Prestadigita-what? (A question in 4E)

[Shnezz]

Prestadigitation can, among other things "Render a small, handheld object invisible." Does the effect of the spell literally change based on the size of the spellcaster's hands? Can a gaint wizard, who can fit a halfling in his hand, make him invisible? Isn't invisibility itself already nullified by "not being able to duplicate a spell or ability"? I am very confused, is there something I missed?

Edit: Also, can prestadigitation affect magical items? I seem to remember hearing it cannot.

Got my answers.

[RagnaroksChosen]

Prestadigitation can, among other things "Render a small, handheld object invisible." Does the effect of the spell literally change based on the size of the spellcaster's hands? Can a gaint wizard, who can fit a halfling in his hand, make him invisible? Isn't invisibility itself already nullified by "not being able to duplicate a spell or ability"? I am very confused, is there something I missed?

Edit: Also, can prestadigitation affect magical items? I seem to remember hearing it cannot.

I belive a gaint wizard cannot make a halfling invisible seeing as a halfing is not an object... I belive you could make a halfings courpse invisible.

[Shnezz]

I belive a gaint wizard cannot make a halfling invisible seeing as a halfing is not an object... I belive you could make a halfings courpse invisible.

One might argue that anything material is, in fact, an object. Still, the basis behind the question was does big wizard = big invisibility? Such as a boulder, if you insist halfling is not an object.

[RagnaroksChosen]

One might argue that anything material is, in fact, an object. Still, the basis behind the question was does big wizard = big invisibility? Such as a boulder, if you insist halfling is not an object.

I didn't see the 4e part in your title for some odd reason... I take back my statement i know in 3.5 a living thing is not an object.

[Shnezz]

I didn't see the 4e part in your title for some odd reason... I take back my statement i know in 3.5 a living thing is not an object.

That's fine, I'm just curious about size effect.

[Beelzebub1111]

The wording on that is bad if you ask me. I think it's supposed to be parlor tricks with actual magic rather than slight of hand. Making coins actually disappear rather than simply palming them in your hand.

[Anonomuss]

To my knowledge creatures are not to be considered "objects" in 4e either. Powers such as disintegrate distinguish between them, and the wizard power "Summon Hammerfist Crusher" is noted as being too slow to attack a creature, and as such it's attack only targets "one object". There may be a definition somewhere, I just don't have my PHB on me.

So, no, a halfling cannot be rendered invisible by a Giant Wizard using Prestadigitation.

[wormwood]

Since nobody else seems to want to actually answer your questions... :)

I don't think there's a clear answer in the RAW. However, I would say that, yes, a giant gets a bigger area of effect from the spell. It goes with the intent of the spell to have bigger creatures be able to still pull off the same tricks on appropriately sized things. That is, of course, my interpretation.

I don't think making hand-held objects invisible is a direct conflict with the restriction against duplicating other spells. The Invisibility spell is far more useful and much wider in scope. This is a very limited version of that. If you wanted to make an unattended object invisible and walk away from it, then you'd have a problem.

[Kurald Galain]

Prestadigitation can, among other things "Render a small, handheld object invisible." Does the effect of the spell literally change based on the size of the spellcaster's hands?

That's up to the DM; the rules don't specify.

I don't think it would be unbalanced either way.

Isn't invisibility itself already nullified by "not being able to duplicate a spell or ability"?

No, because there is no spell or ability that renders small, handheld objects invisible, and also because the Prestidig spell description specifically allows this. Specific allowance trumps general prohibition.

Edit: Also, can prestadigitation affect magical items? I seem to remember hearing it cannot.

Yes, it can. I have no idea where you heard that, but all the rules for Prestidig under its short entry in the chapter on wizards (PHB 158, I think). If it doesn't say so there, then it's not a rule.

[Sipex]

I would rule that since everything else is concrete in size description (Giants are always large, humans medium, halflings small...regardless of how big a PC is) that 'small handheld objects' applies to anything that would be a small, handheld object in the eyes of the core races (all being of small or medium size)

It's really up to your DM though.

[Shnezz]

Okay, thanks for the help. A final clarification, though:

Does it have to STAY in your hand to be invisible? Say, a gaint making a boulder invisible and then throwing it? Does the rock appear when thrown, or more like "It must be in your hand to turn invisible, then stays for X length of time?"

And good for the magical items. A lich with a phylactery ring can keep the ring invisible indefinately, as long as he remembers to keep prestadigitationing it.

[erikun]

I'm not sure how large your giant is, but a Large-sized creature will only be able to hold a rather small "boulder" within one hand.

I would say it stays invisible as long as it is in the Wizard's hand (and as long as they maintain the spell). The Wizard may then slip it object into their pocket, where it becomes visible when released, or my throw it, when it becomes visible when it leaves their hand. I wouldn't see this causing any effect in combat, although out of combat someone probably wouldn't be expecting an attack.

Just my interpretation as a DM.

