Q: If a wizard is trying to cast a spell through a glass window (The point of origin of the spell on the other side of the window), does he have line of effect to that spot or is that blocked as well?
A: (James Jacobs 4/27/10) Yup; a glass window blocks line of effect. It doesn't block line of sight though, so if a spell ONLY requires line of sight, a spellcaster can cast spells through a window.
So, um, how does one determine which spells require line of effect and/or line of sight?
Say my target is on the other side of a crystal clear window, can I target them with:
- charm person?
- confusion?
- holy word?
- lightning bolt?
- scorching ray?
|
Q: If a wizard is trying to cast a spell through a glass window (The point of origin of the spell on the other side of the window), does he have line of effect to that spot or is that blocked as well?
A: (James Jacobs 4/27/10) Yup; a glass window blocks line of effect. It doesn't block line of sight though, so if a spell ONLY requires line of sight, a spellcaster can cast spells through a window.So, um, how does one determine which spells require line of effect and/or line of sight?
You read the targeting rules for magic in the chapter on magic.
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).
You then ask if the spell in question targets a person or space in which you wish to create an effect. If so, you need line of effect.
You also need line of sight for rays. I don't know of other types of effects that explicitly need line of sight.
Say my target is on the other side of a crystal clear window, can I target them with:
- charm person?
- confusion?
- holy word?
- lightning bolt?
- scorching ray?
Charm person targets a person. No.
Confusion: This is a burst effect. You could use the window to see the creatures you wish to affect, but must have line of effect to the origin. You could drop the spell through an open doorway to a point of origin which then targeted creatures you saw through a pane of glass.
Holy word: The effect is centered on you. You can cast this; the point of origin is one of the corners of your square. You need line of effect from the point of origin to the targets. This will generally be blocked by the window, but odd terrain may result in you being able to hit them with the burst, even though it won't be through the window.
Lightning bolt: The line must spread away from you. You would need to either 1) fire it through a doorway or other non barrier such that the area laps over onto your target, or 2) do enough damage to the window to break it and allow the bolt to continue through.
Scorching ray: No. You explicitly need line of sight for rays, but you still need line of effect, which is blocked by the window. There might be odd-ball exceptions involving terrain and holes in the barrier that includes the window.
Why did the game developer give the response that he did if, technically, no spell ignores line of effect without first breaking through the barrier (as lightning bolt might)?
With the exception of teleportation spells, it seems like there's no way around something as simple as a sheet of glass. Something so mundane preventing MAGIC kind of keeps it from seeming, well, MAGICAL.
|
|
Why did the game developer give the response that he did if, technically, no spell ignores line of effect without first breaking through the barrier (as lightning bolt might)?
Even if there is not a single spell that requires line of sight but not line of effect, such a spell could be written. I would suggest that the developer is covering that possibility. This is, after all, an exception based rules system in the hands of creative people.
Example: I cast contingency such that, if I see Bob the Builder, I invoke alter self on myself to avoid detection. This requires line of sight to Bob. It doesn't require line of effect to Bob.
Example: Caster has a feat that results in spells permeating into the ethereal plane. The window blocks line of effect on the material plane, but not on the ethereal.
Q: If a wizard is trying to cast a spell through a glass window (The point of origin of the spell on the other side of the window), does he have line of effect to that spot or is that blocked as well?
A: (James Jacobs 4/27/10) Yup; a glass window blocks line of effect. It doesn't block line of sight though, so if a spell ONLY requires line of sight, a spellcaster can cast spells through a window.So, um, how does one determine which spells require line of effect and/or line of sight?
Say my target is on the other side of a crystal clear window, can I target them with:
- charm person?
- confusion?
- holy word?
- lightning bolt?
- scorching ray?
No, no, no, no, yes, no.
ABout the only spell i can think of that doesn't require line of effect are dream, message, and sending. Lightning can break through the glass and continue on its merry path of destruction
You know what breaks glass real easy? A hammer.
You know what can make hammers? Magic.
What do you call a magic user unable to break glass? An idiot.
Do you know what a system that doesn't allow a discreet charm spell through a window is called? An idiot system for people who like smashing things.
|
Casting spells through closed glass windows may seem innocent enough, but if you have a bunch of powerful spells which require line of sight, but not line of effect, then a Ring of X-ray Vision has just become the most powerful magical weapon in existence... Not to mention all those divination spells which extend what your 'line of sight' could be considered... It's a slippery slope, better avoided by simply saying 'line of effect is required most of the time' and making your wizard carry that hammer... ;)
Casting spells through closed glass windows may seem innocent enough, but if you have a bunch of powerful spells which require line of sight, but not line of effect, then a Ring of X-ray Vision has just become the most powerful magical weapon in existence... Not to mention all those divination spells which extend what your 'line of sight' could be considered... It's a slippery slope, better avoided by simply saying 'line of effect is required most of the time' and making your wizard carry that hammer... ;)
I still think target spells should have more leeway than they do (such as charm person, hold monster, flesh to stone, etc.). After all, there is no beam of magic or anything like that going from point A to point B to be interrupted.
