Channel positive energy through walls?


Rules Questions


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

When a cleric channels positive energy, the rules state that it causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric.

The burst rules found on page 214 state that it can’t affect creatures
with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don’t extend around corners).

This implies that channeled energy does not penetrate. Even a japanese paper wall is enough to stop the effect. Right ?

This came up in a game where an incorporeal enemy was attempting to escape the party by passing through the stone wall into the adjacent room. The cleric channeled positive energy hoping to affect it before it got more than 30 feet away.

Did I rule correctly that channeled energy does not penetrate ?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
SlimGauge wrote:

When a cleric channels positive energy, the rules state that it causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric.

The burst rules found on page 214 state that it can’t affect creatures
with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don’t extend around corners).

This implies that channeled energy does not penetrate. Even a japanese paper wall is enough to stop the effect. Right ?

This came up in a game where an incorporeal enemy was attempting to escape the party by passing through the stone wall into the adjacent room. The cleric channeled positive energy hoping to affect it before it got more than 30 feet away.

Did I rule correctly that channeled energy does not penetrate ?

Yes you did.

Dark Archive

SlimGauge wrote:

When a cleric channels positive energy, the rules state that it causes a burst that affects all creatures of one type (either undead or living) in a 30-foot radius centered on the cleric.

The burst rules found on page 214 state that it can’t affect creatures
with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don’t extend around corners).

This implies that channeled energy does not penetrate. Even a japanese paper wall is enough to stop the effect. Right ?

This came up in a game where an incorporeal enemy was attempting to escape the party by passing through the stone wall into the adjacent room. The cleric channeled positive energy hoping to affect it before it got more than 30 feet away.

Did I rule correctly that channeled energy does not penetrate ?

I'd rule the same.


Yes, that's right.

Only a few effects and spells can turn corners or ignore walls.

Walls with big holes (more than 1x1 feet) may allow the effect to ignore it, but I'm not sure atm.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, you're correct that bursts don't go through walls.

.

According to the rules:
Total Cover
If you don't have line of effect to your target (that is, you cannot draw any line from your square to your target's square without crossing a solid barrier), he is considered to have total cover from you. You can't make an attack against a target that has total cover.

What constitutes a "Solid Barrier" is not illuminated, so I could understand a judgment call going either way when talking about a curtain, paper screen, etc.

I would rule that an effect must either be blocked by the barrier or overcome it. So your Channeled Energy (that only effects undead, not paper) is stopped by a paper wall, but a Fireball burns through the paper wall and effects people on the other side.


so the 1st level "Obscuring Mist" spell stops ALL channeling.

A misty vapor arises around you. It is stationary once created. The vapor obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature 5 feet away has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures farther away have total concealment

So your 10 feet away and that 20th level evil cleric that just channeled a can off whup-a*s dos an epic fail with a 1st level spell.

Sweet!.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Spugly.Fuglet wrote:

so the 1st level "Obscuring Mist" spell stops ALL channeling.

A misty vapor arises around you. It is stationary once created. The vapor obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature 5 feet away has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance). Creatures farther away have total concealment

So your 10 feet away and that 20th level evil cleric that just channeled a can off whup-a*s dos an epic fail with a 1st level spell.

Sweet!.

No. Read that again. Obscuring mist provides total concealment. Not the same as total cover.


If there is a curtain or a Japanese paper wall than if you mean Channel Positive or Negative energy as a DM I'd let it bypass since those have no hardness, but if the player made a big deal and said Negative energy can't bypass my curtain or paper wall I'd file that away for that Positive energy channel.

Although if you are talking about Damaging spells all of those will just fry the curtain or paper wall and you'd just eat the damage without a complaint (Fireball or lightning bolt) all cover really does is give you a bonus to your AC. Such as if you were on the other side of the wall and someone threw a spell at it to try to hit you that spell would have to beat it's hardness than do the hit point damage to the wall to blow it out, and than you and anyone else on the otherside of the wall would take the damage that was remaining following the player's guide. It's more work than it's really worth to bust the wall down, but it's possible.


thanks Shadowborn thought it would be odd if it did


Here's the exact text you want:

Quote:


A burst spell affects whatever it catches in its area, including creatures that you can't see. It can't affect creatures with total cover from its point of origin (in other words, its effects don't extend around corners). The default shape for a burst effect is a sphere, but some burst spells are specifically described as cone-shaped. a burst's area defines how far from the point of origin the spell's effect extends.

