"How do you spell hydraulic" is a common question asked by individuals who are unsure about the correct spelling of the word. The word "hydraulic" has its origins in the Greek language and refers to the science and technology of using water or other fluids to generate power, control motion, or apply force. The spelling of "hydraulic" is often confused due to the letter arrangement and the pronunciation of certain sounds. To spell the word correctly, it is important to break it down into syllables. "Hydraulic" is spelled as H-Y-D-R-A-U-L-I-C. Each syllable represents a sound in the word.

Hydraulic or hydraulic?

Ask your question in our comments section below (we reply to all comments within 24 hours)
or return to main search.

Leave a Reply

2 thoughts on “Hydraulic or hydraulic”?

We continue making this error over and over again! So, so irritating.

Hello. impressive job, really helpful. I did not anticipate content like that. It’s a splendid. Thanks!

✓ Content verified by English professional
Written by: WhichIsCorrect.com
The editorial staff of the WhichIsCorrect.com online dictionary is a group of English language lovers, consisting of native speakers, linguists, and English philology graduates. By using our content, you can be sure it has been prepared by professionals.

Each syllable represents a sound in the word. Breaking it down further, the first syllable "hy" is pronounced as "hi," similar to the word "high." The second syllable "drau" is pronounced as "draw.

Check other spellings »
Click here to open our search engine.

This page is a spellcheck for word hydraulic. All Which is Correct spellings and definitions, including "Hydraulic or hydraulic" are based on official English dictionaries, which means you can browse our website with confidence! Common searches that lead to this page: how to spell hydraulic, correct spelling of hydraulic, how is hydraulic spelled, spell check hydraulic, how do you spell hydraulic. 

Check correct spelling:

Spelling with definitions:

• Secundary or secondary
• Michael vs Michael
• Challange or challenge
• Theatre or theater
• Preform or perform
• Yacht vs yatch
• Stayes or stays
• Officialy or officially
• Specially vs especially
• Showned vs shown
• Writing vs writting
• Written or writen

Hydraulic Torrent vs. Incorporeal creature

What happens if you use the spell Hydraulic Torrent vs an Incorporeal creature?

The two possibilities I see are thus:

1. It has a 50% chance of affecting the creature and pushing it away because

Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature.

2. It will not affect the ghost because

Incorporeal creatures cannot make trip or grapple attacks, nor can they be tripped or grappled. In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.

What are your thoughts?

Case 1 prevails.

1. Incorporeal creatures are not immune to the Bull Rush CM (or being moved in general), unless a physical action is attempting it.

2. A (Bigby's) forceful hand, for example, is perfectly capable of moving a ghost with Bull Rush. As a force effect, it has full effect against incorporeal foes.

3. Hydraulic torrent is neither a physical action (auto-evade), nor a force effect (no chance to evade; roll CMB to hit). Thus, the general rule of 50% would apply.

You call forth a powerful stream of water that batters all creatures and obstacles in its path until it strikes something it cannot push past.

It is immune to all nonmagical attack forms.

Hydraulic Torrent is an attack? Yes.

The water is magical? No.
The Bull rush made by the water is a magical attack? No. It is a stream of water called by the spell, it is not the spell that makes the attack.

In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.

The Bull rush is an action that "manipulate an opponent"? Yes. Immune.

it's an evocation, allows spell resistance, so yeah it's a magical water blast that hits them. 50% chance to work.

If it was a conjuration effect with no sr, I could see the arguments saying that it is a physical effect so wouldn't do anything.

it's an evocation, allows spell resistance, so yeah it's a magical water blast that hits them. 50% chance to work.

If it was a conjuration effect with no sr, I could see the arguments saying that it is a physical effect so wouldn't do anything.

The SR part is a good argument, but it doesn't resolve the pat about Bull rush being an action that "manipulate an opponent". Incorporeal creatures are immune to those.

These are the exact arguments the DM and I had the other night. Trying to resolve before next game.

So by your reading then you would say that an incorporeal creature can't be pushed away by a forceful hand spell? Because if you think forceful hand works, then it follows that hydraulic torrent would also work 50% of the time.

