Or as a DM you can do what a lot of DM's i know do. If a party keeps winning fights by using the same trick, they aren't learning anything. All they have learned is what new creature can die to this trick. Don't award them experience for it. See what happens when that level 9 group realizes a little to late that they are fighting a cr 15 or 16 creature that can get around that with out a problem and destroy the pc's because they have been getting lazy and stopped training.
The first time I ever saw it used in 3.5 was when I as a cleric cast blade barrier on a dragon turtle that failed its save. The druid then summoned a wall of thorns making it impossible for the turtle to move off the blade. We weren't sure what was going on inside as we couldn't see through the dense thorns so we waited 10 minutes before dismissing the walls and finding giant chunks of meat just ready for stewing. We never used it again after that, as the DM told us we could continue to use it but we won't get xp for those encounters as we learned that trick already.
|
Or as a DM you can do what a lot of DM's i know do. If a party keeps winning fights by using the same trick, they aren't learning anything. All they have learned is what new creature can die to this trick. Don't award them experience for it. See what happens when that level 9 group realizes a little to late that they are fighting a cr 15 or 16 creature that can get around that with out a problem and destroy the pc's because they have been getting lazy and stopped training.
The first time I ever saw it used in 3.5 was when I as a cleric cast blade barrier on a dragon turtle that failed its save. The druid then summoned a wall of thorns making it impossible for the turtle to move off the blade. We weren't sure what was going on inside as we couldn't see through the dense thorns so we waited 10 minutes before dismissing the walls and finding giant chunks of meat just ready for stewing. We never used it again after that, as the DM told us we could continue to use it but we won't get xp for those encounters as we learned that trick already.
Not that I'm disagreeing with your point here, but the Blade Barrier didn't destroy the Wall of Thorns around the Dragon Turtle?
Dragon turtles are huge, even if the blade barrier cut a 5 foot path straight through, the dragon turtle wouldn't be able to squeeze through it. It would still be held there by 2 c clamps.
|
I think it needs an official clarification in these respects.Meh. I think that's the GM's job.
This moot argument keeps reemerging over and over.
Look, as a DM of course I can house-rule whatever I want. I am aware of that. In principle I could even rewrite half of the rulebook or build my own game from scratch. BUT that takes time, a lot of it. And talent. A fair amount of it. That is why I thought it better to buy the Pathfinder RPG rulebook rather than writing my own Dungarees & Dragons.
And every time there is a controversial or unclear or ambiguous rule (not a too rare occurrence, actually, since this is to some extent a new set of rules for which no official FAQs are available), it takes time to discuss with the players/GM and decide what to do about it. And then when you are a GM or a player in a different group the same problem keeps being raised again and again.
Therefore, particularly when commonly used spells (like this one) or tactics (e.g. trip maneuver) are involved, I do want to know which one is the official interpretation/explanation.
The game designers did a remarkably good job in designing this game (that's why I decided to buy and play it after all), but providing clarifications to their valued customers is also supposed to be a crucial part of their job, albeit - admittedly - a tedious one. Despite the tediousness, they should strive to excel also in this field.
But unfortunately at the moment it seems - regrettably - that there is no direct channel to achieve that. I've written to the Paizo customer service in the past asking about rules, and a very kind lady promptly readdressed me to this Rules Questions Board, where one can only pray to be lucky enough for an official response to be graciously poured upon him.
Sometimes one is lucky (I was with my question on dancing weapons), sometimes one is less lucky (cf. the trip weapon thread where it took hundreds of posts and geological times to get an official statement - but at least they did), and sometimes the thread simply falls into obscurity unless the poster keeps stubbornly bumping it.
Moreover, the criteria by which one does (or does not) obtain a reply appear to be utterly inscrutable to the uninitated, leaving an impression of complete arbitrariness in the choice of the queries to be answered.
How does Wall of Thorns play out against Woodland Stride? I realize that Woodland Stride specifically says that it does work against magically enhanced underbrush or thorns, but Wall of Thorns also states that
Creatures with the ability to pass through overgrown areas unhindered can pass through a wall of thorns at normal speed without taking damage
This leads me to believe that woodland stride would be effective against wall of thorns. This means that 2nd level Druids and 7th level Rangers can completely subvert the Wall.
