Levitation part 3 or maybe 4

[Veknironth]

Well, I first want to be clear that I had this question in mind before the season finale of Ahsoka. That said, there are two concepts of Levitation. One is that it raises you vertically but outside forces can move you laterally. The other, let's call it the British version, is that you can only move up and down and the spell prevents you from being moved other directions.

What would happen to someone's momentum along an x or y axis if they were suddenly levitated? For example you do a running jump and as you're in the air someone, maybe you the caster, levitates you. Would you continue to move in that same direction on the x or y axis until something stopped you? In the British version, what would happen if you levitate something that's moving quickly, like a flying creature (assuming it fails a save). Would it suddenly be brought to a halt? Would that cause damage?

-Vek
"Or does the subject have to be stationary to be the target of the spell?"

[kiralon]

I play as you set a height and try to stay at it with various forces interfering, for example, levitate will reduce the damage you take from a fall by twice your maximum levitate height but then you start taking damage again.
on X and Y and rotational force, this is not controlled, otherwise you could levitate an iron door and have it impassable.
I also play that levitate is a force holding you up that is frictionless, so you will also slide downhill if you do not do it on a flat surface.
Running levitate jumps are possible unless the wind is too strong, and you can use a weapon once before getting too much rotation speed to attack again easily.

My players usually get around the downsides with rope.

[Library Ogre]

I generally have levitation lift you vertically, but not leave you subject to weightlessness, like kiralon; you don't spin helplessly if you swing a heavy weapon, you just can't move forward without something to push off of. For levitation-enabled jumps, I'd probably allow it, because it is cool; they, basically, levitate you without lifting you, and you push off from the ground. However, I'm not sure how much further I would let you get... maybe double the distance, and without the threat of falling if you fall short.

[drewkitty ~..~]

levitation is not British

[The Dark Elf]

There's a debate about what constitutes as ground but I don't allow levitation to begin from the air at all (so u cant use it to stop from falling either). But if someone levitated a cheetah running really fast I would rule that it stops horizontal movement and levitates up but doesn't take damage from the sudden stop because I don't think that would be enjoyable game-wise. #magic
I wouldn't rule any whiplash damage for carpet of adhesion stopping it either but if it was a mount (or vehicle) for that I would have some physically consequences.

[kiralon]

@dark elf
would you then allow a levitated door to block a doorway as there is no horizontal movement, or would you just say there is a sudden total loss of inertia, how about rotation is that stopped too?
Would wind blow the levitate item around?

[darthauthor]

I feel that Levitation, is spirit is not supposed to be flight so the writers want to box it in to be a sort of ladder or elevator.

Then creative and inventive people thought of ways they could use the power in ways the authors never imagined.

Like LIbrary Ogre, I agree with using it to do cool things like a Star Wars Jedi Force Jump.

I feel it gets tricky IF and when it can be used as a weapon or at least a neutralizing effect.
I acknowledge these things exist in Bio-Manipulation and the spell Petrification but the target gets a saving throw or a dodge.

So NOT as a weapon, I'd like it if players used it to catch some thing or one IF they were falling to rescue them.

[Library Ogre]

A lot of Palladium spells and powers need "If used on an unwilling target, they get a saving throw v. spells". In fact, if they don't say that the target doesn't, assume that the target does.

[Grazzik]

A lot of Palladium spells and powers need "If used on an unwilling target, they get a saving throw v. spells". In fact, if they don't say that the target doesn't, assume that the target does.

Many spells have Saving Throw of "none" or "not applicable", so no ambiguity there - there is no save. If a save is intended for unwanted enchantments, it's listed in some fashion - Cure Minor Disorders, Cure Illness and Memory Bank are examples that have the same distinction but demonstrate no standard phrase.

Levitation is "standard" (PFRPG Core pg 191), so yes it can be used offensively and there is a save roll. Float in Air (pg 192) can also be used offensively, but Saving Throw is listed as "none", so no dice. Someone trying to drown themselves but is enchanted with Swim as a Fish is going to be sorely disappointed.

If PB were to change the rules to make "Standard" default for all unwanted spells, then it would less ambiguous and probably mean a lot more dice rolling during magic combat. Unfortunately, the wording in PFRPG Core pg 46 does not give players discretion as to when to roll to save, it only says "Occasionally, characters must roll to save" which implies it is not discretionary.

