Can the Reverse Gravity spell affect the Meteor Swarm spell?












16












$begingroup$


Since reverse gravity is a concentration spell, what would happen if someone casts it, and then an enemy casts meteor swarm on the area in which reverse gravity is in place?



Now, meteor swarm is described as instantaneous, but still specifies it's blazing orbs of fire plummeting to the ground, as meteors do.
So, would the reverse gravity spell prevent the meteors from working, decreasing how they work, or have no effect?



I'd like both an answer that makes the most sense with the rules, as well as an answer that would make the most sense in general for a DM to implement. Personally, I was thinking that the fairest way of doing it would be to half the damage from them.



(This could also be asked for other spells that involve hurling objects; it's just meteor swarm, in particular, that I was wondering about.)










share|improve this question









New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago
















16












$begingroup$


Since reverse gravity is a concentration spell, what would happen if someone casts it, and then an enemy casts meteor swarm on the area in which reverse gravity is in place?



Now, meteor swarm is described as instantaneous, but still specifies it's blazing orbs of fire plummeting to the ground, as meteors do.
So, would the reverse gravity spell prevent the meteors from working, decreasing how they work, or have no effect?



I'd like both an answer that makes the most sense with the rules, as well as an answer that would make the most sense in general for a DM to implement. Personally, I was thinking that the fairest way of doing it would be to half the damage from them.



(This could also be asked for other spells that involve hurling objects; it's just meteor swarm, in particular, that I was wondering about.)










share|improve this question









New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago














16












16








16





$begingroup$


Since reverse gravity is a concentration spell, what would happen if someone casts it, and then an enemy casts meteor swarm on the area in which reverse gravity is in place?



Now, meteor swarm is described as instantaneous, but still specifies it's blazing orbs of fire plummeting to the ground, as meteors do.
So, would the reverse gravity spell prevent the meteors from working, decreasing how they work, or have no effect?



I'd like both an answer that makes the most sense with the rules, as well as an answer that would make the most sense in general for a DM to implement. Personally, I was thinking that the fairest way of doing it would be to half the damage from them.



(This could also be asked for other spells that involve hurling objects; it's just meteor swarm, in particular, that I was wondering about.)










share|improve this question









New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




Since reverse gravity is a concentration spell, what would happen if someone casts it, and then an enemy casts meteor swarm on the area in which reverse gravity is in place?



Now, meteor swarm is described as instantaneous, but still specifies it's blazing orbs of fire plummeting to the ground, as meteors do.
So, would the reverse gravity spell prevent the meteors from working, decreasing how they work, or have no effect?



I'd like both an answer that makes the most sense with the rules, as well as an answer that would make the most sense in general for a DM to implement. Personally, I was thinking that the fairest way of doing it would be to half the damage from them.



(This could also be asked for other spells that involve hurling objects; it's just meteor swarm, in particular, that I was wondering about.)







dnd-5e spells






share|improve this question









New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









V2Blast

26k588158




26k588158






New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









DMs Popped CherryDMs Popped Cherry

8615




8615




New contributor




DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






DMs Popped Cherry is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago
















$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
2 days ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes


















30












$begingroup$

Simple answer: No



Reverse Gravity affects creatures and objects, and a spell is neither (though a spell may conjure or create a creature or object).



And, as you say, any spell with a duration of instantaneous effectively happens without any chance for something to affect it unless specifically noted.



A more 'physical' argument against Reverse Gravity affecting Meteor Swarm or similar spells is that the spell creates the blazing orbs of fire with enough force and momentum for them to reach their targets before gravity can have much of an effect.



After all, even without Reverse Gravity, a spell that launches something at a target doesn't have to worry about gravity pulling it to the ground before it reaches the target!






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
    $endgroup$
    – cpcodes
    2 days ago






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    @cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago





















11












$begingroup$

OP: Your room is 85 feet tall????



Alright, this is a case where Jeremy Crawford's mantra applies to all Rules as Written answers.



Spells do Exactly What They Say



Reverse Gravity




7th level transmutation



This spell reverses gravity in a 50-foot-radius, 100-foot high cylinder centered on a point within range. All creatures and objects that aren’t somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell. A creature can make a Dexterity saving throw to grab onto a fixed object it can reach, thus avoiding the fall.



If some solid object (such as a ceiling) is encountered in this fall, falling objects and creatures strike it just as they would during a normal downward fall. If an object or creature reaches the top of the area without striking anything, it remains there, oscillating slightly, for the duration.



At the end of the duration, affected objects and creatures fall back down.




Gravity is reversed, things fall up. Cool. You're either falling to the ceiling or hanging from the floor. Right? Alright, we all agree here.



Meteor Swarm




9th level evocation



Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range. Each creature in a 40-foot-radius sphere centered on each point you choose must make a Dexterity saving throw. The sphere spreads around corners. A creature takes 20d6 fire damage and 20d6 bludgeoning damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. A creature in the area of more than one fiery burst is affected only once.



The spell damages objects in the area and ignites flammable objects that aren’t being worn or carried.




Flaming orbs appear and plummet toward the targets. It doesn't say:




  • Which gravity it used

  • Where the orbs appear

  • What inertia they already have from wherever they were pulled.


They appear and plummet toward the targets. If that means they appear "beneath"
them and fall up or above them and fall down or if they magically fall sideways -- because magic -- then they fall sideways. Whatever direction they plummet, they plummet at the targets.



So, if you're hanging from the floor or fell to the ceiling, maybe they appear "above you" closer to the floor than you currently are and traveling in your direction, or they appear already having a huge amount of inertia to overcome the effects of the reverse gravity spell. I don't care what you do narratively to convince yourself and your players why it happens -- the spell says what it does.



From a fairness perspective would you let someone that was spider climbing and clinging to the ceiling allow a 9th level spell to miss them because of the word "plummet"? No, right, because that would be cheap. It's a 9th level spell slot.



Ground



I'm not going to get caught up in definitions of the word "ground" in this context. When gravity is reversed, is "ground" the ceiling or the floor? I don't know and really don't care. It just has to be made to make sense with the narrative. If we keep a tight definition of ground, the spell couldn't ever be cast in open waters, under water, on planes like the Astral Plane or Pandemonium because "ground" doesn't work like we think here on our earth in those places. And that isn't what is intended.



Points, not Creatures



The "a point you choose" don't have to be on the ground. It can be in a person's gut or head or whatever. Moreover, the area of effect for each of the 4 points is the origin of a 40 foot radius sphere which has a diameter of 80 feet. So if the room in question isn't 85 feet tall, the whole argument is moot... because the sphere can encompass both the ceiling and floor. The spell is instantaneous so the person won't have moved by the time the meteor gets there. Unless they have a reaction to use a spell to get out of the way, which, I suspect, is one of the reasons the target is points and not a creatures. Another is so that you can use it on objects. You can't magic missile or eldritch blast a door, but you can meteor swarm it. (Did this really need saying?)



But Physics...



If you're a strict follower of Rules as Written, or even if you aren't, part of the job a DM has is to make the rules make sense in context. Find a flavor or spin that makes the game mechanics work for the understanding of the surrounding environment and physics. So those meteors already have inertia from wherever they were conjured from that is greater than the reverse gravity field, or they conjured closer to the floor so they plummet "upward" toward the characters. "Physics" isn't a good reason to make someone, NPC or PC, lose a 9th level resource for nothing... However...



If reverse gravity is already up, and meteor swarm is cast -- no I'm not going to let a 7th level spell mangle a 9th level casting for no good reason because I think our world's physics should apply to a world where where flaming orbs can just appear, a person waving their arms and saying words can reverse gravity, an expensive enough gem can be used to bring back someone from the dead, and dragons are a real threat to local commerce... D&D is simulations, and our descriptions of what happens as a result of the mechanics is what makes anything in the world believable or not.



