Some Spell-Like Questions

[Armyguyclaude]

1) With Stone Shape. With a high enough Skill Roll to determine a monster's biology could a magic user use stone shape to create a piercing or jagged shape of stone to pierce a monsters skull and kill its brain effectively creating a coup de gras? Would it be an attack roll or saving throw?

What we've come up with so far.

Stone Shape is a transmutation spell and does not fall under the conjuration clause.

Stone Shape can create a weapon that can be picked up to deal a coup de gras.

Stone Shape can form any shape you desire.

Stone Shape's effect is instantaneous.

Stone Shape can deal damage using secondary damage rules (I.E. creating a boulder from a ceiling to drop on someone).

There has been no reference to distinction between attack spells and non attack spells, and that non attack spells being under compulsion to never ever deal no damage under any circumstance.

Creative ideas on how to balance an idea like this.

Performing a Coup De Gras by creating a non held weapon cannot happen since you can only perform Coup De Gras with melee weapons.

The capabilities of using a spell like this are going to overall be up to DM discretion.

2) Can you "Counter" using scrolls or items?

1 for no. 1 for yes.

3) With the Artificer's metamagic feats, can you cast 2 spells in a round using items made with quicken?

Unanimous yes.

Thanks

[Psyren]

1) Do you mean like "earthbending" (or more accurately, transmuting FMA-style) some stone into a spike? I don't think you could transmute it into/through a square that's occupied by another creature. You could make a sharp spike, pick it up and attack with it like an improvised weapon provided you can lift it though, but that might take more than one round. Either way it wouldn't be a CDG unless that creature was helpless.

2) SLAs cannot be used to counter, nor can they be countered.

3) Yes, if an Artificer makes/imbues a spell trigger or spell completion item with Quicken baked into it, using such an item would be a swift action, and thus you'd still have your standard available for other things (like casting a second spell.)

[Gingaroth]

Stone Shape
You can create a stone weapon with Stone Shape, and you can use that weapon in subsequent rounds like any other weapon.

Stone Shape does not let you create a weapon that’s somehow better than any other mundane weapon ever manufactured. The spell description even specifies that objects created are pretty crude.
Making a weapon with it that effectively lets you perform coup de grace on a creature without it being helpless is out of the question, i.m.o..

If you want to improve your attacks using your knowledge skill, maybe you’ll like the feat ‘Knowledge Devotion’ from Complete Champion.

Counterspell
Opinions are divided on this.

To counterspell, you must:

Ready an action (standard action)
Identify the spell being cast (free action)
Complete the (readied) action by casting the correct spell, altered slightly.


“Activating a spell completion item, such as a scroll, is the equivalent of casting a spell” (PHB pag. 142). Nothing in the descriptions of counterspelling (pag 170), or readying for counterspelling (pag 160) says you can’t use a scroll.

I would say yes, you can, if you have an appropriate scroll ready. Others have argued that you can’t, since you need to ‘alter the spell slightly to create a counterspell effect’ and they assume a spell prepared on a scroll is fixed and unalterable. I can’t find that stated explicitly anywhere, though. In my opinion, the description of spell completion items on DMG page 213 indicates otherwise; it says the spell is 'mostly finished' and the caster still needs to make some gestures and sounds.

Whether you can pick up the correct scroll in the same round is another question. You can still move your speed in the same round you’re readying (PHB pag 170), so you should be able to perform move-equivalent actions too, like picking up an item or retrieving one from your backpack. The description of counterspelling seems to suggests you can only move between step 1 and 2, though, before you know what spell your opponent is going to cast, not between step 2 and 3. Again, this is not explicitly stated anywhere that I know of.

Artificer
You mean Metamagic Spell Trigger and Metamagic Spell Completion?
Using those features, the artificer can apply quicken spell to a spell trigger item or a spell completion item, respectively.

Under quicken spell (PHB pag 98) it says:
“Casting a quickened spell is a free action. You can perform another action, even casting another spell, in the same round as you cast a quickened spell. You may cast only one quickened spell per round.”

So, the artificer can cast 2 spells from items in the same round, as long as he uses 1 quickened spell and 1 non-quickened spell.

[Armyguyclaude]

1) Do you mean like "earthbending" (or more accurately, transmuting FMA-style) some stone into a spike? I don't think you could transmute it into/through a square that's occupied by another creature.

Yes something like in FMA or any other anime, fantasy book, etc. There is nothing stating stone shape cannot enter a square that is occupied by any other object, creature, or thing.


Stone Shape
Stone Shape does not let you create a weapon that’s somehow better than any other mundane weapon ever manufactured. The spell description even specifies that objects created are pretty crude.
Making a weapon with it that effectively lets you perform coup de grace on a creature without it being helpless is out of the question, i.m.o..


All it states specifically is the "Detail" is crude. The complexity of what you make can be extreme as you have a 70% chance of actually creating a contraption that has moving objects. A stone spike isn't asking for fine detail at all. You stated you could make a hand-held weapon that could serve the same purpose. While I could argue making a smaller item would increase the "Fine Detail" requirements I feel making a larger stone spike doesn't fall under the "Detail" category at all, but a complexity category for the intents and purposes of how you are using it. And there is no hindering statement in the spell other than then moving parts clause that effect the complexity category.



Counterspell
“Activating a spell completion item, such as a scroll, is the equivalent of casting a spell” (PHB pag. 142). Nothing in the descriptions of counterspelling (pag 170), or readying for counterspelling (pag 160) says you can’t use a scroll.
Whether you can pick up the correct scroll in the same round is another question.


Handy Haversack on an Artificer.

[DeTess]

Yes something like in FMA or any other anime, fantasy book, etc. There is nothing stating stone shape cannot enter a square that is occupied by any other object, creature, or thing.


However, nowhere does it state that it can. This is an 'ask your DM' kind of question.

[Armyguyclaude]

However, nowhere does it state that it can. This is an 'ask your DM' kind of question.

And nowhere does it state that it cannot. I have asked my DM. My DM doesn't know. He has stated that because of lack of information he would need to make a decision based on personal preference. While I am fine with this as it is his game and he is the DM I am still curious if it is possible as outlined by current information given.

[Psyren]

Yes something like in FMA or any other anime, fantasy book, etc. There is nothing stating stone shape cannot enter a square that is occupied by any other object, creature, or thing.

D&D is an exception-based rules system - Air Bud Clause, aka "the rules don't say I can't do this" is not adequate. Spells do what they say they do and no more. You're attempting to attack with a spell that says nothing about being used to attack anything. You need a spell that says you can attack with it instead.

[XionUnborn01]

And nowhere does it state that it cannot. I have asked my DM. My DM doesn't know. He has stated that because of lack of information he would need to make a decision based on personal preference. While I am fine with this as it is his game and he is the DM I am still curious if it is possible as outlined by current information given.

