It came up as a way to get a character across a ravine. As the DM I let it work as it seemed like a creative work around for the problem, but thought I would come here to see what other thought.
Yeah, seems reasonable to me. It was a willing creature after all.
PS- I almost didn’t recognize you with the new look.
So what about the Gust cantrip? It should be able to at the very least push them 5 feet as they would have no way of succeeding on a Str saving throw if they are not right beside a wall (having nothing to grab onto/stand against). In 30 seconds, you could move them 25 feet.
I would rule that situationally, they could not make the strength save to avoid being moved by the gust.
That would seem reasonable if the target were unwilling.
Do remember the 500 lb. limit. I suppose it's arguable that the object must be 500 lbs. or less, but that additional weight can be piled on top without overcoming the spell.... but I'm not sure that's reasonable.
Do remember the 500 lb. limit. I suppose it's arguable that the object must be 500 lbs. or less, but that additional weight can be piled on top without overcoming the spell.... but I'm not sure that's reasonable.
Yes our DM did check that. At the time we were an all caster party, I don't think any of us wore armor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I'm with No gang on this one. Levitate works more like a lifting force than weight reduction.
Lifting force is weight reduction. Weight is how much down-force you exert.
So if I pick you up with a forklift, you have instant weight loss?
Yeah, I was going to ask about that too. Or how people apparently weigh less in a rising elevator. Or an object that is carried is weightless.
Weight is the force of gravity, the only way to reduce it is to fall. A lifting force like buoyancy can oppose gravity so you don't fall, but so does the floor (Newton's laws). In other words, your weight floating in water or being lifted by ropes is the same as when you were on solid ground.
Which brings me back to: the spell creates an upward force that opposes gravity, but does not reduce gravity.
I was with you that there's RAW ambiguity that doesn't require that Levitatenecessarily makes you weightless. However, it absolutely does not describe "creating an upward force that opposes gravity," though that too is a possible interpretation.
The spell suspends a creature in mid-air of a certain weight. Explanations for "how/why" aren't a RAW question, because the spell doesn't say, the answer is probably just "magic, or see your DM for a more specific ruling."
Levitate isn't weightlessness -- the target of the spell stays at whatever altitude you specify, which isn't what weightless would do. It's flight (up and down only). As for moving the target, given that the target can move by pulling and pushing on fixed objects, but at the speed of crawling, I would assume pulling them around is about as hard as it would be to pull around a non-levitating target. Which means mage hand isn't strong enough unless the target is Tiny, but a rope or harpoon is plenty (side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
I'm with No gang on this one. Levitate works more like a lifting force than weight reduction.
Lifting force is weight reduction. Weight is how much down-force you exert.
So if I pick you up with a forklift, you have instant weight loss?
Yeah, I was going to ask about that too. Or how people apparently weigh less in a rising elevator. Or an object that is carried is weightless.
Weight is the force of gravity, the only way to reduce it is to fall. A lifting force like buoyancy can oppose gravity so you don't fall, but so does the floor (Newton's laws). In other words, your weight floating in water or being lifted by ropes is the same as when you were on solid ground.
Which brings me back to: the spell creates an upward force that opposes gravity, but does not reduce gravity.
the problem with this line of thinking is that if the "process" of the spell (for lack of a better word) is to physically lift you or pull you up, then there is a force you can react against (you still stand on an elevator, or are held up by string/whatever, so you are exerting force on something even as you rise with those mundane objects). Given that the target specifically can't react against the force holding it up (it can't control its movement unless there is another physical object to interact with), you could argue that the spell is making the target functionally weightless (as opposed to something like reverse gravity, where there is a clear "end" to the force). Basically, there is no normal description of physics that really applies here, since the spell doesn't specifically say you are weightless but also doesn't specify that any force at all is holding you up other than "magic"
Its an argument anyway, in bounds with at least the logic of the RAW (though obviously the spell doesn't go into so much detail) and one that would support you pushing the levitated creature with gust or mage hand or really anything else, because without that force, the only "force/weight" you are overcoming is air resistance (which 10 pounds of force would be able to do unless the creature was absolutely massive)
(side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
Yes actually, about a month, maybe 5 weeks ago. I was treating a harpoon as a javelin. I figured that a deck mounted harpoon launcher on a Whaling Ship would use the stats for a Ballista.^ and a thrown harpoon would be roughly 1/4 of that (30/120 and a little less than 1d8 piercing), the javelin as the closest match. Although in hindsight, a spear might technically be a closer analogue. But it was kinda spur of the moment so I just grabbed the closest thing I could find.