Rules as Cool



The rules aren't everything. If a PC readies a held casting of reverse gravity with a trigger of meteor swarm, that's pretty clever. And the order can make a narrative to why the "physics" works and rewarding the player for his creativity and his risk of wasting a 7th level slot if meteor swarm isn't cast is a perfectly acceptable narrative tool. Don't have an NPC do it, but allowing a PC to do that once is not a problem. That said, they'll have to fall 85 feet to get out of the way -- which will still be a huge amount of damage.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
    $endgroup$
    – J. A. Streich
    2 days ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Starnes
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
    $endgroup$
    – DMs Popped Cherry
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
    $endgroup$
    – jpmc26
    yesterday





















0












$begingroup$

The blobs of fire created by Meteor Swarm would be affected by Reverse Gravity



As mentioned Meteor Swarm has a duration of instantaneous. For the purposes of the rules instantaneous has a specific meaning in relation to the spell duration:




Instantaneous



Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.




The instantaneous duration refers to the creation of the objects in the spell, the "effect" of the spell. Importantly it does not refer to the resolution of those effects (and in particular the damage caused by the effect).



In the case of Meteor Swarm the effect it creates is




Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range.




The key word here is "plummet". This is not a defined game term, thus we must check what it's natural meaning is in English.



Plummet means




to fall very quickly and suddenly:



House prices have plummeted in recent months.



Several large rocks were sent plummeting down the mountain.



She plummeted to the ground.




Falling is something that is explicitly affected by Reverse Gravity




All creatures and objects that aren't somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell.




How are objects defined in the rules?



DMG > Running the Game > Objects




For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item, like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or vehicle that is composed of many other objects.





  • It is discrete (each orb is described as a single item made of a single substance)

  • It is inanimate

  • It is not composed of many other objects (each orbs isn't composed of other small objects, they are a contiguous whole)


The orbs of fire are pretty clearly objects and thus would be affected by Reverse Gravity when they come into the area of effect of Reverse Gravity.



Even if they are not objects, but are a contiguous whole made up of smaller objects, it doesn't matter. Each of the constituent objects would be affected by the Reverse Gravity field as the orbs of fire are not "anchored to the ground".






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago



















-5












$begingroup$

Alright, I'm going to answer this directly via physics.
The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision. (I am skipping the damage that will happen due to the fire on the meteor(orb)).
Things to consider:
1) Both, the character and the orb are under the same effects of acceleration due to gravity or anti-gravity.
2) As the mass of both the objects (character and meteor) remain the same in both conditions, (gravity or reverse gravity),$$ text{Mass of character } = m text{ and Mass of meteor } = M $$
CASE 1: Normal gravity:
Velocity of the character is 0: before the spell starts, before the meteor hits and after the meteor hits.
After the spell starts,
$$
Meteor Initial Speed = v_1
$$
$$
Acceleration On Meteor = alpha (= g downwards+ some other magical acceleration if added)
$$

After the meteor hits the character,
$$
MeteorFinalSpeed = v_f = CharacterFinalSpeed = 0
$$

Meteor speed just before hitting: $$ v_2 = v_1 + alpha Delta t $$
$$ text{Where } t text{ is the time taken for meteor to reach the character}$$
or, $$ v_2 = root of {v_1^2 + 2alpha Delta h}$$
$$ text{Where } h text{ is the initial distance between the two objects} $$
$$ text{Hence, change in momentum = } - Delta rho = M(v_2 - v_f) = M(v_2 - 0) = Mv_2 $$



Now, those of you who understand relative motion, probably already know the answer, but I'll continue...



CASE 2: Reverse Gravity
$$ text{Initial velocity of character } = u_1`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just before collision } = u_2`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just after collision } = u_f`$$
$$ text{Same for Meteor } v_1` v_2` text{and } v_f`$$
$$ text{Acceleration on character }= -g text{ and acceleration on meteor } = alpha ` text{ = g upwards + same magical acceleration as before if added} $$
$$text{Hence, } alpha - alpha ` = 2g $$
$$ u_2` = u_1` - g Delta t text{ and } v_2` = v_1` + alpha ` Delta t $$
$$ implies v_2` - u_2` = v_1` - u_1` + (alpha - 2g)Delta t + g Delta t text{ is the relative velocity just before collision}$$
Keeping that aside, looking at the velocity of the objects just after collision should enable you to get the relative damage as compared to case 1 using what follows:
$$ text{Change in momentum } = - Delta rho `= M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)$$
To get the damage in case 2 you need to use:
$$ text{Damage in case 2 } = D` = text{Damage in case 1 } (D)text{ x } frac{Delta rho `} {Delta rho} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)} {Mv_2} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_1` + alpha ` Delta t - v_f`) + m (u_1` - g Delta t - u_f`)} {M(v_1 + alpha Delta t)} $$
Of course that means that the amount of damage depends upon how fast the character is going up. But, by what I see it will most of the times be greater in Case 2 than in Case 1, because the character is actually going upwards, towards the meteor.
Now of course, this is still only the analysis of the vertical component of the velocities, but hey that's what the gravity will be affecting after all.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
    $endgroup$
    – Ulterno
    yesterday






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    yesterday



















-7












$begingroup$

Reverse gravity could deflect arrows, but not meteors.



Physics-wise, reverse gravity only affects a 100 ft-high cylinder. Meteors come in around 17 km/s, which means that the 100 ft-high cylinder would do nothing.



More precisely, we've got initial velocity vi=-17 km/s, acceleration a=+9.8 m/s2 (with reverse gravity), and displacement x=-100 ft=30.48 m. Using vf2=vi2+2ax, we get vf=16.9999824 km/s, or more usefully, vf/vi≈99.9999%, meaning the final velocity is 99.9999% the original. So the damage should be reduced by one part in one million.



This assumes reverse gravity does as it says, as compared to amplifying gravity beyond normal earth (e.g.: instead of g→-g, we have g→-200g). To make the meteors come to a stop, so they barely touch the ground, they'd need to have a force of gravity about 500000 times stronger than our own. Even only halving its speed would take a force of gravity 360000 times stronger than our own. With that much force, they'd be crushed by the acceleration and die. (Anything beyond about 50Gs is lethal.)



So either way, they're toast.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$









  • 10




    $begingroup$
    D&D is not a physics simulator
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago










protected by Oblivious Sage yesterday



Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes








5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









30












$begingroup$

Simple answer: No



Reverse Gravity affects creatures and objects, and a spell is neither (though a spell may conjure or create a creature or object).



And, as you say, any spell with a duration of instantaneous effectively happens without any chance for something to affect it unless specifically noted.



A more 'physical' argument against Reverse Gravity affecting Meteor Swarm or similar spells is that the spell creates the blazing orbs of fire with enough force and momentum for them to reach their targets before gravity can have much of an effect.



After all, even without Reverse Gravity, a spell that launches something at a target doesn't have to worry about gravity pulling it to the ground before it reaches the target!






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
    $endgroup$
    – cpcodes
    2 days ago






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    @cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago


















30












$begingroup$

Simple answer: No



Reverse Gravity affects creatures and objects, and a spell is neither (though a spell may conjure or create a creature or object).



And, as you say, any spell with a duration of instantaneous effectively happens without any chance for something to affect it unless specifically noted.



A more 'physical' argument against Reverse Gravity affecting Meteor Swarm or similar spells is that the spell creates the blazing orbs of fire with enough force and momentum for them to reach their targets before gravity can have much of an effect.



After all, even without Reverse Gravity, a spell that launches something at a target doesn't have to worry about gravity pulling it to the ground before it reaches the target!






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
    $endgroup$
    – cpcodes
    2 days ago






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    @cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago
















30












30








30





$begingroup$

Simple answer: No



Reverse Gravity affects creatures and objects, and a spell is neither (though a spell may conjure or create a creature or object).



And, as you say, any spell with a duration of instantaneous effectively happens without any chance for something to affect it unless specifically noted.



A more 'physical' argument against Reverse Gravity affecting Meteor Swarm or similar spells is that the spell creates the blazing orbs of fire with enough force and momentum for them to reach their targets before gravity can have much of an effect.



