Rules Clarification: Spells like Haste, Slow, Mass Heal

[Korred]

There are several spells in the PF core book which have a Target defined as "one creature / level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft apart". Specifically, the most common spells are Haste, Slow, Good Hope, & Mass Heal.

At our gaming table, there is some disagreement as to whether the caster can choose the targets to be affected by these spells. Essentially 2 points of view here:

Position 1) The caster cannot control which creatures are affected. This position could be supported by PFC page 215, where it states under the definition of Creatures "a spell with this kind of area affects creatures directly (like a targeted spell), but it affects all creatures in an area of some kind rather than individual creatures you select. The area might be a spherical burst, a cone-shaped burst, or some other shape."

or

Position 2) If the PFC writers intended for these spells to affect Friend & Foe alike, then why didn't they just define the area of effect as "15' radius burst" instead of "one creature / level, etc". As written, it is not explicitly clear that the caster can choose the target creatures, but it seems to be strongly implied - especially for these spells. It is difficult to imagine the PFC writers intended to create situations where a 17th cleric would memorize Mass Heal with the glaring potential to unavoidably heal the foes within the area of effect.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

[Name Violation]

if you target creatures you get to pick. its not random or dm's choice, its the casters. you dont have to choose targets you dont want.

a burst you dont get to choose (like clerics channel energy) but targets do. thats what the word target means, you "aim" for them.

[Morgen]

They aren't area of effect spells, otherwise they'd have something that said something along the lines of:

Fireball wrote:

Area 20-ft.-radius spread

That's how you know something actually affects an area and hits everything in it depending on what the description of the spell says.

Spells like Haste/Slow/etc however allow you to pick out your targets as you like with the restriction that all of the targets have to be within 30 feet of one another. You choose who gets slowed or hasted but you can't include anyone whose more then 30 feet away from another target.

[Glutton]

Seeing as this topic is going, i've often pontificated on the following

A B C D

A is 15 ft from B who is 15ft from C who is 20 ft from D. Who gets affected by haste if it is cast on A B C or D? Basically is it all have to be withing 30 ft of the origin or can you daisy-chain it?

[Stazamos]

Glutton wrote:

Seeing as this topic is going, i've often pontificated on the following

A B C D

A is 15 ft from B who is 15ft from C who is 20 ft from D. Who gets affected by haste if it is cast on A B C or D? Basically is it all have to be withing 30 ft of the origin or can you daisy-chain it?

So if they are in a line like that, you can select (cramming letters together to hopefully be clear) A, B, C, D, AB, AC, BC, ABC or CD.

Or more simply: Pick some targets. If any two of them are more than 30' apart, you have an invalid selection, so start again. You're not selecting an origin, so don't think of it as something like a burst modified with a built-in Selective Spell.

[Snorter]

I agree with Glutton and Stazamos; if any target is more than 30' from another, it's an invalid selection.

I do think it's a clumsy wording, that's been carried forward through several editions, and it does result in a lot of people attempting to affect a long line of targets, each with 30' between them, stretching out hundreds of square feet.

Could the wording not be tightened?
Does wording it as a burst or spread automatically have to affect everyone?
How about 'Pick a point in range. You may target up to 1 creature/level, whose occupied space is within a 15' radius sphere of that point.' (because we have to remember, higher level encounters take place in three dimensions...).

Would that make things clearer?

[Xraal]

I have a question in the same line...

Does the caster have to be able to SEE his targets or is it enough if he knows where they are?

For example, our rogue had gone into the shrubs, still in range but hidden even to our perception and knowing where he was.

Could our wizard have hit him with Haste even so?

[Diego Rossi]

Xraal wrote:

I have a question in the same line...

Does the caster have to be able to SEE his targets or is it enough if he knows where they are?

For example, our rogue had gone into the shrubs, still in range but hidden even to our perception and knowing where he was.

Could our wizard have hit him with Haste even so?

Quote:

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

So you need to see him/her.

I have a similar problem:
the caster is in the middle of the group, 2 guys ahead of him, 2 guys behind him, none in touch range.
The game has no facing so 'in theory' he see them all (weird 360° vision).

That 'in theory' is a valid interpretation of the rules?

[wraithstrike]

Diego Rossi wrote:

Xraal wrote:

I have a question in the same line...

Does the caster have to be able to SEE his targets or is it enough if he knows where they are?

For example, our rogue had gone into the shrubs, still in range but hidden even to our perception and knowing where he was.

Could our wizard have hit him with Haste even so?

Quote:

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

So you need to see him/her.

I have a similar problem:
the caster is in the middle of the group, 2 guys ahead of him, 2 guys behind him, none in touch range.
The game has no facing so 'in theory' he see them all (weird 360° vision).

That in theory is a valid interpretation of the rules?

That is correct. You have 360 degree vision.

[Diego Rossi]

wraithstrike wrote:

That is correct. You have 360 degree vision.

Ever so often I have this vision of the PCs with a kind of dunce cap with a ring of beholder eyes.

[Thanael]

An awesome hat like this?

[Snorter]

wraithstrike wrote:

That is correct. You have 360 degree vision.

Diego Rossi wrote:

Ever so often I have this vision of the PCs with a kind of dunce cap with a ring of beholder eyes.

Or a screw-top head.

"Caution. Casting in progress."
"Caution. Casting in progress."
RRRRRRrrrrrrrRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrr