| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forget LoE.
I think the spell comes from your square and sticking your arm out does not change / add to your square. If it did, you could get extra range on half the spells in game by sticking your arm out while casting them. I reckon we'd all know if that were the case.
A large prison is going to have maybe one cell designed to hold a wizard.
If it's a viewing hole, it might have bars on it making it hard to stick your hand through it. Too small and you can hardly see 10% of the room. There's a huge blind spot that prisoners can hide quietly in forcing the jailers to come in and look.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules go by what square you are in. The exception is a barrier with holes of a certain size, which has been determined as not qualifying in this case.
Those are the rules.
Now if the GM is willing to reward creativity and ignore the rules then we can discuss that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, the rules for shooting through a little gap like an arrow slit or the like are in the Cover mechanics, if I remember correctly.Hey, I've dealt with this one before as a GM!
My ruling: No, you can't stick your arm through, that interferes with the components (without Still Spell, anyway). But you can make the ranged touch attack. I don't remember the AC of such things off hand, but let me think...that's probably effectively a Tiny creature, with a 0 Dex, so...I'd make it about AC 7? (10 + 2 Size - 5 Dex). I'd probably give a -1 on the roll per 10 feet away, too, but that's an off-the-cuff idea.
And as usual, RD is trying to bypass rules with shenannigans.
I'd allow this with the Still metamagic feat. And if the player has made the wrong guesses about how much empty space there is on the other side, he may well wind up cooking his arm. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now that I am at a computer:
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.
It doesn't say that sticking your hand in the hole stops the barrier from blocking line of effect. It just says that the barrier provides it unless the hole is a certain size, and no other exception is given.
So no, putting your hand in the hold per a strict reading of the rules does not allow you to ignore the barrier. If we are really going to go by RAW that is how it works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guess that's to be expected from the rules forum. ;P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, the rules for shooting through a little gap like an arrow slit or the like are in the Cover mechanics, if I remember correctly.Hey, I've dealt with this one before as a GM!
My ruling: No, you can't stick your arm through, that interferes with the components (without Still Spell, anyway). But you can make the ranged touch attack. I don't remember the AC of such things off hand, but let me think...that's probably effectively a Tiny creature, with a 0 Dex, so...I'd make it about AC 7? (10 + 2 Size - 5 Dex). I'd probably give a -1 on the roll per 10 feet away, too, but that's an off-the-cuff idea.
And as usual, RD is trying to bypass rules with shenannigans.
I'd allow this with the Still metamagic feat. And if the player has made the wrong guesses about how much empty space there is on the other side, he may well wind up cooking his arm. :)
In the original module that I ran where I had to rule on this, the party was in an area where there were dark folk shooting from arrow slits in this small dungeon, and the area they were in was sort of a U shaped set of arrow slits with a wall 5 feet behind it. The party mage threw a fireball through one of the slits, trying to launch it 25 feet to keep from frying the party.
She hit the AC of the arrow slit, but it only went 5 feet before hitting the wall behind the creatures, and the party was very unhappy when the fireball backwashed through the arrow slits, even if it did give them a massive boost to their Reflex saves and effectively evasion.
It was entertaining. ^_^
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much. In the advice forum the "rule of cool" is good. In the rules forum it is an abomination most of the time. :)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ravingdork, roll the ranged touch, please. Or cast a targeted spell that doesn't have a clause about small openings and fiery beads exploding you to a crisp in your jail cell.
I suppose you apply the same modifier to archers firing out of a arrow slit, then, right?
Were this allowed, what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and you should expect bad guys to start shooting arrows at you though holes too small to allow you to return fire, and similar shenanigans.
That is exactly the idea behind arrow slits, and those have been around for a few millennia.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You'd think that people knowing how the laws of physics work in their universe would specifically remember to make the slits too small for that sort of thing.Ahhh, the myth of super abundant casters. One in a thousand are characters. One in a thousand characters can be casters. That's why they all go to the inn. The only reason a party contains both a paladin and a necromancer is because they were the only spellcaster who was available.How big is your usual army? More than a thousand?
