Emergency Force Sphere & Create Pit

[OgeXam]

I have players already prepare for DC asking about interesting combination of spells. I would love of a Dev would chime in but also would like other players advice and or if you know of a specific ruling would be helpful.

PRD: Create Pit wrote:

Create Pit

School conjuration (creation); Level sorcerer/wizard 2, summoner 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, F (miniature shovel costing 10 gp)
Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Effect 10-ft.-by-10-ft. hole, 10 ft. deep/2 levels
Duration 1 round + 1 round/level
Saving Throw Reflex negates; Spell Resistance no

You create a 10-foot-by-10-foot extradimensional hole with a depth of 10 feet per two caster levels (maximum 30 feet). You must create the pit on a horizontal surface of sufficient size. Since it extends into another dimension, the pit has no weight and does not otherwise displace the original underlying material. You can create the pit in the deck of a ship as easily as in a dungeon floor or the ground of a forest. Any creature standing in the area where you first conjured the pit must make a Reflex saving throw to jump to safety in the nearest open space...

"SRD: Emergency Force Sphere wrote:

Emergency Force Sphere

School evocation [force]; Level sorcerer/wizard 4
Casting Time 1 immediate action
Components V
Range 5 ft.
Effect 5-ft.-radius hemisphere of force centered on you
Duration 1 round/level (D)
Saving Throw None; Spell Resistance no

DESCRIPTION

As wall of force, except you create a hemispherical dome of force with hardness 20 and a number of hit points equal to 10 per caster level. The bottom edge of the dome forms a relatively watertight space if you are standing on a reasonably flat surface. ...

Here is the issue. Caster A attempts to cast create pit under Caster B. Caster B responds with a Emergency Force Sphere.

The force sphere is 10X10 Same size as Create Pit. The EFS will stop A from targeting the middle of B location due to LoE rules.

Can Caster A instead target the area next to EFS and have it extend under the force shield? So half of the pit is outside the force shield and half is inside the force shield?

[Trayce]

wow, reminds me of playing Magic: the gathering.

What makes RP sense? I see nothing in the create pit description that says EFS would stop them from targeting that area. In my mind, you'd just end up with a pit with a dome over top of it. You'd lose the 'watertight seal' due to the land no longer being reasonably smooth, but otherwise EFS is not a viable defence against create pit.

[Trayce]

*looks up line of effect rules*

Ah, see what you mean. Even so, I'd personally rule that having line of effect when you start casting a spell is enough, mostly to avoid making EMF too powerful. It's not meant to become a wizard duel 'gotcha' spell, just an emergency tool in the case of falling debris or possibly surprise ranged threats. Trying to go all counter spell is clearly not its intention.

That said, even if you rule that it does work that way, I see no reason why line of effect couldn't target the edge of the sphere rather than its initial point. I'd say it gets shunted.

[Kydeem de'Morcaine]

That is how I would handle it.

Caster can adjust the center of the pit to just outside the EFS as he finishes it.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Trayce wrote:

Ah, see what you mean. Even so, I'd personally rule that having line of effect when you start casting a spell is enough, mostly to avoid making EMF too powerful. It's not meant to become a wizard duel 'gotcha' spell, just an emergency tool in the case of falling debris or possibly surprise ranged threats. Trying to go all counter spell is clearly not its intention.

So, would you also rule it can't be created in time to stop an arrow or sword attack? Or are you only concerned about it making spellcasters feeling sad?

The spell is an immediate action to disrupt harm from coming at you. Whether it be falling debris, a targeted spell, an arrow, or whatever. It is a broken spell, just as 3E's Wings of Cover (which in that case, at least was sorcerer-only...) was a broken spell.

You do not "fix it" by giving the most powerful classes in the game a pass and telling the weaker ones to suck it up and deal. Nuh uh, no way!
You fix it by banning the spell.

[cp]

a). We agree that the spell is *very* strong. The event in question however is called the cheesegrinder. Bring all the cheese you can find.

So discussions about banning aren't conducive to the question. The question really is what do the rules allow.

Lets look at other examples:

Character A has a readied action that will interupt b's action. How do you adjudicate. (These are, for all purposes, the same as immediate actions).

1. Archer readies to shoot caster on casting. Caster starts casting. Archer shoots him. Don't you rule that the caster must make a concentration check due to the damage? Do you let him take a different action?

2. Barbarian charges 40 feet in a straight line vs a mage that has a contingency spell - ddor 400 feet up on a charge.

Barbarian charges. Mage teleports. The barbarian was charging to a specific spot.

Do you let the barbarian redo his turn because the mage tported away? Or has he used his turn?

3. Cleric readies a silence upon bard starting to sing. Bard announces he will use one use of bard song. Cleric casts spell. Bard fails save. Would you let the bard *not* sing - thus wasting the clerics silence?

Immediate spells and readied actions *interrupt* another action. This means that the action announced continues after the immediate or readied action.

Its not relevent what the cost of the interrupting action was - whether it was a readied action, a contingency, or an immediate action.