Nowhere does it say you cannot use a greatsword for your bardic music but that wouldn't fly anywhere.

[Darth Ultron]

1) With Stone Shape. With a high enough Skill Roll to determine a monster's biology could a magic user use stone shape to create a piercing or jagged shape of stone to pierce a monsters skull and kill its brain effectively creating a coup de gras? Would it be an attack roll or saving throw?


Is the question here: Can a character make a weapon that can automatically kill/coup de gras a foe?

If so, the answer is no.

It does not matter if you use stone shape, mundane crafting or even a wish: you simply can't make an auto kill/coup de gras like you seem to be asking about. It's not impossible to make such a weapon or item in general though. A Rod of Distengretation can ''auto kill" a target(maybe).

D&D has no rules for monster biology or weapon types. Weapons just do damage.

[Goaty14]

"The rules don't say I can't do X, therefore I do X" is a slippery, slippery slope. I understand that you may think that this use of stone shape may be a "reasonable" or "plausible" use of the spell, but I think that my fighter taking his greatsword and decapitating your character is also both plausible and certainly reasonable. After all, the rules don't say I can't, right?

[Armyguyclaude]

First off:

I only stated the, "It doesn't state you can't clause" because someone directly stated you cannot do it. Why I replied to that specific statement with "Quotations".


Secondly:

Realistically no one has given me a logical answer as to why you could not do this. There has been specific metaphors using a great sword as an lute for a bard. Does no one play Bard-Barians? Realistically it wouldn't be feasible. Is it possible? Yes. How effective it would or could be would severally be correlated with skills and dice rolling. That's what DnD is all about. 1) Creativity in a world based around fantasy (Thing's that cannot exist) and 2) luck. You are all stating that stone shape cannot be used as an offensive force specifically because you don't believe it can't. You're using feelings to dictate logic.

Could stone shape be used as an offensive force. Yes. How effective would it be? I have no idea. It has been stated that nowhere does monster biology come into play in the DnD universe. I argue that is incorrect. How else do we come to dragon plate armor. Or magical ingredients. Does science not dictate that specific logical actions had to take place, even in a fantasy world, to find truths? And yes I do believe science exists in DnD. Else we would not have engineering as a possible skill, or artificer as a class. Does biology have no place in the DnD world? No. How else would healers know what to do with their subjects when making a heal skill check? Yes there are magical reset buttons with healing potions, scrolls, and spells, but biology still exists.

Logically looking at stone shape as an offensive tool you can logical come to the conclusion you could use it to attack. Stone shape specifically states, "You can form an existing piece of stone into any shape that suits your purpose. Any shape... and fits my purpose. Literally the second sentence states, "for example you can make a stone weapon". The first two people to respond even responded with the ideas of making a stone weapon that you can literally pick up. While you could argue that is different in so many ways the underlying fact remains, you're using stone shape as an offensive tool. Even if you aren't specifically stating you want to use it as a offensive tool, you can still say, "I want to create a stone object in the same space as another object". Whatever happens from there happens. I am just focusing on one specific out of literal 1000's of applications.

Could you making a knowledge check high enough to know the biology of a specific monster to determine where the monsters brain is and cast stone shape allowing your new shape to pierce the monsters brain. I believe so. Would that necessarily make it a coup de gras? Probably not, but could it? I have followed all the guidelines set, not only by you the responders to this thread, but the actual DnD specifically stated rules. I only use, "nothing states I cannot", because using the reverse sentence, "this states that I can", seems to be a hard point for everyone to comprehend. And thus far... nothing you've said disproves that it cannot. Just your feelings.

And to all the people that will eventually argue about maybes, possibles, and gray areas and state they cannot happen. I ask you realistically, "Have you read any of the other 1000's of thread on this forum, have you never tried to break the game while staying inside the rule set given to you, and can you honestly state there are no gray areas in DnD when we have things like compulsion, free will, and neutral alignments." If you can say no to all 3 of those things I call you a liar. I challenge you, all of you, to disprove you cannot use stone shape as an offensive tool to kill someone using the same guidelines and rules DnD itself follows. Not your own interpretation or feelings on the subject. Good luck.


Lastly:
Does no one have anything else to add to either of the other two questions asked? Seeing how question number 2 is split down the middle on interpretation from people responding.

P.P.S.
While I did challenge everyone, I do not do it out of arrogance or pride, but out of curiosity to find truth. In a game that has more gray areas than the DC universe, finding truth helps players and dm's alike.

[RoboEmperor]

As Psyren says, unless the rules say you can do it, you can't.

As much as you want to play a FMA character, d&d does not support that so you need to either go homebrew or find a different system.

As to your logic....
Summon monster says it summons a dog.
Can I add templates to the dog so it's a paragon half dragon half fiend half minotaur celestial dog? The rules say I can summon a dog, it doesn't say which dog, and it doesn't say I can't summon templated creatures, so I can summon a templated creature, especially since a celestial dog is already templated. So give me a Paragon half dragon half fiend half minotaur celestial dog.

You see why this doesn't fly? No, in d&d, unless a spell says you can do it, you can't.

Can I cast multiple warp wood to ruin a Colossal object? Yes. The rules say I can so I can.
Can I cast multiple animate objects to animate a Colossal object? No. The rules don't say I can so I can't.

No matter how much you try to rule lawyer or use mental gymnastics, the answer is no. Stone Shape does not deal damage or do coup de graces. For all you know the spell morphs stone at a SNAIL's pace.

[PunBlake]

This is a creative use of a spell to perform a task it was not designed to do, which makes it strictly a "DM's call" answer.

It reminds me of old uses of the Create Water cantrip to fill someone's lungs with water for the express purpose of drowning them, with no save. A helpless creature could easily die from this as well.

I, as a DM, would not want to allow uses like these in either case. Here are the options I would provide as a DM:
(0) Allow this use once for creativity's sake, but not allow it in the future.
(1) I'd ask you to use an actual weapon-like spell with specified damage and the appropriate action to commit a coup-de-gras. There are rules for this. Stone Shape is not a weapon-like spell.
(2) Using Stone Shape, make a weapon, pick it up, then coup-de-gras. Or make a stocks and guillotine and lock your helpless target in, if you want to be elaborate and risk 30% failure.
(3) In the future, research a version of this spell that does what you want; your DM may raise its spell level and/or add an attack roll or saving throw. The spell Drown (SpC) is an example of what I'm talking about here when compared to Create Water. How many spells at 3rd or less are not called out as weapon-like and allow you to coup-de-gras? Trust me, there aren't many.
(4) I would suggest, if this is applicable, that you carve boulders out of the ceiling with Stone Shape and let gravity do the rest. It's still not a coup-de-gras, but it may do more damage than a spike, especially with a high ceiling. "Rocks fall. He probably dies." This use also may bury your target in rubble and cause suffocation, but again, up to your DM.