If one vehicle in a thousand is a tank, you don't defend your palace against the Volkswagen beetle.
And the "one in a thousand" fallacy. If we go with the old books that defined those percentage (1st or 2nd edition), 1 of 100 persons can have class levels and 1of 10 of those persons work on raising those class levels. So 1/1000 of the populations was made by people with several class levels. In those books there was no way to have NPC class levels.
Now? Where we have some population statistic? Oh, yes, Spellcasting and services. Let's see:
In addition, not every town or village has a spellcaster of sufficient level to cast any spell. In general, you must travel to a small town (or larger settlement) to be reasonably assured of finding a spellcaster capable of casting 1st-level spells, a large town for 2nd-level spells, a small city for 3rd- or 4th-level spells, a large city for 5th- or 6th-level spells, and a metropolis for 7th- or 8th-level spells. Even a metropolis isn't guaranteed to have a local spellcaster able to cast 9th-level spells.
Small town 201–2,000
So in a small town (with an average population of about one thousand people) I can find at least one cleric and one wizard capable to cast first level spells. I.e. 1/500 of the population.
For 3rd or 4th level spells? Small city, 5.001 to 10.000 inhabitants.
Hmm, so we have a level 7 spellcaster every 5.000 people or even more as they will cover every possible spell, even those of specialistic spellist.
At least 1 level 7 wizard, 1 level 7 cleric, 1 level 7 druid and 1 level 10 bard to cover for the CRNB spells.
Let's amend that: "at least 1 level 7 wizard, 1 level 7 cleric, 1 level 7 druid and 1 level 10 bard willing to sell his services". No, those rules don't mesh at all with 1 in a million spellcaster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much. In the advice forum the "rule of cool" is good. In the rules forum it is an abomination most of the time. :)The problem is that the rules work badly when applied to firing out of arrow slits.
I won't disagree with that. RD's group will have to decide how much they want to let the rules get in the way of the game.
As an aside if I were to say his hand can fit through the slit and bypass line of effect then I would say that if that back wall was not far enough back the radius of the fireball can come back through those holes that he put his hand through.
Also if the slit was not long enough his exposed hand could be hit since we would be already outside the rules, and that may force a concentration check.
I wouldn't say it was trapped because that might mess with the arrows or bolts.
It also makes sense to say they can see his hand and attack him. Depending on how the init is setup readying an action to disrupt the spell is not a bad idea. I can't think of any other reason to put a hand in that area.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guess that's to be expected from the rules forum. ;P:P Well to put it another way, where would you draw the line of 'well I can just fit my arm around it?'
A character can use a tower shield as a standard action to grant cover against a direction (for example) so if a spell caster walks up and casts (for example) fireball, and loops their arm around the shield, then the shield user's ability to affect the game is negated.
Furthermore, the caster still has cover relative to the shield-bearer and (presumably) his allies sitting behind them, so now the caster can cast in melee, and no one can make attacks of opportunity against them; essentially turning the enemy shield-bearer into their own minion without even using magic. In fact, in such a system all wizards should pay shield-bearer hirelings to sell themselves to any adventurers attempting to assail their towers.
In neither case the caster get full cover. If he can cast behind the obstacle, the people on the other side of the obstacle can cast/shoot at him.
Essentially we are in a situation where someone that has full cover peek over/around the obstacle to cast/shoot. When he do that he trade away his full cover, getting partial cover in exchange for the ability to cast/shoot.
Partial cover give a bonus to AC, but not total protection.
Unless we give him the ability to expose himself, cast/shoot and then hide again (essentially giving him the bonus of the Shot on the run feat) he don't benefit from immunity to retaliation.
If instead you are arguing that we are allowing him to stich a limb behind the obstacle without exposing himself, sure it is possible, but then he his casting or shooting blindly at a square he can't see. Very few spells or weapons allow that, and generally they suffer from a 50% miss chance.
It can be done with a fireball as it throw a small bead, but not with any precision.
BTW, fireball has spread AoE. If you cast it on the other side of a tower shield sticking your arm around it, you are within the area of effect and get hit by it, even if with a good bonus to the save.
