| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The PCs, all archers and a spellcaster, are tearing into a nearby enemy force from range. The enemy, having a spellcaster of their own, cast wind wall, which shut down about 80% of the party's offensive capability.
The PC spellcaster (lacking something so simple as a dispel magic) then cast wall of iron and the party, together, toppled it over onto the wind wall, squashing the upwards gust of wind and creating a breach that they could send their volleys through.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?
The PCs, all archers and a spellcaster, are tearing into a nearby enemy force from range. The enemy, having a spellcaster of their own, cast wind wall, which shut down about 80% of the party's offensive capability.
The PC spellcaster (lacking something so simple as a dispel magic) then cast wall of iron and the party, together, toppled it over onto the wind wall, squashing the upwards gust of wind and creating a breach that they could send their volleys through.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?
Not. For the same reason you cant squash real wind. More would just rush into the space. The iron wall toppling wouldnt affect real wind, why would it affect magicly created wind?
The PCs, all archers and a spellcaster, are tearing into a nearby enemy force from range. The enemy, having a spellcaster of their own, cast wind wall, which shut down about 80% of the party's offensive capability.
The PC spellcaster (lacking something so simple as a dispel magic) then cast wall of iron and the party, together, toppled it over onto the wind wall, squashing the upwards gust of wind and creating a breach that they could send their volleys through.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?
You can clonk him in the head with the wall of iron (its certainly abnormal ammunition)but that doesn't stop the wind wall. The wind simply moves up and over the corner of the wall in the casters spot.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?
I would allow it to work. Wind Wall goes from the ground and up to 5' per level. If this was cast indoors, you would not expect the effect to continue through multiple floors of a castle, for example. Once the line of effect is broken, the spell does not continue. Since the Iron Wall would be heavy enough to not be affected by a Wind Wall, I'd rule that the Iron Wall blocks line of effect and limits the range of the Wind Wall to the distance between the ground and the Iron Wall.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?I would allow it to work. Wind Wall goes from the ground and up to 5' per level. If this was cast indoors, you would not expect the effect to continue through multiple floors of a castle, for example. Once the line of effect is broken, the spell does not continue. Since the Iron Wall would be heavy enough to not be affected by a Wind Wall, I'd rule that the Iron Wall blocks line of effect and limits the range of the Wind Wall to the distance between the ground and the Iron Wall.
I'm seeing this too -- but nothing in core says either way.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?I would allow it to work. Wind Wall goes from the ground and up to 5' per level. If this was cast indoors, you would not expect the effect to continue through multiple floors of a castle, for example. Once the line of effect is broken, the spell does not continue. Since the Iron Wall would be heavy enough to not be affected by a Wind Wall, I'd rule that the Iron Wall blocks line of effect and limits the range of the Wind Wall to the distance between the ground and the Iron Wall.
That's exactly the logic being used by the players.
I think the situation is similar to having a trapped room where the ceiling slowly moves down to crush the party. If the room is 10' high and you cast Wind Wall, the wall is 10' high. As the ceiling drops, so does the size of the Wind Wall. It doesn't flow around corners, or retain its original height beyond the distance to the ceiling. It's 2' wide, and N feet tall. The height of the wall is restricted by caster level, and line of effect (which could change over the duration of the spell). At least that's my take.
as RAW is fuzzy on the issue, my deciding factor for ruling would be: will it enhance the scene or story to allow? It sounds creative,though i'm not sure how they toppled it, but assuming they had the power/trick to do so, i personally have no objection to it working for their benefit. I'd probably have the enemy caster look very surprised and confused for the next round, and let the players have a feel good moment.
|
as RAW is fuzzy on the issue, my deciding factor for ruling would be: will it enhance the scene or story to allow? It sounds creative,though i'm not sure how they toppled it, but assuming they had the power/trick to do so, i personally have no objection to it working for their benefit. I'd probably have the enemy caster look very surprised and confused for the next round, and let the players have a feel good moment.
Did I miss where it says the wind wall blows out of the ground like a heater vent?
Its magical. Its just a gush of wind blowing upward. The origin point is vague so how can you "close" the gush if there is no real origin point to be closed? If it starts at the ground then the metal wall is now the ground so it has a new origin point...
Clever use of game mechanics but I think its a DM call how the spell works/originates.
I would deny it to.
