3

A variety of demons have teleportation at will, with a limit of 50lbs. of objects besides the demon itself. What happens when a demon tries to teleport with a bag that contains a creature, such as a cat, mouse, or fly?

Does the same apply to a wizard's familiar in a backpack if it was not selected as a target of a wizard's teleport spell, such as a level 9 wizard teleporting himself and three party members?

SevenSidedDie
  • 243,609
  • 44
  • 785
  • 1,025
shufly
  • 434
  • 3
  • 12

1 Answers1

1

This GM would rule that the teleportation effect fails

Magic on Spell Failure says, "If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted."

The spell teleport et al. has the entry Target: You and touched objects or other touched willing creatures. Merely touching the container holding a creature is insufficient to affect the creature.

Further, this GM would rule that teleportation can't differentiate between a container and its contents. It's all or nothing; take the container and everything within it or else the effect fails. That is, a teleporter in possession of a bottle of wine can't leave behind the wine and take only the bottle or, somehow, vice versa, and a teleporter can't take only the cage he's touching yet leave behind the wolverines it contains or, bravely, vice versa. It's either take the bottle of wine or leave it, and either take the cage of wolverines or leave it.

Also, in this GM's campaigns, a teleporter can't leave behind the tobacco he's chewing, his partially-digested lunch, nor his belly fat, although he can teleport out of his clothes. (In addition, this GM wouldn't allow a teleporter to take with him another creature's attended objects even if the teleporter were, at the time, touching that other creature's objects; those objects are busy counting toward that creature's maximum load. If the teleporter wants those objects, he's gotta either take those objects from that creature first or teleport the creature.)

Thus a demon like a babau that can use as a spell-like ability an effect that's like the spell greater teleport except only on itself and 50 lbs. of objects sees that greater teleport effect fail outright if it attempts to take another creature with it, even if that other creature managed to secrete itself in the demon's backpack, sack, or belt pouch without the demon seeing it and without the demon noticing the extra weight. (This GM suspects a babau has an extremely keen sense of what exactly 50 lbs. feels like!)

Similarly, a wizard who puts her familiar in her backpack and casts a teleport spell without including the familiar among her creatures touched has created conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform: she has counting against her maximum load an untouched creature, and that's a conundrum that the teleportation effect just refuses to resolve. This GM would have the spell simply fail rather than, for example, ruling that the spell is cast normally except that it leaves behind the familiar yet takes with it the backpack or that it leaves behind both backpack and familiar.

Expand your teleportation capacity with a bag of holding

The typical solution to the low creature capacity of teleportation effects is to put creatures that'll fit into an extradimensional space like a bag of holding then use the teleportation effect and not to forget to let them out afterward! (That last part's really important.) With the extra creatures not on the same plane, the teleportation effect functions normally. (Also see this similar D&D 3.5 question; Pathfinder has, so far as I'm aware, left these rules unchanged from its forebear.)

Note: This GM totally agrees that The effect fails isn't a lot of fun, but it's been this GM's experience that, in the long run,—especially when teleportation effects are involved—that's what's often best for the campaign.

Hey I Can Chan
  • 191,258
  • 18
  • 357
  • 866
  • The ability teleports the demon and up to 50 lbs of objects. If the creature doesn't count as an object (which I assume is the problem here) then shouldn't it just not get teleported? – Mark Wells Jun 23 '18 at 22:06
  • Can I empty a bag of fleas on a spellcaster or demon to prevent them from teleporting, since they would have to bring extra creatures? – Kieran Mullen Jun 23 '18 at 22:37
  • 1
    @MarkWells The demon's trying to teleport with its possessions, including the sack's contents. If those contents are a creature, the game says the effect fails. Yeah, I know that's a little weird, but I imagine that outright failure is easier on the game: the game needn't prioritize which creatures are teleported in the same way that the game needn't describe which objects over the 50-lb. limit also aren't teleported. – Hey I Can Chan Jun 23 '18 at 22:38
  • @KieranMullen If the GM agrees, you can do anything. Most Pathfinder fleas won't fit in a bag, though. – Hey I Can Chan Jun 23 '18 at 22:41
  • @HeyICanChan I suspect "trying" is the key word: if the demon tries to kidnap someone by grabbing them and teleporting out, then it will find it can't. But if someone hides a live wolverine in the demon's pants (what's the Sleight of Hand DC for that?), the demon can teleport and leave the wolverine behind. – Mark Wells Jun 24 '18 at 00:42
  • @MarkWells In Pathfinder planting stuff on folks is really difficult, and secretly putting an animal on a dude is, I think, impossible. Like I said, I think it's just the game taking the path of least resistance. You're welcome to compose your own alternative answer, though. – Hey I Can Chan Jun 24 '18 at 01:49
  • Additionally, all they have to do is not designate that they're taking the fleas/bag/etc. They could certainly teleport without the things. Although, it might result in a failure first, before they realize the issue, if your GM allows it in a 'Rule of Cool' fashion. – Ifusaso Jun 24 '18 at 16:26
  • @Ifusaso As a GM, I'd hesitate to allow a teleporter to depart with a container and not its contents. That seems open to abuse (e.g. teleporting away with a barrel on top of which was a lit torch and within which was lamp oil; teleporting away with a cage but leaving behind the dozens of wolverines). But, sure, I'd allow a teleporter to exclude any fleas the teleporter's aware of. (However, it's really difficult to be on another creature (except a mount) in Pathfinder, so all this discussion of, like, secret fleas makes me uncomfortable from a mechanical perspective.) – Hey I Can Chan Jun 24 '18 at 16:38
  • @Ifusaso Let me make that even clearer: I'd rule that the teleporter needn't exclude the secret fleas that were roaming about his person; he only needs to include himself for the teleportation effect to automatically exclude the fleas. The question's central point is, I think, What happens when an attempt is made to take a container if the container's contents would stop the spell? In that case, I'd rule—like the answer says—that the spell fails. – Hey I Can Chan Jun 24 '18 at 16:55
  • While this answer seems like it is probably correct, I am hesitant to accept it when I seem to be the only one who has up-voted it. The situation that spawned this question was a character was baleful polymorphed into a mouse and hid in one of their horse's saddlebags. The horse got killed, then the demon decided to teleport away with one of the bags rather than be killed. I decided they took the bag the player wasn't in since i wasn't sure how it should work. – shufly Jun 26 '18 at 20:19
  • @shufly That's totally fair. You needn't be in a hurry to accept an answer, and you've already shown that you found the answer useful by upvoting it. (That's all the feedback I need; I'm happy to have helped.) If you think alternatives to this answer would be useful, a bounty on the question would likely attract more answers. (I know you're fairly new here so every reputation point's important, but if an answer is important, too, a bounty may be a good use of that rep.) – Hey I Can Chan Jun 26 '18 at 20:41