Further, a standard sword and board fighter would be partially immune to the Wall's effects. Granted, they well may be immoblized, due to the high strength check, but assuming +1 full plate, +1 large shield and both the shield focus and greater shield focus feats, such a character would be immune to damage from the Wall.
Also, a 10th level cleric with a STR 10, access to the strength domain and Enlarge person (or Righteous Might) would only need a 6 or greater to move through the wall. Given that the cleric could give those buffs to another character, it is likely that such a cleric could enable *any* pc to get through the Wall.
|
This moot argument keeps reemerging over and over.
It is not moot to say the dm can intercede. That is what the DM is FOR. Just for advocating situations like this where in some circumstanses one thing may be more powerful than in other circumstances and adjusting for it.
Toh, people have already explained to you why they feel it is not broken for a 5th level spell. You have found there reason not good enough and keep using the same reasons you feel it is broken over and over.Like many other other threads, it looks like you didn't start this to ask opinions about the spell, instead you started it to state you opinion, regardless of what everyone else thinks. You have done so, and others have done so. Now it is just a matter of.
"It's green"
"But its pale green"
"But it is still green"
"It isn't it's pale green"
"Pale green is grren"
"No, Green is green, pale green is pale green"
and so on and so on...
If I had a group that kept doing this I'd have the caster get eaten by a purple worm never to be seen again.
To some extent yes, the rules need to be clear.
But also- this is not monopoly we're playing. Its a fully interactive and alterable game where the players (Dm +PC) have *full complete total* control over everything.
As such, there Are some things that they Are Not Going To Clarify and just leave to the DM to fix and or figure out. Why?
Because its a problem for some games and not for others.
This spell is an issue for you. For others it is not. Reasons have been stated (as proposed solutions that others have used).
This is why the rules are mutable. "This is what the DM is for" doesn't mean "your question is stupid" it means that the power of the spell is subjective to the campaign its players and the DM. Some folks have an issue with it and others don't, and therefore the solution (if needed) is for the DM to intervene not for the creators/designers of the spell.
That is what "This is what the DM is for" means.
-S
|
Therefore, particularly when commonly used spells (like this one) or tactics (e.g. trip maneuver) are involved, I do want to know which one is the official interpretation/explanation.
I understand that.
I'm also pragmatic enough to know that (a) there isn't an answer in any of the threads where you're discussing this (I only know of two such threads) and (b) that means you don't have an official answer.
This isn't a CRPG. You don't need an official answer because your answer (ie. the GM's answer) is always official by definition.
However, now that you've brought this up I'll be adding this one to my list of "house rules" so I don't get blindsided by it later. :)
This spell stands out as an exceedingly effective way to block the movement of many opponent
(snip)
As other said, its a 5th level spell so it got to worth its spell slot. That being said, my biggest beef with Wall of Thorns is this:
Any creature within the area of the spell when it is cast takes damage as if it had moved into the wall and is caught inside. In order to escape, it must attempt to push its way free, or it can wait until the spell ends. Creatures with the ability to pass through overgrown areas unhindered can pass through a wall of thorns at normal speed without taking damage.
Combine that with a Freedom of Movement spell so that allies can attack the trapped creatures in melee with impunity and you can kiss any low AC creature goodbye, especially if you interpret "A creature trapped in the thorns can choose to remain motionless in order to avoid taking any more damage." as the trapped creature takes damage as if moving if it attempts to fight back or cast a spell with somatic movement!
Beats Wall of Force anytime as far as I'm concerned...
'findel
Speaking of which, the spell states that:
- A creature trapped in the thorns can choose to remain motionless in order to avoid taking any more damage.
(emphasis mine)
Is a character fighting, casting a spell (without the still spell effect) or doing any kind of physical movement considered motionless as long as he/she is not moving from 1 square to another?
If it matters, my opinion is that it is overpowered, a spell that would typically be nerved if paizo had given it any more attention than a passing glance.
This isn't a save or suck spell, it is a suck with no save spell, you could do any or all of the following to adjust it.
1)Downgrade the strength checks asked for by 5 in this and other cases.