Levitate isn't weightlessness -- the target of the spell stays at whatever altitude you specify, which isn't what weightless would do. It's flight (up and down only). As for moving the target, given that the target can move by pulling and pushing on fixed objects, but at the speed of crawling, I would assume pulling them around is about as hard as it would be to pull around a non-levitating target. Which means mage hand isn't strong enough unless the target is Tiny, but a rope or harpoon is plenty (side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
Its the speed of climbing, not crawling (this is a significant difference for creatures with a climbing speed), and could be explained due to the ungainly motion and extra control required in weightlessness as much as the presence of weight (no one says astronauts move fast in space, at least relative to their surroundings)
(side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
I've been unsatisfied with just slapping a ranged "grappled" condition onto Spears or Javelins on a hit, since it causes improper interactions like causing the harpooned creature to just go to speed 0 in all directions, and instead gone down a rabbit hole of houseruling entirely new weapon properties and a complicated condition called "tethered" that lets the two creatures interact with each other through the connecting rope. But I've never managed to get it slimmed down and intuitive enough to recommend it to others, you've really got to draw a line with stuff like that and say "I'm not trying to simulate a real harpoon, so what's the bare minimum I can include".
(side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
I've been unsatisfied with just slapping a ranged "grappled" condition onto Spears or Javelins on a hit, since it causes improper interactions like causing the harpooned creature to just go to speed 0 in all directions, and instead gone down a rabbit hole of houseruling entirely new weapon properties and a complicated condition called "tethered" that lets the two creatures interact with each other through the connecting rope. But I've never managed to get it slimmed down and intuitive enough to recommend it to others, you've really got to draw a line with stuff like that and say "I'm not trying to simulate a real harpoon, so what's the bare minimum I can include".
Sorry OT:
Tethered is good for things like harpoons, probably lassos as well.
The attacker and target cannot increase distance between each other but can choose to get closer. Contested STR rolls to see if you can move the other person. The attacker/initiator can choose to let go at anytime. The target needs to spend an action to attempt to free itself.
So yeah, harpoon your levitating friend and drag him wherever.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
(side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
I've been unsatisfied with just slapping a ranged "grappled" condition onto Spears or Javelins on a hit, since it causes improper interactions like causing the harpooned creature to just go to speed 0 in all directions, and instead gone down a rabbit hole of houseruling entirely new weapon properties and a complicated condition called "tethered" that lets the two creatures interact with each other through the connecting rope. But I've never managed to get it slimmed down and intuitive enough to recommend it to others, you've really got to draw a line with stuff like that and say "I'm not trying to simulate a real harpoon, so what's the bare minimum I can include".
I'd make a harpoon a martial weapon with the special property:
Harpoon (1dx piercing, range xx/xxx): a creature hit with a harpoon becomes tethered to it's wielder, and cannot move further away from the wielder of the harpoon until it is freed. The wielder of the harpoon can use its action to make a contested strength check against the tethered creature, moving it up to 10 feet closer to itself on a success. A creature can use its action to make a DC 10 Strength check, removing the barb and freeing itself or another creature on a success. Dealing 5 slashing damage to the tether destroys the harpoon and frees the creature (without harming it) though the barb must still be removed. A creature takes 1dx slashing damage when the barb is removed from it.
That seems no wordier than the rules for nets, and is based off those rules. For lassos, it would be similar, but with no damage (initially, and no barb/barb damage)
(side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
I've been unsatisfied with just slapping a ranged "grappled" condition onto Spears or Javelins on a hit, since it causes improper interactions like causing the harpooned creature to just go to speed 0 in all directions, and instead gone down a rabbit hole of houseruling entirely new weapon properties and a complicated condition called "tethered" that lets the two creatures interact with each other through the connecting rope. But I've never managed to get it slimmed down and intuitive enough to recommend it to others, you've really got to draw a line with stuff like that and say "I'm not trying to simulate a real harpoon, so what's the bare minimum I can include".
Sorry OT:
Tethered is good for things like harpoons, probably lassos as well.