After all, even without Reverse Gravity, a spell that launches something at a target doesn't have to worry about gravity pulling it to the ground before it reaches the target!






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Simple answer: No



Reverse Gravity affects creatures and objects, and a spell is neither (though a spell may conjure or create a creature or object).



And, as you say, any spell with a duration of instantaneous effectively happens without any chance for something to affect it unless specifically noted.



A more 'physical' argument against Reverse Gravity affecting Meteor Swarm or similar spells is that the spell creates the blazing orbs of fire with enough force and momentum for them to reach their targets before gravity can have much of an effect.



After all, even without Reverse Gravity, a spell that launches something at a target doesn't have to worry about gravity pulling it to the ground before it reaches the target!







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 days ago









PJRZPJRZ

12k13658




12k13658












  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
    $endgroup$
    – cpcodes
    2 days ago






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    @cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago




















  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago






  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
    $endgroup$
    – cpcodes
    2 days ago






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    @cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago


















$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener
2 days ago




3




3




$begingroup$
Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
$endgroup$
– cpcodes
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Also worth noting that the spell is evocation so the in game effect is to cause damage and all else is simply special effects. If it were a conjuration spell, then the effect would be to call something into existence, at which point it becomes an object that is affected by the world like any other. The "meteors" from Meteor Swarm are not objects, they are simply cosmetic effects of magical energy being directed to cause damage. The only ways to change that are to either interfere with the magic - counterspells, etc. - or to be immune/resistant to the damage type.
$endgroup$
– cpcodes
2 days ago




6




6




$begingroup$
@cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
$endgroup$
– Yakk
2 days ago






$begingroup$
@cpcodes No, 5e doesn't have "special effects". That isn't flavour text. They do plummit to the ground, they are blazing orbs of fire. They aren't "merely cosmetic". 5e doesn't have flavour text. For example, if there is no ground at the point you select, the spell doesn't work (the spell only creates orbs that plummet to the ground at the points you select; again, not flavour text, all text in spells is actual game rules),
$endgroup$
– Yakk
2 days ago















11












$begingroup$

OP: Your room is 85 feet tall????



Alright, this is a case where Jeremy Crawford's mantra applies to all Rules as Written answers.



Spells do Exactly What They Say



Reverse Gravity




7th level transmutation



This spell reverses gravity in a 50-foot-radius, 100-foot high cylinder centered on a point within range. All creatures and objects that aren’t somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell. A creature can make a Dexterity saving throw to grab onto a fixed object it can reach, thus avoiding the fall.



If some solid object (such as a ceiling) is encountered in this fall, falling objects and creatures strike it just as they would during a normal downward fall. If an object or creature reaches the top of the area without striking anything, it remains there, oscillating slightly, for the duration.



At the end of the duration, affected objects and creatures fall back down.




Gravity is reversed, things fall up. Cool. You're either falling to the ceiling or hanging from the floor. Right? Alright, we all agree here.



Meteor Swarm




9th level evocation



Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range. Each creature in a 40-foot-radius sphere centered on each point you choose must make a Dexterity saving throw. The sphere spreads around corners. A creature takes 20d6 fire damage and 20d6 bludgeoning damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. A creature in the area of more than one fiery burst is affected only once.



The spell damages objects in the area and ignites flammable objects that aren’t being worn or carried.




Flaming orbs appear and plummet toward the targets. It doesn't say:




  • Which gravity it used

  • Where the orbs appear

  • What inertia they already have from wherever they were pulled.


They appear and plummet toward the targets. If that means they appear "beneath"
them and fall up or above them and fall down or if they magically fall sideways -- because magic -- then they fall sideways. Whatever direction they plummet, they plummet at the targets.



So, if you're hanging from the floor or fell to the ceiling, maybe they appear "above you" closer to the floor than you currently are and traveling in your direction, or they appear already having a huge amount of inertia to overcome the effects of the reverse gravity spell. I don't care what you do narratively to convince yourself and your players why it happens -- the spell says what it does.



From a fairness perspective would you let someone that was spider climbing and clinging to the ceiling allow a 9th level spell to miss them because of the word "plummet"? No, right, because that would be cheap. It's a 9th level spell slot.



Ground



I'm not going to get caught up in definitions of the word "ground" in this context. When gravity is reversed, is "ground" the ceiling or the floor? I don't know and really don't care. It just has to be made to make sense with the narrative. If we keep a tight definition of ground, the spell couldn't ever be cast in open waters, under water, on planes like the Astral Plane or Pandemonium because "ground" doesn't work like we think here on our earth in those places. And that isn't what is intended.



Points, not Creatures



The "a point you choose" don't have to be on the ground. It can be in a person's gut or head or whatever. Moreover, the area of effect for each of the 4 points is the origin of a 40 foot radius sphere which has a diameter of 80 feet. So if the room in question isn't 85 feet tall, the whole argument is moot... because the sphere can encompass both the ceiling and floor. The spell is instantaneous so the person won't have moved by the time the meteor gets there. Unless they have a reaction to use a spell to get out of the way, which, I suspect, is one of the reasons the target is points and not a creatures. Another is so that you can use it on objects. You can't magic missile or eldritch blast a door, but you can meteor swarm it. (Did this really need saying?)



But Physics...



If you're a strict follower of Rules as Written, or even if you aren't, part of the job a DM has is to make the rules make sense in context. Find a flavor or spin that makes the game mechanics work for the understanding of the surrounding environment and physics. So those meteors already have inertia from wherever they were conjured from that is greater than the reverse gravity field, or they conjured closer to the floor so they plummet "upward" toward the characters. "Physics" isn't a good reason to make someone, NPC or PC, lose a 9th level resource for nothing... However...



If reverse gravity is already up, and meteor swarm is cast -- no I'm not going to let a 7th level spell mangle a 9th level casting for no good reason because I think our world's physics should apply to a world where where flaming orbs can just appear, a person waving their arms and saying words can reverse gravity, an expensive enough gem can be used to bring back someone from the dead, and dragons are a real threat to local commerce... D&D is simulations, and our descriptions of what happens as a result of the mechanics is what makes anything in the world believable or not.



Rules as Cool



The rules aren't everything. If a PC readies a held casting of reverse gravity with a trigger of meteor swarm, that's pretty clever. And the order can make a narrative to why the "physics" works and rewarding the player for his creativity and his risk of wasting a 7th level slot if meteor swarm isn't cast is a perfectly acceptable narrative tool. Don't have an NPC do it, but allowing a PC to do that once is not a problem. That said, they'll have to fall 85 feet to get out of the way -- which will still be a huge amount of damage.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
    $endgroup$
    – J. A. Streich
    2 days ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Starnes
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
    $endgroup$
    – DMs Popped Cherry
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
    $endgroup$
    – jpmc26
    yesterday


















11












$begingroup$

OP: Your room is 85 feet tall????



Alright, this is a case where Jeremy Crawford's mantra applies to all Rules as Written answers.



Spells do Exactly What They Say



Reverse Gravity




7th level transmutation



This spell reverses gravity in a 50-foot-radius, 100-foot high cylinder centered on a point within range. All creatures and objects that aren’t somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell. A creature can make a Dexterity saving throw to grab onto a fixed object it can reach, thus avoiding the fall.



If some solid object (such as a ceiling) is encountered in this fall, falling objects and creatures strike it just as they would during a normal downward fall. If an object or creature reaches the top of the area without striking anything, it remains there, oscillating slightly, for the duration.



At the end of the duration, affected objects and creatures fall back down.




Gravity is reversed, things fall up. Cool. You're either falling to the ceiling or hanging from the floor. Right? Alright, we all agree here.



Meteor Swarm




9th level evocation



Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range. Each creature in a 40-foot-radius sphere centered on each point you choose must make a Dexterity saving throw. The sphere spreads around corners. A creature takes 20d6 fire damage and 20d6 bludgeoning damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. A creature in the area of more than one fiery burst is affected only once.