But if e.g. he creates one or two iron walls like
===| |=== = windwall | Ironwall
I would allow it, because it's a good idea and they should be rewarded. Also it's restricted
Clever use of game mechanics but I think its a DM call how the spell works/originates.This.
Did I miss where it says the wind wall blows out of the ground like a heater vent?
Perhaps.
While the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like.
To me, that means it originates from the ground and blows upward, up to the limits of the spell, or line of effect.
If it starts at the ground then the metal wall is now the ground so it has a new origin point...
Not sure about that. I believe magical effects are generally static once placed, unless it says otherwise.
|
|
Did I miss where it says the wind wall blows out of the ground like a heater vent?Perhaps.
While the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like.To me, that means it originates from the ground and blows upward, up to the limits of the spell, or line of effect.
If it starts at the ground then the metal wall is now the ground so it has a new origin point...Not sure about that. I believe magical effects are generally static once placed, unless it says otherwise.
All of your points are mooted by my last point which was so elequantly left out.
Its vague and up to the DM to make that decision. Its a clever use of the game mechanics and if the DM wants to allow it for its clever usage then more power to him. I wouldn't let it fly because that isn't how I pictured the spell working.
As an aside, what prevented the characters from trying to arch their arrows over the wall?
Its vague and up to the DM to make that decision. Its a clever use of the game mechanics and if the DM wants to allow it for its clever usage then more power to him. I wouldn't let it fly because that isn't how I pictured the spell working.
Rule #0 is always in effect. I was trying to craft my replies in terms of RAW.
As an aside, what prevented the characters from trying to arch their arrows over the wall?
Lack of mechanics.
I thought the rule of thumb was that higher level spells trump lower level spells. If it is ambiguous, I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The PCs, all archers and a spellcaster, are tearing into a nearby enemy force from range. The enemy, having a spellcaster of their own, cast wind wall, which shut down about 80% of the party's offensive capability.
The PC spellcaster (lacking something so simple as a dispel magic) then cast wall of iron and the party, together, toppled it over onto the wind wall, squashing the upwards gust of wind and creating a breach that they could send their volleys through.
Would such a breaching trick work? Why or why not?
I would not let it work. Wind wall creates a wall made of wind. The whole area define by the spell is whirling moving magically forced air. There is no 'vent' on the ground blowing air up. It is not 'Summon Bathroom Air Hand Dryer'. There is no 'aperature' that the wind originates from to block with a wall of iron to keep the wind wall from being there. The Wall of Iron would fall through the Wind Wall and do exactly nothing besides disturb some air as it fell through.
Once it hit ground it would do exactly the same thing the ground does to a wind wall. Nothing.
While the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like. It is possible to create cylindrical or square wind walls to enclose specific points."
It seems rather clear to me that the wind is blowing upwards. I'm surprised to see so many people disallow it.
I would say no. The effect is decided when the wall is created and it will continue as long as the spell lasts, but afftects only lighter things.
I think the situation is similar to having a trapped room where the ceiling slowly moves down to crush the party. If the room is 10' high and you cast Wind Wall, the wall is 10' high. As the ceiling drops, so does the size of the Wind Wall. It doesn't flow around corners, or retain its original height beyond the distance to the ceiling. It's 2' wide, and N feet tall. The height of the wall is restricted by caster level, and line of effect (which could change over the duration of the spell). At least that's my take.
Also in this case I would rule that the effect is created 10'. If the ceiling comes down for a while, it doesn't end the spell inside the wall (it just doesn't do anything there since the ceiling is too heavy). When the ceiling raises again the wind wall will be there, if there is duration left.
If this was cast indoors, you would not expect the effect to continue through multiple floors of a castle, for example.
In this case the wizard has no line of effect into second floor, so the effect won't come there in the first place.
I think this is question like: If somebody stands in wind wall does he cancel the wall, since the wall can't blow him away & can't blow when he is standing there? (= character partially dispels a wind wall by spending a round standing there)
** spoiler omitted **
It seems rather clear to me that the wind is blowing upwards. I'm surprised to see so many people disallow it.
Vertical - noun, a situation perpendicular to a flat plane
Yes. It does stay stuff blows up. It doesn't say that air erupts from the very ground itself. The spell causes the air that is to magically blow upwards. The end. Dropping an iron wall or anything else on it should not cause it to cease to occur within the area it is affecting.
|
|
** spoiler omitted **
It seems rather clear to me that the wind is blowing upwards. I'm surprised to see so many people disallow it.