This is literally a game balance issue. Flexible spells like this are always subject to DM fiat to prevent people from using cantrips to kill.

[Darth Ultron]

Well, look, if you want to stone shape awesome killer weapons in your game...then just do it. Don't bother asking anyone about anything.

Heck, why not just have your character use their 'knowledge of geology' to use stone shape to blow up the world...


Now, if you do want to play a game of D&D even close to by the rules, then you can't use stone shape to make awesome killer weapons. And if you, do, well there is really no reason why not to just ''make'' awesome killer weapons using other spells or abilities. As a DM, I'd love that sort of game. Where everyone in the whole world had awesome killer weapons. then It would just be like "Haha, your character is dead, that goblin had an awesome killer weapon!"

Of course your ''biology expert" does not make sense.....I'm not a Doctor, but I know where the brain of most animals are. So, what, like a check of DC 1?

And for shaping stone, what exactly is a ''shape" that does auto kill? Wounder why no one of Earth uses such awesome killer weapons? Guess it's just as we don't have the spell?

And your other two questions had easy answers, see above.

[Armyguyclaude]

No matter how much you try to rule lawyer or use mental gymnastics, the answer is no. Stone Shape does not deal damage or do coup de graces. For all you know the spell morphs stone at a SNAIL's pace.

It's instantaneous. Only reason I'm considering the use of said application. Do you know what the spell does?


This is a creative use of a spell to perform a task it was not designed to do, which makes it strictly a "DM's call" answer.

It reminds me of old uses of the Create Water cantrip to fill someone's lungs with water for the express purpose of drowning them, with no save. A helpless creature could easily die from this as well.

This is literally a game balance issue. Flexible spells like this are always subject to DM fiat to prevent people from using cantrips to kill.

Thank you for 1) keeping an open mind and 2) understanding that it is quite possible. As I stated above I've already worked out above with my DM as to our decision. Which I specifically have not said what it was just so I could see what peoples thoughts were.



(2) Or make a stocks and guillotine and lock your helpless target in, if you want to be elaborate and risk 30% failure.
(4) I would suggest, if this is applicable, that you carve boulders out of the ceiling with Stone Shape and let gravity do the rest. It's still not a coup-de-gras, but it may do more damage than a spike, especially with a high ceiling. "Rocks fall. He probably dies." This use also may bury your target in rubble and cause suffocation, but again, up to your DM.


Wouldn't these two examples be directly related to the question I am asking. Seems like a very thin line from these uses to the use I am expressing. This is why I have stated possible ideas on how to balance it. Possible skill role, knowledge, to see if you're even familiar with the type of creature. Using an attack role for aiming the spell, or (my favorite) reflex save. You can still do the 30% instant failure as I feel, like I stated above, the idea of this spell shouldn't be categorized as "fine detail", but under complexity like moving parts.


Well, look, if you want to stone shape awesome killer weapons in your game...then just do it. Don't bother asking anyone about anything.

Heck, why not just have your character use their 'knowledge of geology' to use stone shape to blow up the world...

I am asking because I want to know if it is possible. So far only PunBlake has answered me sufficiently or at least I think (I can be wrong, even about this entire conversation, but I don't believe that should exclude the topic at hand). No one has addressed the points that I have brought up and mainly use obtuse metaphors as a reason it cannot ever happen. 1) I don't care if it happens or it doesn't. I want to know if it is possible. 2) Yes technically you could use your knowledge of geology to blow up the world. Though I would think it would require other skills to pull off. Also the reason why I ask is I want to test this theory. If it holds up then I know it is true. I test to learn.


And your other two questions had easy answers, see above.
Looking above the responses count as:

1) 5 against. 2 for possible, but not suitable for gameplay. 1 Ask your dm.

2) 1 Against 1 For

3) 2 For

I wanted clarification on number two since so far it's still 50/50 and only 2 people have responded. So I asked it as a deterrent to the main question #1 which so mainly people were focused on, because I would like to know peoples thoughts.


but I think that my fighter taking his greatsword and decapitating your character is also both plausible and certainly reasonable. After all, the rules don't say I can't, right?

1) Sorry I skipped over your response, but this part jumped out at me.

2) Yes you are correct. Rules do not state you cannot.

3) Vorpal swords do this exact thing.

4) A fighter decapitating someone with a normal greatsword isn't a far fetched idea. You're just assuming the use of this application of beheading should be tied to unreasonable situations. If you think of it's use in reasonable situations then a fighter decapitating someone seems a lot like something a fighter would do.

P.S.
My grammar sucks lol. Had to do so many edits xD

[Daefos]

I wonder what the Sleight of Hand DC is to grasp at all these straws.

[Armyguyclaude]

I wonder what the Sleight of Hand DC is to grasp at all these straws.

Can you prove that it could never be used in the application stated above? If so how? Are there any applications in which a similar idea could be used?

Ideas stated above:
1) Using it as a way of harming someone or something?

2) Using it as a way to deal a killing blow to someone or something?

Questions not stated above:
1) If the question is about balance of said idea, how could it be balanced?

2) If the question is about practical application of said skill, in what ways could this practically apply?

3) If the question is about set rules and guidelines, what are the set rules and guidelines and how does this application not abide by those rules or guidelines?

So far the majority of people, like yourself, are quick to laugh at my creativity stating that it could never, ever, ever be even feasible let alone possible. Why not? Other than just saying, "It can't happen" as a blanket statement, tell me why? How does it not have a chance of being a workable idea?

[RoboEmperor]

Can I cast Wall of Stone to create an Iron Maiden that envelops and closes around my target during casting that completely skewers my opponent?
Can I cast Fabricate to completely envelop my opponent so he suffocates and dies without being able to move?
Can I cast Telekinesis on a creature's heart and just pull it out??
Can I cast Fiery Burst except have it burst inside a creature's brain thus killing him instantly?
Can I cast Magic Missile to hit my opponent directly in the neck so it decapitate him resulting in an instant kill?
Can I cast Woodshape so the wood flies into my opponent's mouth and nose and fills his lungs thus killing him?

If you say no to any of this, you are an unoriginal uncreative person and you are wrong. I am right and I can do all of this. It's not my fault all of you are uncreative and can't handle my creativity.

edit: I'm not trying to be mean but this is essentially what you are doing.

It is possible, but difficult, to trap mobile opponents within or under a wall of stone, provided the wall is shaped so it can hold the creatures. Creatures can avoid entrapment with successful Reflex saves.
Wall of stone says I can use the spell to trap opponents, but it doesn't say I can skewer the trapped opponents with rock spikes so I cannot do that. If a spell doesn't say you can, you can't do it. Period.