Now several spells (like fireball for example) state the following:

Quote:
The fireball sets fire to combustibles and damages objects in the area. It can melt metals with low melting points, such as lead, gold, copper, silver, and bronze. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier shatters or breaks through it, the fireball may continue beyond the barrier if the area permits; otherwise it stops at the barrier just as any other spell effect does.

However channel energy doesn't have any such line and is a 'normal' burst effect, therefore stopped by anything that offers total cover.

The Exchange

I understand that the paper wall thing was just an example for you to use, but I found it interesting enough to post something.

Quite often with those Oriental paper walls, you can clearly see a shadowy image of folks walking on the other side. (At least in my limited experience of the ones I've seen in real life.) This of course depends on light sources etc. If this was happening in a game, I would rule that it acts more like concealement than cover (50% miss chance concelament given the nature of shadows and distortion etc).

However, if no shadow was being cast for whatever reason (no light source, too far from intervening wall etc) then it would become cover which then prevents targeting as well.

It's a corner case and outside what the point of your question was but does bring up something that could be an issue at some stage.

For me, if it acts like a window (glass, paper, thin curtains) then I let channels work through them. Anything of substantial material (heavy curtains upwards) then I rule it blocks channels.

I guess as long as you and your group are consistant, it doesn't matter.

Cheers


Even if it said otherwise I would still rule it as the current core book does.

Dark Archive

A scary side-effect of allowing channeled energy to bypass cover would be the ability of an evil cleric to walk up to a crowded inn in the evening, stand blocking the door and channel negative energy to murder everyone within 30 ft., through the walls. (Or he could stand in an alley and kill people in two adjacent buildings, which might make for an interesting murder mystery. 'Why would someone kill everyone in the inn, and in the stables next door? Who was the targer?')

It's not much different than spiking the doors and setting the building on fire, really, but it gets points for style.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

One time I played a Gnome cleric that specialized in channeling. We knew that a group of bandits were coming, and were preparing for them. I hid inside a barrel, and carved out eyeholes in a 360 degree radius around the barrel. That way, enemies never had TOTAL cover, and I could channel from inside a barrel. I realized I couldn't move, though, so a party member rolled me into the enemy group. WIN.


Well, in the artwork, Channel positive energy has always been depicted as a radiance of holy light, so the light is definitely going to at least somewhat penetrate a translucent paper wall.

If we say that any solid material stops it, then any undead clad head-to-rotting toes in armor (or even a bedsheet - oooh, spooky!) is going to be completely immune to Channel energy (of either variety).

What if there's a skeleton hiding behind a curtain that doesn't quite reach all the way to the floor, and you CPE it? Does it fry him only from the ankles down?

Liberty's Edge

Voin_AFOL wrote:

Well, in the artwork, Channel positive energy has always been depicted as a radiance of holy light, so the light is definitely going to at least somewhat penetrate a translucent paper wall.

If we say that any solid material stops it, then any undead clad head-to-rotting toes in armor (or even a bedsheet - oooh, spooky!) is going to be completely immune to Channel energy (of either variety).

What if there's a skeleton hiding behind a curtain that doesn't quite reach all the way to the floor, and you CPE it? Does it fry him only from the ankles down?

The RULES do not know such small things. The RULES ARE or ARE NOT. ;-)

The damn skeleton will fry entirely or not at all.

Armor does not grant total cover BTW : they burn !!!


Art =/= rules.


DM Sothal wrote:
Art =/= rules.

Perhaps not, but the rules are abstract mechanical concepts that govern the visual action taking place in our imaginations. Ultimately, the rules should serve the narrative (we don't need "rules for the sake of rules" - this isn't a board-game), and the narrative is like a book or movie playing out in the heads of the players and GM. And sometimes the abstracts are not adequately described, or people have difficulty visualizing them. How does that exchange rate on picture to words go again?