But what you seem to be ignoring is the part where it says WHERE it starts blowing upward from. Oh, thats because it doesn't. This isn't a hole in the ground where if you cover it with a large enough object the hole is covered and you have no wind. Its a magical source of wind that blows upward. Even in the segment you posted it doesn't say anything about the wind wall starting at the specs of dirt on the ground.
Depending on the circumstances if I were the GM I may say something like, "The wind keeps blowing because the wall starts 6 inches from the gound." So since it is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels it can't possibly be used for the implication you'd like it to. Heck...you may even say, "As the wall begins to fall over you realize that the wind wall appears to be blowing the wall back in your direction. Make a Reflex save."
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
But what you seem to be ignoring is the part where it says WHERE it starts blowing upward from. Oh, thats because it doesn't. This isn't a hole in the ground where if you cover it with a large enough object the hole is covered and you have no wind. Its a magical source of wind that blows upward. Even in the segment you posted it doesn't say anything about the wind wall starting at the specs of dirt on the ground.
+1.
Depending on the circumstances if I were the GM I may say something like, "The wind keeps blowing because the wall starts 6 inches from the gound." So since it is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels it can't possibly be used for the implication you'd like it to. Heck...you may even say, "As the wall begins to fall over you realize that the wind wall appears to be blowing the wall back in your direction. Make a Reflex save."
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
Who's breaking the rules now? If I was one of your players and you told me the wall was six inches off the ground I'd call "shenanigans!" The wall must clearly be on the ground. It says so in the spell's text, "while the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like."
Who's breaking the rules now? If I was one of your players and you told me the wall was six inches off the ground I'd call "shenanigans!" The wall must clearly be on the ground. It says so in the spell's text, "while the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like."Depending on the circumstances if I were the GM I may say something like, "The wind keeps blowing because the wall starts 6 inches from the gound." So since it is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels it can't possibly be used for the implication you'd like it to. Heck...you may even say, "As the wall begins to fall over you realize that the wind wall appears to be blowing the wall back in your direction. Make a Reflex save."
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
Define "ground."
|
|
Who's breaking the rules now? If I was one of your players and you told me the wall was six inches off the ground I'd call "shenanigans!" The wall must clearly be on the ground. It says so in the spell's text, "while the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like."Depending on the circumstances if I were the GM I may say something like, "The wind keeps blowing because the wall starts 6 inches from the gound." So since it is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels it can't possibly be used for the implication you'd like it to. Heck...you may even say, "As the wall begins to fall over you realize that the wind wall appears to be blowing the wall back in your direction. Make a Reflex save."
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
Where does it say its "touching" the ground is what I'm getting at? And again, if I'm the GM I can do whatever I want to progress the game in the direction I want it to be going. While I'd admire their creativity (and would reward them bonus experience for it), but if I needed it to continue I would still make it happen.
It seems to me you've made up your mind which begs to question why are you asking us? You've made up your mind so that is what happens.
I think this is question like: If somebody stands in wind wall does he cancel the wall, since the wall can't blow him away & can't blow when he is standing there? (= character partially dispels a wind wall by spending a round standing there)
The issue isn't about creating a physical barrier to block a blower vent. It's all about the line of effect for spells, and what happens if the line of effect changes after the spell is cast.
A person standing on the wall would not block line of effect. To block line of effect, you need to have a large solid object interceding between the point of origin and the upper range of the spell. If this object has a 1' square opening in it, it no longer blocks line of effect.
If the line of effect is sufficiently blocked by a barrier, the spell's range ends at the point at which the line of effect ends.
If a 10th level wizard casts Wind Wall, the upper bound of the spell is 50' high. If he cast it in a 10' high room, the Wind Wall would extend up to 10' in this case. If the distance between the ground and ceiling changed (say the ceiling raised), the Wind Wall would extend up to the new line of effect, up to a maximum of 50'. Conversely, if the ceiling was lowered, the Wind Wall would also be diminished, until the line of effect changed again.
Let's look at the situation from a different angle. Suppose a Titan took a 10' x 10' sheet of metal and held it 5' high into a 10' tall Wind Wall. The line of effect of the spell is blocked. What happens?
1) The Wind Wall is cut into two smaller walls, one blows from 0 - 5' and one from 5' to 10' (essentially no effect).
2) The Wind Wall is cut in half and blows from 0 - 5'.
3) The Wind Wall is cut in half and blows from 5' - 10'.
I contend it is #2. I believe the point of origin of the spell is the ground (you must designate the wall to be along the ground), and the range is 5'/level high. This is no different than having the ceiling lowered by 5' in a 10' room.
Now take that analogy and continue to lower the sheet of metal until it is nearly touching the ground. I don't see this as any different from casting Wall of Iron and pushing it over a Wind Wall to block the line of effect.
|
Define "ground."Who's breaking the rules now? If I was one of your players and you told me the wall was six inches off the ground I'd call "shenanigans!" The wall must clearly be on the ground. It says so in the spell's text, "while the wall must be vertical, you can shape it in any continuous path along the ground that you like."Depending on the circumstances if I were the GM I may say something like, "The wind keeps blowing because the wall starts 6 inches from the gound." So since it is 1 inch thick for every 4 caster levels it can't possibly be used for the implication you'd like it to. Heck...you may even say, "As the wall begins to fall over you realize that the wind wall appears to be blowing the wall back in your direction. Make a Reflex save."
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
Define "define." </antagonism>
From what I've seen in this thread I don't think that there is a RAW for this, just like there isn't for arching your shot with a bow even though that is clearly possible given the setup. Or for taking a penalty for not sleeping. Or for any number of things.
They came up with a cool idea for countering a spell with a (much) higher one, reward them for it, have the enemy caster put a wind wall on top of the wall of iron, then move on with your life.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I think this is question like: If somebody stands in wind wall does he cancel the wall, since the wall can't blow him away & can't blow when he is standing there? (= character partially dispels a wind wall by spending a round standing there)The issue isn't about creating a physical barrier to block a blower vent. It's all about the line of effect for spells, and what happens if the line of effect changes after the spell is cast.
A person standing on the wall would not block line of effect. To block line of effect, you need to have a large solid object interceding between the point of origin and the upper range of the spell. If this object has a 1' square opening in it, it no longer blocks line of effect.
If the line of effect is sufficiently blocked by a barrier, the spell's range ends at the point at which the line of effect ends.
If a 10th level wizard casts Wind Wall, the upper bound of the spell is 50' high. If he cast it in a 10' high room, the Wind Wall would extend up to 10' in this case. If the distance between the ground and ceiling changed (say the ceiling raised), the Wind Wall would extend up to the new line of effect, up to a maximum of 50'. Conversely, if the ceiling was lowered, the Wind Wall would also be diminished, until the line of effect changed again.
Let's look at the situation from a different angle. Suppose a Titan took a 10' x 10' sheet of metal and held it 5' high into a 10' tall Wind Wall. The line of effect of the spell is blocked. What happens?
1) The Wind Wall is cut into two smaller walls, one blows from 0 - 5' and one from 5' to 10' (essentially no effect).
2) The Wind Wall is cut in half and blows from 0 - 5'.
3) The Wind Wall is cut in half and blows from 5' - 10'.
I contend it is #2. I believe the point of origin of the spell is the ground (you must designate the wall to be along the ground), and the range is 5'/level high. This is no different than having the ceiling lowered by 5' in a 10' room.
Now...
So then does this work the same way for Fire Wall? What about Prismatic Wall?
Kind of trivializes those spells now doesn't it?
By your reasoning anything like that could simply be blocked and walked over.
So then does this work the same way for Fire Wall? What about Prismatic Wall?
Kind of trivializes those spells now doesn't it?
By your reasoning anything like that could simply be blocked and walked over.
Same thing holds true. You could negate a Fire Wall by reducing the line of effect by putting a large barrier over it.
Prismatic Wall, not so much.
Violet: Energy field destroys all objects and effects.
The Wall of Iron would be destroyed.
Creative Director
|
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.
To be honest, I don't see this as a problem at all, but reality. The fact that a Pathfinder game is adjudicated by a GM means that we don't HAVE to write every single one of the 750 or so spells in the core game so that all possible interactions between them are accounted for. We CAN'T do that.
And we don't have to. Because the GM is able to interpret the situation and make a ruling. Or come onto the internet to ask for advice, as in this case. There's no right answer for something like this, and there shouldn't be.
The main thing is to be consistent—if you rule that a wall of iron CAN negate a wind wall (which is a perfectly legitimate and fun interpretation... ESPECIALLY since this is a case of a higher level spell negating a lower level one), you'll just have to remember that ruling next time the tactic (or a similar one) comes along. Or if you forget and a player remembers, you just need to have the good grace to admit you forgot and go with the ruling once reminded by the helpful player.