Stone shape is an out of combat crafting spell. Don't try to turn it into something it's not.

[Armyguyclaude]

If you say no to any of this, you are an unoriginal uncreative person and you are wrong. I am right and I can do all of this. It's not my fault all of you are uncreative and can't handle my creativity.

edit: I'm not trying to be mean but this is essentially what you are doing.


edit: I don't agree with something so it makes it automatically wrong. Even if facts dictate otherwise. This is what you're doing. Why I stated you had an obtuse thought earlier.

Can I cast Wall of Stone to create an Iron Maiden that envelops and closes around my target during casting that completely skewers my opponent?
Roll a reflex save. Since there are moving parts roll for 30% failure.

Can I cast Fabricate to completely envelop my opponent so he suffocates and dies without being able to move?
Create a air tight bag and put it over the opponents head while they are sleeping, incapacitated, cc'd in any way.

Can I cast Telekinesis on a creature's heart and just pull it out??
Make a spellcraft check. Make a concentration check. Make a fortitude save. If all these pass then yes. Also Indiana Jones meets X-men? YES!

Can I cast Fiery Burst except have it burst inside a creature's brain thus killing him instantly?
How much HP does the creature have?

Can I cast Magic Missile to hit my opponent directly in the neck so it decapitate him resulting in an instant kill?
How much HP does the enemy have?

Can I cast Woodshape so the wood flies into my opponent's mouth and nose and fills his lungs thus killing him?
Make a spellcraft check to see if you could even comprehend on how to utilize a spell like this. Roll a knowledge skill check associated with Creature type knowing where to target the spell. Roll a concentration skill check since you would need to focus to aim. Is the opponent incapacitated in any way? Is your caster level high enough that the range would reach? If the opponent can defend themselves make a reflex save. Is there any outside factors that might inhibit this idea? A Force wall in the way. Limited vision. Something invisible in the way.

Seems easy enough.

Also thanks for those ideas. Trying to expand my knowledge and those are cool applications.

[Darth Ultron]

I am asking because I want to know if it is possible.

Ok..so then No, it is not possible.



So far the majority of people, like yourself, are quick to laugh at my creativity stating that it could never, ever, ever be even feasible let alone possible. Why not? Other than just saying, "It can't happen" as a blanket statement, tell me why? How does it not have a chance of being a workable idea?

Well, what your doing is not creativity, you are just making your own game rules and ignoring the published ones.

You can't just make anything by using a single low level spell. By your non-logic, you can stone shape anything...so you are saying stone shape equals the spell wish. Ok, then. I would guess every spell equals wish then? So you'd just have endless wishes?

Now, to note, creativity would be you making your very own unique Instant Death Spell. Though I'd recommend dropping the whole 'stone bit' and make it ''when I cast the spell and touch a creature they die".

And if you want a Instant Death Spell, why be fixated on Stone Shape? Why not pick any attack spell. How about Magic Stone, just cast that spell and 'throw the stones at the speed of light', awesome right?

[Armyguyclaude]

And if you want a Instant Death Spell, why be fixated on Stone Shape? Why not pick any attack spell. How about Magic Stone, just cast that spell and 'throw the stones at the speed of light', awesome right?

How could you throw something at the speed of light in this game? Infinite strength gain loop?



You can't just make anything by using a single low level spell. By your non-logic, you can stone shape anything...so you are saying stone shape equals the spell wish. Ok, then. I would guess every spell equals wish then? So you'd just have endless wishes?

Now, to note, creativity would be you making your very own unique Instant Death Spell. Though I'd recommend dropping the whole 'stone bit' and make it ''when I cast the spell and touch a creature they die".


Slay living. PHB 280.



You can't just make anything by using a single low level spell. By your non-logic, you can stone shape anything...so you are saying stone shape equals the spell wish. Ok, then. I would guess every spell equals wish then? So you'd just have endless wishes?


No. Just a low level spell that could be applied should necessary skill checks be met.

Spellcraft:
DC 30: Understand a strange or magical effect. PHB 82

Concentration:
While engaged in an action that requires your full attention.
Such actions includes casting a spell (check), directing a spell (check) PHB 69.

Knowledge creature type (Example: Dungeoneering on an ooze to determine if there are any vital points or weak spots in the creature, which there probably wouldn't be).
PHB 78

Reflex Save:
Reflex saves reflect physical (and sometimes mental) agility. They incorporate quickness, nimbleness, hand-eye coordination, overall coordination, speed, and reaction time.
DMG 33

All of which would be triggered should you try and direct a spell like stone shape into the intended purpose of dealing damage to a creature by creating a stone spike still attached to a wall. Possibly inside a hallway. While the enemy is charging at you.

I am abiding by the rules given to me by the game (these are direct quotes from the PHB). I am making the idea practical and or reasonable. Do you have to use it? No. Does that make it any less real? No.

I find it amusing you answered with a blanket no, then quoted me stating don't give me a blanket no.

I also find it amusing you keep focusing on extremes. Instead of thinking realistic or practical.

[torrasque666]

Look, the spell does what it says it does. Nothing more, nothing less. Does it say that if you shape it in such a way that the opponent would take damage? It does not. Ergo, the spell cannot do damage. That's it really. Working with exception-based rules is easier than you are making it out to be.

[Armyguyclaude]

Look, the spell does what it says it does. Nothing more, nothing less. Does it say that if you shape it in such a way that the opponent would take damage? It does not. Ergo, the spell cannot do damage. That's it really. Working with exception-based rules is easier than you are making it out to be.

Stone shape the ceiling into a boulder no longer connected with the ceiling. It drops on an enemy. Does this deal no damage? Am I no longer using the spell for it's intended use, which is to shape a piece of stone into, "Any shape that suits my purpose". (Literally text in the PHB for Stone Shape). Nowhere does it state the object create has to remain attached to materials used. Hence why the book also states, "You can make a stone weapon". This was also pointed out twice in above comments.

[torrasque666]

Stone shape the ceiling into a boulder no longer connected with the ceiling. It drops on an enemy. Does this deal no damage? Am I no longer using the spell for it's intended use, which is to shape a piece of stone into, "Any shape that suits my purpose". (Literally text in the PHB for Stone Shape). Nowhere does it state the object create has to remain attached to materials used. Hence why the book also states, "You can make a stone weapon". This was also pointed out twice in above comments.

Alright, if you want to get into the nitty gritty of it, yes a falling boulder would deal damage because of the falling object rules. HOWEVER, basically every spell or rule that has the potential to allow for things appearing inside of creatures specifically calls out that solid things cannot form in such a way to intersect with creatures. Wall of Force cannot be used to bisect opponents, for example. Enlarge Person cannot be used to crush someone in a tiny space.