"picture : words = 1 : >1000" I give you that.

"picture : rules = 1 : 0"

You read any of those tales? Are they always going straight by the rules of the game?

Now that I think about it, it's the same in our world with Photoshop. :)


I'm not saying the picture > rules, but they should not be dismissed as a useful tool. Imagination is the birthplace of these games, and visualizing epic sagas in the mind's eye is the end goal, is it not?


DM Sothal wrote:


You read any of those tales? Are they always going straight by the rules of the game?

Sorry, I'm not sure to which tales you are referring. Could you clarify, please?


You got the channel rules right but *may* have gotten the Incorporeal rules wrong. Incorporeal creatures have to remain adjacent to an objects exterior and so cannot pass through objects larger than their space.


andreww wrote:
You got the channel rules right but *may* have gotten the Incorporeal rules wrong. Incorporeal creatures have to remain adjacent to an objects exterior and so cannot pass through objects larger than their space.

Only if the wall is thicker than the creature's width.

A medium Incorporeal creature could pass through a 5ft wall or thinner. You would need a really thick wall to stop Incorporeal creatures.


Snowblind wrote:
andreww wrote:
You got the channel rules right but *may* have gotten the Incorporeal rules wrong. Incorporeal creatures have to remain adjacent to an objects exterior and so cannot pass through objects larger than their space.

Only if the wall is thicker than the creature's width.

A medium Incorporeal creature could pass through a 5ft wall or thinner. You would need a really thick wall to stop Incorporeal creatures.

Yes, as I said in my post, it cannot pass through an object, such as a wall, larger than its space. It could pass through something up to 5' thick if it was medium but nothing larger.


Davor wrote:
One time I played a Gnome cleric that specialized in channeling. We knew that a group of bandits were coming, and were preparing for them. I hid inside a barrel, and carved out eyeholes in a 360 degree radius around the barrel. That way, enemies never had TOTAL cover, and I could channel from inside a barrel. I realized I couldn't move, though, so a party member rolled me into the enemy group. WIN.

This strikes me as an entirely valid and even favored tactic for clerics of Cayden Cailean. :)

The eyeholes would have to be at least one square foot large though.


If I were GM'ing I'd be a little more generous as far as something like a "paper wall" were concerned.

Stone, wood, something like that on the other hand? Oh no. No channeling through that.

Then again, if we go with the letter of the law, I don't think you can fireball through a paper wall either.


RAW needs to have common sense applied to it for the game to have any sense of verisimilitude or plausibility. I don't like using the word "realism" in these discussions, because then that derails the convo into these pointless arguments of "what place does "realism" have in a world w/ magic & dragons and such" vs. "well if we throw any "realism" out the window, why do humans walk on their feet instead of their hands, why is gp coins instead of globs of purple goop, and why doesn't the whole fanatasy world just resemble a Dali painting".

So let's not do that. :)

However, a fireball would logically consume a paper wall.

So the rules on Channeling Energy state: "A good cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships a good deity) channels positive energy and can choose to deal damage to undead creatures or to heal living creatures. An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) channels negative energy and can choose to deal damage to living creatures or to heal undead creatures."

A paper wall is neither living nor undead, so neither energy type really "damages" it.


HWalsh wrote:

If I were GM'ing I'd be a little more generous as far as something like a "paper wall" were concerned.

Stone, wood, something like that on the other hand? Oh no. No channeling through that.

Then again, if we go with the letter of the law, I don't think you can fireball through a paper wall either.

From fireball wrote:

The fireball sets fire to combustibles and damages objects in the area. It can melt metals with low melting points, such as lead, gold, copper, silver, and bronze. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier shatters or breaks through it, the fireball may continue beyond the barrier if the area permits; otherwise it stops at the barrier just as any other spell effect does.

Fireball will rip right through paper. It's also going to have little problem with a wooden plank building.


MeanMutton wrote:
Fireball will rip right through paper. It's also going to have little problem with a wooden plank building.

