Standing in a Wall of Fire.

[TheChuck]

Hey all, I need some help here if you've got a moment.

A character is standing in an Energy Wall spell, for simplicity we can assume it's acting exactly like a Wall of Fire. Opaque wall, dealing fire damage in one direction. Can that character see out of the square, thus being able to target creatures with spells and attacks? Is the wall actually as thick as the 5 foot square that the PC is in, and opaque on both sides?

The exact situation is that the PC in question started her turn in the wall, cast Enervation at a target (that just happens to be the caster of the Energy Wall.) The target had Energy Retort active, which shot back at the PC, knocking her below 0 hp. Now she's unconscious in the wall and is going to take damage enough to kill her when the caster of the wall acts again.

We're trying to figure out if she could have targeted the enemy with Enervation to begin with, since the wall is opaque and blocks line of sight but not line of effect. It makes logical sense than she could just lean forward a bit and see out of the wall, but there are no mechanics for such an occurrence that I know of. Would she have needed to make a 50% miss chance for targeting the square that she believed the enemy to be standing in?

Thoughts?

Thanks for your time.

[Fomsie]

I believe line of sight issues address intervening squares, not the square you are occupying. So she should have been able to see if there were no additional squares of the wall between her and her target.

[Starglim]

The wall doesn't take up the entire square. A creature standing in the wall breaks its surface (which is why other walls can't be cast in such a way). I think the creature could see to both sides of the wall.

On the other hand, if she cast at that position and was affected by the wall's energy, she would certainly need a concentration check for taking continuing damage, so she might have chosen not to do that.

[Brox RedGloves]

Standing in a Wall of Fire is an achievement and also a reason to be booted from the guild!

[Tarantula]

Generally, we have walls appear on the borders of 5' squares. This keeps it obvious which side of the wall you are on.

Since you can fire a ray blindly, yes they could have cast it and aimed with the 50% miss chance unless they were on the other side of the wall. If they didn't actually move to a square with a corner on the same side of the wall as the target.

[birched]

In this case, the wall does not fall on an edge, because it was cast so as to affect the creatures in the squares (it landed on them). Thus, if it is considered a 2 dimensional wall, it would fall down the middle of the squares.

Is there a flaw in considering both the wall and the player to occupy that 5x5 square, and to rule that neither occludes the other?

[Tarantula]

birched wrote:

In this case, the wall does not fall on an edge, because it was cast so as to affect the creatures in the squares (it landed on them). Thus, if it is considered a 2 dimensional wall, it would fall down the middle of the squares.

Is there a flaw in considering both the wall and the player to occupy that 5x5 square, and to rule that neither occludes the other?

Then you use the rule for determining cover to a ranged attack. The player gets to choose an intersection that their square borders to make the cover check from. Since there would be a corner on the same side of the wall as the caster, they could make the attack without the wall providing its total cover.

The flaw is its simpler to have walls fall on edges, because you can put the wall on the edge, and if it functions like a wall of fire, it damages creatures within 10' of the "hot" side. With it "in" a square, you instead have to decide does it effect the square it is in, and an additional 2 squares? Effectively making it a 15' effect? My opinion is no, so then does it only effect the square it is in and one more? Plus the seeing through it issues.

Basically, if you want to affect the creatures in the squares, you put it on the border of their square, as it has a 10' effective range from the walls actual point.

[LazarX]

Don't you all listen to your raid leaders when they say "Don't stand in fire!"?

[OldSkoolRPG]

LazarX wrote:

Don't you all listen to your raid leaders when they say "Don't stand in fire!"?

Life is not tried, it is merely survived if you're standing outside the fire

[That Crazy Alchemist]

OldSkoolRPG wrote:

Life is not tried, it is merely survived if you're standing outside the fire

I live in his hometown of Yukon OK, he's really big around here lol.

But back on topic:
I've always handled walls like Tarantula says: on the edges of squares rather than on the squares themselves. Much much simpler to work with. I've been doing it that way for so long I thought that was how you were supposed to do it. Is it not?

[OldSkoolRPG]

That Crazy Alchemist wrote:

OldSkoolRPG wrote:

Life is not tried, it is merely survived if you're standing outside the fire

I live in his hometown of Yukon OK, he's really big around here lol.

I live in Altus, OK not too far from there either, just a couple of hours.

[birched]

Tarantula wrote:

Basically, if you want to affect the creatures in the squares, you put it on the border of their square, as it has a 10' effective range from the walls actual point.

The damage from being within 10' is not the same as the damage for passing through it, and the damage for it landing on you is the same as the damage for passing through it.

The two spaces, 'in the wall' and 'within 10 feet of the hot side of the wall', do not have equivalent effects.

Nonetheless, placing the wall along a border, and ruling that the occupants of the space right beside the hot side of the wall count as being 'in' the wall when the spell is cast, seems like a simplifying and useful workaround of the RAW

[Tarantula]

I'd argue that the effects for "passing through the wall" cannot be done during the casting. Its not like you are forcing them to walk through the wall. This is another reason to keep walls on square edges. You can't stop "in" a wall, either you are within 10' of the hot side, or you pass through it to the other side.

[birched]

"If you manifest the wall so that it appears where creatures are, each creature takes damage as if passing through the wall."
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/e/energy-wall

[Tarantula]

And for a pathfinder reference, the one in the initial post.

Wall of Fire wrote:

An immobile, blazing curtain of shimmering violet fire springs into existence. One side of the wall, selected by you, sends forth waves of heat, dealing 2d4 points of fire damage to creatures within 10 feet and 1d4 points of fire damage to those past 10 feet but within 20 feet. The wall deals this damage when it appears, and to all creatures in the area on your turn each round. In addition, the wall deals 2d6 points of fire damage + 1 point of fire damage per caster level (maximum +20) to any creature passing through it. The wall deals double damage to undead creatures.

If you evoke the wall so that it appears where creatures are, each creature takes damage as if passing through the wall. If any 5-foot length of wall takes 20 points or more of cold damage in 1 round, that length goes away. (Do not divide cold damage by 2, as normal for objects.)

Wall of fire can be made permanent with a permanency spell. A permanent wall of fire that is extinguished by cold damage becomes inactive for 10 minutes, then reforms at normal strength.

I must have missed that line. That, complicates things. I guess you can put it in a square... I would have to say that it effects the 2 squares outside of the square it is in, and that being "in" the square counts as "passing through" the wall each turn.

[Dosgamer]

We count walls as being on the edges of squares also, but if someone purposefully casts it on a diagonal then it could affect creatures in squares. Also, if a wall is cast such that it passes through a larger (or larger) creature's square then the bolded reference takes effect.