[Armyguyclaude]

Wall of Force cannot be used to bisect opponents, for example. Enlarge Person cannot be used to crush someone in a tiny space.

Wall of Force:
Where does it state Wall of Force could not be use to bisect someone? It isn't stated in the spell's info under PHB.
Also Wall of Force's effect isn't instantaneous. Unlike stone shape. Could this play a factor?

Also I want to clarify: Because of what you believe to be the intended purposes of stone shape, if a creature was held in place with no way to defend itself, and the creatures head was held still be a device attached to a stone wall, that you couldn't use stone shape to create a stone spike jutting into that creatures head?


Look, the spell does what it says it does. Nothing more, nothing less.

Stone Shape:
1st sentence.
You can form an existing piece of stone into any shape that suits your purpose. PHB 284

Also I want to know if anyone can point me to a place in any DnD 3.5 book that there is a distinction between attack spells and non attack spells. (Still looking, but only distinction I've found are Touch Attacks).

Also can someone point out to me in any DnD 3.5 book that states non-damaging spells cannot ever deal damage under any circumstance.

[Blue Jay]

Wall of Force:
Where does it state Wall of Force could not be use to bisect someone? It isn't stated in the spell's info under PHB.

It's a general rule for Conjuration spells. See here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#conjuration):


"A creature or object brought into being or transported to your location by a conjuration spell cannot appear inside another creature or object..."

[Armyguyclaude]

It's a general rule for Conjuration spells. See here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#conjuration):

Under conjuration it states specifically:
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. PHB 170

Wall of force (PHB 298) is an evocation spell. Nowhere under evocation does it state anything like this. PHB 173. It does specifically state, "and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage".

Shape stone is a transmutation spell. Nowhere under transmutation or subschool polymorph does it state the same thing.

PHB 174
Transmutation:
Transmutation spells change the properties of some creature, thing, or condition.
Literally the only sentence there :p.

It also states for transmutation spells under subschool polymorph PHB 320 say,
"The subject retains it's own hitpoints."
Possibly hinting that if you used stone shape to creating a piercing jutting spike the penetrate a person's head, the stone could possibly break? (But I think polymorph subschool only effects living things not inanimate objects).

[Allanimal]

Also I want to clarify: Because of what you believe to be the intended purposes of stone shape, if a creature was held in place with no way to defend itself, and the creatures head was held still be a device attached to a stone wall, that you couldn't use stone shape to create a stone spike jutting into that creatures head?


As a DM, I encourage and welcome my players to use their characters’ abilities creatively.

Your original plan, while creative, I don’t feel would be a legal use of the spell. Mainly because coup de grace requires specific conditions, such as helplessness and a full-round action. You made no indication IIRC if the opponent was helpless or not, and stone shape itself is a standard action.

The example I quoted above, would work in one if at least two ways. 1) no question is legal. You shape a spike with your standard action and pick it up and wield it with your move action. Next round you coup de grace. But that’s not so cool. 2) In the case of playing up the creative and cool aspects, I’d allow it to work as desired under these specific circumstances with no guarantee of future success. This would also assume no major distractions like a battle raging around you.

Going back to your original use case, in the middle of a combat during my rare D&D sessions, in order to respect the creative thinking and keep the game going, I would say no to the coup de grace (target isn’t helpless, not full round action). I Would offer instead that with a successful appropriate knowledge check, and a successful attack roll, you could form the spike and do sneak attack damage as if a rogue of your caster level.

I would then work out with the player between sessions if this would still work in the future. We would have to review spells that do similar things and see if it is appropriate for stone shape’s level. Also I would want to be sure that any rogue players don’t feel like their niche isn’t being taken away, and adjust the parameters accordingly.

[HighWater]

1) With Stone Shape. With a high enough Skill Roll to determine a monster's biology could a magic user use stone shape to create a piercing or jagged shape of stone to pierce a monsters skull and kill its brain effectively creating a coup de gras? Would it be an attack roll or saving throw?


Stone shape doesn't offer any means of attacking a creature, helpless or not. It simply is not an attack spell, hence the lack of attack roll or specified damage. You can't coup de grace with things that are not attacks.

Coup de grace rules:


Coup de Grace

As a full-round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless opponent. You can also use a bow or crossbow, provided you are adjacent to the target.

You automatically hit and score a critical hit. If the defender survives the damage, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. A rogue also gets her extra sneak attack damage against a helpless opponent when delivering a coup de grace.

Even if the DM were to say you could use not-attacks to do a coup de grace (and you can't, but there is always Rule 0), you still do no damage. This means your "free critical" multiplies nothing and I guess you force a Fortitude save of DC10?


As to the "But why not, because it is so cool" argument:

Rule of Cool is interesting for bending rules for better cinematics, it is also not RAW or even RAI. That means that Rule of Cool is straight up DM fiat => Rule 0. We can advise you on whether it would be prudent to allow this 'exception' to the actual rules or not, but only your DM can actually make that call.

Reasons I would be rather hesistant to allow this use if I were the DM:

Stone Shape has plenty of power without also turning it into an attack spell for damage and Coup de Grace.

Full-list casters have plenty of power without expanding what their spells can do.
There are plenty of alternatives that allow a caster to finish a helpless opponent in narratively interesting ways.
It infringes on martial territory: what is wrong with your caster melding a nice spike that a martial can then force a helpless enemy against as a Coup de Grace?
Forcing Stone Shape to meld stone into a space that is already occupied probably breaks line of effect (causing the spell to fail).
Allowing this use creates a precedent for all kinds of 'creative uses' of similar spells that are already plenty powerful without splitting enemies in half, skewering them, obstructing critical arteries etcetera.


Reasons I might be amendable to allow this use if I were the DM:

If I happen to allow this kind of thing all the time and
If I let all other players also perform actions that the rules do not support (that means the martials too!... Like hitting the ceiling to create a fog effect, perhaps?)


Make of that what you will. :smallsmile:

Edit: fixed typo.

[Gingaroth]

All it states specifically is the "Detail" is crude. The complexity of what you make can be extreme as you have a 70% chance of actually creating a contraption that has moving objects.

It says fine detail is impossible. It says ‘you can make crude idols… crude coffers, doors, and so forth...’ A 30% chance that moving parts don’t work means the quality of objects created by stoneshape is less than similar items created by an average craftsman.


I challenge you, all of you, to disprove you cannot use stone shape as an offensive tool to kill someone using the same guidelines and rules DnD itself follows. Not your own interpretation or feelings on the subject. Good luck.

That’s a nice reversal of the burden of proof you’re trying to pull there. Spells do what the description says they do, not what the description doesn’t say they don’t do. If you want to do something with a spell that is not explicitly in its description, you need to come up with arguments why that would be possible, not the other way around. But okay, I’ll bite.