It is way more efficiente to stay back and cast the spell above the square and the tower shield. That way the enemies get no benefit from the shield and the full effect of the spell, without risk for the caster.
Air burst for the win.
Were this allowed, what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and you should expect bad guys to start shooting arrows at you though holes too small to allow you to return fire, and similar shenanigans.That is exactly the idea behind arrow slits, and those have been around for a few millennia.
You're missing something important; I specifically said "shooting arrows at you through holes too small to allow you to return fire". In Pathfinder, there's no distinction as to who is on what side of a gap. It's either big enough or it isn't. The shelter either provides cover or it isn't. If RD can't return fire through the hole, the shooter shouldn't be able to return fire through the hole. If RD's opponent can't pop a fireball through the hole, he shouldn't be able to get one through.
I get it how reality works. I even made comment that Pathfinder's simulation of reality doesn't get granular enough to make this circumstance realistic.
I kind of like Diego's proposed method of handling it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Were this allowed, what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and you should expect bad guys to start shooting arrows at you though holes too small to allow you to return fire, and similar shenanigans.That is exactly the idea behind arrow slits, and those have been around for a few millennia.You're missing something important; I specifically said "shooting arrows at you through holes too small to allow you to return fire". In Pathfinder, there's no distinction as to who is on what side of a gap. It's either big enough or it isn't. The shelter either provides cover or it isn't. If RD can't return fire through the hole, the shooter shouldn't be able to return fire through the hole. If RD's opponent can't pop a fireball through the hole, he shouldn't be able to get one through.
I get it how reality works. I even made comment that Pathfinder's simulation of reality doesn't get granular enough to make this circumstance realistic.
That is not accurate because the caster is using rule specific to spells, and bow or crossbow shoot is not.
So fighters can shoot arrows through arrow slits with impunity. Is this to make up for all those spells like true strike that make casters better at melee?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ravingdork, roll the ranged touch, please. Or cast a targeted spell that doesn't have a clause about small openings and fiery beads exploding you to a crisp in your jail cell.I suppose you apply the same modifier to archers firing out of a arrow slit, then, right?
No, because archers using bows and crossbows with arrow slits are covered by the PRD:
Walls with Arrow Slits: Walls with arrow slits can be made of any durable material but are most commonly masonry, hewn stone, or wood. Such a wall allows defenders to fire arrows or crossbow bolts at intruders from behind the safety of the wall. Archers behind arrow slits have improved cover that gives them a +8 bonus to Armor Class, a +4 bonus on Reflex saves, and the benefits of the improved evasion class feature.
For wizards firing fireballs through arrow slits, refer to the spell "fireball".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is imagined and does not really exist.Pretty much. In the advice forum the "rule of cool" is good. In the rules forum it is an abomination most of the time. :)The problem is that the rules work badly when applied to firing out of arrow slits.
I was looking for that rule you quoted, but my search-fu failed me.
Good find.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So fighters can shoot arrows through arrow slits with impunity. Is this to make up for all those spells like true strike that make casters better at melee?
It has nothing to do with wizardry. It's about weapons, engineering and warfare. Some dude put on his thinking cap and designed something that allowed fighters to shoot arrows and bolts with impunity against anyone assailing their rather large and heavy fortifications.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
+9 to someone's ac is hardly impunity: its the same benefit as wearing full plate to someone in a bathrobe.
That is not accurate because the caster is using rule specific to spells, and bow or crossbow shoot is not.
I disagree. A hole that is too small to use to perform an action is a hole that is too small to use to perform that action, regardless of what action one is talking about. Different actions will require different sized holes, but that's not the point.
|
|
That is not accurate because the caster is using rule specific to spells, and bow or crossbow shoot is not.I disagree. A hole that is too small to use to perform an action is a hole that is too small to use to perform that action, regardless of what action one is talking about. Different actions will require different sized holes, but that's not the point.
YAPQTTW (yet another pathfinder quote that's t-shirt worthy)
|
|
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect.