The spell damages objects in the area and ignites flammable objects that aren’t being worn or carried.




Flaming orbs appear and plummet toward the targets. It doesn't say:




  • Which gravity it used

  • Where the orbs appear

  • What inertia they already have from wherever they were pulled.


They appear and plummet toward the targets. If that means they appear "beneath"
them and fall up or above them and fall down or if they magically fall sideways -- because magic -- then they fall sideways. Whatever direction they plummet, they plummet at the targets.



So, if you're hanging from the floor or fell to the ceiling, maybe they appear "above you" closer to the floor than you currently are and traveling in your direction, or they appear already having a huge amount of inertia to overcome the effects of the reverse gravity spell. I don't care what you do narratively to convince yourself and your players why it happens -- the spell says what it does.



From a fairness perspective would you let someone that was spider climbing and clinging to the ceiling allow a 9th level spell to miss them because of the word "plummet"? No, right, because that would be cheap. It's a 9th level spell slot.



Ground



I'm not going to get caught up in definitions of the word "ground" in this context. When gravity is reversed, is "ground" the ceiling or the floor? I don't know and really don't care. It just has to be made to make sense with the narrative. If we keep a tight definition of ground, the spell couldn't ever be cast in open waters, under water, on planes like the Astral Plane or Pandemonium because "ground" doesn't work like we think here on our earth in those places. And that isn't what is intended.



Points, not Creatures



The "a point you choose" don't have to be on the ground. It can be in a person's gut or head or whatever. Moreover, the area of effect for each of the 4 points is the origin of a 40 foot radius sphere which has a diameter of 80 feet. So if the room in question isn't 85 feet tall, the whole argument is moot... because the sphere can encompass both the ceiling and floor. The spell is instantaneous so the person won't have moved by the time the meteor gets there. Unless they have a reaction to use a spell to get out of the way, which, I suspect, is one of the reasons the target is points and not a creatures. Another is so that you can use it on objects. You can't magic missile or eldritch blast a door, but you can meteor swarm it. (Did this really need saying?)



But Physics...



If you're a strict follower of Rules as Written, or even if you aren't, part of the job a DM has is to make the rules make sense in context. Find a flavor or spin that makes the game mechanics work for the understanding of the surrounding environment and physics. So those meteors already have inertia from wherever they were conjured from that is greater than the reverse gravity field, or they conjured closer to the floor so they plummet "upward" toward the characters. "Physics" isn't a good reason to make someone, NPC or PC, lose a 9th level resource for nothing... However...



If reverse gravity is already up, and meteor swarm is cast -- no I'm not going to let a 7th level spell mangle a 9th level casting for no good reason because I think our world's physics should apply to a world where where flaming orbs can just appear, a person waving their arms and saying words can reverse gravity, an expensive enough gem can be used to bring back someone from the dead, and dragons are a real threat to local commerce... D&D is simulations, and our descriptions of what happens as a result of the mechanics is what makes anything in the world believable or not.



Rules as Cool



The rules aren't everything. If a PC readies a held casting of reverse gravity with a trigger of meteor swarm, that's pretty clever. And the order can make a narrative to why the "physics" works and rewarding the player for his creativity and his risk of wasting a 7th level slot if meteor swarm isn't cast is a perfectly acceptable narrative tool. Don't have an NPC do it, but allowing a PC to do that once is not a problem. That said, they'll have to fall 85 feet to get out of the way -- which will still be a huge amount of damage.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
    $endgroup$
    – J. A. Streich
    2 days ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Starnes
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
    $endgroup$
    – DMs Popped Cherry
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
    $endgroup$
    – jpmc26
    yesterday
















11












11








11





$begingroup$

OP: Your room is 85 feet tall????



Alright, this is a case where Jeremy Crawford's mantra applies to all Rules as Written answers.



Spells do Exactly What They Say



Reverse Gravity




7th level transmutation



This spell reverses gravity in a 50-foot-radius, 100-foot high cylinder centered on a point within range. All creatures and objects that aren’t somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell. A creature can make a Dexterity saving throw to grab onto a fixed object it can reach, thus avoiding the fall.



If some solid object (such as a ceiling) is encountered in this fall, falling objects and creatures strike it just as they would during a normal downward fall. If an object or creature reaches the top of the area without striking anything, it remains there, oscillating slightly, for the duration.



At the end of the duration, affected objects and creatures fall back down.




Gravity is reversed, things fall up. Cool. You're either falling to the ceiling or hanging from the floor. Right? Alright, we all agree here.



Meteor Swarm




9th level evocation



Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range. Each creature in a 40-foot-radius sphere centered on each point you choose must make a Dexterity saving throw. The sphere spreads around corners. A creature takes 20d6 fire damage and 20d6 bludgeoning damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. A creature in the area of more than one fiery burst is affected only once.



The spell damages objects in the area and ignites flammable objects that aren’t being worn or carried.




Flaming orbs appear and plummet toward the targets. It doesn't say:




  • Which gravity it used

  • Where the orbs appear

  • What inertia they already have from wherever they were pulled.


They appear and plummet toward the targets. If that means they appear "beneath"
them and fall up or above them and fall down or if they magically fall sideways -- because magic -- then they fall sideways. Whatever direction they plummet, they plummet at the targets.



So, if you're hanging from the floor or fell to the ceiling, maybe they appear "above you" closer to the floor than you currently are and traveling in your direction, or they appear already having a huge amount of inertia to overcome the effects of the reverse gravity spell. I don't care what you do narratively to convince yourself and your players why it happens -- the spell says what it does.



From a fairness perspective would you let someone that was spider climbing and clinging to the ceiling allow a 9th level spell to miss them because of the word "plummet"? No, right, because that would be cheap. It's a 9th level spell slot.



Ground



I'm not going to get caught up in definitions of the word "ground" in this context. When gravity is reversed, is "ground" the ceiling or the floor? I don't know and really don't care. It just has to be made to make sense with the narrative. If we keep a tight definition of ground, the spell couldn't ever be cast in open waters, under water, on planes like the Astral Plane or Pandemonium because "ground" doesn't work like we think here on our earth in those places. And that isn't what is intended.



Points, not Creatures



The "a point you choose" don't have to be on the ground. It can be in a person's gut or head or whatever. Moreover, the area of effect for each of the 4 points is the origin of a 40 foot radius sphere which has a diameter of 80 feet. So if the room in question isn't 85 feet tall, the whole argument is moot... because the sphere can encompass both the ceiling and floor. The spell is instantaneous so the person won't have moved by the time the meteor gets there. Unless they have a reaction to use a spell to get out of the way, which, I suspect, is one of the reasons the target is points and not a creatures. Another is so that you can use it on objects. You can't magic missile or eldritch blast a door, but you can meteor swarm it. (Did this really need saying?)



But Physics...



If you're a strict follower of Rules as Written, or even if you aren't, part of the job a DM has is to make the rules make sense in context. Find a flavor or spin that makes the game mechanics work for the understanding of the surrounding environment and physics. So those meteors already have inertia from wherever they were conjured from that is greater than the reverse gravity field, or they conjured closer to the floor so they plummet "upward" toward the characters. "Physics" isn't a good reason to make someone, NPC or PC, lose a 9th level resource for nothing... However...



If reverse gravity is already up, and meteor swarm is cast -- no I'm not going to let a 7th level spell mangle a 9th level casting for no good reason because I think our world's physics should apply to a world where where flaming orbs can just appear, a person waving their arms and saying words can reverse gravity, an expensive enough gem can be used to bring back someone from the dead, and dragons are a real threat to local commerce... D&D is simulations, and our descriptions of what happens as a result of the mechanics is what makes anything in the world believable or not.



