Hi all
Had an issue with a game last night, and so I decided to see what peoples views are.
The party was fighting a nasty nest of Dark Nagas and their serpent-man minions. The fight was winding down at this point with just two naga left, and the party moving in for the kill.
Our cleric was under sanctuary after been hit by a pair of lightning bolts, failing against one, so he cast sanctuary. During one of the Nagas turn. It stepped five feet to line up the cleric and the paladin/monk with a lightning bolt and let fly.
The cleric immediately protested that the Naga had targeted him and so should make a will save to launch the spell. The reply was that lightning bolt is an area effect spell and so is not stopped by sanctuary. Discussion followed. Finally the GM, decided to make the save, which he did handily, and the lightning bolt went through.
After the session the discussion continued. The clerics point was that the GM had targeted him specifically since the Naga, being highly intelligent and observant would have known the paladin could completely avoid the attack. The reply was if that was the case the naga need not have moved as he could have blasted the cleric from where he was.
So after that preamble here are my questions
Should the naga make the save?
If a character is under sanctuary could someone hit him with an area effect spell if no one else is hit?
If the sancturied character is in a group and someone wants to hit him with an area effect spell, does the caster need to save?
Can an alchemist target the square of the sancturied character so as to splash him?
Thanks for your help.
|
If the intent is to hit the being using Sanctuary, then the save should be required. You don't get to "game the system" by dropping a splash or burst or whatever next to them and claiming it is just an AOE, nor could you line it up to intentionally pass through the character using Sanctuary.
Incidental damage is one thing... a fireball cast at a group of players that happens to also hit the Cleric is not a violation of Sanctuary, but one dropped intentionally next to said cleric would be violating the Sanctuary.
Lightning bolt is fine for use against sanctuary. You don't specifically target a creature. You send it off in a line, and it hits what it hits. Sanctuary is a first level spell. It's got it's uses, but it's not all powerful.
So, to answer the questions..
No, the naga shouldn't have to try the save.
Yes, a character could be the sole target of an area effect if you don't have to target it AT the person. If you can send it off in a direction, you're good to go.
Again, as long as you're not specifically targeting the sanctuaried character.
Not sure. If you can normally target a square, as opposed to a creature, sure.
Completely disagree. Distinguishing between attacking a creature and attacking a square is needless pedantry in most cases. Intent is what should count for Sanctuary.
|
The warded creature explicitly can be affected by area of effect spells. Only targeted spells require a Will save. No gaming of the system is involved.
The warded creature explicitly can be affected by area of effect spells. Only targeted spells require a Will save. No gaming of the system is involved.
Really?
This spell does not prevent the warded creature from being attacked or affected by area of effect spells
Yes, really. I have to admit, I didn't read the spell description. Apparently, neither did the OP, at any point in the discussion.
We did note the reading of the spell. But it was argued that the spirit of the rules intended for this to mean that if you target a group, it still affects the person with sanctuary as that person was not specifically targeted.
I thought that was sophistry, and targeting is either area or individuals. Going into the motivations of opponents of the spelluser is not only highly subjective, but silly. Its only a 1st level spell, and it doesn't read minds.
But I thought I would sound out the community. After all I have been wrong before.