[Yakk]

The Wizard prestidigitation rules are intended for PC characters.

PC characters are not intended to be ridiculously large giants.

Thus the question is pretty moot that way.

If on a monster, if you are a DM and you want the giant to be making invisible boulders, then just do it?

[erikun]

I just looked up Presdigitation in the book. Note that it doesn't have a substain action. That is, you could keep a small object invisible all day, but it would require spending each and every Standard action to do so.

While I suppose a lich could technically spend all their time focusing on making their phylactery invisible, I don't see how one would want to. After all, most become liches for more free time, not to spend all their time doting on one object. It also wouldn't make much sense to die and immediately have your killers find the one object you need to resurrect...

[Thajocoth]

No. There are only Small and Medium PC races. The PC class Wizard can be applied only to these races. So a Large or larger entity with the PC class Wizard cannot do anything, as it cannot exist.

[RebelRogue]

The Wizard prestidigitation rules are intended for PC characters.

PC characters are not intended to be ridiculously large giants.

Thus the question is pretty moot that way.

If on a monster, if you are a DM and you want the giant to be making invisible boulders, then just do it?

You could add the wizard template to a Gargantuan creature!

But really, I agree with you. Let it work the way you want it to work. The End!

[DabblerWizard]

I just looked up Presdigitation in the book. Note that it doesn't have a substain action. That is, you could keep a small object invisible all day, but it would require spending each and every Standard action to do so.

While I suppose a lich could technically spend all their time focusing on making their phylactery invisible, I don't see how one would want to. After all, most become liches for more free time, not to spend all their time doting on one object. It also wouldn't make much sense to die and immediately have your killers find the one object you need to resurrect...

^^ The above scenario made me laugh. Immediately I started thinking about Gollum from LOTR. He would love to have that particular cantrip.

"It is my own, my precious... and it's now invisible!"

I would rule that items made invisible by prestidigitation become visible again a minute later, once no longer being held by the wizard, just for fun.

[Dyllan]

^^ The above scenario made me laugh. Immediately I started thinking about Gollum from LOTR. He would love to have that particular cantrip.

"It is my own, my precious... and it's now invisible!"

I would rule that items made invisible by prestidigitation become visible again a minute later, once no longer being held by the wizard, just for fun.

Um, it *IS* invisible, as soon as he puts it on his finger. Gollum doesn't need prestidigitation.

[Rixx]

I know if it specified the exact volume, mass, and weight of what I could or could not turn invisible, I'd probably cry a bit.

[hamishspence]

^^ The above scenario made me laugh. Immediately I started thinking about Gollum from LOTR. He would love to have that particular cantrip.

"It is my own, my precious... and it's now invisible!"

I would rule that items made invisible by prestidigitation become visible again a minute later, once no longer being held by the wizard, just for fun.

In the LoTR book, Tom Bombadil makes the Ring disappear for a moment, before handing it back to Frodo.

Very like prestidigitation.

[Shnezz]

All right. So, in essence, ignoring the fact that a PC wizard is not supposed to be above medium sized, prestidigitation:

-Can Affect Magical Items
-Only makes items invisible in the character's hand
-Is fairly impractical (which is intended, it's a cantrip...) as it requires several standard actions to keep going.

All right, got all I needed.

[Angelmaker]

In the LoTR book, Tom Bombadil makes the Ring disappear for a moment, before handing it back to Frodo.

Very like prestidigitation.

Just a proper sleight-of-hand check ( thievery in 4 ed ) me thinks. After all, Frodo is just a hobbit.

[hamishspence]

He also puts it on, in front of Frodo- without disappearing.

[Tiki Snakes]

He also puts it on, in front of Frodo- without disappearing.

Unless that is further trickery. He certainly put A ring on...

(I'm amused at the idea of the mighty Tom Bombadil being a level 1 rogue, sue me.)

[hamishspence]

I suppose he could have had another ring around, or be good at illusion. Frodo's immediate response is to suspiciously check the ring he's been handed back, since he remembers The One Ring being unusually heavy for its size.

Still, the Council seem to take Frodo's account seriously.

One of the wackier Tom Bombadil theories:

http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/bombadil.htm

does manage to provide an explanation for some of his abilities, even if it's not a serious one.

[DabblerWizard]

Um, it *IS* invisible, as soon as he puts it on his finger. Gollum doesn't need prestidigitation.

This is a good point. Gollum wasn't magically powerful in his own right, thus he succumbed to the ring so much, that he couldn't avoid turning invisible. If I remember correctly, maybe from reading the Silmarillion, someone like Gandalf could have worn the ring, and not turned invisible because of his own magic powers.

[hamishspence]

If "the Great Rings" including the three elven rings, turn ordinary mortals invisible- then the reason Elrond,Galadriel, and Gandalf aren't invisible, may be that they aren't mortal- since elves in LoTR are immortals.

Its possible that if a mortal stole Gandalf's ring, they might become invisible upon putting it on.