Page 1 of 1

Question on Barkskin

Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 8:23 pm
by Gameconscious
Okay, looking over Barkskin, I really liked the addition of being able to use it to physically change into a tree. That's really cool. But I've got a question.

Should it not have a Wisdom save if used to turn another character into a tree? Or did I miss that?

Posted: Wed May 10, 2006 8:45 pm
by Treebore
Apparently it never occurred to them that it could be used offensively, or they figured if it was used that way it would be the same save as for any polymorphing type of spell, and that the CK would rule that way in the unlikely event a save was ever needed.

The other possibility, since I don't have my book with me, is what is the range? If it is self, which i doubt? If it is it can't be used on someone else anyways. I would guess that saving as versus polymorph is a good answer though.

Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 8:06 pm
by Gameconscious
The range is Touch, and it even specifically says that the caster (but not the recipient) can dismiss the spell early.

I think it was simply a matter of taking the basic text from the SRD for the spell, adding the cool transformation option, and somehow the Saving Throw info didn't get changed. It happens.

Posted: Fri May 12, 2006 1:10 am
by Treebore
I would think your right, so just go with a standard save versus polymorph when used offensively.

Posted: Fri May 12, 2006 9:02 am
by cleaverthepit
Yeah, it would be like polymorph other when used offensively. The recipient gets a wisdom save.

Thanks for catching that.

Davis

Posted: Fri May 12, 2006 6:36 pm
by serleran
Course, in my games, it would be a Con save... but, Wisdom is by the book.

Posted: Sat May 13, 2006 12:04 am
by Moorcrys
Seems like a great use for the spell... a druid showing his ire by turning the offending entity into a tree for a time, rather than killing the creature.

Moorcrys

Posted: Sun May 14, 2006 1:45 pm
by Maliki
Moorcrys wrote:
Seems like a great use for the spell... a druid showing his ire by turning the offending entity into a tree for a time, rather than killing the creature.

Moorcrys

I like that idea.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:26 am
by Kayolan
Barkskin has a range of "Self". Is that the same as having a range of "Touch"? Can you caste it on other people?

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:22 pm
by Grandpa
Gameconscious wrote:
Wed May 10, 2006 8:23 pm

Should it not have a Wisdom save if used to turn another character into a tree? Or did I miss that?
Range of spell is SELF. Therefore cannot cast on another.

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:46 pm
by serleran
[quote=Grandpa post_id=258910 time=1600093379 user_id=5364]
[quote=Gameconscious post_id=1474 time=1147292580 user_id=125]

Should it not have a Wisdom save if used to turn another character into a tree? Or did I miss that?
[/quote]

Range of spell is SELF. Therefore cannot cast on another.
[/quote]

That may be true now, with more recent printings of the PHB, but in the original (and at least the 2nd), the spell was listed with range: touch.

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:21 pm
by Kayolan
Well that makes sense now. I can see why it was changed.

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:56 pm
by Grandpa
serleran wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:46 pm

That may be true now, with more recent printings of the PHB, but in the original (and at least the 2nd), the spell was listed with range: touch.
I don't know. I'm commenting on what the rule is now and several years ago. No idea what it was before that. ;)

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:29 am
by Grandpa
serleran, you said in the beginning it was a range of touch. AD&D had it as touch also. Maybe a typo crept in during editing of a printing. Might want to check with the powers that be...

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:29 am
by Kayolan
Grandpa wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:29 am
serleran, you said in the beginning it was a range of touch. AD&D had it as touch also. Maybe a typo crept in during editing of a printing. Might want to check with the powers that be...
That is strange. Was it changed because it was considered to be too powerful or prone to abuse?

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2020 4:13 am
by Grandpa
Kayolan wrote:
Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:29 am
Grandpa wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:29 am
serleran, you said in the beginning it was a range of touch. AD&D had it as touch also. Maybe a typo crept in during editing of a printing. Might want to check with the powers that be...
That is strange. Was it changed because it was considered to be too powerful or prone to abuse?
Unknown Maybe just an error.

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:20 am
by Captain_K
Barkskin... too powerful.... touch vs self... I see a druid doing it only to self... and little need to do it to the fighter or cleric since it does not stack with armor (I think)... so you barkskin up the mage or a thief.. big deal... let it be either... or self at start and with a WIS check they can do another... holding a holy leaf and a piece of bark????

Re: Question on Barkskin

Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2020 3:04 am
by Kayolan
Captain_K wrote:
Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:20 am
Barkskin... too powerful.... touch vs self... I see a druid doing it only to self... and little need to do it to the fighter or cleric since it does not stack with armor (I think)... so you barkskin up the mage or a thief.. big deal... let it be either... or self at start and with a WIS check they can do another... holding a holy leaf and a piece of bark????

I thought Barkskin stacked with armor, at least that's how I've always ruled it. But that's not really what I considered to be a potential source of abuse, it would be the ability to turn a creature into a shrub with a touch attack, and with a duration of 10 minutes/level, not to mention what you could do to that shrub, like setting it on fire.