2)I'd advise you give it a reflex save to escape the area like blade barrier if you find the spell too harsh.
3)Add an escape artist check at the same DC.
4)Allow magical flame to burn it away in one minute time, generating heat similar to a wall of fire. (possibly decreasing DC to escape by 1 every round)
During the APG play test I used this spell on my party of level 7s. The eidolon (not optimized, post revision, level 7 bipedal) walked right through it. Maybe I was using it wrong, but that's what happened.
Great spell. Hardly Bigby's Crushing Tactical Nuke.
How'd the other party memebers make out?
The questions - slightly reformulated - are:
1. What can a creature do (i.e. which actions can it take) while inside the wall?
2. Does the WoT provide a concealment/cover modifier to those inside? Does it block the line-of-effect of spells?
3A. If a creature is blocked inside the wall, can it still attack with melee weapons opponents which happen to be on squares within its reach? Can it attack target outside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?
Can it attack other targets inside the wall with ranged weapons or spells?
3B. Viceversa, can creatures from outside make melee attacks to the creatures inside the wall (and within reach)?
Can creatures from outside target the creatures inside with ranged attacks and spells?
1. Stay motionless (aka helpless) take no damge, do anything else take damage. You can use full round action to move(if you make the check) or you can stay stuck in place doing whatever else you want to do, taking damage.
2. No, and No. Think of a briar patch you can see through it. just if you get in it you don't want to move anymore.3a. yes, yes, yes
3b. yes, yes
In the end wall of thorns is an movement lock that does some damage. Casting spells would be annoying though, each time you try to cast you take damage and have to make concentration check.
So to be nasty,
1. wall of thorns creatures
2. cloud kill or blade barrier creatures
3. wall of stone or wall of fore to encapsulate creatures
4. wait
5. profit
|
|
How'd the other party memebers make out?During the APG play test I used this spell on my party of level 7s. The eidolon (not optimized, post revision, level 7 bipedal) walked right through it. Maybe I was using it wrong, but that's what happened.
Great spell. Hardly Bigby's Crushing Tactical Nuke.
It was Conquest of Bloodsworn Vale, the fight against
It was Conquest of Bloodsworn Vale, the fight against ** spoiler omitted **. The cavalier charged in and got slowly chopped to bits waiting for the party to figure out how to get through the barrier, while they took on six minions on their side. Between an eidolon, inquisitor, and alchemist, the minions didn't last long.How'd the other party members make out?
Ahh, so they didn't have to deal with the wall except for it separating the party?
To answer the initial question: the spell needs fixing.
My suggestion:
1) lower the duration from 10 minutes per level to 1 minute per level
2) allow a reflex save to avoid being trapped
That should make the spell still usable, worthwhile and not overpowered.
As a side note, it is a druid spell.
Why do I mention that? Well that's because traditionally, in other editions, druids and some of their spells have been over powered but are (or were) seen as rarer (like paladins) and thus it wasn't considered a major issue as it didn't come up all the time.
This spell appears to be a hold out of that philosophy.
Sounds like the wall of thorns was improved in PF and the wall of stone was weakened.
Used to be you could conjure an iron or stone wall and drop it from the sky on opponents. Not sure that the balance came out for the changes to the wall spells....
I do think that some lower level spells can be used to get out or through a wall of thorns, warp wood, speak with plants etc...
Someone help me out on lower level spells that can get you out of a wall of thorns!!!
Dispel Magic, Gaseous Form, Dimension Door come immediately to mind. There's probably a bunch more.
Not to mention if you use the MIC you have a ton of items that allow short teleports.
Their is a cleric domain that allows for short teleports per day as well.
Shadowdancers shadow walk.
A monks abundant step.
OH and remember the mage with dim door or teleport can reach to touch there friend adjacent to them and dim door out more then just himself.
HEY! Post monster ate my post! Good thing it's still in another tab in Firefox.
And wall of thorns is 5th-level, which puts it above, say, fireball and lightning bolt, so I don't see it as terribly broken.
For that matter, flesh to stone which permanently turns you to stone is 6th-level.
Rope trick, on the other hand, is only 2nd-level. Diminish plants and gaseous form are 3rd-level, dimension door and stoneskin are 4th-level, and teleport is 5th-level.
