Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: Money (was Re: Nifty Idea)
Next Message: Re: Ground attacks from spelljammers
Month Index: September, 1996


From:     "Thomas O. Magann Jr." <tomjr@???.com>
Date:     Fri, 13 Sep 96 13:09:10 PDT
Subject:  Re: Nifty Idea
>>Dispel ia an area effect spell (it's a spell, not an item being dispelled).
>The area of effect
>>is 30x30. Woc lists that as the equivalent of a 10 ton ship. (Book 1 , page 65)

>>The bad news is, the shrapnel from a hit on regular glass, such as after a
>dispel, would
>>probably cause an effect similar to Shrapnel Shot, or the like.
>>
>
>True but the point I was making was that singlehandedly it wouldn't destroy
>the ship.

Single handedly? That depends on the sive of the ship, and the area hit. It actually stands a
fair chance, especially if it hits the middle of the ship. Definately on smaller ships, such as
about 30 tons or less, where 1/3 or more of the ship becomes much weaker, and quite fragile.
Hell the weight of the ship might do the rest.



>Ok. The question is, does glassteel actually alter the item or not. Does
>lead turned to gold remain magic? or is it just gold? I would say that since
>it is alteration and says it turns glass to glassteel(not merely enchants it
>to steel like strengh).

Well, at the risk of sounding like a rules lawyer, the Plymorph spells disagree with you, as
does stone to flesh.

Also, the glass is still Glass, it hasn't been changed, just strengthened abnormally. Sounds
like ongoing maic.


 The spell just alters the glass and then stops(same
>as mend and such).

And Stone to Flesh, Poly Other, and Poly Any object. The Difference: Mending *returns* an object
to the state it used to be. The others, Glassteel included, alter the very nature of the
material. Not just the shape, but the nature.

 Also think of the magic web(or whatever your world uses)
>Does it make sense to have a spell that lasts forever or a spell that's
>effects last forever. A tree destroyed by a fireball is still destroyed if a
>dispel magic is cast at the stump.

Yes, but a Fireball is an Instantaneous spell, not a permanent one. It summons energy that acts
one other things, it doesn't act on them directly, much less directlt alter them.

>I can see your point here. I was saying that some DM's would rule this way.
>However there are more ways than enchant an item to enchant an item. (All
>depending on the DM's decretion of course). I would rule that if glassteel
>is considered still magic then glassteel is enchanted glass. Remember that
>it is an eighth level spell, which is a higher level than limited wish, and
>only a level lower than the wish itself. Thinking about it, if anything it
>should be a lower level. If the instantaneus method is not used, it should
>at least be a magic item.

Why? It's the SAME level as Permanency, and does more inthat it doesn't need another spell to be
made permanent. And Permanency can be dispelled. Yes, it's an eighth level spell, so I looked at
other 8th level spells to determine Displeability, and found one that *directly* applied.

>Spells such as polymorph make it seem as though maybe it could be
>dispelled(polymorph can). However the desciption of polymorph spends a
>paragraph telling us how it *can* be dispelled so maybe it's an exception
>rather than the rule.

Well, then, Look at Permanency. It says it can be dispelled as well, and tells us that nothing
spell is required. At the same level.

>>Remeber, Glassteel is the same level as permanency, and does a touch more,
>as permanency makes
>>another spell permanent, Glasteel makes itself permanent. It shouldn't be
>*harder* to dispel
>>than Permanency, or in any way stronger.
>
>This I really disagree with. Lots of spells make themselves permenent.
>Permenency is making non-permenent spells permenent. That's really powerful!
>Even some 1st level spells make themselves permenent(Does erase erase a
>message or merely hide it? Can it be dispelled? Or mending? Depends on the DM.)

For the most part, I apply a simple rule: If the spell destroies material, such as Erase,
Dispel Won;t *create* material. Other than that, if the spell doesn't specifically say that
Dispel doesn't effect it, then it does. Otherwise what's the point of the Dispel Magic Spell?

>>>So the amount of damage a dispel magic would do would far less damage than
>>>other 3rd level spells.
>>
>>I'm not so sure about that. More, I think.
>>
>
>I think it's about the same. Consider fireball and lightning bolt, if not to
>the ship itself than to the crew. Without the crew the ship means little.
>However with your description of its effects on the ship rather than mine, I
>can see how it could be considered more deadly.

I did consider them. At their maximum they do 10d6. A really good roll does 60 points,
equivalent to 6 tons, but they average 35 points, 3 tons. 17 or 1 ton if save made.

Disple magic affects everything in a 30x30 area if it works at all. 10 tons. severely weakening
the structure of larger ships, possibly causing them to tear themsleves apart, and making
smaller ships flying death traps.


Thank You For Your Time,

Thomas O Magann Jr
http://www.sfo.com/~tomjr/

<tomjr@???.com> or my back-up: <TMagann@???.com>




Previous Message: Re: Money (was Re: Nifty Idea)
Next Message: Re: Ground attacks from spelljammers
Month Index: September, 1996

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
Nifty Idea    Matt Tong    10 Sep 1996 00:07:02
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    10 Sep 1996 00:28:55
Re: Nifty Idea    Alvin Lee    10 Sep 1996 05:30:53
Re: Nifty Idea    Jamie McGarty    10 Sep 1996 18:51:27
Re: Nifty Idea    Alvin Lee    11 Sep 1996 03:46:11
Re: Nifty Idea    Toby Mekelburg    11 Sep 1996 04:47:12
Re: Nifty Idea    Matt Tong    12 Sep 1996 02:38:08
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    12 Sep 1996 02:51:10
Re: Nifty Idea    Alvin Lee    12 Sep 1996 05:33:52
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    12 Sep 1996 05:40:48
Re: Nifty Idea    Jamie McGarty    12 Sep 1996 19:31:42
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    12 Sep 1996 21:21:27
Re: Nifty Idea    Ian Bowley    13 Sep 1996 02:04:00
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    13 Sep 1996 02:25:30
Re: Nifty Idea    Matt Tong    13 Sep 1996 19:07:37
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    13 Sep 1996 20:09:10
Re: Nifty Idea    Matt Tong    15 Sep 1996 23:14:35
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    15 Sep 1996 23:29:12
Re: Nifty Idea    Matt Tong    16 Sep 1996 20:08:32
Re: Nifty Idea    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    16 Sep 1996 20:52:17

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]