If two commoners were true polymorphed into liquids, like glasses of beer, and you mixed the two together, what would be the result, assuming you had a way to true polymorph two things at once. This leads to three questions at least
1. Would you consider glass to be the body and the liquid represents thier life force, so pouring and drinking it causes damage?
2 if I and say an assistant just turned both into a free form liquid above a normal container what would happen when they intermix
3. Would you consider evaporation over a long term to be considered damage, say I left the mug out in the sun in the guild hall for weeks or months
I would rule that when whatever object you creates ceases to have definite boundaries, it is no longer considered a discrete object, so therefore is destroyed. Destroying the object drops its hitpoints to 0, ending the spell. So If you mix the glass of beer that you turned the commoner into with another commoner-beer, that destroys the beers, ending the spell and freeing the commoners. The commoner-beer (magically) does not evaporate.
From my reading of the spell, the sentence "If you concentrate on this spell for the full duration, the spell lasts until it is dispelled." only deals with duration, not other ways to end the spell (so reducing hitpoints to 0 of the object or creature that you have transformed your target into still ends the spell).
Pretty elaborate way to kill two commoners though...
Especially because when the object is destroyed, the spell ends (and doesn't kill the commoners).
Edit: I based my interpretation on what I think of as an object, but there seems to be some rules support for my position. The DMG calls an object a discrete item. I'm not sure if I would call a glass of beer discrete (or rather two objects). But either way, I'd say that if you turn a humanoid into a liquid puddle then destroy the "object" by interfering with the puddle, then you've effectively ended the spell.
The rules sort of break when you start treating fluids as "an object" (not only here). The simplest and most efficient fix is to say fluids are not objects.
Objects have durability and can take damage and break. How does water take damage? What happens to water that runs out of durability? Can you break the ocean?
I wouldn't call a liquid an object. A sealed object with liquid inside - maybe - like a snow globe - but an open container like a mug of ale? Nah. Sure you could turn the commoners into mugs and drink ale from them - but I wouldn't say you could turn them into just liquid - and certainly not a mug with liquid in it - those are two different things.
I tend to agree that liquids should be off limits, at least for mechanically simplicity. But if you want to try to take a wider view of "object" then you have to take an appropriately reasonable view of when that object "ceases to be."
But it does remind me of one of the greatest jokes in The Hitchhiker's Guide: "It's a bit like being drunk."/ "What's wrong with being drunk?" / "Ask a glass of water."
What if you turn them into a metal (such as gallium) that has a low melting point, and you just hold them in your hands until they melt?
Why do you have to complicate game mechanics with science? I would probably have to rule a change of state as damage. Just to keep the shenanigans down.
What if you turn them into a metal (such as gallium) that has a low melting point, and you just hold them in your hands until they melt?
Why do you have to complicate game mechanics with science? I would probably have to rule a change of state as damage. Just to keep the shenanigans down.
So, raising their overall temperature slowly by warming them by less than 15 degrees overall during the course of about 10 minutes causes damage? I don't know how I feel about that.
Also, not trying to complicate the game mechanics with science, just spitballing strange ideas. I have gallium IRL, and True Polymorph can turn them into anything, so I was just wondering.
Also, True Polymorph doesn't say that they have to be the same overall temperature as before, but I don't know if I'd allow someone to turn another person into an Ice Cube, because then they'd melt, and then the water would be absorbed by plants, and animals would drink the water, and then eat those plants, and soon the polymorphed person is scattered across many different places in multiple different forms, possibly the part of another monster.
It's just a strange concept. I don't think it is outrageous to think that a player would like to polymorph a Demon Lord into an icicle or Gallium, or frozen Mercury.
Science should go along with the game mechanics to an extent. That's why guns and gunpowder exist in D&D.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
What if you turn them into a metal (such as gallium) that has a low melting point, and you just hold them in your hands until they melt?
Why do you have to complicate game mechanics with science? I would probably have to rule a change of state as damage. Just to keep the shenanigans down.
So, raising their overall temperature slowly by warming them by less than 15 degrees overall during the course of about 10 minutes causes damage? I don't know how I feel about that.
15° is the difference between normal body temperature and a deadly fever. The amount of energy required to give a small 3rd degree burn to a person would not be enough energy to raise their body temperature that amount.
What if you turn them into a metal (such as gallium) that has a low melting point, and you just hold them in your hands until they melt?
Why do you have to complicate game mechanics with science? I would probably have to rule a change of state as damage. Just to keep the shenanigans down.
So, raising their overall temperature slowly by warming them by less than 15 degrees overall during the course of about 10 minutes causes damage? I don't know how I feel about that.
Smacking it against a table causes damage in way less than 10 minutes. I agree that "state change causes damage" is a reasonable way to rule such an obscene edge case. Gallium is particularly susceptible to such damage. Don't turn someone into gallium (or, you know, ice) if you're worried about them melting. None of this seems at all unreasonable.
I guess state change could cause damage, but would it be to the creature or the object? If the object is destroyed, can it not be restored to its original form?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I guess state change could cause damage, but would it be to the creature or the object? If the object is destroyed, can it not be restored to its original form?
The spell's description doesn't say anything except that the creature's statistics become the object's (including HP). An object breaks when it hits 0 HP, and when the target of the spell hits 0 HP, it reverts to its pre-spell form. I just don't think melting an object is any different than smashing it. It's probably EASIER to break OP's beer bottle than it is to rub gallium in your hands until it melts. It seems super unproblematic to me to rule this way.
No matter what you choose for your object and what you do to it, whenever you'd consider it no longer the "object" that you started with then I'd consider it to be 0 HP. Breaking the object ends the spell. You can get creative on how you end the spell, but that doesn't help you destroy monsters because that isn't how the spell works.
