Clarification on Wail of the Banshee


Rules Questions


11 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

In a nutshell: The spell was changed from 3.X from an Area spell to a Target spell. The last line of text seems to override the normal targeting process, making it act more like an Area spell.

PRD:
School necromancy [death, sonic]; Level sorcerer/wizard 9

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V

Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)

Target one living creature/level within a 40-ft.-radius spread

Duration instantaneous

Saving Throw Fortitude negates; Spell Resistance yes

When you cast this spell, you emit a terrible, soul-chilling scream that possibly kills creatures that hear it (except for yourself). The spell affects up to one creature per caster level, inflicting 10 points of damage per caster level. Creatures closest to the point of origin are affected first.

My question is this: What did that change actually do to make the spell different, if at all? Should we treat the spell as a Targeted spell (caster selects targets) or does the spell select it's own targets based on distance from the point of origin?

Feel free to post your own opinions, especially if you're on the Pazio staff. Would love to hear from someone with inside knowledge.

If not, hopefully we can get enough FAQ clicks to get a developer response.


I'm not sure I understand the confusion. The standard magic rules from the CRB apply:

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.

Spread

Some effects, notably clouds and fogs, spread out from a point of origin, which must be a grid intersection. The effect can extend around corners and into areas that you can't see. Figure distance by actual distance traveled, taking into account turns the spell effect takes. When determining distance for spread effects, count around walls, not through them. As with movement, do not trace diagonals across corners. You must designate the point of origin for such an effect, but you need not have line of effect (see below) to all portions of the effect.

Applying that to the spell:

Pick a spot within 25' + 5'/2 levels. Calculate a 40' spread from there. This defines the maximum area - you can affect every possible target within this area. Then you can choose up to one living creature per your caster level within that area that you can see or touch but you must select the creatures closest to the point of origin first - if several creatures are equally close, you decide which ones are affected.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Actually DMB, I think Cruel Kindness has a point.

Target or Targets wrote:

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.

In the case of wail, I think the bolded text is overriding the italicized text. In other words, you don't get to choose the targets, the spell is simply limited on the total number of targets, within it's area of effect, beginning with those closest to the center of the spell.

Good question CK!


To further complicate things, the spell is a Spread effect which contradict the mechanics for how a targeted spell normally works. What's the point of the spell reaching around blind corners if you have to select targets for the spell?

Is it possible the Area to Target change was unintentional? If not, why not edit out the bit about the order of affect and remove the Spread effect? If it was unintentional, how has this gone unnoticed for so long?


Technically, it could spread around a blind corner but you could still see the enemies there if you were scrying, for example. Or using mirrors. It's one of the benefits of spreads vs. bursts.

Me, I don't like the idea that you must see an enemy to affect it with sound. If he's hiding behind a tree and I make the area of effect right next to him, how is it that my sound (Banshee's WAIL) cannot affect him because I cannot see him from where I stand.

I would Houserule this as being a purely spread area with no targets. But that's not the current RAW.


DM_Blake wrote:

Technically, it could spread around a blind corner but you could still see the enemies there if you were scrying, for example. Or using mirrors. It's one of the benefits of spreads vs. bursts.

Me, I don't like the idea that you must see an enemy to affect it with sound. If he's hiding behind a tree and I make the area of effect right next to him, how is it that my sound (Banshee's WAIL) cannot affect him because I cannot see him from where I stand.

I would Houserule this as being a purely spread area with no targets. But that's not the current RAW.

My feelings are exactly the same, hence this thread asking for FAQ clicks. I don't know of any other spells that add wording to allow such specific circumstances (mirrors, Xray Vision ring, etc.). As for scrying, wouldn't the caster be too preoccupied by the scrying to even cast the spell? The wording in WotB is a bit unclear and possibly contradictory.


So what you want is an errata, not a clarification. Since the targeting mechanic is fairly clear to begin with. I agree, this spell should be errata'd.


*Chuckle*

What I really want Is to understand how the spell is intended to work. Whether that means errata, FAQ, or just a Dev posting their team's intent is irrelevant to me. As long as it's clear and understandable, I'll be happy.