So, yeah. This is a case where things are working exactly as they should. An unusual interaction comes into play, the GM rules on the interaction and/or asks for advice here, and multiple possible and equally legitimate solutions are arrived at.
It's not a problem with the spell at all.
|
|
That is the problem with so many spells...the wording is left vague and open to interpretation so you can make the game yours.To be honest, I don't see this as a problem at all, but reality. The fact that a Pathfinder game is adjudicated by a GM means that we don't HAVE to write every single one of the 750 or so spells in the core game so that all possible interactions between them are accounted for. We CAN'T do that.
And we don't have to. Because the GM is able to interpret the situation and make a ruling. Or come onto the internet to ask for advice, as in this case. There's no right answer for something like this, and there shouldn't be.
The main thing is to be consistent—if you rule that a wall of iron CAN negate a wind wall (which is a perfectly legitimate and fun interpretation... ESPECIALLY since this is a case of a higher level spell negating a lower level one), you'll just have to remember that ruling next time the tactic (or a similar one) comes along. Or if you forget and a player remembers, you just need to have the good grace to admit you forgot and go with the ruling once reminded by the helpful player.
So, yeah. This is a case where things are working exactly as they should. An unusual interaction comes into play, the GM rules on the interaction and/or asks for advice here, and multiple possible and equally legitimate solutions are arrived at.
It's not a problem with the spell at all.
I don't see it as a problem either. I was simply stating that is what makes the game what it is...creative. There are a few things that need specific clarification (like my stupid Suffocation spell), but a lot of it is how you interpret it. I personally like the creative flare the characters used to get around the spell, but (again) if I needed them not to get around it then they wouldn't.
|
So then does this work the same way for Fire Wall? What about Prismatic Wall?
Kind of trivializes those spells now doesn't it?
By your reasoning anything like that could simply be blocked and walked over.
Same thing holds true. You could negate a Fire Wall by reducing the line of effect by putting a large barrier over it.
Prismatic Wall, not so much.
Violet: Energy field destroys all objects and effects.
The Wall of Iron would be destroyed.
And it's a case of a lower level spell taking out a higher one, yeah not likely. Higher level spells should trump lower level ones.
Just like the GMG recommends, let your players do cool things with their abilities. It's a novel approach and it nullifes the wizards action for the round. The party has to get to the wall to knock it over so swarm your troops into melee range with all ranged party. You just made the party give up its ranged superiority.
--Vrock the House
Ok, just to be ornery, wouldn't the wall of iron become the ground once it toppled over? Also, could they use another non-magical object (boards, a previous stone wall, a dead dragon) to do the same trick?
Personally, I think I would rule that it wouldn't stop the wind, since I see wind wall as more of a telekinetic effect, it creates an upward pulse that draws air around it into the desired effect, rather than pulling in air from a distant source, that's why it starts and stops at a certain point.
But that's my opinion.
I've always sort of let players describe how their spells work on the non-game statistic details. i.e. with the same game stats, one caster could throw green, viscous fireballs and another throws red, pulsing ones. Magic missles could be rainbow arcs or screaming skulls. Either way, a spellcraft check would point out which spell it was, but it's all for style. Likewise, it might be a matter of style for the wind wall (i.e. does the caster create an air fountain or does he wield the air already there or some mix of the two).
You (or if you will your players) have simply put a large object in the same area as the wind wall. It doesn't seem as if the object would destroy the wind wall, so why should it have any effect on it?
If it were an emanation from the ground the tactic would work, as it is I don't believe that it would.
-James
Just to understand this, your position is that line of effect isn't relevant after the spell is cast? That is, the spell's shape is defined by the line of effect at the time of casting, and would continue to hold that shape for the duration of the spell, right?
Ok, just to be ornery, wouldn't the wall of iron become the ground once it toppled over? Also, could they use another non-magical object (boards, a previous stone wall, a dead dragon) to do the same trick?
My take is that the point of origin was already defined, and would not necessarily adjust if there was new "ground".
As far as other materials go, I'd think that would also work. The Wall of Iron is a conjuration spell that creates a permanent slab of non-magical iron.
Yes, I would.
Why would the wall of iron being in the same area as the wind wall possibly do so?