For sure, unless there's been recent heavy rains, and that might give it fire resistance of 1 or 2.

I mean, what's the point of having these different energy damage types if they don't act like they ought? If fire doesn't burn flammable stuff, if cold doesn't freeze water, if electricity isn't conducted through metal, etc. This isn't just a video game where we're merely playing Elemental Rock Paper Scissors w/ monster's resistances, and the damage is all just generic.

I really get tired of this trend in game design where "well, it looks like fire, and it has "fire" in the spell name, but it's not really "fire" fire, because you can't so much as set that dry hay bale over there alight with it."

^ No, this madness has got to stop. That's not a fire spell, that'a a magic-missile with an illusion attacked to make it look like fire. If you're gonna have "fire" in the name, then the spell needs to act like fire. Anything less is a sorry sack of lies.

You don't have to have a Master's degree in physics to simply apply some common-sense logic (that's good enough for the game narrative, anyway) to how these effects would interact with the environment around them. And when we do that, it creates a more immersive world with creative tactical options. And that's fun. :)


Wooden buildings laugh at fireballs. Energy damage applied to objects is first halved, and then reduced by hardness. So a fireball that hits a simple wooden door (10hp, 5 hardness) would need to deal 30 (!) damage to destroy it. So a level 9 wizard on average.

If you think about it, this makes sense. Wood is actually not very "burny." To use wood for a fire, you have to take the effort of making sure it's dry and then build the fire up really carefully.


Knight Magenta wrote:

Wooden buildings laugh at fireballs. Energy damage applied to objects is first halved, and then reduced by hardness. So a fireball that hits a simple wooden door (10hp, 5 hardness) would need to deal 30 (!) damage to destroy it. So a level 9 wizard on average.

If you think about it, this makes sense. Wood is actually not very "burny." To use wood for a fire, you have to take the effort of making sure it's dry and then build the fire up really carefully.

Energy Attacks wrote:
Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily.

I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to rule that an explosion of fire is particularly effective against wood. That said, a dedicated blastet is doing more than level d 6 damage.


Had a player that was frustrated by this. I let him take a feat that let his channels go through barriers. He had to know the target was there to make it work though.


pfsrd said wrote:
Energy Attacks: Energy attacks deal half damage to most objects. Divide the damage by 2 before applying the object's hardness. Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily. Sonic might do full damage against glass and crystal objects.

Source

I agree, wood is not "instantly flammable". Try holding a match up to a wooden beam sometime, see how well it lights. Of course, a dragon's breath (or a fireball) is many magnitudes of energy output stronger than a mere match, and may produce the desired combustion, based on circumstances.

Now straw-thatched roofs, on the other hand, and the tar underneath (or most any roofs sealed with tar) is a different matter. This is why it's not uncommon to see buildings gutted by fire still have the exterior walls somewhat standing, but be missing a roof (that, and the interior walls tend not to be as strong as the exterior ones).


MeanMutton wrote:
Knight Magenta wrote:

Wooden buildings laugh at fireballs. Energy damage applied to objects is first halved, and then reduced by hardness. So a fireball that hits a simple wooden door (10hp, 5 hardness) would need to deal 30 (!) damage to destroy it. So a level 9 wizard on average.

If you think about it, this makes sense. Wood is actually not very "burny." To use wood for a fire, you have to take the effort of making sure it's dry and then build the fire up really carefully.

Energy Attacks wrote:
Some energy types might be particularly effective against certain objects, subject to GM discretion. For example, fire might do full damage against parchment, cloth, and other objects that burn easily.
I don't think it's unreasonable for a GM to rule that an explosion of fire is particularly effective against wood. That said, a dedicated blastet is doing more than level d 6 damage.

Keep in mind, most wizards, blasters or otherwise, don't want their fireballs to deal full damage to wood. Imagine you have a nice little brawl in the corrupt noble's mansion. He drops a fireball, and all the walls in a 30ft burst disintegrate and the roof collapses :p

Grand Lodge

How does a paper wall provide cover rather than concealment? If I am on one side of a paper wall with a greatsword, it is impossible to strike through a paper wall against a silhouetted opponent? Really? I guess that is what the rule says if by 'solid' barrier it means matter in a solid state rather than gaseous or liquid.


