/level.

I mean like if you target 1cft of stone and 9cft of stone attached to the object, can you merge the two? Or is 9cft ripped out of the object and you create a separate object that is 10cft of stone because the finished product of the spell has to be a separate individual product instead of something merged with another object?

Fabricate specifically doesn't target an object, but rather an volume, so it should work fine, since, as you said when mentioning make whole, you only need to fix parts of the object.

[RoboEmperor]

Fabricate specifically doesn't target an object, but rather an volume, so it should work fine, since, as you said when mentioning make whole, you only need to fix parts of the object.

There's that whole thing about material components needing to be completely annihilated and fabricate lists its target material as a material component, meaning if you target a volume of stone attached to the object, that volume is going to be annihilated, meaning you can't use fabricate to mend large objects.

Fabricate is a very poorly written spell.