The whole question boils down to is the water itself magic, or did you conjure water magically, and that water is normal water being projected at an enemy.

Personally, I don't like the evocation vs conjuration argument because I've always found conjuration as a cop out to give a spell a work around for spell resistance.

In any event, as a GM I would rule that the water was magical and had a 50% chance to work.

So by your reading then you would say that an incorporeal creature can't be pushed away by a forceful hand spell? Because if you think forceful hand works, then it follows that hydraulic torrent would also work 50% of the time.

In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.

Flat immunity, it doesn't care about it being a force effect.

So by your reading then you would say that an incorporeal creature can't be pushed away by a forceful hand spell? Because if you think forceful hand works, then it follows that hydraulic torrent would also work 50% of the time.

In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.

"Such" is standing in for all three adjectives:

• - any
  
• - physical
  
• - that would. (the subordinate clause)

Thus the immunity is not to ALL actions that would move/manipulate, only to physical actions that would do so.

So by your reading then you would say that an incorporeal creature can't be pushed away by a forceful hand spell? Because if you think forceful hand works, then it follows that hydraulic torrent would also work 50% of the time.

In fact, they cannot take any physical action that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions.

"Such" is standing in for all three adjectives:

• - any
  
• - physical
  
• - that would. (the subordinate clause)

Thus the immunity is not to ALL actions that would move/manipulate, only to physical actions that would do so.

You call forth a powerful stream of water that batters all creatures and obstacles in its path until it strikes something it cannot push past. Against creatures and movable objects this stream acts as a bull rush.

This spell functions as interposing hand, except that it can also pursue and bull rush one opponent you select.

You are arguing that a Bull Rush isn't a physical action?

Or that " a powerful stream of water" isn't physical?

That something that says "Its Combat Maneuver Bonus for bull rush checks uses your caster level in place of its base attack bonus, with a +8 bonus for its Strength score (27), and a +1 bonus for being Large." is a magical wave of force? Especially as it says (if you follow the link to the other hand spells) "creates a Large magic hand" and "An interposing hand is 10 feet long and about that wide with its fingers outstretched. It has as many hit points as you do when you’re undamaged, and is AC 20 (-1 size, +11 natural). It takes damage as a normal creature, but most magical effects that don’t cause damage do not affect it."?

The hand is a force effect with 0 harness, but it has a physical presence and use that to push, not a magical effect.

You are arguing that a Bull Rush isn't a physical action?

Or that " a powerful stream of water" isn't physical?

Correct. Incorporeal separates everything into two categories, physical and magical, with two different sets of rules for each. Spells clearly fall under the second category.

I'm curious, how far do you take your interpretation? Like do you think an incorporeal creature can pass through a wall of force since that physically blocks people from passing it?

It's funny to me how one rule can be extremely obvious to different people with completely different, sometimes even opposite, interpretations on how it functions.

You are arguing that a Bull Rush isn't a physical action?

Or that " a powerful stream of water" isn't physical?

That something that says "Its Combat Maneuver Bonus for bull rush checks uses your caster level in place of its base attack bonus, with a +8 bonus for its Strength score (27), and a +1 bonus for being Large." is a magical wave of force?

This is what we're arguing.

• 1. Bull rush isn't a physical action unless it's caused by a physical action.
  
• 2. A powerful stream of water isn't physical if it's magical. This was the purpose of pointing out that Hydraulic Torrent allows SR. A fire hose can push a golem back, but a Hydraulic Torrent can't.
  
• 3. No one's arguing that Hydraulic Torrent is a force effect. The argument is between "the spell auto-fails" (you) and "the spell has a 50% miss chance, like other non-force non-damage magics" (us).
  

As for the hand: force actually treats incorporeal creatures as though they weren't.

Force: Spells with the force descriptor create or manipulate magical force. Force spells affect incorporeal creatures normally (as if they were corporeal creatures).

You are arguing that a Bull Rush isn't a physical action?

Or that " a powerful stream of water" isn't physical?