I’m not arguing you can’t create a spike or a boulder and drop it or attack with it later on. You can, but that is not what you asked. You asked if, with enough knowledge of a creatures anatomy, you could use stone shape to “create a piercing or jagged shape of stone to pierce a monsters skull and kill its brain, effectively creating a coup de grace”.

In other words, you asked if stone shape lets you create a weapon that automatically hits and scores criticals, and forces the defender to make a fortitude save or die. Why on earth would a plain stone spike have such qualities? That's somewhere in the neighbourhood of the power of a true striked keen vorpal sword.

Stone shape says you can create a object, not that you can attack with it in the same round, let alone that you get some special advantage with this attack. You can’t use your knowledge of anatomy to coup de grace with a normal weapon, so you can’t do it with a weapon created by stone shape, either.

The conditions for a coup de grace are clearly specified (PHB page 153/154). One of these conditions is that your opponent needs to be helpless. ‘Helpless’ is described as ‘bound, sleeping, paralyzed, unconscious, or otherwise at your mercy’. Creating a stone spike, boulder or weapon, no matter how detailed or awesome, does not render your opponent helpless. Neither does knowing where it’s brain is located. Hence, neither action provides an opportunity for coup de grace.

Another condition is that you use a melee weapon, bow or crossbow. Not boulders dropped from the ceiling or spikes growing out of the earth. As stone bowstrings don’t work, creating a melee weapon is your only viable option. (This condition is a bit to restrictive for my personal taste, I allow other options within reason when I'm DM, but strictly by the rules, thats how it works)

Lastly, coup de grace is a full round action. You can’t execute one in the same round you create your stone weapon. Even if you cast the spell quickened, you still need to pick up the weapon; which is a move equivalent action.

In short, the only way you could execute a coup de grace using stone shape is to first render your opponent helpless by other means, then create a melee weapon using the spell and pick it up, and next spend a full round on the coup de grace itself.

Next there is the question of killing a creature by piercing it’s brain. Sure, you can make a knowledge check in (biology or anatomy or the like) to determine where a brain is located, or any other organ for that matter. No problem. The buzzkill here is that D&D 3.5 has no rules to make called shots. So even if you know exactly where to hit, it doesn’t help you one bit because there is no way you can target a specific location. The only ways I know of that anatomy matters during 3.5 combat are the rogue’s sneak attack and similar abilities, and the feat I mentioned earlier.

Besides even if you did manage to hit the head specificly, according to the 'damage to specific areas' variant rules (DMG page 27), damage to the head results in a -2 to attack rolls, saves and checks, not instant death or a coup de grace.

(Pathfinder does have rules for called shots, but they’re optional. A called shot to the head, in the most successful scenario, causes unconsciousness, ability damage, and a semi-permanent feeblemind effect. https://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCombat/variants/calledShots.html )

Loose notes
You could argue that if you opt to create boulders or jagged spikes rather than a proper weapon, they’d be improvised weapons, requiring you to take a -4 to attack.

If you want to use stone shape to drop boulders from the ceiling, you first need to get to the ceiling yourself. You need to touch your clay model to the stone you want to change.

There are spells that resemble the earthbending effect you want to achieve much better than stoneshape, e.g ‘elemental burst’, ‘earthbolt’, ‘spike stones’ or ‘bones of the earth’. They all offer reflex saves and deal an amount of damage normal for their spell level, not instant kills.

Ps: Retrieving an item from a haversack still is a move action, so the next paragraph I wrote also applies to that.

[PunBlake]

Wouldn't these two examples be directly related to the question I am asking. Seems like a very thin line from these uses to the use I am expressing. This is why I have stated possible ideas on how to balance it. Possible skill role, knowledge, to see if you're even familiar with the type of creature. Using an attack role for aiming the spell, or (my favorite) reflex save. You can still do the 30% instant failure as I feel, like I stated above, the idea of this spell shouldn't be categorized as "fine detail", but under complexity like moving parts.

The "thin line" here is the number of actions required to do what you want with a non-weapon-like spell; also, I'm assuming your target is already helpless (qualifying for a coup-de-gras) for this.
(2) would take at least two rounds in both scenarios. (Make the weapon and pick it up in first, full action coup-de-gras in second; make the stocks and move to your target in first, pick up target and lock into place in second, activate guillotine in third. I hope your unconscious target doesn't wake up/stabilize in the interim.)
(4) is actually using the spell as intended IMO, but your damage will be defined by game rules (ie. falling damage rules) and wouldn't be a coup-de-gras. Granted, this is an abusable use of this spell; assuming a high enough ceiling, you can hit "terminal velocity" for large damage. Also, just noticed this, but Stone Shape is touch range, so you have to reach the ceiling to drop a rock from it. This is semi-trivial.

[Blue Jay]

Under conjuration it states specifically:
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. PHB 170

Wall of force (PHB 298) is an evocation spell. Nowhere under evocation does it state anything like this. PHB 173. It does specifically state, "and evocation spells can deal large amounts of damage".

I was just pointing to where torrasque666 got the idea that you can't bring something into being inside something else.

But, wall of force (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfForce.htm) does have this line:


The wall must be continuous and unbroken when formed. If its surface is broken by any object or creature, the spell fails.

So, wall of force can't bisect a creature.

-----

The rest of your idea is just playing the game in bad faith. It's perfectly fine to be creative and come up with new uses of a spell or ability, but you're taking it a step further than that. You're taking advantage of ambiguities in the wording of the rules to give yourself permissions that are completely unprecedented elsewhere in the game, and giving yourself power that's out of proportion with the spell's level.

For example, the Knowledge skill doesn't usually give you the ability to bypass the conditions for delivering a coup de grace. Even specialized Knowledge-based abilities that grant special, in-combat mechanical advantages --- like the Knowledge Devotion feat or the Archivist's Dark Knowledge feature --- don't offer that kind of permission, so at least understand that your original idea is granting a very, very unique advantage that isn't even offered to the specialists in that area.

If you want to use stone shape as a weapon, do so within the normal confines of the rules, and calibrate it against other spells and abilities of nominally similar power. For example, there are several spells with the [Earth] descriptor that produce "pointy stone" effects. Sudden stalagmite from the Spell Compendium does pretty much exactly what you're imagining for stone shape: it makes a big, pointy stone object grow in such a way that it impales a single target creature. That spell is one level higher than stone shape, but it just does 1d6 damage/caster level (max 10d6, Ref half); so if you're making stone shape do things that exceed sudden stalagmite in power, that indicates that you should re-calibrate.

[Armyguyclaude]

Your original plan, while creative, I don’t feel would be a legal use of the spell. Mainly because coup de grace requires specific conditions, such as helplessness and a full-round action. You made no indication IIRC if the opponent was helpless or not, and stone shape itself is a standard action.


While I did not specify if the target is or is not harmless in my original question I have amended the question several times in above replies to help decide if it is even possible.



I would then work out with the player between sessions if this would still work in the future. We would have to review spells that do similar things and see if it is appropriate for stone shape’s level. Also I would want to be sure that any rogue players don’t feel like their niche isn’t being taken away, and adjust the parameters accordingly.

I like this idea on how to balance the issue and keep from having spells in the future become a problem. Thanks for the input.


Stone shape doesn't offer any means of attacking a creature, helpless or not. It simply is not an attack spell, hence the lack of attack roll or specified damage.

I am a new player. Where does it state there are things such as attack spells and non attack spells? (Besides Touch Attacks, which quite literally say attack in their name). Also where does it state that a non attack spell can never deal damage under any circumstance?



Coup de grace rules:


Even if the DM were to say you could use not-attacks to do a coup de grace (and you can't, but there is always Rule 0), you still do no damage. This means your "free critical" multiplies nothing and I guess you force a Fortitude save of DC10?


Thank you for this information. So far I believe this is the first quote from the book that is actually correct. Did not realize anything but a melee weapon could perform a coup de gras? grace? I don't remember.



Rule of Cool is interesting for bending rules for better cinematics, it is also not RAW or even RAI. That means that Rule of Cool is straight up DM fiat => Rule 0. We can advise you on whether it would be prudent to allow this 'exception' to the actual rules or not, but only your DM can actually make that call.


I do not know what RAW or RAI mean. Sorry.



Make of that what you will. :smallsmile:


Thanks for your input. Both now and before. The more we all learn together the better informed we all become ;)


It says fine detail is impossible.

That’s a nice reversal of the burden of proof you’re trying to pull there. Spells do what the description says they do, not what the description doesn’t say they don’t do.


How is making a giant spike considered fine detail? The spike does not have to be smooth. It can still have jagged edges sufficient enough to consider it a crude spike.

As to spells do what they say they do and nothing else arguement;

Stone Shape:
1st line:
You can form an existing piece of stone into any shape that suits your purpose. PHB 284



Sure, you can make a knowledge check in (biology or anatomy or the like) to determine where a brain is located, or any other organ for that matter. No problem. The buzzkill here is that D&D 3.5 has no rules to make called shots. So even if you know exactly where to hit, it doesn’t help you one bit because there is no way you can target a specific location.

Besides even if you did manage to hit the head specificly, according to the 'damage to specific areas' variant rules (DMG page 27), damage to the head results in a -2 to attack rolls, saves and checks, not instant death or a coup de grace.


First off you stated there is no rules set up for targeted attacks and then give a solution to the same problem right afterwords.

Secondly:
Concentration PHB 69 States
Such actions include casting a spell, and directing a spell.
With those rules itself it seems like you could effectively target with a spell should you roll a high enough DC to focus.

Spellcraft PHB 82
DC 30+: Understand a strange or unique magical effect.
Could a character with a high enough skill check dc roll be allowed to understand how to utilize stone shape to the effect of using it as a directed attack?

Lastly:
I really did try and disprove you, but 3.5 got screwed when it comes to situations like this. Touche'.



Ps: Retrieving an item from a haversack still is a move action, so the next paragraph I wrote also applies to that.

?


The "thin line" here is the number of actions required to do what you want with a non-weapon-like spell

Yea no distinction was given on to how many rounds it would have to take just if the idea was possible.



Interesting note for everyone stating things cannot instant kill:
Variant: Spell Roll DMG 36
Substitute this variant for the standard method of determining saving throw DCs for spells.

Variant: Instant Kill DMG 28
Now a third roll, an instant kill roll, is made.

As for the Spell Roll Variant I find it interesting that the game has specific rules set up for situation like we're specifically dealing with.
And instant kill was put here for 2 reasons. 1) to prove you can instantly kill something according to game rules. 2) I have yet to have someone show me there is a distinction between attack spells and non attack spells, and that non attack spells can never ever deal damage.

Thank you everyone for your continued responses. Think we've made a lot of progress and am really excited to see what we come up with for a final answer. Also will someone give their thoughts on question 2 :p. So far it's split down the middle for 1 for and 1 against... Really difficult coming up with an answer on a 50/50

[Armyguyclaude]

I was just pointing to where torrasque666 got the idea that you can't bring something into being inside something else.

But, wall of force (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfForce.htm) does have this line:



So, wall of force can't bisect a creature.


All this states is there cannot be something inside the wall upon creation. It does not state that the wall of force cannot bisect a creature, deal any type of damage itself, or cause a secondary form of damage from occurring.

Sounds like you're trying to twist words to fit your ideals like you claim of me.

[KillianHawkeye]

All this states is there cannot be something inside the wall upon creation. It does not state that the wall of force cannot bisect a creature, deal any type of damage itself, or cause a secondary form of damage from occurring.

Sounds like you're trying to twist words to fit your ideals like you claim of me.

Read it again, because that's exactly what it says.

The wall is immobile, so the only way it could possibly bisect a creature is if it was created with its surface running directly through them. It explicitly cannot do this; the spell fails if anything is in the way.

One the wall exists, you could still damage yourself by bashing your head against it or something like that, but you appear to be immune to the effects of running repeatedly into a brick wall.

[Psyren]

It's instantaneous. Only reason I'm considering the use of said application. Do you know what the spell does?

Do you? "Instantaneous" just means the spell's magic comes and goes instantly. It does not do anything the spell doesn't say it does, nor does it mean the effect of the spell (the thing you create) appears at weaponized speed. You can certainly shape a rock into a spike, and then attack someone with it (as an improvised weapon) because there are rules for that. There are no rules for attacking with Stone Shape itself.

You also completely ignored someonenoone's example of what your logic would do if applied to other spells, presumably because you had no response. Summon monster doesn't say I don't get a Pseudonatural Paragon Phrenic Lion. Lightning Bolt doesn't say it doesn't paralyze and blind people. Silent Image doesn't say it doesn't provide flanking to every enemy within the area. You can continue this way through the whole PHB, making up any spell effects you feel like, again using your logic.

[Darth Ultron]

I am a new player. Where does it state there are things such as attack spells and non attack spells? (Besides Touch Attacks, which quite literally say attack in their name). Also where does it state that a non attack spell can never deal damage under any circumstance?


If a spell is an attack spell, it will say so in the spell description as it will have game rule effects. You will note attack spells are very clear as to what they do. This is to avoid wacky power levels.

D&D has set power levels for spells, lower level spells don't do much, medium level spells do a bit more and high level spells can do a lot. Looking through the lists, you can see the minimum level for each effect.

Take Instant Death spells. Looking through the list, you will see this effect does not come into play until 5th level spells and above. So, that makes instant death at least a 5th level effect.