The attacker and target cannot increase distance between each other but can choose to get closer. Contested STR rolls to see if you can move the other person. The attacker/initiator can choose to let go at anytime. The target needs to spend an action to attempt to free itself.
So yeah, harpoon your levitating friend and drag him wherever.
That was about the gist of it, yes! Except, I found that leaving the attacker/initiator can let go part of it out of the condition, and making it a special property of the weapon (as well as the rules for how the weapon is used to initiate Tethered in the first place) was more helpful... because then it let you re-use Tethered to adjudicate things like being tied together on a chain gang or a climbing rope.
Putting the full block of special rules in the harpoon gets too unwieldy, and putting the full block of rules in a Tethered property makes it too narrow, its a balancing act to add a new system like that.
Levitate isn't weightlessness -- the target of the spell stays at whatever altitude you specify, which isn't what weightless would do. It's flight (up and down only). As for moving the target, given that the target can move by pulling and pushing on fixed objects, but at the speed of crawling, I would assume pulling them around is about as hard as it would be to pull around a non-levitating target. Which means mage hand isn't strong enough unless the target is Tiny, but a rope or harpoon is plenty (side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
The rules neither establish nor disprove this detail. It's a fair assumption, but the alternative is also equally fair.
I ran into the situation where the mage used Levitate to climb up a 50-foot wall. It took him three turns to reach the top by using the unevenness of the stone wall to 'push' his way up.
I ran into the situation where the mage used Levitate to climb up a 50-foot wall. It took him three turns to reach the top by using the unevenness of the stone wall to 'push' his way up.
Why? "You can change the target's altitude by up to 20 feet in either direction on your turn." Can't he just float up?
I ran into the situation where the mage used Levitate to climb up a 50-foot wall. It took him three turns to reach the top by using the unevenness of the stone wall to 'push' his way up.
Don't really need to do that. You can just move up or down 20' inherently as part of the spell. Pushing on things is for horizontal movement or if you want to move despite the desires of the caster.
I ran into the situation where the mage used Levitate to climb up a 50-foot wall. It took him three turns to reach the top by using the unevenness of the stone wall to 'push' his way up.
Don't really need to do that. You can just move up or down 20' inherently as part of the spell. Pushing on things is for horizontal movement or if you want to move despite the desires of the caster.
Fair enough. It gave a nice visual context but I understand what you are saying. (Or what I should have understood what the spell description was saying.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah, seems reasonable to me. It was a willing creature after all.
PS- I almost didn’t recognize you with the new look.
That would seem reasonable if the target were unwilling.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
We once carted our entire party into the air by casting Levitate on a sled and Fly on a mount.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Lol. I had to change things up a little. :)
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Do remember the 500 lb. limit. I suppose it's arguable that the object must be 500 lbs. or less, but that additional weight can be piled on top without overcoming the spell.... but I'm not sure that's reasonable.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yes our DM did check that. At the time we were an all caster party, I don't think any of us wore armor.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Yeah, I was going to ask about that too. Or how people apparently weigh less in a rising elevator. Or an object that is carried is weightless.
Weight is the force of gravity, the only way to reduce it is to fall. A lifting force like buoyancy can oppose gravity so you don't fall, but so does the floor (Newton's laws). In other words, your weight floating in water or being lifted by ropes is the same as when you were on solid ground.
Which brings me back to: the spell creates an upward force that opposes gravity, but does not reduce gravity.
I was with you that there's RAW ambiguity that doesn't require that Levitate necessarily makes you weightless. However, it absolutely does not describe "creating an upward force that opposes gravity," though that too is a possible interpretation.
The spell suspends a creature in mid-air of a certain weight. Explanations for "how/why" aren't a RAW question, because the spell doesn't say, the answer is probably just "magic, or see your DM for a more specific ruling."