Rules as Cool



The rules aren't everything. If a PC readies a held casting of reverse gravity with a trigger of meteor swarm, that's pretty clever. And the order can make a narrative to why the "physics" works and rewarding the player for his creativity and his risk of wasting a 7th level slot if meteor swarm isn't cast is a perfectly acceptable narrative tool. Don't have an NPC do it, but allowing a PC to do that once is not a problem. That said, they'll have to fall 85 feet to get out of the way -- which will still be a huge amount of damage.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



OP: Your room is 85 feet tall????



Alright, this is a case where Jeremy Crawford's mantra applies to all Rules as Written answers.



Spells do Exactly What They Say



Reverse Gravity




7th level transmutation



This spell reverses gravity in a 50-foot-radius, 100-foot high cylinder centered on a point within range. All creatures and objects that aren’t somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell. A creature can make a Dexterity saving throw to grab onto a fixed object it can reach, thus avoiding the fall.



If some solid object (such as a ceiling) is encountered in this fall, falling objects and creatures strike it just as they would during a normal downward fall. If an object or creature reaches the top of the area without striking anything, it remains there, oscillating slightly, for the duration.



At the end of the duration, affected objects and creatures fall back down.




Gravity is reversed, things fall up. Cool. You're either falling to the ceiling or hanging from the floor. Right? Alright, we all agree here.



Meteor Swarm




9th level evocation



Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range. Each creature in a 40-foot-radius sphere centered on each point you choose must make a Dexterity saving throw. The sphere spreads around corners. A creature takes 20d6 fire damage and 20d6 bludgeoning damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. A creature in the area of more than one fiery burst is affected only once.



The spell damages objects in the area and ignites flammable objects that aren’t being worn or carried.




Flaming orbs appear and plummet toward the targets. It doesn't say:




  • Which gravity it used

  • Where the orbs appear

  • What inertia they already have from wherever they were pulled.


They appear and plummet toward the targets. If that means they appear "beneath"
them and fall up or above them and fall down or if they magically fall sideways -- because magic -- then they fall sideways. Whatever direction they plummet, they plummet at the targets.



So, if you're hanging from the floor or fell to the ceiling, maybe they appear "above you" closer to the floor than you currently are and traveling in your direction, or they appear already having a huge amount of inertia to overcome the effects of the reverse gravity spell. I don't care what you do narratively to convince yourself and your players why it happens -- the spell says what it does.



From a fairness perspective would you let someone that was spider climbing and clinging to the ceiling allow a 9th level spell to miss them because of the word "plummet"? No, right, because that would be cheap. It's a 9th level spell slot.



Ground



I'm not going to get caught up in definitions of the word "ground" in this context. When gravity is reversed, is "ground" the ceiling or the floor? I don't know and really don't care. It just has to be made to make sense with the narrative. If we keep a tight definition of ground, the spell couldn't ever be cast in open waters, under water, on planes like the Astral Plane or Pandemonium because "ground" doesn't work like we think here on our earth in those places. And that isn't what is intended.



Points, not Creatures



The "a point you choose" don't have to be on the ground. It can be in a person's gut or head or whatever. Moreover, the area of effect for each of the 4 points is the origin of a 40 foot radius sphere which has a diameter of 80 feet. So if the room in question isn't 85 feet tall, the whole argument is moot... because the sphere can encompass both the ceiling and floor. The spell is instantaneous so the person won't have moved by the time the meteor gets there. Unless they have a reaction to use a spell to get out of the way, which, I suspect, is one of the reasons the target is points and not a creatures. Another is so that you can use it on objects. You can't magic missile or eldritch blast a door, but you can meteor swarm it. (Did this really need saying?)



But Physics...



If you're a strict follower of Rules as Written, or even if you aren't, part of the job a DM has is to make the rules make sense in context. Find a flavor or spin that makes the game mechanics work for the understanding of the surrounding environment and physics. So those meteors already have inertia from wherever they were conjured from that is greater than the reverse gravity field, or they conjured closer to the floor so they plummet "upward" toward the characters. "Physics" isn't a good reason to make someone, NPC or PC, lose a 9th level resource for nothing... However...



If reverse gravity is already up, and meteor swarm is cast -- no I'm not going to let a 7th level spell mangle a 9th level casting for no good reason because I think our world's physics should apply to a world where where flaming orbs can just appear, a person waving their arms and saying words can reverse gravity, an expensive enough gem can be used to bring back someone from the dead, and dragons are a real threat to local commerce... D&D is simulations, and our descriptions of what happens as a result of the mechanics is what makes anything in the world believable or not.



Rules as Cool



The rules aren't everything. If a PC readies a held casting of reverse gravity with a trigger of meteor swarm, that's pretty clever. And the order can make a narrative to why the "physics" works and rewarding the player for his creativity and his risk of wasting a 7th level slot if meteor swarm isn't cast is a perfectly acceptable narrative tool. Don't have an NPC do it, but allowing a PC to do that once is not a problem. That said, they'll have to fall 85 feet to get out of the way -- which will still be a huge amount of damage.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago









V2Blast

26k588158




26k588158










answered 2 days ago









J. A. StreichJ. A. Streich

25.1k175129




25.1k175129












  • $begingroup$
    To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
    $endgroup$
    – J. A. Streich
    2 days ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Starnes
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
    $endgroup$
    – DMs Popped Cherry
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
    $endgroup$
    – jpmc26
    yesterday




















  • $begingroup$
    To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
    $endgroup$
    – Yakk
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
    $endgroup$
    – J. A. Streich
    2 days ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Starnes
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
    $endgroup$
    – DMs Popped Cherry
    2 days ago












  • $begingroup$
    Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
    $endgroup$
    – jpmc26
    yesterday


















$begingroup$
To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
$endgroup$
– Yakk
2 days ago






$begingroup$
To be clear, you are ignoring the "to the ground" part of the spell rules because you feel it wasn't intended? Or are you aruing that the "ground" part is just fluff text? I'm just looking for a clarification about that point.
$endgroup$
– Yakk
2 days ago














$begingroup$
Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
$endgroup$
– J. A. Streich
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Neither actually. In a comment that was since removed I explained that "ground" has been ruled to not necessarily mean "ground" by Jeremy Crawford a couple of times. I just didn't want to go look for it, so I argued that "ground" isn't the meat of the intent of the spell. I only added the ground section because of comment (also since remonved).
$endgroup$
– J. A. Streich
2 days ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
$endgroup$
– Chris Starnes
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Overall, a great answer. The fairness of spider climbing example is a bit weak, I feel. The 2nd-level invisibility can defeat the 9th-level power word kill if the caster can't see through it. The 1st-level tasha's hideous laughter can end the 9th-level invulnerability on one failed save. Still, +1 for a thorough analysis.
$endgroup$
– Chris Starnes
2 days ago












$begingroup$
Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
$endgroup$
– DMs Popped Cherry
2 days ago






$begingroup$
Really enjoyed reading through this, though I feel like not everything you mentioned was entirely just (Streichs comment being an example) Also, no, the room isn't that high, it would be an open space.
$endgroup$
– DMs Popped Cherry
2 days ago














$begingroup$
Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
$endgroup$
– jpmc26
yesterday






$begingroup$
Seems like you're making a huge assumption that the battle is indoors. An outdoor battle would easily allow for the full 100-foot cylinder to be of concern. And the grabbing save would easily allow for some creatures to be on the ground and some to be at the top of the cylinder.
$endgroup$
– jpmc26
yesterday













0












$begingroup$

The blobs of fire created by Meteor Swarm would be affected by Reverse Gravity



As mentioned Meteor Swarm has a duration of instantaneous. For the purposes of the rules instantaneous has a specific meaning in relation to the spell duration:




Instantaneous



Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.




The instantaneous duration refers to the creation of the objects in the spell, the "effect" of the spell. Importantly it does not refer to the resolution of those effects (and in particular the damage caused by the effect).



In the case of Meteor Swarm the effect it creates is




Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range.




The key word here is "plummet". This is not a defined game term, thus we must check what it's natural meaning is in English.



Plummet means




to fall very quickly and suddenly:



House prices have plummeted in recent months.



Several large rocks were sent plummeting down the mountain.



