Question on Barkskin

Open Discussion on all things C&C from new product to general questions to the rules, the laws, and the chaos.
Post Reply
Gameconscious
Henchman
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 7:00 am

Question on Barkskin

Post 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?

Treebore
Mogrl
Posts: 20660
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Arizona and St Louis

Post 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.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.

Gameconscious
Henchman
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 7:00 am

Post 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.

Treebore
Mogrl
Posts: 20660
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Location: Arizona and St Louis

Post by Treebore »

I would think your right, so just go with a standard save versus polymorph when used offensively.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.

cleaverthepit
Ulthal
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am

Post by cleaverthepit »

Yeah, it would be like polymorph other when used offensively. The recipient gets a wisdom save.

Thanks for catching that.

Davis

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 13866
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Post by serleran »

Course, in my games, it would be a Con save... but, Wisdom is by the book.

Moorcrys
Red Cap
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am

Post 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

Maliki
Lore Drake
Posts: 1523
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am

Post 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!

User avatar
Kayolan
Lore Drake
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:00 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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?

User avatar
Grandpa
Mist Elf
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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.

serleran
Mogrl
Posts: 13866
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:00 am

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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.

User avatar
Kayolan
Lore Drake
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:00 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post by Kayolan »

Well that makes sense now. I can see why it was changed.

User avatar
Grandpa
Mist Elf
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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. ;)

User avatar
Grandpa
Mist Elf
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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...

User avatar
Kayolan
Lore Drake
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:00 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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?

User avatar
Grandpa
Mist Elf
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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.

User avatar
Captain_K
Greater Lore Drake
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:37 pm
Location: North Coast

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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????
Wow, Another Natural One! You guys are a sink hole for luck. Stay away from my dice.

User avatar
Kayolan
Lore Drake
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:00 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Question on Barkskin

Post 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.

Post Reply