Don't despair (maybe)! Mysteries of Magic comes to the rescue with an automatic chance to save for all "sentient beings"... MoM pg 47 discusses auras and the automatic resistance leading to a roll to save vs magic. However, in true PB fashion, the two examples they give are listed as having Saving Throws, so it remains unclear if the aura extends this resistance to spells listed with Saving Throws of "none" or "not applicable".

[Library Ogre]

A lot of Palladium spells and powers need "If used on an unwilling target, they get a saving throw v. spells". In fact, if they don't say that the target doesn't, assume that the target does.

Many spells have Saving Throw of "none" or "not applicable", so no ambiguity there - there is no save. If a save is intended for unwanted enchantments, it's listed in some fashion - Cure Minor Disorders, Cure Illness and Memory Bank are examples that have the same distinction but demonstrate no standard phrase.

This goes back to the problem of the "Increase Weight" spell. I can increase the weight of a person by 400 pounds, but they get a saving throw. But, since their armor is an object, I can increase the weight of their armor by 400 pounds without a saving throw, and crush their chest with their own chainmail. It's a lack of consideration into the implications of things being used creatively.

[Grazzik]

A lot of Palladium spells and powers need "If used on an unwilling target, they get a saving throw v. spells". In fact, if they don't say that the target doesn't, assume that the target does.

Many spells have Saving Throw of "none" or "not applicable", so no ambiguity there - there is no save. If a save is intended for unwanted enchantments, it's listed in some fashion - Cure Minor Disorders, Cure Illness and Memory Bank are examples that have the same distinction but demonstrate no standard phrase.

This goes back to the problem of the "Increase Weight" spell. I can increase the weight of a person by 400 pounds, but they get a saving throw. But, since their armor is an object, I can increase the weight of their armor by 400 pounds without a saving throw, and crush their chest with their own chainmail. It's a lack of consideration into the implications of things being used creatively.

Doesn't quite work... unless of course someone is holding a shield over their head and the spell is cast on the shield...

This "aura" of protection extends, in most cases, to the clothing or armor one is wearing, so it too is covered by the saving throw. Most handheld weapons (usually made of metal or minerals) are not usually protected by one's aura or natural resistance to magic.

A claim might be tried that the reference to "metal or minerals" means that the metallic substance of the chainmail disrupts the protection, but unfortunately it's open to interpretation as no such provision is provided for in that section on auras and saving throws. It could be house ruled though.

[Library Ogre]

This goes back to the problem of the "Increase Weight" spell. I can increase the weight of a person by 400 pounds, but they get a saving throw. But, since their armor is an object, I can increase the weight of their armor by 400 pounds without a saving throw, and crush their chest with their own chainmail. It's a lack of consideration into the implications of things being used creatively.

Doesn't quite work... unless of course someone is holding a shield over their head and the spell is cast on the shield...

If you are wearing a chain hauberk, and it suddenly weighs an additional 400 pounds, it is going to severely restrict your breathing, especially as you fall to your knees and can't get up, as you're carrying an additional 400 pounds.

This "aura" of protection extends, in most cases, to the clothing or armor one is wearing, so it too is covered by the saving throw. Most handheld weapons (usually made of metal or minerals) are not usually protected by one's aura or natural resistance to magic.

A claim might be tried that the reference to "metal or minerals" means that the metallic substance of the chainmail disrupts the protection, but unfortunately it's open to interpretation as no such provision is provided for in that section on auras and saving throws. It could be house ruled though.

Ah, fun. "(Usually made of metal or minerals)" is one of the many unnecessary clauses that got added in the editing process.

The original did not include that clause, making it much clearer.

[Grazzik]

Ah, fun. "(Usually made of metal or minerals)" is one of the many unnecessary clauses that got added in the editing process.

The original did not include that clause, making it much clearer.

Hmm, I actually think sometimes that PB has a very strict editing standard to remove any clarity in order to maintain a recognizable brand and keep their detail-obsessed fanbase abuzz about things like this. After ~40 years of copious publications, it simply can't be by chance...