Correct. Incorporeal separates everything into two categories, physical and magical, with two different sets of rules for each. Spells clearly fall under the second category.

I'm curious, how far do you take your interpretation? Like do you think an incorporeal creature can pass through a wall of force since that physically blocks people from passing it?

It's funny to me how one rule can be extremely obvious to different people with completely different, sometimes even opposite, interpretations on how it functions.

In the impetus to reply I disregarded the rule that says that Force effect threat incorporeal creatures as corporeal but you two are doing the same thing. You have decided that there is a hierarchy of rules where there isn't any.

"Corporeal spells and effects that do not cause damage only have a 50% chance of affecting an incorporeal creature (except for channel energy)." actually isn't linked with "They can’t perform trip or grapple combat maneuvers, nor can they be tripped or grappled. In fact, they can’t take any physical actions that would move or manipulate an opponent or its equipment, nor are they subject to such actions." as they are two completely different paragraphs of the rules.

Noting in the Incorporeal (Ex) ability says one of those rules is affected by the other, they are two completely different paragraphs of the ability. Force effects have a very specific rule that essentially removes the incorporeal ability.

There are specific exceptions:
- force effects threat incorporeal creatures as corporeal, and that essentially remove the whole ability;
- ghost touch weapons and armors;
- other incorporeal creatures.

Just for the record: Wall of Force is a spell and a magical effect, but it has SR: no. So having SR or not isn't a clear indication of something being a magical effect.

Can the Hydraulic Push Spell be used in conjunction with Ranged Spellstrike?

Right now im creating a character for a pathfinder game. Suffice to say its a magus with the Eldritch Archer Archetype, which replaces normal Spellstrike with a ranged version:

At 2nd level, whenever an eldritch archer casts a spell that calls for a ranged attack, she can deliver the spell through a ranged weapon she wields as part of a ranged attack. Instead of the free ranged attack normally allowed to deliver the spell, an eldritch archer can make one free ranged attack with a ranged weapon (at her highest base attack bonus) as part of casting this spell. [. ]

Hydraulic push is a spell that initiates a Bull Rush. The question is: Can I use hydraulic push in conjunction with ranged spellstrike.

" The third syllable "lic" is pronounced as "lik." When spelling the word, it is important to pay attention to each letter and its corresponding sound. The order of the letters should be maintained, and the correct pronunciation should be followed to ensure the spelling is accurate. In conclusion, the correct spelling of "hydraulic" is H-Y-D-R-A-U-L-I-C. It is essential to break down the word into syllables and pay attention to the order and pronunciation of each letter for accurate spelling..

Reviews for "Spelling Mastery: A Guide to Memorizing Hydraulic"

1. Sarah - 1/5 stars - I found "How do you spell hydraulic" to be incredibly tedious and boring. The author seemed to overcomplicate a simple concept and I didn't appreciate their writing style. I struggled to stay engaged throughout the book and ultimately gave up halfway through. I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone looking for a straightforward and easy-to-understand guide.

2. John - 2/5 stars - This book was a disappointment. I had high hopes for a helpful and concise guide on spelling hydraulic, but instead, I was met with a confusing and convoluted read. The author seemed to go off on tangents that were unnecessary and detracted from the main topic. Overall, I found it frustrating and time-consuming, and I don't think it achieved what it set out to do.

3. Emily - 2/5 stars - I was expecting a clear and informative book on the spelling of hydraulic, but unfortunately, I was left disappointed. The author seemed more focused on showcasing their extensive vocabulary and writing prowess rather than delivering helpful and easy-to-understand explanations. I found myself re-reading paragraphs multiple times just to grasp the point being made. It lacked simplicity and clarity, making it a tedious read overall.

4. Michael - 1/5 stars - As someone who was genuinely looking for a straightforward answer to how to spell hydraulic, this book was a complete letdown. The author seemed more interested in showcasing their wit and humor than providing a simple and concise answer. The book was filled with unnecessary anecdotes and tangents that derailed from the main question. I would not recommend wasting your time on this book.

Fun Facts About the Spelling of Hydraulic