# Shorter Wall of Stone?

### Skills, Feats, Equipment & Spells

So Wall of Stone creates a 120 ft. long, 20 ft. high wall. It can be shaped, but lacks the text from Wall of Thorns "the wall can be of a shorter length or height". By inference, Wall of Stone can't be shortened - this seems to make its utility seriously limited in most dungeon (or even fairly big cavern) type environments, given that it must be placed in unbroken empty space. It's only really useful RAW for vertically partitioning enormous caverns (or clear outside areas), or bridging canyons that are ~100 ft. wide...

(It's also not clear - given that it's only shapeable on 5 ft. square boundaries - how it can be used to make the "set of stairs" in its example text. Surely stairs with a 5 ft. rise only??)

Could we get the text cleaned up a bit to at least 1) allow shorter/narrower bridges; 2) allow the kind of "crumple" shaping necessary to make stairs?

Given

Quote:
The path of a wall can’t cover the same space more than once, but it can double back so one section is adjacent to another section of the wall.

I would assume you can effectively "shorten" such a wall by doubling its thickness.

Also, while it calls out stairs, those would definitely be titan stairs with a 5 foot rise. Because

Quote:
Each square of the wall’s length must be adjacent with the square or squares next to it, so walls cannot be shaped to make a diagonal line.

This means it can't make a sloped ramp or set of proper stairs. Also this version of wall of stone doesn't call out being able to buttress it like some previous versions, so not even the called out bridge would work unless it was short; you can't support it and the prohibition on diagonals forbids arching it, so if it is too long it would just collapse.

Speaking of, why ARE diagonal walls forbidden? It just causes all kinds of weird logical problems to forbid them, beyond even the problems raised above where it prevents spells from working the way they clearly are supposed to work. The alignment of the battle grid is purely arbitrary, it is only generally considered north south east west for convenience. It could just as easily be northeast southeast southwest northwest.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:

I would assume you can effectively "shorten" such a wall by doubling its thickness.

Yes, that's fair I suppose. Don't think that helps if the ceiling is less than 20 ft. high though!

Also: you clearly passed your Perception check for other problems too. Wow, this version is hard to use.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
The alignment of the battle grid is purely arbitrary, it is only generally considered north south east west for convenience. It could just as easily be northeast southeast southwest northwest.

Not just could be, I know of at least one case in a Paizo AP where "up" is Northwest.

I think that by 'diagonal' they are meaning choosing a path for the wall that is only connected by the corners.

And yeah. I think that having a straight, off-grid-alignment wall should be allowed. Although it would be harder to handle with the mechanics of the tactical grid combat.

No different than the diagonal and curved surfaces we've been dealing with in buildings caves etc for 40 years now~