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Levitate isn't weightlessness -- the target of the spell stays at whatever altitude you specify, which isn't what weightless would do. It's flight (up and down only). As for moving the target, given that the target can move by pulling and pushing on fixed objects, but at the speed of crawling, I would assume pulling them around is about as hard as it would be to pull around a non-levitating target. Which means mage hand isn't strong enough unless the target is Tiny, but a rope or harpoon is plenty (side note: has anyone used a harpoon in a game, and if so what stats did you give it?)
the problem with this line of thinking is that if the "process" of the spell (for lack of a better word) is to physically lift you or pull you up, then there is a force you can react against (you still stand on an elevator, or are held up by string/whatever, so you are exerting force on something even as you rise with those mundane objects). Given that the target specifically can't react against the force holding it up (it can't control its movement unless there is another physical object to interact with), you could argue that the spell is making the target functionally weightless (as opposed to something like reverse gravity, where there is a clear "end" to the force). Basically, there is no normal description of physics that really applies here, since the spell doesn't specifically say you are weightless but also doesn't specify that any force at all is holding you up other than "magic"
Its an argument anyway, in bounds with at least the logic of the RAW (though obviously the spell doesn't go into so much detail) and one that would support you pushing the levitated creature with gust or mage hand or really anything else, because without that force, the only "force/weight" you are overcoming is air resistance (which 10 pounds of force would be able to do unless the creature was absolutely massive)
Yes actually, about a month, maybe 5 weeks ago. I was treating a harpoon as a javelin. I figured that a deck mounted harpoon launcher on a Whaling Ship would use the stats for a Ballista.^ and a thrown harpoon would be roughly 1/4 of that (30/120 and a little less than 1d8 piercing), the javelin as the closest match. Although in hindsight, a spear might technically be a closer analogue. But it was kinda spur of the moment so I just grabbed the closest thing I could find.
^https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/running-the-game#SiegeEquipment
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Its the speed of climbing, not crawling (this is a significant difference for creatures with a climbing speed), and could be explained due to the ungainly motion and extra control required in weightlessness as much as the presence of weight (no one says astronauts move fast in space, at least relative to their surroundings)
I've been unsatisfied with just slapping a ranged "grappled" condition onto Spears or Javelins on a hit, since it causes improper interactions like causing the harpooned creature to just go to speed 0 in all directions, and instead gone down a rabbit hole of houseruling entirely new weapon properties and a complicated condition called "tethered" that lets the two creatures interact with each other through the connecting rope. But I've never managed to get it slimmed down and intuitive enough to recommend it to others, you've really got to draw a line with stuff like that and say "I'm not trying to simulate a real harpoon, so what's the bare minimum I can include".
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Sorry OT:
Tethered is good for things like harpoons, probably lassos as well.
The attacker and target cannot increase distance between each other but can choose to get closer. Contested STR rolls to see if you can move the other person. The attacker/initiator can choose to let go at anytime. The target needs to spend an action to attempt to free itself.
So yeah, harpoon your levitating friend and drag him wherever.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I'd make a harpoon a martial weapon with the special property:
Harpoon (1dx piercing, range xx/xxx): a creature hit with a harpoon becomes tethered to it's wielder, and cannot move further away from the wielder of the harpoon until it is freed. The wielder of the harpoon can use its action to make a contested strength check against the tethered creature, moving it up to 10 feet closer to itself on a success. A creature can use its action to make a DC 10 Strength check, removing the barb and freeing itself or another creature on a success. Dealing 5 slashing damage to the tether destroys the harpoon and frees the creature (without harming it) though the barb must still be removed. A creature takes 1dx slashing damage when the barb is removed from it.
That seems no wordier than the rules for nets, and is based off those rules. For lassos, it would be similar, but with no damage (initially, and no barb/barb damage)
That was about the gist of it, yes! Except, I found that leaving the attacker/initiator can let go part of it out of the condition, and making it a special property of the weapon (as well as the rules for how the weapon is used to initiate Tethered in the first place) was more helpful... because then it let you re-use Tethered to adjudicate things like being tied together on a chain gang or a climbing rope.
Putting the full block of special rules in the harpoon gets too unwieldy, and putting the full block of rules in a Tethered property makes it too narrow, its a balancing act to add a new system like that.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The rules neither establish nor disprove this detail. It's a fair assumption, but the alternative is also equally fair.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I ran into the situation where the mage used Levitate to climb up a 50-foot wall. It took him three turns to reach the top by using the unevenness of the stone wall to 'push' his way up.
Why? "You can change the target's altitude by up to 20 feet in either direction on your turn." Can't he just float up?
Don't really need to do that. You can just move up or down 20' inherently as part of the spell. Pushing on things is for horizontal movement or if you want to move despite the desires of the caster.
Fair enough. It gave a nice visual context but I understand what you are saying. (Or what I should have understood what the spell description was saying.)