She plummeted to the ground.




Falling is something that is explicitly affected by Reverse Gravity




All creatures and objects that aren't somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell.




How are objects defined in the rules?



DMG > Running the Game > Objects




For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item, like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or vehicle that is composed of many other objects.





  • It is discrete (each orb is described as a single item made of a single substance)

  • It is inanimate

  • It is not composed of many other objects (each orbs isn't composed of other small objects, they are a contiguous whole)


The orbs of fire are pretty clearly objects and thus would be affected by Reverse Gravity when they come into the area of effect of Reverse Gravity.



Even if they are not objects, but are a contiguous whole made up of smaller objects, it doesn't matter. Each of the constituent objects would be affected by the Reverse Gravity field as the orbs of fire are not "anchored to the ground".






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago
















0












$begingroup$

The blobs of fire created by Meteor Swarm would be affected by Reverse Gravity



As mentioned Meteor Swarm has a duration of instantaneous. For the purposes of the rules instantaneous has a specific meaning in relation to the spell duration:




Instantaneous



Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.




The instantaneous duration refers to the creation of the objects in the spell, the "effect" of the spell. Importantly it does not refer to the resolution of those effects (and in particular the damage caused by the effect).



In the case of Meteor Swarm the effect it creates is




Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range.




The key word here is "plummet". This is not a defined game term, thus we must check what it's natural meaning is in English.



Plummet means




to fall very quickly and suddenly:



House prices have plummeted in recent months.



Several large rocks were sent plummeting down the mountain.



She plummeted to the ground.




Falling is something that is explicitly affected by Reverse Gravity




All creatures and objects that aren't somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell.




How are objects defined in the rules?



DMG > Running the Game > Objects




For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item, like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or vehicle that is composed of many other objects.





  • It is discrete (each orb is described as a single item made of a single substance)

  • It is inanimate

  • It is not composed of many other objects (each orbs isn't composed of other small objects, they are a contiguous whole)


The orbs of fire are pretty clearly objects and thus would be affected by Reverse Gravity when they come into the area of effect of Reverse Gravity.



Even if they are not objects, but are a contiguous whole made up of smaller objects, it doesn't matter. Each of the constituent objects would be affected by the Reverse Gravity field as the orbs of fire are not "anchored to the ground".






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago














0












0








0





$begingroup$

The blobs of fire created by Meteor Swarm would be affected by Reverse Gravity



As mentioned Meteor Swarm has a duration of instantaneous. For the purposes of the rules instantaneous has a specific meaning in relation to the spell duration:




Instantaneous



Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.




The instantaneous duration refers to the creation of the objects in the spell, the "effect" of the spell. Importantly it does not refer to the resolution of those effects (and in particular the damage caused by the effect).



In the case of Meteor Swarm the effect it creates is




Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range.




The key word here is "plummet". This is not a defined game term, thus we must check what it's natural meaning is in English.



Plummet means




to fall very quickly and suddenly:



House prices have plummeted in recent months.



Several large rocks were sent plummeting down the mountain.



She plummeted to the ground.




Falling is something that is explicitly affected by Reverse Gravity




All creatures and objects that aren't somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell.




How are objects defined in the rules?



DMG > Running the Game > Objects




For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item, like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or vehicle that is composed of many other objects.





  • It is discrete (each orb is described as a single item made of a single substance)

  • It is inanimate

  • It is not composed of many other objects (each orbs isn't composed of other small objects, they are a contiguous whole)


The orbs of fire are pretty clearly objects and thus would be affected by Reverse Gravity when they come into the area of effect of Reverse Gravity.



Even if they are not objects, but are a contiguous whole made up of smaller objects, it doesn't matter. Each of the constituent objects would be affected by the Reverse Gravity field as the orbs of fire are not "anchored to the ground".






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$



The blobs of fire created by Meteor Swarm would be affected by Reverse Gravity



As mentioned Meteor Swarm has a duration of instantaneous. For the purposes of the rules instantaneous has a specific meaning in relation to the spell duration:




Instantaneous



Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.




The instantaneous duration refers to the creation of the objects in the spell, the "effect" of the spell. Importantly it does not refer to the resolution of those effects (and in particular the damage caused by the effect).



In the case of Meteor Swarm the effect it creates is




Blazing orbs of fire plummet to the ground at four different points you can see within range.




The key word here is "plummet". This is not a defined game term, thus we must check what it's natural meaning is in English.



Plummet means




to fall very quickly and suddenly:



House prices have plummeted in recent months.



Several large rocks were sent plummeting down the mountain.



She plummeted to the ground.




Falling is something that is explicitly affected by Reverse Gravity




All creatures and objects that aren't somehow anchored to the ground in the area fall upward and reach the top of the area when you cast this spell.




How are objects defined in the rules?



DMG > Running the Game > Objects




For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item, like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or vehicle that is composed of many other objects.





  • It is discrete (each orb is described as a single item made of a single substance)

  • It is inanimate

  • It is not composed of many other objects (each orbs isn't composed of other small objects, they are a contiguous whole)


The orbs of fire are pretty clearly objects and thus would be affected by Reverse Gravity when they come into the area of effect of Reverse Gravity.



Even if they are not objects, but are a contiguous whole made up of smaller objects, it doesn't matter. Each of the constituent objects would be affected by the Reverse Gravity field as the orbs of fire are not "anchored to the ground".







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago

























answered 2 days ago









illustroillustro

8,68222571




8,68222571












  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago


















  • $begingroup$
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    $endgroup$
    – doppelgreener
    2 days ago
















$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener
2 days ago











-5












$begingroup$

Alright, I'm going to answer this directly via physics.
The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision. (I am skipping the damage that will happen due to the fire on the meteor(orb)).
Things to consider:
1) Both, the character and the orb are under the same effects of acceleration due to gravity or anti-gravity.
2) As the mass of both the objects (character and meteor) remain the same in both conditions, (gravity or reverse gravity),$$ text{Mass of character } = m text{ and Mass of meteor } = M $$
CASE 1: Normal gravity:
Velocity of the character is 0: before the spell starts, before the meteor hits and after the meteor hits.
After the spell starts,
$$
Meteor Initial Speed = v_1
$$
$$
Acceleration On Meteor = alpha (= g downwards+ some other magical acceleration if added)
$$

After the meteor hits the character,
$$
MeteorFinalSpeed = v_f = CharacterFinalSpeed = 0
$$

Meteor speed just before hitting: $$ v_2 = v_1 + alpha Delta t $$
$$ text{Where } t text{ is the time taken for meteor to reach the character}$$
or, $$ v_2 = root of {v_1^2 + 2alpha Delta h}$$
$$ text{Where } h text{ is the initial distance between the two objects} $$
$$ text{Hence, change in momentum = } - Delta rho = M(v_2 - v_f) = M(v_2 - 0) = Mv_2 $$



Now, those of you who understand relative motion, probably already know the answer, but I'll continue...



