Casting spells from inside a solid fog?

[Voomer]

Hi all. Can a spellcaster hidden inside a solid fog cast spells at targets outside the solid fog where the spells require line of sight? It seems like not, but if not I'm a bit confused why a Paizo AP would indicate in combat strategy that a spellcaster would put herself inside a solid fog...

[CampinCarl9127]

If the spell requires line of sight, no they cannot cast them.

The strategy would be to break line of sight and/or retreat.

[Dragonchess Player]

Only if they have an ability to see through fog like the Eyes of the Storm archetype feature for a storm druid (4th level), Gaze of Flames (Flame mystery) or Water Sight (Waves mystery) oracle revelation, or through a magic item like fogcutting lenses or a Goz mask.

Note the blindsense 60 ft from the Stormchild bloodline power at 9th level (Stormborn bloodline) only works against natural fog, mist, and weather effects.

[Dragonchess Player]

The tactical advantage for the caster is that adjacent creatures (i.e., allies) can be targeted, but the caster cannot be subject to ranged attacks (unless the enemy can see through the fog); so a caster can buff up himself and/or allies while the enemy can't attack them with arrows, etc. Also, it prevents the enemy from charging for melee attacks.

[Cevah]

If you are just inside the edge, your spells can be cast since you do not cast thru the fog. On the other hand, you are inside the fog as far as others outside are concerned, so you gain concealment.

It all comes down to the use of squares to represent space, and how they interact with casting and other effects.

/cevah

[Crimeo]

Voomer wrote:

Hi all. Can a spellcaster hidden inside a solid fog cast spells at targets outside the solid fog where the spells require line of sight? It seems like not, but if not I'm a bit confused why a Paizo AP would indicate in combat strategy that a spellcaster would put herself inside a solid fog...

Yes. You do not need line of sight to cast targeting spells, if they are attacks. Nor any other attack:

CRB:

Quote:

Total Concealment

If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

So you have to guess the square they're in. Ideally this would be an actual guess as in the GM conceals the location from you somehow and gives you information relevant to your senses. Otherwise, roleplaying this. Then if you guess incorrectly, 0% hit chance. If you guess correctly, 50% additional coin flip on top of normal. You wouldn't necessarily know if you hit (unless there's an associated scream), and you should also hit any allies, etc. if you guess their squares accidentally.

And it also has to be a spell that is an "attack" which is any spell that damages, involves a resisting saving throw, "hampers" or "harms" an opponent.

CRB:

Quote:

Attacks: Some spell descriptions refer to attacking. All offensive combat actions, even those that don't damage opponents, are considered attacks. Attempts to channel energy count as attacks if it would harm any creatures in the area. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don't harm anyone.

So for example, magic missile would be allowed, as it damages, is an attack, and thus can qualify for the concealment clause that you can attack into guessed squares.

In that example, you would guess a square, if wrong, magic missile unerringly hits some shrubbery. If right, flip a coin: magic missile either also unerringly hits some shrubbery in the same square, or otherwise unerringly hits the dude.

Note that if it's an attack roll spell, you would also still roll attack on top of that. But since he can't see you when you're attacking, he would also be denied his DEX to AC, which (slightly) partially makes up for that 50% miss chance.

[Voomer]

Cevah wrote:

If you are just inside the edge, your spells can be cast since you do not cast thru the fog. On the other hand, you are inside the fog as far as others outside are concerned, so you gain concealment.

It all comes down to the use of squares to represent space, and how they interact with casting and other effects.

/cevah

Thanks all. Does this note from Cevah make sense to you all? Effectively the caster would be peeking outside the fog, targeting her spell and then ducking back. Conceivably a PC could notice her peeking out, but not enough to target her since she would be back in the fog right away...

[Crimeo]

Well in the case of solid fog in particular, it says "rays and such" can go through anyway, so if you're a caster, just hang out anywhere in and you can cast out at people (guessing their squares) and yet are protected entirely from arrows and such. If you're casting "rays and such" whatever that is, I would again just interpret it as attack spells, but who knows

As for being on the edge, it doesn't say anything about there being a difference between the edge versus further in that I can see. Obscuring mist and such say that, but not seemingly solid fog, so being on the outer edge should be identical in this case to further in. (except for the falling thing)

[Quandary]

re: edge, This is simply relying on standard game rules for Concealment:
"To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment."
I bolded the parts that provide for assymetry in concealment. Similar assymetry applies to Cover situations FYI.

To clarify, if an enemy (or ally) is adjacent to you (i.e. you are on edge of fog, they are just outside - or within, in fact both of you can be fully within),
then you only have normal (20%) Concealment vs. them (melee or ranged) and they can see you/target you normally.
But even though if you on edge and the adjacent opponent can see you/target you normally with only 20% Concealment,
opponents further away than 5' still suffer Full Concealment (50%/no LoS) vs. you due to wording of Fog Cloud.
(although I have seen some groups rule that differently, e.g. that only more than 5' OF FOG blocks LoS, that isn't quite RAW)
(RAW: only that one square of fog is enough to block LoS and achieve Full Concealment if they are more than 5' away)

[Quandary]

@OP: Isn't clear what spells this NPC is supposed to be casting, or if they have alternate means of perception.
Besides the "Fog Sight" means mentioned, there is Blindsense, Blindsight, Tremorsense (etc),
and also things like seeing thru Familiars/ Animal Companions, and Divination effects allowing remote viewing etc.
As well as spells that simply don't require LoS. Rules for "Effect" and "Line of Effect" are clear that those spells (unlike "Targetted" spells naming X creatures/objects) don't need LoS, only LoE which isn't blocked by fog.

[Crimeo]

Sure, but solid fog is a more specific rule so takes precedence over those rules in conflict. It says it obscures sight, so you have full concealment in its area of effect, because you have "line of effect [for some things] but not line of sight"

[Quandary]

???
It [Fog Cloud, basis of Solid Fog] says:

Quote:

fog obscures all sight, including darkvision, beyond 5 feet. A creature within 5 feet has concealment (attacks have a 20% miss chance).

Creatures farther away have total concealment (50% miss chance, and the attacker can't use sight to locate the target).

This isn't different than mundane fog (Environment):

Quote:

fog obscures all sight beyond 5 feet, including darkvision. Creatures 5 feet away have concealment (attacks by or against them have a 20% miss chance).

[Crimeo]

Oh weird, I must have just read that part wrong, okay (obscuring sight part just carrying over from fog). Kind of a silly spell actually now that I'm reading it correctly, how does it get thicker but not obscure vision more? Anywho, carry on.

[Matthew Downie]

Crimeo wrote:

how does it get thicker but not obscure vision more?

Magic.