Note that a arrow slit is "of the height of a man and about a palm's width on the outside", or about 6' by 4", 288 square inches. A square foot is 144 square inches.
The LOS limitation isn't a hole of 1' by 1', but a square foot. As we are speaking RAW, Ravingdork murder hole isn't enough, but most arrow slits area is large enough to allow the passage of spells.
this is a glorious definition for impunity if I've ever seen one! Want to sell t-shirts with that quote next Gencon? (I'll just take 10%)+9 to someone's ac is hardly impunity: its the same benefit as wearing full plate to someone in a bathrobe.
You can have my quote above it for free as long as you attribute it to me.:)
Fun fact, murderholes don't allow you to do anything at all.
Line of Sight
A line of sight is the same as a Line of Effect but with the additional restriction that that it is blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight (such as Concealment).
Ranged Attacks
With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon's maximum range and in line of sight. The maximum range for a thrown weapon is five range increments. For projectile weapons, it is 10 range increments. Some ranged weapons have shorter maximum ranges, as specified in their descriptions.
That being said, I didn't find the rule that says you need 1 square foot for line of effect. In any case, anything that allows a ranged attack would, in my book, also allow a fireball.
Line of Effect
A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight. A line of effect starts from any corner of your square and extends to the limit of its range or until it strikes a barrier that would block it. A line-shaped spell affects all creatures in squares through which the line passes.
If you are targeting an opening one foot behind an opening, you either hit, and it goes through, or it impacts on the bars or frame and goes off there. If it's a wooden door, it does not save(unattended object).
Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.
That is not accurate because the caster is using rule specific to spells, and bow or crossbow shoot is not.I disagree. A hole that is too small to use to perform an action is a hole that is too small to use to perform that action, regardless of what action one is talking about. Different actions will require different sized holes, but that's not the point.
I am telling you what the rules say. If you disagree provide rules to back your statement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.
The spell is pretty clear on that:
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.
Arrow slits should restrict the field of fire as well, is that part of the rules?
It's also irrelevant. It's not the job of a defending castle archer to cover the entire defensive arc, just his part of it. That's why the upper wall is LINED with archers instead of relying on a single man. If you do have a super ace, He's probably shooting from a different kind of location.
If you are targeting an opening one foot behind an opening, you either hit, and it goes through, or it impacts on the bars or frame and goes off there. If it's a wooden door, it does not save(unattended object).
Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.
If the door is destroyed, the blowback may well hit you even if you got it correctly through the grating and it burst on the other side.
Ladies, I miss the days when lightning bolt could bounce back. :)
Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.
As has been said, the answer to that is pretty clear cut. The real question is, if the cover is destroyed, do the people behind it retain cover bonuses to their Reflex saves versus the fireball's spread?
Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.As has been said, the answer to that is pretty clear cut. The real question is, if the cover is destroyed, do the people behind it retain cover bonuses to their Reflex saves versus the fireball's spread?
No, because the cover has been blown away/destroyed by the blast. They should be happy that the rules don't call for additional shrapnel damage from the blown apart door.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Arrow slits should restrict the field of fire as well, is that part of the rules?It's also irrelevant. It's not the job of a defending castle archer to cover the entire defensive arc, just his part of it. That's why the upper wall is LINED with archers instead of relying on a single man. If you do have a super ace, He's probably shooting from a different kind of location.It's quite relevant. If the rules don't define a field of view, then a single defending super ace castle archer CAN cover the entire defensive arc.
That's the whole point of my question, since obviously arrow slits should have restrictive fields of view and yet, in the rules, they don't.
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.
Look at the character's square. Draw the "best" straight line (don't worry about the grid) to where they're trying to attack. If it goes through the open part of the arrow slit, they can make an attack. If not, they can't. No need for additional rules, since it's already handled in the normal rules for cover/total cover.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, because the cover has been blown away/destroyed by the blast. They should be happy that the rules don't call for additional shrapnel damage from the blown apart door.Now the question becomes, if the door is destroyed, does the fireball effect the jailers on the other side.As has been said, the answer to that is pretty clear cut. The real question is, if the cover is destroyed, do the people behind it retain cover bonuses to their Reflex saves versus the fireball's spread?