CASE 2: Reverse Gravity
$$ text{Initial velocity of character } = u_1`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just before collision } = u_2`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just after collision } = u_f`$$
$$ text{Same for Meteor } v_1` v_2` text{and } v_f`$$
$$ text{Acceleration on character }= -g text{ and acceleration on meteor } = alpha ` text{ = g upwards + same magical acceleration as before if added} $$
$$text{Hence, } alpha - alpha ` = 2g $$
$$ u_2` = u_1` - g Delta t text{ and } v_2` = v_1` + alpha ` Delta t $$
$$ implies v_2` - u_2` = v_1` - u_1` + (alpha - 2g)Delta t + g Delta t text{ is the relative velocity just before collision}$$
Keeping that aside, looking at the velocity of the objects just after collision should enable you to get the relative damage as compared to case 1 using what follows:
$$ text{Change in momentum } = - Delta rho `= M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)$$
To get the damage in case 2 you need to use:
$$ text{Damage in case 2 } = D` = text{Damage in case 1 } (D)text{ x } frac{Delta rho `} {Delta rho} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)} {Mv_2} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_1` + alpha ` Delta t - v_f`) + m (u_1` - g Delta t - u_f`)} {M(v_1 + alpha Delta t)} $$
Of course that means that the amount of damage depends upon how fast the character is going up. But, by what I see it will most of the times be greater in Case 2 than in Case 1, because the character is actually going upwards, towards the meteor.
Now of course, this is still only the analysis of the vertical component of the velocities, but hey that's what the gravity will be affecting after all.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
    $endgroup$
    – Ulterno
    yesterday






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    yesterday
















-5












$begingroup$

Alright, I'm going to answer this directly via physics.
The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision. (I am skipping the damage that will happen due to the fire on the meteor(orb)).
Things to consider:
1) Both, the character and the orb are under the same effects of acceleration due to gravity or anti-gravity.
2) As the mass of both the objects (character and meteor) remain the same in both conditions, (gravity or reverse gravity),$$ text{Mass of character } = m text{ and Mass of meteor } = M $$
CASE 1: Normal gravity:
Velocity of the character is 0: before the spell starts, before the meteor hits and after the meteor hits.
After the spell starts,
$$
Meteor Initial Speed = v_1
$$
$$
Acceleration On Meteor = alpha (= g downwards+ some other magical acceleration if added)
$$

After the meteor hits the character,
$$
MeteorFinalSpeed = v_f = CharacterFinalSpeed = 0
$$

Meteor speed just before hitting: $$ v_2 = v_1 + alpha Delta t $$
$$ text{Where } t text{ is the time taken for meteor to reach the character}$$
or, $$ v_2 = root of {v_1^2 + 2alpha Delta h}$$
$$ text{Where } h text{ is the initial distance between the two objects} $$
$$ text{Hence, change in momentum = } - Delta rho = M(v_2 - v_f) = M(v_2 - 0) = Mv_2 $$



Now, those of you who understand relative motion, probably already know the answer, but I'll continue...



CASE 2: Reverse Gravity
$$ text{Initial velocity of character } = u_1`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just before collision } = u_2`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just after collision } = u_f`$$
$$ text{Same for Meteor } v_1` v_2` text{and } v_f`$$
$$ text{Acceleration on character }= -g text{ and acceleration on meteor } = alpha ` text{ = g upwards + same magical acceleration as before if added} $$
$$text{Hence, } alpha - alpha ` = 2g $$
$$ u_2` = u_1` - g Delta t text{ and } v_2` = v_1` + alpha ` Delta t $$
$$ implies v_2` - u_2` = v_1` - u_1` + (alpha - 2g)Delta t + g Delta t text{ is the relative velocity just before collision}$$
Keeping that aside, looking at the velocity of the objects just after collision should enable you to get the relative damage as compared to case 1 using what follows:
$$ text{Change in momentum } = - Delta rho `= M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)$$
To get the damage in case 2 you need to use:
$$ text{Damage in case 2 } = D` = text{Damage in case 1 } (D)text{ x } frac{Delta rho `} {Delta rho} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)} {Mv_2} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_1` + alpha ` Delta t - v_f`) + m (u_1` - g Delta t - u_f`)} {M(v_1 + alpha Delta t)} $$
Of course that means that the amount of damage depends upon how fast the character is going up. But, by what I see it will most of the times be greater in Case 2 than in Case 1, because the character is actually going upwards, towards the meteor.
Now of course, this is still only the analysis of the vertical component of the velocities, but hey that's what the gravity will be affecting after all.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
    $endgroup$
    – Ulterno
    yesterday






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    yesterday














-5












-5








-5





$begingroup$

Alright, I'm going to answer this directly via physics.
The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision. (I am skipping the damage that will happen due to the fire on the meteor(orb)).
Things to consider:
1) Both, the character and the orb are under the same effects of acceleration due to gravity or anti-gravity.
2) As the mass of both the objects (character and meteor) remain the same in both conditions, (gravity or reverse gravity),$$ text{Mass of character } = m text{ and Mass of meteor } = M $$
CASE 1: Normal gravity:
Velocity of the character is 0: before the spell starts, before the meteor hits and after the meteor hits.
After the spell starts,
$$
Meteor Initial Speed = v_1
$$
$$
Acceleration On Meteor = alpha (= g downwards+ some other magical acceleration if added)
$$

After the meteor hits the character,
$$
MeteorFinalSpeed = v_f = CharacterFinalSpeed = 0
$$

Meteor speed just before hitting: $$ v_2 = v_1 + alpha Delta t $$
$$ text{Where } t text{ is the time taken for meteor to reach the character}$$
or, $$ v_2 = root of {v_1^2 + 2alpha Delta h}$$
$$ text{Where } h text{ is the initial distance between the two objects} $$
$$ text{Hence, change in momentum = } - Delta rho = M(v_2 - v_f) = M(v_2 - 0) = Mv_2 $$



Now, those of you who understand relative motion, probably already know the answer, but I'll continue...



CASE 2: Reverse Gravity
$$ text{Initial velocity of character } = u_1`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just before collision } = u_2`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just after collision } = u_f`$$
$$ text{Same for Meteor } v_1` v_2` text{and } v_f`$$
$$ text{Acceleration on character }= -g text{ and acceleration on meteor } = alpha ` text{ = g upwards + same magical acceleration as before if added} $$
$$text{Hence, } alpha - alpha ` = 2g $$
$$ u_2` = u_1` - g Delta t text{ and } v_2` = v_1` + alpha ` Delta t $$
$$ implies v_2` - u_2` = v_1` - u_1` + (alpha - 2g)Delta t + g Delta t text{ is the relative velocity just before collision}$$
Keeping that aside, looking at the velocity of the objects just after collision should enable you to get the relative damage as compared to case 1 using what follows:
$$ text{Change in momentum } = - Delta rho `= M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)$$
To get the damage in case 2 you need to use:
$$ text{Damage in case 2 } = D` = text{Damage in case 1 } (D)text{ x } frac{Delta rho `} {Delta rho} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)} {Mv_2} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_1` + alpha ` Delta t - v_f`) + m (u_1` - g Delta t - u_f`)} {M(v_1 + alpha Delta t)} $$
Of course that means that the amount of damage depends upon how fast the character is going up. But, by what I see it will most of the times be greater in Case 2 than in Case 1, because the character is actually going upwards, towards the meteor.
Now of course, this is still only the analysis of the vertical component of the velocities, but hey that's what the gravity will be affecting after all.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



Alright, I'm going to answer this directly via physics.
The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision. (I am skipping the damage that will happen due to the fire on the meteor(orb)).
Things to consider:
1) Both, the character and the orb are under the same effects of acceleration due to gravity or anti-gravity.
2) As the mass of both the objects (character and meteor) remain the same in both conditions, (gravity or reverse gravity),$$ text{Mass of character } = m text{ and Mass of meteor } = M $$
CASE 1: Normal gravity:
Velocity of the character is 0: before the spell starts, before the meteor hits and after the meteor hits.
After the spell starts,
$$
Meteor Initial Speed = v_1
$$
$$
Acceleration On Meteor = alpha (= g downwards+ some other magical acceleration if added)
$$

After the meteor hits the character,
$$
MeteorFinalSpeed = v_f = CharacterFinalSpeed = 0
$$

Meteor speed just before hitting: $$ v_2 = v_1 + alpha Delta t $$
$$ text{Where } t text{ is the time taken for meteor to reach the character}$$
or, $$ v_2 = root of {v_1^2 + 2alpha Delta h}$$
$$ text{Where } h text{ is the initial distance between the two objects} $$
$$ text{Hence, change in momentum = } - Delta rho = M(v_2 - v_f) = M(v_2 - 0) = Mv_2 $$



Now, those of you who understand relative motion, probably already know the answer, but I'll continue...