I tried to outline an argument about that here
Sounds like your position is for #1 in the case I described. If a barrier is introduced and blocks line of effect, your take is that the wall would be bisected and continue above and below the barrier. By extension, if the ceiling of a room was lowered 5 feet, the wind wall would continue beyond the ceiling up to the point of where it was first created. Is that a fair assessment?
I tried to outline an argument about that here
Sounds like your position is for #1 in the case I described. If a barrier is introduced and blocks line of effect, your take is that the wall would be bisected and continue above and below the barrier. By extension, if the ceiling of a room was lowered 5 feet, the wind wall would continue beyond the ceiling up to the point of where it was first created. Is that a fair assessment?
My ruling would be that. So the wall would be of a fixed shape once created (it just couldn't affect anything inside the iron, but it would essentially exist there).
** spoiler omitted **
It seems rather clear to me that the wind is blowing upwards. I'm surprised to see so many people disallow it.
It seems rather clear to me that the wind is blowing upwards. I'm surprised to see so many people disallow it.
because its not blowing upwards from the earth. It works perfectly well on the 10th story of a tower, under ground, or on a ships deck. The wind is not being generated on the ground, its being generated at every single point within the wall itself.
Even if the spell functioned like a magic fan, blocking a small section of wall wouldn't do anything to the rest of it, as the air can simply blow around the obstruction. Anything in its way is simply replacing the air as an obstacle.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
as RAW is fuzzy on the issue, my deciding factor for ruling would be: will it enhance the scene or story to allow? It sounds creative,though i'm not sure how they toppled it, but assuming they had the power/trick to do so, i personally have no objection to it working for their benefit. I'd probably have the enemy caster look very surprised and confused for the next round, and let the players have a feel good moment.Did I miss where it says the wind wall blows out of the ground like a heater vent?
Its magical. Its just a gush of wind blowing upward. The origin point is vague so how can you "close" the gush if there is no real origin point to be closed? If it starts at the ground then the metal wall is now the ground so it has a new origin point...
Clever use of game mechanics but I think its a DM call how the spell works/originates.
+1
The wind doesn't flow FROM anywhere TO anywhere. Not up, down, left, right, diagonally, or anything else. The AoE of the spell has the effect as strong wind. Creatures or objects within are affected by the wind, though the wind doesn't affect the interior of solid objects. If the ceiling is falling in a crushing trap, the wind doesn't affect the interior of the stone. It wouldn't affect the interior of the WoI either. But if would fill up all of the space the WoI doesn't occupy. The WoI falls *THROUGH* the wind wall but doesn't disrupt it after it passes.
The wind doesn't flow FROM anywhere TO anywhere. Not up, down, left, right, diagonally, or anything else.
I disagree. Though it can be argued WHERE the wind comes from initially (and thereby causing the wall of iron to work or fail), it is clearly blowing upwards. The spell makes that clear, if nothing else.
I disagree. Though it can be argued WHERE the wind comes from initially (and thereby causing the wall of iron to work or fail), it is clearly blowing upwards. The spell makes that clear, if nothing else.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to wonder why you post questions like this, when it's very clear that there's only one answer you want to hear.
|
I can see valid points from both points of view. I think one could argue it either way and both have reason why it would and would not work.
Me personally I would allow it, the simple reason i would allow it is. It is a creative use of a spell for a creative tactic. I tend to encourage my players to be creative and use tactics and right or wrong ruling to allow this, IMHO does just that.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to wonder why you post questions like this, when it's very clear that there's only one answer you want to hear.
That's just not true at all.
I'm certainly open to the differing interpretations people have presented here, except for when they their interpretations clearly go against clear RAW. The spell clearly says the wind blows things upwards. There are no "ifs," "ands," or "buts" about it.
One could argue that the moving air is magically created throughout the entire area, and thus the wall of iron does no good whatsoever (since it will continue blowing upwards despite the wall's presence). It can be argued just as easily that the wind starts from the bottom of the floor (or similar surface underfoot) and flows upwards, in which case the wall would help block it. Neither interpretation seems to be right or wrong. However, to say the air isn't moving in a generally upwards direction (knocking things up into the air as per the spell description) is, to put it bluntly, dead wrong.
Personally, I don't much favor the former interpretation since it would only serve to ruin peoples' fun and keep players from wanting to do creative things in the future, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't abide by such a ruling if my GM made such a ruling.
And yes, I have a reputation for being a debater. At least I'm generally civil about it, unlike some people I've seen on these boards.