In fact, the costs of an immediate action (and EFS) are quite high since it burns your swift action for the next round (which could be used to cast a quickend fireball) and it consumes a valuable spell slot.

When you cast a spell, you announce the spell and the target. Neither of these things can be changed after the interruption, RAW.

"You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."

People often confuse an announced action with a desired result.
A player will announce a move action, and an attack action on the pointy headed wizard.

The wizard teleports away, (readied action) just as the fighter swings.
The fighter has taken the actions (move, and attack action against wizard). The fact that the results are unsatisfactory (from his point of view) aren't grounds to change the action.

The line " assuming he is still capable of doing so" refers to being incapacitated during the turn.

So, for example, fighter A readies a spear against a charge. Fighter B charges him. Fighter A will roll his to hit against fighter b using Fighter B's lowered AC. He will do double damage on a hit. Only after the resolution of A's readied action will B then be able to complete the charge attack, if his is still capable (ie., not dead, unconscious etc).

[OgeXam]

Here is how I read one person's view on the situation which will come in handy. Let me know if you guys agree.

Okay, here's how I see casting and immediate actions interacting, mechanically:

* Player X informs GM he is casting a spell.

* GM makes perception rolls if necessary for player Y to notice the casting.

* If player Y notices the casting
o GM makes Spellcraft roll for player Y to identify the spell
o GM informs player Y that player X is casting a spell, and includes spell name if Spellcraft succeeded. GM provides no other details, since player X has not been required to provide any other details yet.
o Player Y may use an immediate action now.

* Player X finishes casting. He informs the GM of any decisions related to the spell (usually: what's the target).
o The GM resolves all instant effects the spell. This may include saving throws, damage, teleportation, etc. It would not include things that happen over time, like falling.
o After the instant effects of the spell are resolved, player Y may use an immediate action (if he has not already used one).
o The GM now resolves any non-instant effects (like falling) and provides appropriate opportunities for player Y to use an immediate action (if he has not already used one).

[HaraldKlak]

OgeXam wrote:

Here is how I read one person's view on the situation which will come in handy. Let me know if you guys agree.

Okay, here's how I see casting and immediate actions interacting, mechanically:

That is how I see it.

Either you use the emergency force sphere before the other character finish casting the spell, thus preventing him from targeting the square below you, allowing him to choose another target.

Or the target finish casting the spell, choosing the square below you as a legal target (since there is no EFS yet). The pit appears, although the target is free to cast his EFS, although it wouldn't do anything but create a roof on top of the pit.

[Kydeem de'Morcaine]

cp wrote:

...

2. Barbarian charges 40 feet in a straight line vs a mage that has a contingency spell - ddor 400 feet up on a charge.

Barbarian charges. Mage teleports. The barbarian was charging to a specific spot.

Do you let the barbarian redo his turn because the mage tported away? Or has he used his turn?

...

I would not let him redo his turn. But I would let him slightly adjust it. Mage teleports away during his charge so I would let him stop at say the half way point or move farther if he still has the movement (since there is nothing to stop him now).

Can't completely change his action and not charge.

Same way if the dude casting the pit can tell the target is interupting him with a EFS. I would probably allow him to slightly adjust the targeting of the spell. But I wouldn't allow him to choose a different spell or not cast it.

I am not 100% sure you are correct on the RAW as stated above, but you might be. But to me it inhibits immersion because it doesn't follow common sense.

Way back when I was a kid winding up to throw a rotten apple at my brother, he would pull up a trash can lid to protect his face. I couldn't instantly switch targets to my cousin on the other side of the garage. I could adjust the throw a bit and try to hit him in the stomach. Judgement call.

It is a problem cause by the turn based simplification of the system.

[cp]

Lets turn this around for a minute OG.

Suppose player A readies an action to cast "prot evil" if player B casts Dominate person.

B announces casting dominate person. A casts his prot evil and is immune.

Are you then going to allow B to redirect the dominate person to someone else?

This is really demoralizing to player A. He took a risky action in the calculated hopes of wasting B's action. His actions had cost: it cost him his action (he might get to do nothing should B not cast dominate), and it cost him his prot E.

Your two step process (casting the spell & targeting it) doesn't really change the fundamental question. If the spell can interrupt the casting of the spell the player can choose to interrupt between the casting of the spell and when the spell 'hits' - he can interrupt the targeting of it.

More or less the same principle as- the spell can interrupt the blow hitting before it hits you.

I don't think anything is served by slicing the turn ever more finely...

[Kydeem de'Morcaine]

Nope I wouldn't allow switching targets. But I would alow a very minor adjustment. I don't see that there is anyway to do a very minor adjustment to dominate person.

Again, I am aware that it is not entirely consistant and may not be quite RAW. But the simplification inherent in a game do not always yield an entirely consistant rule that also always makes sense.

{shrug}

[tyger]

wait, would this be a viable defense, Player casts EMS then create pit. He would have an instant mini bunker. A fox hole with a roof.

just a random observation