One other note, there is another "hidden" reason why the examples in the CRB work and Toblakai's example does not.
Count the distance from the caster to ANY far point in the cone. It will always equal the distance of the cone (or 5' less if the next square would cost more than the available remaining distance).
Toblakai's examples violate that premise.
Huh??? Try counting the number of squares and examine the shapes of my cones, amazingly they are all the same size. You living in some non-euclidean space where cones of the same size can be different?
The cones in my example ALL start from a corner, as the rules say. Each one of them.
They all GO away from the caster which is in the square.
If an archer can target a creature by tracing lines from a corner behind him to the creature, then a cone can be fired from the same location. I am going by the rules, you are going by pictures, which I have shown do not accurately portray what cones (and lines) can look like.
Now, try answering one of my previous questions. Would you allow a player to cast burning hands at a tiny creature sharing the casters square?
I know I have, and didn't think twice about allowing it, actually the thought of disallowing it never crossed my mind until now.
Toblakai, count the distance. Your (incorrect) examples use incorrect distances.
Take a look at the image I provided. You will see that, using your examples, some of the cone's distances are wrong.
Regarding Burning Hands: What I would or would not allow at my table is not relevant to this discussion, this is the rules forum.
Toblakai, count the distance. Your (incorrect) examples use incorrect distances.
Take a look at the image I provided. You will see that, using your examples, some of the cone's distances are wrong.
Regarding Burning Hands: What I would or would not allow at my table is not relevant to this discussion, this is the rules forum.
The cones lengths are the same, 15 feet. The rule is 15 feet from a corner. pointing away from the caster.
RE:Regarding Burning hands: It is relevant, because the cones that show the caster in it represent this case.
Exactly, the rule is 15feet, count the distance, it isn't 15'. In the last image I provided the bottom left "north-facing" example is 20' to the corners because the cone is started in the wrong place.
Most of your cone examples have the wrong distances. For this and the other reasons listed earlier they are not correct.
Regarding Burning Hands: how I run it is NOT relevant. This is the rules forum. Not the "How does Gauss run it" forum.
If you would like to discuss if the rules allow you to target a creature in your square using a cone then that is another matter, but asking me how I run it is 100% not relevant to the discussion.
Exactly, the rule is 15feet, count the distance, it isn't 15'. In the last image I provided the bottom left "north-facing" example is 20' to the corners because the cone is started in the wrong place.
Most of your cone examples have the wrong distances. For this and the other reasons listed earlier they are not correct.
Your not counting the distance correctly. You are counting the distance from the center of the square, not the origin point of the cone. Which by the rules is a corner of the square, not the center.
Exactly, the rule is 15feet, count the distance, it isn't 15'. In the last image I provided the bottom left "north-facing" example is 20' to the corners because the cone is started in the wrong place.
Most of your cone examples have the wrong distances. For this and the other reasons listed earlier they are not correct.
Regarding Burning Hands: how I run it is NOT relevant. This is the rules forum. Not the "How does Gauss run it" forum.
If you would like to discuss if the rules allow you to target a creature in your square using a cone then that is another matter, but asking me how I run it is 100% not relevant to the discussion.
Again I disagree on the how you run it. Do the rules specifically state anywhere that you cannot cast a cone spell against a creature in the same square as you? Nope
Do the rules indicate that you can? Yes, by setting the point of origin to one of the corners in the square that allows you to encompass the square you are in, per my interpretation of the RAW.
How can you disagree with something I didn't state? Wow.
Again, how I run it is not relevant. I am not stating how I run it because how I run it is not relevant.
From that, how can you infer that I either do or do not allow people to use burning hands against a creature in the caster's square? You cannot.
What I did state is we could discuss the rules on attacking a creature in your own square with a cone, but to date we have not yet done so.
How can you disagree with something I didn't state? Wow.
Again, how I run it is not relevant. I am not stating how I run it because how I run it is not relevant.
From that, how can you infer that I either do or do not allow people to use burning hands against a creature in the caster's square? You cannot.
What I did state is we could discuss the rules on attacking a creature in your own square with a cone, but to date we have not yet done so.
I think this is probably a pointless conversation at this point, we aren't changing each others minds on it. You believe your interpretation of the RAW (incorrect IMO). I will believe my interpretation of the RAW (incorrect IYO). The odds of this being FAQ'd is about 0, so I guess we can agree to disagree.
How can you disagree with something I didn't state? Wow.
Again, how I run it is not relevant. I am not stating how I run it because how I run it is not relevant.
From that, how can you infer that I either do or do not allow people to use burning hands against a creature in the caster's square? You cannot.
What I did state is we could discuss the rules on attacking a creature in your own square with a cone, but to date we have not yet done so.