I can understand the possible imbalances of such a thing. Even so, the ring of x-ray vision could probably use a power boost. I don't think I've ever seen anyone invest in it over a ring of protection, ring of evasion, ring of freedom of movement, or even over a ring of sustenance.
Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I think magic is strong enough as is.
Edit: It seems as though the magic still has to travel through the air to get to the target. It just does not require an attack roll.
Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I think magic is strong enough as is.Edit: It seems as though the magic still has to travel through the air to get to the target. It just does not require an attack roll.
Oh I know from experience its not something you want to run into.
When I was about 12 or so I ran into a glass pane door running down the stairs at full speed. Stopped me cold.
Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I think magic is strong enough as is.Edit: It seems as though the magic still has to travel through the air to get to the target. It just does not require an attack roll.
It's also medieval times. There's enough lead in the glass to be problematic.
Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I think magic is strong enough as is.Edit: It seems as though the magic still has to travel through the air to get to the target. It just does not require an attack roll.
Oh I know from experience its not something you want to run into.
When I was about 12 or so I ran into a glass pane door running down the stairs at full speed. Stopped me cold.
I don't feel so bad anymore. My aunt had one of those glass sliding doors, and I guess I was not paying attention one day....
|
ABout the only spell i can think of that doesn't require line of effect are dream, message, and sending.
I can think of a whole bunch of them. They're all Touch, Personal, or Range 0 spells. :)
Oh, and I'd probably not require LoE for illusions unless shadow magic was involved. I certainly wouldn't require LoE for illusions that are strictly visual (like Silent Image).
I don't feel so bad anymore. My aunt had one of those glass sliding doors, and I guess I was not paying attention one day....Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I think magic is strong enough as is.Edit: It seems as though the magic still has to travel through the air to get to the target. It just does not require an attack roll.
Oh I know from experience its not something you want to run into.
When I was about 12 or so I ran into a glass pane door running down the stairs at full speed. Stopped me cold.
To this day I'm amazed that I didn't so much as crack the glass. It was one wide sheet too, not those little panes with the internal tic tac-toe-frame.
Being able to see through glass does not make it less solid. Glass while not as hard as brick, is not something you want to run into, and is dense enough to count for a barrier to magic.
I'm pretty sure if you took a 2 inch thick by three inch wide peice of glass it would actually be HARDER to break than brick. Glass is not a weak substance, we just tend to make it very very thin.
Not to get off topic but this is why the spell Emergency Force Sphere has caused such a problem in my home game. Anytime the groups sorcerer encounters a paticularly nasty spell effect he simply puts up a sphere as an immediate action, thereby negating line of effect. anyone care to way in their opinion on this potentially unbalanced spell?
Not to get off topic but this is why the spell Emergency Force Sphere has caused such a problem in my home game. Anytime the groups sorcerer encounters a paticularly nasty spell effect he simply puts up a sphere as an immediate action, thereby negating line of effect. anyone care to way in their opinion on this potentially unbalanced spell?
Seems reasonable to me. It blocks line of effect both ways, so he's effectively taking himself out of the fight too. Also, while you can take your immediate action during someone else's turn, I wouldn't let you take it between seeing what a spell effect does and having it affect you (unless you make the appropriate spellcraft check to know what is being cast before the casting finishes, as if you were counterspelling).
You keep bringing up supposedly new threads but a lot of them boil down to this:
What you want is a caster who casts spells of mind control and influence without having to face the consequences of doing so.
Never thought of it that way. I suppose you're right about that.
If thats what you want than houserule it, because I very much doubt Paizo or that many others have an interest in designing that kind of game for you.
Still, there's a big difference between mind control effects having consequences (the charm victim realizes later that he may have been charmed) versus mind affecting/illusion trickery not being viable at all (because the victim still managed to make his Spellcraft check against your eschewed, silenced, stilled enchantment/illusion spell).
On one hand, you risk having a character with a lot of power (nothing new to the system) while on the other you have two whole schools of magic that are basically useless as written. Sorry, but I think I'd prefer the former.
Why the heck shouldn't enchanters and illusionists be as powerful as any other kind of wizard?
You need line of affect to the destination for summoning spells.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Why did the game developer give the response that he did if, technically, no spell ignores line of effect without first breaking through the barrier (as lightning bolt might)?
With the exception of teleportation spells, it seems like there's no way around something as simple as a sheet of glass. Something so mundane preventing MAGIC kind of keeps it from seeming, well, MAGICAL.
Teleport