Personally, I don't see any huge problem with this spell other than the rather odd "10 minutes gets you 1 foot deep" mechanic.
It takes me ten minutes to hack one foot through thorns that I can walk through if I'm strong enough? This should have been redone to have hit points and hardness - a kobold with a dagger and a storm giant with a colossal scythe each have the same effect on a wall of thorns, according to the RAW. Obviously this cannot be the case.
(I have a similar issue with black tentacles ... tentacles that cannot be damaged? Ought to be a way to hide behind it and be immune to all damage :)
And wall of thorns is 5th-level, which puts it above, say, fireball and lightning bolt, so I don't see it as terribly broken.
For that matter, flesh to stone which permanently turns you to stone is 6th-level.
Personally, I don't see any huge problem with this spell other than the rather odd "10 minutes gets you 1 foot deep" mechanic.
Wall of Thorns is a no save, no spell resistance, affects all types of targets, affects multiple targets and areas, and lasts almost forever (considering combat duration). And it's 5th level.
Flesh to Stone allows a save, spell resistance, affects only fleshy targets, affects only 1 target, doesn't impact an entire area, and also outlasts combat. And it's 6th level.
You find these comparably balanced?
You find these comparably balanced?
Absolutely. Flesh to stone is pretty much game over. Wall of thorns can be easily countered by the most common 3rd level spell in the game.
Absolutely. Flesh to stone is pretty much game over. Wall of thorns can be easily countered by the most common 3rd level spell in the game.
Well, there is that minor inconvenience.
Edit: Let's forget about the save and spell resistance and compare it to Acid Fog, although that's an admittedly lousy spell to compare anything to....How about a comparison to Reverse Gravity - a no save, no SR, control spell nerfed by flight that causes (situational) damage, and that's 7th level!
|
|
Absolutely. Flesh to stone is pretty much game over. Wall of thorns can be easily countered by the most common 3rd level spell in the game.
As already noted, Flesh to stone has save, SR and only affects a subset of creatures (living creatures).
Also, it can be reversed with break enchantment or stone to flesh. If you look at the casting times, you'll see that this is typically much faster than getting out of the WoT...
Of course if you have a ranger in the group they can just walk through the wall no problems at 7th level a Druid can do that at 2nd level. Any monster who can pass through overgrown areas unhindered can get through he wall too. That's big limitation to this spell.
As already noted, Flesh to stone has save, SR and only affects a subset of creatures (living creatures).
Yes, it has a save. SR isn't really a big deal, and only affecting living creatures is pointless in a comparison of effectiveness on PCs.
Also, it can be reversed with break enchantment or stone to flesh. If you look at the casting times, you'll see that this is typically much faster than getting out of the WoT...
Not when it takes 15 minutes to prepare the break enchantment (a 5th level slot) or stone to flesh (a 6th level slot) in empty slots, because nobody ever walks around with those spells prepared. They're far too situational. Oh, and break enchantment takes 3 minutes to cast, which makes it just as non-combat-usable as burning down a wall of thorns even if it IS prepared (which is more likely than stone to flesh being prepared, unless the party knows it's walking into a basilisk/cocatrice/gorgon/medusa lair).
|
|
Not when it takes 15 minutes to prepare the break enchantment (a 5th level slot) or stone to flesh (a 6th level slot) in empty slots, because nobody ever walks around with those spells prepared. They're far too situational. Oh, and break enchantment takes 3 minutes to cast, which makes it just as non-combat-usable as burning down a wall of thorns even if it IS prepared (which is more likely than stone to flesh being prepared, unless the party knows it's walking into a basilisk/cocatrice/gorgon/medusa lair).
Actually I think the casting time for break enchantment is only 1 minute.
Also, since break enchantment appears in so many lists (wizard/sorcerer, cleric, bard, paladin) and it is quite versatile in what it "breaks", there is usually at least one character which keeps it prepared (or has a couple scrolls with the spell, but then you may suffer because of lower CL).
This is kind of similar to what happens with dispel magic or greater dispel, although it is true that - in my experience - characters are more likely to memorize multiple dispels rather than multiple BE.
|
|
This should have been redone to have hit points and hardness - a kobold with a dagger and a storm giant with a colossal scythe each have the same effect on a wall of thorns, according to the RAW. Obviously this cannot be the case.