Dark Archive

Cruel Kindness wrote:
To further complicate things, the spell is a Spread effect which contradict the mechanics for how a targeted spell normally works. What's the point of the spell reaching around blind corners if you have to select targets for the spell?

That's easy - so you can catch the target's friends. You wail the one guy you can see, and all his friends hiding around the corner get hit too.

Or target yourself - you're unaffected, but it will spread out 40ft. from you and zap everyone hiding near by unless they have total cover.


No, I'm afraid that as worded, you have to see every target that gets affected.


Psyren wrote:
Cruel Kindness wrote:
To further complicate things, the spell is a Spread effect which contradict the mechanics for how a targeted spell normally works. What's the point of the spell reaching around blind corners if you have to select targets for the spell?

That's easy - so you can catch the target's friends. You wail the one guy you can see, and all his friends hiding around the corner get hit too.

Or target yourself - you're unaffected, but it will spread out 40ft. from you and zap everyone hiding near by unless they have total cover.

But that's not how Target spells work, really. If the target is hidden, its not a valid Target. Unless the spell itself chooses targets, but then shouldn't it still be an Area spell?

I've seen both sides of the argument come to a stalemate without any clear, concise answer forming out of the debate.

Again, I encourage anyone reading this to click FAQ while we (politely) debate this in the mean time.

Dark Archive

DM_Blake wrote:
No, I'm afraid that as worded, you have to see every target that gets affected.

Only if the spell's entry doesn't override the general target entry, as Majuba pointed out with his quote. This one does, because it's a Spread, and thus goes around corners/cover less than total.

Cruel Kindness wrote:


But that's not how Target spells work, really. If the target is hidden, its not a valid Target. Unless the spell itself chooses targets, but then shouldn't it still be an Area spell?

It does have an area - a 40ft. spread.


Psyren wrote:
Cruel Kindness wrote:
But that's not how Target spells work, really. If the target is hidden, its not a valid Target. Unless the spell itself chooses targets, but then shouldn't it still be an Area spell?
It does have an area - a 40ft. spread.

It has an area, but is not an Area spell. It's a Target spell, hence the confusion. Back in 3.X, it was a proper Area spell, but Pazio changed it to what we see in the PRD.

Liberty's Edge

Yes, there is a target. The target is a Point of Origin, from which the spell spreads to affect the closest creatures/level.

Given all of the possible interpretations that have been presented, picking the point of origin and then having it spread is really the only logical way to make the wording of the spell description (including the target header) work.

If each individual target has to be picked by the caster, as has been asserted by a number of people, from where is the 40-ft.-radius spread measured?

You have to pick a point of origin. That point of origin has to be visible to you. The effect spreads from the point of origin. Spreads go around corners. Creatures affected do not have to be visible to the caster, they only need to be within the range of the spell and within the radius of the effect.


This is the conclusion I had been quietly coming to, but even that doesn't really mesh well with how Target spells work. In fact, that's exactly how most Area spells
work...

Unless, the Target refers, in this case, to objects instead of people and the object is the ground.


Anyone else want to chime in? Agree/disagree with what's being said here?

I encourage polite debate (and hopefully FAQ clicks).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

It's not how target spells normally work, but it's also not how Area spells normally work, since it affects a limited number of creatures (a.k.a. targets).

Sleep is similar, affecting an indeterminate number of creatures based on total HD. Most "area limited" target spells are expressed with the "X number of targets within Y feet of each other" language. Both sleep and wail don't give the choice of targets (closest to center first). Sleep is listed as an area spell of course.


Sorry for performing thread necromancy, but I'm curious if this issue ever got clarified. I tried searching the forum but the only threads that came back were from 2013 or earlier and, I figured, instead of making another new thread, I'd recycle my old thread.

Can someone provide a link if this has been covered? If not, feel free to click the FAQ button up top or chime in with your own opinion on RAI/RAW.


I posted in 2012 to a thread (two threads back) because all I wanted to know is if this would pulp your witch's familiar's brainmeats.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Clarification on Wail of the Banshee All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.