The game has a lot of spells that can do a lot of things, limited only by your imagination....but that should not be used to get around the spell power levels. For example, you can't use the zero level spell Mage Hand, to cover a creatures head and instantaneously kill it. Most 3E ish spells have the 'rules lawyer' stuff build right into them, but not all of them. You can't use the spell Create Water to fill a persons lungs with water and kill them....but there is a higher level spell that does do that.

You can use lots of spells to do indirect damage, but that is covered by other rules. You can 'stone shape' a stone ceiling to fall...and the stones will do damage per the falling object rules. You could also set a boulder held in place, and then dropped when you shape the stone away, but again, it would use the falling object rules.

[HighWater]

I am a new player.
Welcome to the game and this forum. :smallsmile:
The Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 ruleset is very extensive and a lot of the rules are found in places where you wouldn't immediately expect them. It will take a fair bit of time to master, but it sure is a lot of fun.


Where does it state there are things such as attack spells and non attack spells? (Besides Touch Attacks, which quite literally say attack in their name). Also where does it state that a non attack spell can never deal damage under any circumstance?
Well, just to illustrate how tricky it can be to keep your terminology straight: I made a bit of a booboo. The technical term is 'weaponlike spell'. From the Rules Compendium (a book that further clarifies rules and sometimes amends them):


Any spell that requires an attack roll is weaponlike. Most weapon like spells also deal some form of damage—lethal damage, nonlethal damage, ability damage, or ability drain. Some bestow negative levels, or they grant conditions or penalties.
No spell declares itself to be 'weaponlike', it either fits the criteria above, or it does not. Spells that require an attack roll (such as a melee or ranged touch attack) are spells that qualify.

The relevance of weaponlike spells to your particular case is that in some relevant ways they can be treated as a weapon. The most relevant to your case is that they can apply Sneak Attack damage and trigger Critical Hits. Many take this to mean they can also be used in a Coup de Grâce (it's a French term, hence the spelling), but by RAW (will explain in a bit) you actually can't, because even in the texts that expand on weaponlike spells Coup de Grâce is never mentioned as an option. I did hear that there is a Prestige Class that specifically allows Coup de Grâce with ray-spells for characters that have enough levels in it, but I'd have to check.

Regretfully, in the case of Stone Shape, it is very far removed from qualifying for a Coup de Grâce as:

it doesn't specify any attack roll,
it therefore doesn't qualify as a weaponlike spell and even if it did,
by RAW weaponlike spells still don't qualify for Coup de Grâce.




I do not know what RAW or RAI mean. Sorry.
RAW means "Rules as Written". "By RAW" means you're trying to stick as closely to the written text of the D&D books as possible and are trying to leave any interpretation or speculation at the door. Because this is an online forum and every DM and game is different, "we" have to stick to something that at least we can all share when we are debating the workings of D&D: RAW is that starting point. (This doesn't mean that RAW is never debated.)

RAI means "Rules as Intended". Sometimes the rules are weird, confusing or obviously stupid if you take them literally. When arguing RAI, you say that the Intent of the Rules is also important. Because this inherently carries interpretation and because interpretation is so very personal, Rules as Intended spark many debates and are subjects that are rarely settled.



Thanks for your input. Both now and before. The more we all learn together the better informed we all become ;)

Sure thing!


Secondly:
Concentration PHB 69 States
Such actions include casting a spell, and directing a spell.
With those rules itself it seems like you could effectively target with a spell should you roll a high enough DC to focus.

I guess I can see the confusion, but a broader quote is much more revealing as to what Concentration actually does:


You must make a Concentration check whenever you might potentially be distracted (by taking damage, by harsh weather, and so on) while engaged in some action that requires your full attention. Such actions include casting a spell, concentrating on an active spell, directing a spell, using a spell-like ability, or using a skill that would provoke an attack of opportunity. In general, if an action wouldn’t normally provoke an attack of opportunity, you need not make a Concentration check to avoid being distracted.
Concentration is not a skill that allows you to add effects to a spell, instead it allows you to use the spell in its stated manner in spite of somebody (for example) shooting you. If you fail your concentration check, a spell that requires you to "direct" it will not be directed. An example of a spell that requires the caster to direct it is Flaming Sphere: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/flamingSphere.htm You can't use Concentration to add "directed" to a spell description (and being "directed" doesn't mean a spell "targets" anything or has an attack roll).



Spellcraft PHB 82
DC 30+: Understand a strange or unique magical effect.
Could a character with a high enough skill check dc roll be allowed to understand how to utilize stone shape to the effect of using it as a directed attack?

again, the full quote is important:

30 or higher | Understand a strange or unique magical effect, such as the effects of a magic stream. Time required varies. No retry.
It does not say "add a strange or unique magical effect to a spell you know" or something along those lines. Instead this use of Spellcraft is for when your character comes across something magical in their world that is not straight up a predefined spell and tries to understand it. (Think along the lines of "This strange, translucent river is a Conduit of Magic, flowing from the Plane of Fire to the Plane of Hel".) If you're looking for stuff that can actually change the workings of a spell, you're looking for MetaMagic feats and effects.


I have yet to have someone show me there is a distinction between attack spells and non attack spells, and that non attack spells can never ever deal damage.
I am pretty sure some people have pointed out a few ways you could do damage through creatively applying Stone Shape to the immediate surroundings (such as dropping boulders by Stone Shaping the ceiling), but Stone Shape will never directly do damage on its own. Why? Because nowhere in the spell description does it say it can do such a thing. If this does not satisfy you, consider this: if spell descriptions were expected to list everything they can't do, how large would they have to be? The answer would be "massively impractically large", in fact the Player's Handbook would need to have infinite length (as the list of things that are impossible is infinite) and you never would have gotten to the end of "Acid Fog" while reading it: the very first spell listed! Instead spells state what they can do. Spells that directly do damage will say so. Spells that can be used to choke, impale or otherwise instantly kill creatures will also say so. I understand that it's a bit disappointing that Stone Shape does not come with a "drive a this stone through the enemy"-feature, but you can be sure that that is unlikely to be an oversight: if it did, it would not have been a Level 3 spell. It is plenty powerful as it is. :smallsmile:

[PunBlake]

I have yet to have someone show me there is a distinction between attack spells and non attack spells, and that non attack spells can never ever deal damage.
The reason I've been talking about weapon-like spells is the obvious distinction. This is laid out in detail in CArc, p85, in the weapon-like spells section. Here's a quote:


Any spell that requires an attack roll and deals damage functions as a weapon in certain respects...

The reason you can use a weapon-like spell to coup-de-gras is in this section; basically, it's because these spells can critical an attack roll that you can use them this way.

Non-attack spells can definitely deal damage; it's usually more complicated than using a weapon-like spell, though.