Breathe Air as an offensive spell

[seasong]

Is there any rules-as-written reason that the Breathe Air spell ([i]GURPS Magic, p. 26) shouldn't work as an exceptionally deadly attack spell?

I understand that - as a GM - I will be telling the player "no, no, and also, NO!" However, if there is an rules-as-written reason, I would like to be able to provide it.

[PK]

I don't get why it would be. It just lets you breathe air (as well as water, if you already could). If you cast it on a normal person, you'd just be giving him the impressive ability to breathe air. That's not even enough to get you into the Mystery Men. :)

[Dustin]

The rules-as-written reason is because you have to torture the words-as-written to think that it would have any effect at all on an air-breather.

If you really need something to point to, "This spell is primarily useful for keeping fish, mermen, etc. alive out of water." If it was a phenomenally deadly and fast and cheap attack spell (it's not even Resisted!), then that would be its primary use, ergo "no, no, and also, NO!"

[lexington]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

I don't get why it would be. It just lets you breathe air (as well as water, if you already could).

What it says is that you can breathe air "as though it was water". The rules/grammar lawyer will demand that this means a person without the ability to breathe water will drown in air because the air should be treated as if it was water.

[zoncxs]

I believe you are thinking of making it into a spell like breathe fire, allowing you to make a breath attack with air instead of flames. it would be crushing with double knock back. its like some one took a pressurized tube, pointed it at you, then released it cause the air to burst out and hit you. I would probably give it -1 per dice just because its "air" and it does double knock back. :)


for example I made a breathe metal spell which is a breath attack that does cutting damage, it works just like breathe fire but instead of flames its tiny shards of metal flying out at your target.

[PK]

Originally Posted by lexington

What it says is that you can breathe air "as though it was water". The rules/grammar lawyer will demand that this means a person without the ability to breathe water will drown in air because the air should be treated as if it was water.

Eh, trying to interpret it that way goes beyond "being literal" and into "willful and intentional misreading." It's quite clear to me that the sentence above is being phrased from the perspective of it being cast on a water-breather, since that's the whole reason the spell exists.

To paraphrase Kromm, GURPS rules aren't written with "proof this against all rules lawyers!" as a primary goal -- trying to lock down every possible way a munchkin could twist something would triple the length of every book and make 'em all unreadable.

[Sarge]

I think what he's talking about is casting it on someone underwater which then causes them to drown. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.

Please forgive me for copying and pasting the entire entry from Magic (p. 26).

Breath Air

Breathe air as though it were water; the spell also prevents water creatures from dehydrating in air. This spell is primarily useful for keeping
fish, mermen, etc., alive out of water. The subject can also still breathe water normally. This is also a Water spell.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Sarge

I think what he's talking about is casting it on someone underwater which then causes them to drown. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
.

No, what he's talking about is casting it on an air-breathing person in the air to make them drown.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Sarge

Breath Air

Breathe air as though it were water; the spell also prevents water creatures from dehydrating in air. This spell is primarily useful for keeping
fish, mermen, etc., alive out of water. The subject can also still breathe water normally. This is also a Water spell.

Clearly the correct English reading is the caster drowns. After all "Breathe air as though it were water" lacks a subject, so if it not a meaningless fragment, it must take the normal implied subject "You", literalists have no good justification for reading it as if it began "The subject of the spell".

Seriously, any player who tried to make an argument like this *deserves* to have the GM insist on that reading.

[Nemi3e]

Actually, I think he's thinking of using it on someone who doesn't breath air.

As in "I cast Breathe Air on the attacking shark!" Of course that's covered in RAW.