For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or a vehicle that is composed of many other objects.
It is pretty iffy whether you could call a liquid under this definition anyway, but certainly when it stops being discrete it stops being an object.
All I can say is, you have come up with a fine explanation for the origin of the Owlbear.
I would totally permit unusual effects for mixing polymorphed creatures, though you'd have to make a high spellcasting ability check (25 or so) (incidentally, the way to get two targets is to have two casters or be wizard-17/sorcerer-3).
If two commoners were true polymorphed into liquids, like glasses of beer, and you mixed the two together, what would be the result, assuming you had a way to true polymorph two things at once. This leads to three questions at least
1. Would you consider glass to be the body and the liquid represents thier life force, so pouring and drinking it causes damage?
2 if I and say an assistant just turned both into a free form liquid above a normal container what would happen when they intermix
3. Would you consider evaporation over a long term to be considered damage, say I left the mug out in the sun in the guild hall for weeks or months
Whatever the DM rules.
Pretty elaborate way to kill two commoners though...
I would rule that when whatever object you creates ceases to have definite boundaries, it is no longer considered a discrete object, so therefore is destroyed. Destroying the object drops its hitpoints to 0, ending the spell. So If you mix the glass of beer that you turned the commoner into with another commoner-beer, that destroys the beers, ending the spell and freeing the commoners. The commoner-beer (magically) does not evaporate.
From my reading of the spell, the sentence "If you concentrate on this spell for the full duration, the spell lasts until it is dispelled." only deals with duration, not other ways to end the spell (so reducing hitpoints to 0 of the object or creature that you have transformed your target into still ends the spell).
Especially because when the object is destroyed, the spell ends (and doesn't kill the commoners).
Edit: I based my interpretation on what I think of as an object, but there seems to be some rules support for my position. The DMG calls an object a discrete item. I'm not sure if I would call a glass of beer discrete (or rather two objects). But either way, I'd say that if you turn a humanoid into a liquid puddle then destroy the "object" by interfering with the puddle, then you've effectively ended the spell.
The rules sort of break when you start treating fluids as "an object" (not only here). The simplest and most efficient fix is to say fluids are not objects.
Objects have durability and can take damage and break. How does water take damage? What happens to water that runs out of durability? Can you break the ocean?
I wouldn't call a liquid an object. A sealed object with liquid inside - maybe - like a snow globe - but an open container like a mug of ale? Nah. Sure you could turn the commoners into mugs and drink ale from them - but I wouldn't say you could turn them into just liquid - and certainly not a mug with liquid in it - those are two different things.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I tend to agree that liquids should be off limits, at least for mechanically simplicity. But if you want to try to take a wider view of "object" then you have to take an appropriately reasonable view of when that object "ceases to be."
But it does remind me of one of the greatest jokes in The Hitchhiker's Guide: "It's a bit like being drunk."/ "What's wrong with being drunk?" / "Ask a glass of water."
What if you turn them into a metal (such as gallium) that has a low melting point, and you just hold them in your hands until they melt?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Why do you have to complicate game mechanics with science? I would probably have to rule a change of state as damage. Just to keep the shenanigans down.
So, raising their overall temperature slowly by warming them by less than 15 degrees overall during the course of about 10 minutes causes damage? I don't know how I feel about that.
Also, not trying to complicate the game mechanics with science, just spitballing strange ideas. I have gallium IRL, and True Polymorph can turn them into anything, so I was just wondering.
Also, True Polymorph doesn't say that they have to be the same overall temperature as before, but I don't know if I'd allow someone to turn another person into an Ice Cube, because then they'd melt, and then the water would be absorbed by plants, and animals would drink the water, and then eat those plants, and soon the polymorphed person is scattered across many different places in multiple different forms, possibly the part of another monster.
It's just a strange concept. I don't think it is outrageous to think that a player would like to polymorph a Demon Lord into an icicle or Gallium, or frozen Mercury.
Science should go along with the game mechanics to an extent. That's why guns and gunpowder exist in D&D.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
15° is the difference between normal body temperature and a deadly fever. The amount of energy required to give a small 3rd degree burn to a person would not be enough energy to raise their body temperature that amount.
Smacking it against a table causes damage in way less than 10 minutes. I agree that "state change causes damage" is a reasonable way to rule such an obscene edge case. Gallium is particularly susceptible to such damage. Don't turn someone into gallium (or, you know, ice) if you're worried about them melting. None of this seems at all unreasonable.
I guess state change could cause damage, but would it be to the creature or the object? If the object is destroyed, can it not be restored to its original form?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The spell's description doesn't say anything except that the creature's statistics become the object's (including HP). An object breaks when it hits 0 HP, and when the target of the spell hits 0 HP, it reverts to its pre-spell form. I just don't think melting an object is any different than smashing it. It's probably EASIER to break OP's beer bottle than it is to rub gallium in your hands until it melts. It seems super unproblematic to me to rule this way.
No matter what you choose for your object and what you do to it, whenever you'd consider it no longer the "object" that you started with then I'd consider it to be 0 HP. Breaking the object ends the spell. You can get creative on how you end the spell, but that doesn't help you destroy monsters because that isn't how the spell works.
It is pretty iffy whether you could call a liquid under this definition anyway, but certainly when it stops being discrete it stops being an object.
All I can say is, you have come up with a fine explanation for the origin of the Owlbear.
I would totally permit unusual effects for mixing polymorphed creatures, though you'd have to make a high spellcasting ability check (25 or so) (incidentally, the way to get two targets is to have two casters
or be wizard-17/sorcerer-3).