Plant growth on spike growth

[Aaedimus]

Plant growth and spike growth stack. We all know this.

To refresh your memories:

-Spike growth is concentration and plant growth is not.
-Spike growth makes an area difficult terrain (halving movement) and plant growth makes each foot traveled equal four feet.

My question is, if you're in a barren area with no plants, could you use spike growth to create an area of plants that you could grow with plant growth on the next turn? I read plant growth (although it isn't specifically stated) to infer that plants must be present.

[Quoz]

I don't see a reason it wouldn't work, but I would rule that as the plant growth is dependent on spike growth both will be lost if you lose concentration.

[MThurston]

I would say you need plants. Any would do but if none are there then it doesn't work.

An example of this is space.

[Citan]

Plant growth and spike growth stack. We all know this.

To refresh your memories:

-Spike growth is concentration and plant growth is not.
-Spike growth makes an area difficult terrain (halving movement) and plant growth makes each foot traveled equal four feet.

My question is, if you're in a barren area with no plants, could you use spike growth to create an area of plants that you could grow with plant growth on the next turn? I read plant growth (although it isn't specifically stated) to infer that plants must be present.
I understand your view on this (although I think it's a bit of a nerf to require existing plants for Plant Growth it is certainly the closest to RAI) so I'd certainly allow this kind of workaround. :)

Note though that if you really want to follow Plant Growth's text as strictly as possible, it says "normal plants are affected" which is imo not a qualifier that could be applied to plant conjured by a spell (so existing solely per magic). Although I admit having no source right now that could clearly say if "normal plants" must infer a specific meaning in game mechanics and/or if plants conjured by magic can still be considered "normal" as instead a distinction with... Something? XD

In other words, for me, whether you dismiss the "need plants" requirement or allow this stacking, in both case you end up making a houserule (which is completely normal though, 5e is all about that). :)

[Chronos]

Spike Growth doesn't produce plants. It reshapes the ground into "hard spikes and thorns", which are presumably made out of the same material as the rest of the floor. In a forest, those spikes and thorns might be made of tree roots and so on, but in a bare cave, they'd presumably be made of stone.

[Dr. Cliché]

Spike Growth doesn't produce plants. It reshapes the ground into "hard spikes and thorns", which are presumably made out of the same material as the rest of the floor. In a forest, those spikes and thorns might be made of tree roots and so on, but in a bare cave, they'd presumably be made of stone.

Yeah, I'd have thought Entangle would make more sense if you wanted to create plants to use Plant Growth on.

[Citan]

Spike Growth doesn't produce plants. It reshapes the ground into "hard spikes and thorns", which are presumably made out of the same material as the rest of the floor. In a forest, those spikes and thorns might be made of tree roots and so on, but in a bare cave, they'd presumably be made of stone.
My... I never viewed this spell in such way. That's very interesting...

So we agree in such view the spell is usable whatever material you use it upon right?