The Gaming Den

I was looking up Major Creation.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Major_creation

So, you can create precious metals.

But they only last 20 min/level.

But that's long enough for this idea.

See, they were foolish enough to let you create it by volume (a cubic foot per caster level).

Gold weighs 1,206 pounds (546 kg) per square foot.

You can cast Major Creation at level 9, so that means...

-You can make about 10 tons of gold at level nine. At level 15, it's nine tons of gold.

-You can make it within Close range. That doesn't matter because you can fly up to any height you want. Spend ten minutes casting the spell.

-And then you can crack open almost any building you want.

The major problem is that the falling certainly did not take into account a five-to-twelve-ton lump of gold getting airborne. They cap out at 20d6. I suppose you could make an argument for each multiple of 200 lbs increasing die size, in which case you could have...160d6 for the impact of a cubic foot of gold. But scaling that up for the potential of twelve tons of gold...or even the nine tons at level 15, would make me, as a DM, go "It breaks through the roof, goes through multiple floors, and goes down through the bottom floor. The building shudders."

You have to conjure it on something capable of supporting it, not thin air (general rule for Conjurations). Still, you can put it on a wall of force and then drop it.

Depending on interpretation, weight-related falling object damage isn't capped, while distance-based is.

Of course, if you're doing it in two steps already, you can divide up the ingot into multiple 200-lb chunks, to fix this problem.

The real problem, of course, is that the falling object damage rules are overpowered for PC use.

d20 SRD wrote:For each 200 pounds of an object’s weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage).

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/environment.htm

I think IGTN's parsing is correct, you actually get 1d6 for each 200 lbs of material you've got in the lump, so you can make it as massive as you want. There's a very real benefit to splitting it up though, since then each of those would get separate bonus falling dice. For example:

One 1T thing falling 50': 10d6 + 4d6 falling = 14d6
Ten 200lb things falling 50': (1d6 + 4d6 falling) * 10 = 50d6

You can fix that particular issue by adding the same damage for each additional 10' increment (capping at 20 increments instead of 20d6), so that you get the same damage potential whether it's broken up or not. The 1T thing above would get 10d6 per 10', so it works out the same. It doesn't address the general obnoxiousness of dropping heavy things from up high, but at least it's consistent.

Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead, or, if your DM is completely off his rocker, uranium?

Uranium sword?

Mister_Sinister wrote:Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead, or, if your DM is completely off his rocker, uranium?

Cause it's funnier to murder them with wealth.

Also, gold is almost twice as dense as lead. And a bit more than uranium. Tungsten beats it out slightly, but not enough to make up for the lost irony.

[Edit] Platinum is denser still (21400 kg/m^3 or 1335 lb/ft^3) and also worth more, so also more ironic. And it'll last just as long, though the duration isn't even a concern with this sort of use.

TGD - where physics and gaming meet.

A better way to do it is to get up on the roof with a jar of Marvelous Pigments and start drawing pictures of lead blocks at a rate of 35.4 tons per minute

Mister_Sinister wrote:Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead, or, if your DM is completely off his rocker, uranium?

Well, you could do it with platinum, too. But it's not appreciably denser than gold but costs a platinum piece.

See, you need a bit of whatever you're making. So you could make this with a gold piece as a material component.

Also, using gold is 1) Very noticeable to those inside, because a huge chunk of gold has fallen out of the sky and crashed through the roof 2) more fun because you can call it things like the Midas Meteor as well as Damocles' Ingot. 3) Funny because this costs you a gold piece.

Hm.

Well, I see how to make a wall of force do that. The wall is always a flat, vertical plane. So you could make the gold a U-shape and hang it onto the wall. The weight (and softness) of the gold will probably mean it slices itself in half on it. BUT. The Wall is capable of taking the weight, even if the gold isn't capable of supporting itself.

Of course, a plane has no thickness, so it's debateable about if that's a surface in the real world and outside of geometry.

Grek wrote:A better way to do it is to get up on the roof with a jar of Marvelous Pigments and start drawing pictures of lead blocks at a rate of 35.4 tons per minute

So that's why you want Craft (painting) as a skill....

Mister_Sinister wrote:Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead

Sinister, you can't believe everything you see on TV.
Gold ain't no lightweight. Google up the density of elements.

Gold is actually one of the heaviest metals around, and is much denser than lead.

Maxus wrote: Of course, a plane has no thickness, so it's debateable about if that's a surface in the real world and outside of geometry.

So does this mean that anyone bullrushed into the edge of a wall is automatically sliced in half?

I don't think there's any information given about the dimensionality of the wall of force.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:

Maxus wrote: Of course, a plane has no thickness, so it's debateable about if that's a surface in the real world and outside of geometry.

So does this mean that anyone bullrushed into the edge of a wall is automatically sliced in half?

I don't think there's any information given about the dimensionality of the wall of force.

Ja. I think it's safe to assume you can refer to the shape "plane" outside of the exact geometrical context just as you can "point," "ray," "line," or for that matter, "square."

Caedrus wrote:

Mister_Sinister wrote:Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead

Sinister, you can't believe everything you see on TV.
Gold ain't no lightweight. Google up the density of elements.

Gold is actually one of the heaviest metals around, and is much denser than lead.

OW4, you should learn to read threads before posting. Tarvish beat you to that, WAAAAY ago.

Mister_Sinister wrote:

Caedrus wrote:

Mister_Sinister wrote:Why not do this with a denser metal? Say, lead

Sinister, you can't believe everything you see on TV.
Gold ain't no lightweight. Google up the density of elements.

Gold is actually one of the heaviest metals around, and is much denser than lead.

OW4, you should learn to read threads before posting. Tarvish beat you to that, WAAAAY ago.

lol, now you're talking trash for me adding my voice to his, as if there's something wrong with that, especially when you never admitted error. Grow up, Sin.

Caedrus wrote:

Mister_Sinister wrote:

Caedrus wrote:
Sinister, you can't believe everything you see on TV.
Gold ain't no lightweight. Google up the density of elements.

Gold is actually one of the heaviest metals around, and is much denser than lead.

OW4, you should learn to read threads before posting. Tarvish beat you to that, WAAAAY ago.

lol, now you're talking trash for me adding my voice to his, as if there's something wrong with that, especially when you never admitted error. Grow up, Sin.

No offence, or anything at all like that, but that honestly, to any outside observer, looks like 'look, lol at the noob who doesn't know metal densities'. I had it explained once, I don't need it explained again.

Furthermore, stop flinging statements without taking them first. This is my last post on this matter.

Very old news.

Frank's old Hulking Hurler build used spiky Gold generated this way.

Mister_Sinister wrote: No offence, or anything at all like that, but that honestly, to any outside observer, looks like 'look

Right, because you're totally an outside observer in this conversation.