I didn't mean to imply you answered the how you run it question. This:
Again I disagree on the how you run it.
Should have read more like:
Again I disagree on "how you run it" being relevant.
How people run the game is always going to be irrelevant to a rules question in the rules forum.
The Rules Forum is for hammering out an understanding of the rules as written (and sometimes the rules as intended if the RAW fails us). Discussing how people run it is anathema to that and will only confuse the issue.
okay Toblakai... read down a bit in the book to Cone Cylinder, Line, or Sphere... you'll see, "A cone-shaped spell shoots away from you in a quarter-circle in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and widens out as it goes. Most cones are either bursts or emanations (see above), and thus won't go around corners."
so what is being said is origin of the cone is at a corner of the caster's square and the centroid of the volume should be radially away from the caster.
This argues against skewing of the vector to the centroid of the volume as shown in some of your pictures.
The rules(RAW) also assumes that the caster aims an AoE away from himself.This is what Gauss is arguing.
As this is a rules forum people tend to stick to the printed material.
Sure in a home game you can declare all of your pictures legal.
I am sticking to the rules. I would allow my view of RAW as a PFS GM also.
Do you think RAW allows you to cast a cone at a creature in your square?
How people run the game is always going to be irrelevant to a rules question in the rules forum.
The Rules Forum is for hammering out an understanding of the rules as written (and sometimes the rules as intended if the RAW fails us). Discussing how people run it is anathema to that and will only confuse the issue.
Ok then by RAW do you think you can cast a cone at a creature in your square?
No, because that is not away from you. That is towards you, crossing through you, and then away from you.
Is it silly? Sure, but so what? Half of Pathfinder is silly.
And on that note...time to kill some enemy tanks with a Walker Bulldog (gotta love autoloaders). :)
A cone-shaped spell shoots in a quarter-circle in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and widens out as it goes.
A line-shaped spell shoots in a line in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and extends to the limit of its range or until it strikes a barrier that blocks line of effect.
This is pretty much the same text, right?
So, why is the last example for the line-spell valid, but offsetting the examples for cone in the same way isn't?
That's what I'd like to know! :PIf you can't figure out how to represent it in the game, how do you expect to use it?
With string? Plastic quarter circle spread diagrams from Warhammer?
As an aside, no one will ever convince me that I cannot blast a cone straight down against the swarm at my feet.
|
That's what I'd like to know! :PIf you can't figure out how to represent it in the game, how do you expect to use it?With string? Plastic quarter circle spread diagrams from Warhammer?
As an aside, no one will ever convince me that I cannot blast a cone straight down against the swarm at my feet.
We're assuming an easy-to-use grid-based game. If you want to free form it then obviously use whatever method you want that works.
|
Exactly, the rule is 15feet, count the distance, it isn't 15'. In the last image I provided the bottom left "north-facing" example is 20' to the corners because the cone is started in the wrong place.
Most of your cone examples have the wrong distances. For this and the other reasons listed earlier they are not correct.
Your not counting the distance correctly. You are counting the distance from the center of the square, not the origin point of the cone. Which by the rules is a corner of the square, not the center.
Toblakai, you've been counting distance incorrectly.
When determining whether a given creature is within the area of a spell, count out the distance from the point of origin in squares just as you do when moving a character or when determining the range for a ranged attack. The only difference is that instead of counting from the center of one square to the center of the next, you count from intersection to intersection.
You can count diagonally across a square, but remember that every second diagonal counts as 2 squares of distance. If the far edge of a square is within the spell's area, anything within that square is within the spell's area. If the spell's area only touches the near edge of a square, however, anything within that square is unaffected by the spell.
Toblakai, you've been counting distance incorrectly.
I did count the diagonals correctly. It is you and Gauss that cannot count correctly.
As an aside, no one will ever convince me that I cannot blast a cone straight down against the swarm at my feet.Who would claim such a thing?
It's a necessary consequence of requiring the cone to start at a corner of your square and travel away from you. There is no way then to include your own square within the affected area of the spell, meaning you cannot target a swarm in your square using a cone spell.
I'm no good with drawing programs. But for RD's point re: fluidity of placement...
.
.
.
.
.
Standard 30' Cone:
0123456
_X
_XXX
_XXXX
_XXXXX
_XXXXX
_XXXXXX
C
Slightly Angled
0123456
___
__XX
__XXX
__XXXX
_XXXXX
_XXXXXX
C__XXX
(30' cones used because 15' looks weird and it's too small to flesh out the point, I think.)
Should this sort of area should be permissible? It starts at a corner, travels away from you almost entirely (there is a slight angle that travels back and crosses your mid line). 30' away from origin in the relevant direction.
