5

I would like to use Minor Conjuration to summon a flask of oil or alchemist's fire. Assuming I keep the object within the spells range (10ft), am I allowed to light this conjured substance on fire and will it keep burning?

Although it is on fire it isn't really taking damage, it is being expended/used. Or if you interpret the bottle being shattered as damage then couldn't I just choose to summon a puddle of oil on the ground or above a creatures head?
For example if I use this ability to create water or food does eating/drinking it dispel the conjuration? Or if created a torch could I not light the torch since that is the purpose of the object?
Since the substance has to stay within 10ft of me and I would have to light it on fire with other means I don't believe that this would be an overpowered concept for a level 2 character.

Is this allowed within the scope of the RAW?

Gimble
  • 53
  • 1
  • 4

2 Answers2

5

No, you can't light it on fire without ending the conjuration, and still be within the rules as written. The spell doesn't specify that it ends "if [the object] takes 1 hit point of damage", it specifies that it ends "if [the object] takes any damage." Any damage definitely includes burning, tearing, scratching, cutting (with teeth), etc. — and depending on your DM,1 may also include splitting the object into multiple drops or any other alteration that either is irreversible or would split the object into multiple objects.

No, it's not overpowered played otherwise. It's just not something that Minor Conjuration allows for without deliberate house rules.

I wanted to address another issue in the question that you didn't ask about, but is also contrary to the ability's scope: You can't summon anything above a creature's head. It must be "in your hand or on the ground", and further, if conjured on the ground it must be in an unoccupied space. There's no way to get this puddle of oil within danger-range of a creature, even if you could light it.

  1. The ability specifically deals with "an object", not "a volume of substance" as some other abilities in the game do. That means that a DM is within their rights to rule that a puddle of X is the object, not the volume of substance the puddle is made of, so damaging the puddle will end the conjuration. This is probably something most DMs won't make a big deal about, but a DM would be following literal RAW if they had a conjured puddle disappear if any of the puddle was removed. Different DMs will rule this differently, because the real ontological nature of anthropocentric concepts such as "damage" and "object" — is a page, cut up, damaged? is a glass of wine, drunk, damage? is a glass of wine, dropped on hard stone floors, damaged? if the answers are different, why? — is an unsolved problem in metaphysics.
SevenSidedDie
  • 243,609
  • 44
  • 785
  • 1,025
  • I'm not sure I agree with this definition of "any damage." I don't see that supported by the wording of the ability, and I don't see any reason to think it isn't identical to "takes 1 hit point of damage." Different phrasing does not necessarily imply different function. Conjuring a bottle or wine skin -- both of which have stoppers -- or conjuring a weapon or tool (sword, mace, wood axe, saw, rope) and using it seems to be within the intended scope of the ability, yet they involve either objects with multiple parts or objects which (in our world) endure wear and tear through normal use. – Bacon Bits Jan 24 '15 at 18:38
  • @BaconBits Because 5e is written in natural language as a deliberate design choice, where it doesn't refer explicitly to a game term, words just mean what they mean in English. "Damage" then, means just what it means in the real world. Note that opening the stopper on a bottle is not "damage" in English usage; what that means for tools and weapons is up to the DM just like how what damages a pool-object is. – SevenSidedDie Jan 24 '15 at 18:42
  • I agree, and that's my point. If you conjure a bucket of oil, you should be able to dump it out. In plain English, that damages nothing and creates a slick surface. If you conjure a bucket of water, can you put out a real fire? Drinking or cooking in water doesn't damage it in plain English, so what happens? How about conjuring a bag of salt and dropping it into water? A bucket of lime, mixing it with ash and stones, and then adding water? A bag of baking soda into some acid? A vial of acid poured onto metal? A plate of copper used in a pile? Do you argue you just can't conjure liquids? Why? – Bacon Bits Jan 24 '15 at 19:02
  • @BaconBits Again, that's why the answer says DMs are going to rule that bit about puddles/buckets/whatever differently, because of the additional need to interpret the meaning of the word "object". Can you cut up a page and have it still count as an undamaged object? What about a bucket of oil? What's the difference? (Hint: it's an unsolved problem in philosophy!) Since it's unclear (and currently insolvable anyway), DMs are within their rights to rule as they see fit on this, per use of the ability. I take no stand about that in the answer, just give a caveat emptor. – SevenSidedDie Jan 24 '15 at 19:06
  • Damage is not:any outside influence that alters the state of the object in question. Damage is anything that inhibits or prohibits the object from preforming its intended use. For example using RAW you could create a metal bar across a door in order to brace it. A creature that tried to break through would not automatically succeed by the logic of: as soon as the bar bends even a little it would take some minuscule amount of "damage' and therefore would be dispelled. If the str check is a success then the bar does not remain broken/bent on the ground but disappears. – Gimble Jan 25 '15 at 03:57
  • @Gimble That's a convenient interpretation, but not an interpretation that the game will back up a player on against a DM. This is up to the DM's interpretation. (Besides, since when is a metal door bar "supposed" to be bent.) – SevenSidedDie Jan 25 '15 at 04:02
  • I agree it is a gray area and ultimately the line of what damage is, is open to the interpretation of the DM. I think my example was not clear. In that scenario if you even just leaned on the door a small amount of force is acting on the bar.Now on a molecule level the bar has now been altered (bent). My example's purpose was to bring the point that if we count all the "everyday" ware on the summoned object as damage then nothing this spell creates can be be used or even touched. This is why i put the torch example in my question. If I lit a torch conjured with this ability nobody would argue. – Gimble Jan 25 '15 at 04:20
0

Great question, but I think the answer is no. The moment 1 single HP of consumption ocurred the whole mess would disappear before it had a chance to do any damage to your target.

Escoce
  • 4,367
  • 3
  • 20
  • 30