CASE 2: Reverse Gravity
$$ text{Initial velocity of character } = u_1`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just before collision } = u_2`$$
$$ text{Velocity of character just after collision } = u_f`$$
$$ text{Same for Meteor } v_1` v_2` text{and } v_f`$$
$$ text{Acceleration on character }= -g text{ and acceleration on meteor } = alpha ` text{ = g upwards + same magical acceleration as before if added} $$
$$text{Hence, } alpha - alpha ` = 2g $$
$$ u_2` = u_1` - g Delta t text{ and } v_2` = v_1` + alpha ` Delta t $$
$$ implies v_2` - u_2` = v_1` - u_1` + (alpha - 2g)Delta t + g Delta t text{ is the relative velocity just before collision}$$
Keeping that aside, looking at the velocity of the objects just after collision should enable you to get the relative damage as compared to case 1 using what follows:
$$ text{Change in momentum } = - Delta rho `= M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)$$
To get the damage in case 2 you need to use:
$$ text{Damage in case 2 } = D` = text{Damage in case 1 } (D)text{ x } frac{Delta rho `} {Delta rho} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_2` - v_f`) + m (u_2` - u_f`)} {Mv_2} $$
$$ implies D` = D frac{M (v_1` + alpha ` Delta t - v_f`) + m (u_1` - g Delta t - u_f`)} {M(v_1 + alpha Delta t)} $$
Of course that means that the amount of damage depends upon how fast the character is going up. But, by what I see it will most of the times be greater in Case 2 than in Case 1, because the character is actually going upwards, towards the meteor.
Now of course, this is still only the analysis of the vertical component of the velocities, but hey that's what the gravity will be affecting after all.







share|improve this answer








New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer






New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered yesterday









UlternoUlterno

1




1




New contributor




Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Ulterno is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
    $endgroup$
    – Ulterno
    yesterday






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    yesterday


















  • $begingroup$
    This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
    $endgroup$
    – Ulterno
    yesterday






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    "The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
    $endgroup$
    – Rubiksmoose
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    yesterday
















$begingroup$
This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
$endgroup$
– Ulterno
yesterday




$begingroup$
This took longer than I expected. I need to hone my LaTeX skills
$endgroup$
– Ulterno
yesterday




6




6




$begingroup$
Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
yesterday




$begingroup$
Magic is not physics, and 5e is definitely not a physics simulator.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
"The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
yesterday




$begingroup$
"The amount of Physical damage a character is going to get from a meteor depends upon the change in momentum before and after the collision." No, the amount of damage depends only on the numbers outlined in the spell effect. That is the way magic works in D&D. It doesn't follow physics, it works by a separate system called magic. Applying physics to D&D rules is always going to lead to problems.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
yesterday












$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
yesterday




$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
yesterday











-7












$begingroup$

Reverse gravity could deflect arrows, but not meteors.



Physics-wise, reverse gravity only affects a 100 ft-high cylinder. Meteors come in around 17 km/s, which means that the 100 ft-high cylinder would do nothing.



More precisely, we've got initial velocity vi=-17 km/s, acceleration a=+9.8 m/s2 (with reverse gravity), and displacement x=-100 ft=30.48 m. Using vf2=vi2+2ax, we get vf=16.9999824 km/s, or more usefully, vf/vi≈99.9999%, meaning the final velocity is 99.9999% the original. So the damage should be reduced by one part in one million.



This assumes reverse gravity does as it says, as compared to amplifying gravity beyond normal earth (e.g.: instead of g→-g, we have g→-200g). To make the meteors come to a stop, so they barely touch the ground, they'd need to have a force of gravity about 500000 times stronger than our own. Even only halving its speed would take a force of gravity 360000 times stronger than our own. With that much force, they'd be crushed by the acceleration and die. (Anything beyond about 50Gs is lethal.)



So either way, they're toast.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$









  • 10




    $begingroup$
    D&D is not a physics simulator
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago
















-7












$begingroup$

Reverse gravity could deflect arrows, but not meteors.



Physics-wise, reverse gravity only affects a 100 ft-high cylinder. Meteors come in around 17 km/s, which means that the 100 ft-high cylinder would do nothing.



More precisely, we've got initial velocity vi=-17 km/s, acceleration a=+9.8 m/s2 (with reverse gravity), and displacement x=-100 ft=30.48 m. Using vf2=vi2+2ax, we get vf=16.9999824 km/s, or more usefully, vf/vi≈99.9999%, meaning the final velocity is 99.9999% the original. So the damage should be reduced by one part in one million.



This assumes reverse gravity does as it says, as compared to amplifying gravity beyond normal earth (e.g.: instead of g→-g, we have g→-200g). To make the meteors come to a stop, so they barely touch the ground, they'd need to have a force of gravity about 500000 times stronger than our own. Even only halving its speed would take a force of gravity 360000 times stronger than our own. With that much force, they'd be crushed by the acceleration and die. (Anything beyond about 50Gs is lethal.)



So either way, they're toast.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$









  • 10




    $begingroup$
    D&D is not a physics simulator
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago














-7












-7








-7





$begingroup$

Reverse gravity could deflect arrows, but not meteors.



Physics-wise, reverse gravity only affects a 100 ft-high cylinder. Meteors come in around 17 km/s, which means that the 100 ft-high cylinder would do nothing.



More precisely, we've got initial velocity vi=-17 km/s, acceleration a=+9.8 m/s2 (with reverse gravity), and displacement x=-100 ft=30.48 m. Using vf2=vi2+2ax, we get vf=16.9999824 km/s, or more usefully, vf/vi≈99.9999%, meaning the final velocity is 99.9999% the original. So the damage should be reduced by one part in one million.



This assumes reverse gravity does as it says, as compared to amplifying gravity beyond normal earth (e.g.: instead of g→-g, we have g→-200g). To make the meteors come to a stop, so they barely touch the ground, they'd need to have a force of gravity about 500000 times stronger than our own. Even only halving its speed would take a force of gravity 360000 times stronger than our own. With that much force, they'd be crushed by the acceleration and die. (Anything beyond about 50Gs is lethal.)



So either way, they're toast.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



Reverse gravity could deflect arrows, but not meteors.



Physics-wise, reverse gravity only affects a 100 ft-high cylinder. Meteors come in around 17 km/s, which means that the 100 ft-high cylinder would do nothing.



More precisely, we've got initial velocity vi=-17 km/s, acceleration a=+9.8 m/s2 (with reverse gravity), and displacement x=-100 ft=30.48 m. Using vf2=vi2+2ax, we get vf=16.9999824 km/s, or more usefully, vf/vi≈99.9999%, meaning the final velocity is 99.9999% the original. So the damage should be reduced by one part in one million.



This assumes reverse gravity does as it says, as compared to amplifying gravity beyond normal earth (e.g.: instead of g→-g, we have g→-200g). To make the meteors come to a stop, so they barely touch the ground, they'd need to have a force of gravity about 500000 times stronger than our own. Even only halving its speed would take a force of gravity 360000 times stronger than our own. With that much force, they'd be crushed by the acceleration and die. (Anything beyond about 50Gs is lethal.)



So either way, they're toast.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago





















New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 days ago









William BlackWilliam Black

71




71




New contributor




William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






William Black is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 10




    $begingroup$
    D&D is not a physics simulator
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago














  • 10




    $begingroup$
    D&D is not a physics simulator
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
    $endgroup$
    – illustro
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
    $endgroup$
    – V2Blast
    2 days ago








10




10




$begingroup$
D&D is not a physics simulator
$endgroup$
– illustro
2 days ago




$begingroup$
D&D is not a physics simulator
$endgroup$
– illustro
2 days ago




2




2




$begingroup$
Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
$endgroup$
– illustro
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Moreover you are making some pretty stark assumptions on how the magic spell works to make objects fall upwards. D&D is a world where conservation of momentum simply doesn't apply because magic.
$endgroup$
– illustro
2 days ago












$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance.
$endgroup$
– V2Blast
2 days ago





protected by Oblivious Sage yesterday



Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



Popular posts from this blog

數位音樂下載

When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

格利澤436b