It's on a grid, so it looks awkward. However, the question boils down to, why does the angle from the caster have to be 0, 45, or 90 degrees for a cone? Am I allowed to set the edge of a 30' cone with the same line I could use to cast a 30' line spell? If not, why not?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's a necessary consequence of requiring the cone to start at a corner of your square and travel away from you. There is no way then to include your own square within the affected area of the spell, meaning you cannot target a swarm in your square using a cone spell.
Thankfully, swarms are 10x10 and do not require you to target your own square to burn them off. It's simple enough to say you're aiming at your feet but counting the squares out from your own for game purposes.
|
Even though it says "start at a corner" it is not obvious they mean that the corner must be the one closest to the direction the cone is aimed towards. Especially the cones that point toward the 4 cardinal directions where there is no closest corner. After all, in plenty of other places in the rules we are told that a medium character could be anywhere within the 5' square, which is why when you have a spell that emanates in a 5' radius, then you only pick 4 squares and your character is in one of the "corner" squares. Likewise, nothing in the written rules indicates you have to pick the closest corner, though I understand how someone would say it is implied by the image, I have never even considered that that is what they meant.
We have always thought the only restriction is you cannot pick the OPPOSITE corner from the direction the cone is travelling in (i.e. your square cannot be included in the cone), because of the distance rule mentioned above that the area must reach the "far corner" of the square. In this case the far corner would be the one behind you opposite the direction of the cone, and the cone cannot reach that corner since even if you are in the corner of the square you are still taking up some space in the square.
And there is no need to blast a cone down as long as you have a ready supply of alchemist's fire to smash against yourself.
For what it's worth, I now agree with you Toblakai.
This is a very valid point:
If an archer can target a creature by tracing lines from a corner behind him to the creature, then a cone can be fired from the same location. I am going by the rules, you are going by pictures, which I have shown do not accurately portray what cones (and lines) can look like.
It's a necessary consequence of requiring the cone to start at a corner of your square and travel away from you. There is no way then to include your own square within the affected area of the spell, meaning you cannot target a swarm in your square using a cone spell.Thankfully, swarms are 10x10 and do not require you to target your own square to burn them off. It's simple enough to say you're aiming at your feet but counting the squares out from your own for game purposes.
Ah right. Forgot they're always 10x10. I herped when I should have derped.
I count three diagonals from corner to corner. Three diagonals is 20ft. What do you see?Toblakai, you've been counting distance incorrectly.
I did count the diagonals correctly. It is you and Gauss that cannot count correctly.
where do you see three diagonals in the cones area?
Toblakai is correct, I did use "center to center" rather than "corner to edge" and that was my error.
Regardless of the shape of the area, you select the point where the spell originates, but otherwise you don’t control which creatures or objects the spell affects. The point of origin of a spell is always a grid intersection. When determining whether a given creature is within the area of a spell, count out the distance from the point of origin in squares just as you do when moving a character or when determining the range for a ranged attack. The only difference is that instead of counting from the center of one square to the center of the next, you count from intersection to intersection.
You can count diagonally across a square, but remember that every second diagonal counts as 2 squares of distance. If the far edge of a square is within the spell’s area, anything within that square is within the spell’s area. If the spell’s area only touches the near edge of a square, however, anything within that square is unaffected by the spell.
I retract my distance objection. However, the does not change that most of his templates violate the away from clause.
That's what I'd like to know! :PIf you can't figure out how to represent it in the game, how do you expect to use it?With string? Plastic quarter circle spread diagrams from Warhammer?
As an aside, no one will ever convince me that I cannot blast a cone straight down against the swarm at my feet.
By the rules that everyone else is espousing you can fire straight down, just like you can fire straight up... The problem with firing down is that it still won't affect the square your in, its starts in the square under you. It is then of course blocked by the floor and no effect would be seen...
If I throw a ball with my right hand across the front of my body towards the left, parallel to my shoulders, am I not also throwing it away from me?
Above all, there is no way that a "straight" cone can only start in one of 4 squares. Assuming a medium creature, a 15' cone to the "north" could easily start in any of the 3 northern squares and continue north.
This shouldn't fail any test. We know we can flip the template. Doing so allows us to use the exact same vertex on both the template and the map but gives us a different area of effect.
XXX
XXX
_O_
123
For the above, assume 2 is the caster. The spell starts at the joint of 2O3 or 1O2. Either way, we know this is valid.
If we know both are valid starting places, then we know they are always valid.
If it starts at 1O3 and you move it, without flipping it to 2O3, you get:
_XXX
_XXX
__O
123
If it starts at 1O3 and you flip it, without moving it, you get:
XXX_
XXX_
_O__
_123
The difference can easily be explained as casting through your left or right hand.
I think the super strict readings presented in this thread are a little too focused to be a logical outcome.