Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

When you put a shrunken item in a confined space and the unshrink it, what happens?

Does it work like "Enlarge Person"?

If insufficient room is available for the desired growth, the creature attains the maximum possible size and may make a Strength check (using its increased Strength) to burst any enclosures in the process. If it fails, it is constrained without harm by the materials enclosing it— the spell cannot be used to crush a creature by increasing its size.

In which case, how do you define the item's strength and if it can break its confines? Otherwise, does it break the confines simply because it does not fit in there, provided it is of sufficient hardness?

For example, how does a shrunken cube of adamantine, lodged in the keyhole of a wooden door, behave when unshrunk? Does the door break? Does the cube break? Does the cube unshrink until it meets resistance? Any related rules would be a really nice addition to your answer.

The thing is, I find it more than logical that a shrunken item - especially a hard, dense one - when unshrinking, should be able to break stuff, and not get confined per the enlarge person spell. A hardness check is my best guess, but what happens when I, for example stuff said shrunken cube down a person's throat? Or when I unshrink a previously shrunken ballista bolt, lodged inside a guys sternum?

share|improve this question
    
I dont think it is defined anywhere in RAW, you might have to rely on your own judgement. What about an opposed hardness check? Looking forward to the answers. –  kravaros Jun 14 '13 at 5:48
    
I think the same rules that apply to crushing creatures could mostly be applied to crushing about anything else. Why can't you crush a creature by increasing its size? It'd be too powerful. Enlarging a cube to destroy a door lock could be nifty, but it would negate the use for locks. On the other hand, your idea of unshrinking a cube in some poor guy's throat reminds me a little bit of No Country For Old Men... –  Giganticus Jun 14 '13 at 6:03
1  
The creature is exactly that, a creature, not a solid block of material, so it can "find a way" not to be crushed but only to be confined when expanding. On the other hand the cube you shrinked, can't do that. About the locks, I don't think it would negate their use, it's not like every person in the multiverse is a crafty wizard. But, let's face it, if you are a wizard, the locks aren't really there to stop you, they are there to stop all the other puny classes :P. Also, I don't think Shrink is too powerful (in that case only) since Knock, a 2nd level spell can do exactly what you described. –  Thunderfork Jun 14 '13 at 6:37
4  
Physics questions in 3.5 are debate and acrimony magnets. Closed because there can be no universally good answer, as everything boils down to "GM whim." –  Brian Ballsun-Stanton Jun 14 '13 at 6:47
2  
This is up to the DM. RPGs don't have rules for everything, and this can be understood as either a feature or flaw—in cases like this it can be a feature, allowing the GM to make the ruling that suits their own sense of fun, balance, fairness, rules consistency, physics, and common sense. –  SevenSidedDie Jun 14 '13 at 14:41
show 1 more comment

closed as not constructive by Brian Ballsun-Stanton Jun 14 '13 at 6:47

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.