It does have Hardness and Hit points just like normal thick brush does, they are just not explicitly stated. It is still an object, though. As with walls, breaking through it's HP, however, only breaks a 5ft segment of wall, or in this case a 5ft wide path through a 10ft deep segment of the spell area.
|
|
It does have Hardness and Hit points just like normal thick brush does, they are just not explicitly stated. It is still an object, though. As with walls, breaking through it's HP, however, only breaks a 5ft segment of wall, or in this case a 5ft wide path through a 10ft deep segment of the spell area.
Well, then why does the description explicitely say the following?
"A wall of thorns can be breached by slow work with edged weapons. Chopping away at the wall creates a safe passage 1 foot deep for every 10 minutes of work."If it is as you are saying, the description should have just reminded the reader about hardness and hp/thickness, as wall of stone does.
|
|
It does have Hardness and Hit points just like normal thick brush does, they are just not explicitly stated. It is still an object, though. As with walls, breaking through it's HP, however, only breaks a 5ft segment of wall, or in this case a 5ft wide path through a 10ft deep segment of the spell area.Well, then why does the description explicitely say the following?
"A wall of thorns can be breached by slow work with edged weapons. Chopping away at the wall creates a safe passage 1 foot deep for every 10 minutes of work."If it is as you are saying, the description should have just reminded the reader about hardness and hp/thickness, as wall of stone does.
Special rules in addition to the normal?
|
|
Special rules in addition to the normal?
Well, then why does the description explicitely say the following?
"A wall of thorns can be breached by slow work with edged weapons. Chopping away at the wall creates a safe passage 1 foot deep for every 10 minutes of work."If it is as you are saying, the description should have just reminded the reader about hardness and hp/thickness, as wall of stone does.
Uhm. Very unconvincing.
I think I'm gonna houserule a Reflex save if it's conjured area of effect is on a critter. Would operate like a Wall of Fire save, or a tipping Wall of Iron.
This should have been redone to have hit points and hardness - a kobold with a dagger and a storm giant with a colossal scythe each have the same effect on a wall of thorns, according to the RAW. Obviously this cannot be the case.
It does have Hardness and Hit points just like normal thick brush does, they are just not explicitly stated. It is still an object, though. As with walls, breaking through it's HP, however, only breaks a 5ft segment of wall, or in this case a 5ft wide path through a 10ft deep segment of the spell area.
If it has normal hardness/hit points, then there wouldn't be a blanket rule that it takes 10 minutes to get one foot into it, because it wouldn't take that long. And regular fire would affect it.
Besides, I'd love to see a source for hardness and hit points for undergrowth. There's rules for trees, but none for undergrowth.
|
|
Uhm. Very unconvincing.Special rules in addition to the normal?
Well, then why does the description explicitely say the following?
"A wall of thorns can be breached by slow work with edged weapons. Chopping away at the wall creates a safe passage 1 foot deep for every 10 minutes of work. "If it is as you are saying, the description should have just reminded the reader about hardness and hp/thickness, as wall of stone does.
How is that unconvincing? I didn't write the book, so your asking the wrong person. All I am saying is that it IS an Object, and ALL objects have Hardnss and HP. All Objects can be broken.
The spell does not say that the Wall of Thorns does not follow the rules for every other Object.
Also notice that the spell is a minimum of 18 10ft by 10ft by 5ft (tall) cubes that are shapeble. Unless you are stick inside a single area, (and thus the spell was a waste of time anyway), it is not possible to escape this way - "A wall of thorns can be breached by slow work with edged weapons. Chopping away at the wall creates a safe passage 1 foot deep for every 10 minutes of work." It takes 2 full hours to get through 10ft, the minimum. And that is a single 10ft cube of it. Having to go through 2 would not be possible before the entire spell simply went away.
You find these comparably balanced?Absolutely. Flesh to stone is pretty much game over. Wall of thorns can be easily countered by the most common 3rd level spell in the game.
I find that most monsters don't have access to Dispel Magic.