A Fireball isn't explosive it burn or melt away things. Burned or melted things don't generate shrapnel.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's not how the ranged cover rules work, and if it was handled your way, the field of view for an arrow slit would be close to 0 degrees. Saying 'don't worry about the grid' is in direct contradiction to the cover rules which explicitly tell you to use the corners of your square.
Depend on how it is drawn on the map. If it is drawn as a straight hole through a 5' wall, sure. But that isn't the shape of a real arrowslit. Look the Wikipedia page I linked for the real shape.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A spread spell extends out like a burst but can turn corners. You select the point of origin, and the spell spreads out a given distance in all directions. Figure the area the spell effect fills by taking into account any turns the spell effect takes.
A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.
You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.
A burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation spell affects only an area, creature, or object to which it has line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst's center point, a cone-shaped burst's starting point, a cylinder's circle, or an emanation's point of origin).
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.
Bolded for emphasis. People are drastically misinterpreting how line of effect is figured regarding the fireball bead. If this was a lightning bolt, they would be correct. But the bead from a fireball has more in common with a ray, hence the ranged touch aspect. When it detonates, THEN it is a spread and subject to the line of effect rules as stated.
So, since Fireball specifically allows the ranged touch scenario, the following would happen:
A successful ranged touch fires a fireball bead through the small gap, where it impacts something, likely the hallway wall. It explodes. The gap, being an opening NOT equal to a square foot, prevents the fireball from backwashing into the cell. While perhaps a bit warm, the caster is fine, and the hallway is otherwise filled with fire and pain for anyone within 20' of the origin/detonation point, even if that happens to be just around a corner 15' away, because fireball is a spread. (My group thought it was a burst for, basically, ever. After realizing a decade of mistaken fireballs, we took great pains to re-learn the magic section and it's intricacies.)
As for the arm through the hole, that is a different issue entirely and I feel it is fully in DM territory. The unknown variables to me are:
1. Must a fireball bead/spell effect come from the hand making the gestures? (Magus don't, but they have special training, although much of that is to channel it through a weapon.)
2. Would my arm through a small opening completely prevent the gestures or impose arcane spell failure? (Important for if a cleric tries to do the same with flamestrike, no ASF).
3. What are the consequences to the caster for trying to "avoid" the ranged touch attack? (Important because EVERYTHING HAS CONSEQUENCES (tm)).
As the DM of my group, with the relationship developed over the years and the expected playstyle, I would rule as such.
1. Spellcraft DC 15+spell level to cast with 1 hand and release with other. (About as hard as casting underwater.)
2. If not wanting to risk a spellcraft check, (maybe its a sorceror) I would apply a concentration check of 15+spell level, as per the entangled entry under Concentration.
3. My main consequence would be the character looses the benefits improved evasion via improved cover. The +4 reflex bonus stands (most is still behind cover), but I find a good chance of a singed arm is present.
But thats just how I would run it, others will interpret differently.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's not how the ranged cover rules work, and if it was handled your way, the field of view for an arrow slit would be close to 0 degrees. Saying 'don't worry about the grid' is in direct contradiction to the cover rules which explicitly tell you to use the corners of your square.Depend on how it is drawn on the map. If it is drawn as a straight hole through a 5' wall, sure. But that isn't the shape of a real arrowslit. Look the Wikipedia page I linked for the real shape.
That's how total cover works, from the Core Rulebook. Where do the rules say that ranged attacks don't follow these general rules?
To determine if a target has total cover, it's "any line" from a corner of your square to the target.* If you can't draw one, you can't attack. This automatically creates an attackable area, which will vary depending on the shape of your arrow slit. As Diego Rossi's link showed, if you have a reasonable shape for your arrow slit, you'll get a 30-40° field of vision out of it, using Pathfinder's rules. If your arrow slit has a 0° angle, and is 10 feet long, that's poorly designed on the part of the architect.
* You don't worry about following the squares on the grid with your line, which is what I meant, and is correct. I'm sorry if that's was not clear.