Ronnie K wrote:
How does a paper wall provide cover rather than concealment? If I am on one side of a paper wall with a greatsword, it is impossible to strike through a paper wall against a silhouetted opponent? Really? I guess that is what the rule says if by 'solid' barrier it means matter in a solid state rather than gaseous or liquid.

Yep. The rules do not make allowances for penetration except with a small number of specific rules elements. If a wall blocks your LoE, the other guy has cover, regardless of if the wall is made of granite or tissue paper.


Snowblind wrote:
The rules do not make allowances for penetration

/snerk

Well, methinks first you have to make a Grapple check... ;P


Tissue paper is not a wall. Neither is a curtain. I'd rule that those provide concealment, but not cover. If I can put an arrow through it, then it's not cover.

If you look at cover, it talks about blocking line of effect. In order to block line of effect, you need a "solid barrier." Rice paper doors and cloth curtains do not fit that definition, unless you'd rule that they'd stop a lightning bolt.


This discussion has become about the wall-ness of paper. Personally, in the case of a cleric, I'd allow them to punch through the paper wall and channel that way. That's if I didn't let effects pass through regardless.


Shadowborn wrote:

Tissue paper is not a wall. Neither is a curtain. I'd rule that those provide concealment, but not cover. If I can put an arrow through it, then it's not cover.

If you look at cover, it talks about blocking line of effect. In order to block line of effect, you need a "solid barrier." Rice paper doors and cloth curtains do not fit that definition, unless you'd rule that they'd stop a lightning bolt.

A high level archer could put an arrow through a wooden wall easily. Are walls not cover now?

What about plaster walls? Some of those are as flimsy as ****. You could easily stick your fist through it. Or an arrow. Do some houses only provide concealment now? Can dragons randomly spot you through a wall because the wall isn't tough enough and thus doesn't block LoE?

This is a painful rabbit hole to go down. There is a reason the rules don't try to handle corner cases and just go with the "physical barrier=cover" option.


~sigh~ People, people - cover=/=concealment.

When I was in the service, they actually taught us the specifics of each in detail (because your very life could depend on knowing the difference).

Basically, it boils down to:

Cover makes it harder for you to be hit.

Concealment makes it harder for you to be seen.

Both are very circumstantial, depending on the context of the situation.

For example:

- "Door of typical civilian car": Concealment vs line of sight (can't see you behind it. Well, maybe your feet, but not your vitals.). Cover vs low-velocity projectiles (rocks). Not reliable cover vs bullets or explosions.

- "Tall grass": Concealment vs sight (hard to see you in it if camouflaged). Not cover (if I drop a firebomb in the grass, you go up with it, regardless if I can pinpoint your position or not).

- "Darkness": Concealment vs sight (again, hard to see you). Not concealment vs night vision or infra-red.

- "Wall of Force": Cover (can't hit you through it). Not concealment (but I can see you perfectly well).

Well, that's in practical terms anyway, not necessarily in "game mechanics terms". But if the game mechanics don't match up to practical terms, then the game mechanics need to be adjusted.

Grand Lodge

Concealment gives a miss chance.

Is that not a variant of "harder to hit"?


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Concealment gives a miss chance.

Is that not a variant of "harder to hit"?

Well, in game terms, the bonus from cover can be negated by a good enough attack, but a miss chance from concealment always applies (unless the attacker can see through it)

The thing about concealment is that it's not any sort of "hard" protection. Sure, it makes it harder to target, but if I have enough firepower to hose the are down with, well, an area effect, you're not behind that can protect you.

For example, hiding behind a cloth curtain, vs hiding behind a solid rock wall (assume a couple feet thick). In either case, I have trouble seeing you. I get fed up with your sneakiness and toss a grenade (or setting-appropriate equivalent thereof) in your general direction.

In the first case, the curtain is toast, and you with it. In the second, the rock wall is a solid barrier between my grenade and your squishy innards.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Channel positive energy through walls? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.