At any rate, do you agree that it doesn't make much sense to severely nerf Solid Fog and yet leave Wall of Thorns as is?
Put it this way.
Solid wood has hardness 5 and 120 hp/foot of thickness (10 hp/inch).
For a foot-thick wall of solid wood to take 10 minutes to hack through, you'd have to do an average of 6.2 hp/round damage. Not really that hard to do, even for a first-level fighter, especially when fighting something that doesn't fight back and has a 10 AC. Two-handed Power Attack, anyone?
Thus, according to the spell description, a wall of thorns is harder to chop through than an equivalent amount of solid wood.
Personally, if this comes up in my campaign, I'm going to ignore that silly part of it, which clearly makes no sense, and use standard hardness/hit point rules. I'll just have to make some up for undergrowth.
|
|
Put it this way.
Solid wood has hardness 5 and 120 hp/foot of thickness (10 hp/inch).
For a foot-thick wall of solid wood to take 10 minutes to hack through, you'd have to do an average of 6.2 hp/round damage. Not really that hard to do, even for a first-level fighter, especially when fighting something that doesn't fight back and has a 10 AC. Two-handed Power Attack, anyone?
Thus, according to the spell description, a wall of thorns is harder to chop through than an equivalent amount of solid wood.
Personally, if this comes up in my campaign, I'm going to ignore that silly part of it, which clearly makes no sense, and use standard hardness/hit point rules. I'll just have to make some up for undergrowth.
But, more than one person can try and break the Hardness/HP, and some affects bypass Hardness. It is a trade off. Also, it is not a solid wooden wall, so should have less Hardness over all. Possibly more HP, though. The example Hardness/HP are just guidlines.
Just a thought.
What is the wall of thrones keeps regenerating parts as someone hacks through it, but only growing back 95% each time. So instead of listing hit points and giving it a fast healing or regeneration they just said ok it takes X amount of time to cut through.
Just think of the vines regrowing as the PCs hack there way through.
Yes the current time to cut through is WAY to slow, switch the number to 10 feet with 1 minutes worth of work. Or a full attack action allows the creature to cut through 1 foot of the way. So 3 creatures could cut through 3 feet of a wall in a round.
|
|
It just occurred to me that if the party is encased in the WoT, then they no longer have opponents and the time scale drops out of combat rounds and into minutes. While that doesn't help with the obvious problem of 10 minutes to cut through 1 foot of branches, it does mean more progress can be made more quickly overall.
(Whew, I'm just glad I don't have a druid amongst my PCs! :))
I think the spell just needs a saving throw. The damage dealt by the spell is minor, but the lack of mobility without a save is ridiculous. I know that many other posters have brought up the variety of spells one could use to defeat the wall, but I think that that misses the point, which is that the spell violates one of the unspoken rules of spell design, which is to allow either a saving throw or to require an attack roll on any spell that can be used to directly attack enemies. What you have in Wall of Thorns, in essence, is an unblockable attack. These should be reserved for higher level spells or for special circumstances, and used sparingly. It doesn't matter if a character has a very poor chance to make the save, they should get one barring extreme circumstances. The spell functions like a higher level version of Web, so maybe Web could provide some good guidelines for this spell. Also, Escape Artist should work on this spell, that's pretty much exactly what the skill is for. In summary, add Reflex save, allow Escape Artist.
On a separate note, I dislike the specific call out that allows Woodland Striders to walk through this spell. Why bother to disallow Woodland Stride for magically influenced undergrowth and then allow it for this spell (the highest level spell available to Druids that magically created or affects undergrowth for the purpose of impeding movement). One can, therefore, Woodland Stride through a Wall of Thorns, but not through an Entangled area. I also think Druids should have to suck it up just like anyone else, obeying the text and intent of Woodland Stride. YMMV, and remember, these are just one DM's opinion of how this should work.
Full Disclosure: As a player, my 6th level Sorcerer was caught by this spell (in a published module aimed a 7th level characters, we had 5 PCs, and were ALMOST 7th level, so it seemed fair). No save, Dispel Magic failed twice. The party Druid saved us all. By himself. Which was oh so fun to watch for the 45 minutes that the rest of the party was trapped. Without saves. Or hope of making the Strength check to escape.