Line of effect versus line of sight example

[Gortle]

A quick example from my game last night, on line of effect versus line of sight.

Names removed to avoid spoilers.

The PCs travelling in a forest, came across a nest of animals in the middle of a stream. The animals attacked to defend their territory.

The animals had good movement and stealth powers so they climed up the bank and hid in the forest. Attacking players with darting attacks, retreating into the undergrowth each turn with their excellent stealth.

Yes I gave the animals a special movement power so I could stride, attack, then stride and hide as a single action. Why? Because they needed it tactically to make their powers make sense and the players certainly had that.

This forced the PCs to make seek checks, point out, attempt flat checks versus hidden targets. The animals got in some good damage while the PCs got their tactics together.
Eventually the PCs goblin sorcerer landed dazzled and 5 persistent fire damage on the last creature.

Being an animal, it ran wildly and jumped into the river. I ruled that is was visible to the PCs as the water was clear, but it was also 10 ft down, that is at least 5 foot of water between the PCs and it.

Not willing to let anything escape the PCs continued to hunt it. Arrow shot failed. Electric arc hit the water and fizzled. Line of Sight but not Line of Effect.

The creature rolled a 1 and a 2 on its flat check to remove the ongoing fire damage. I was giving it huge modifiers but I felt I had to let the sorcerers napalm keep working in that situation. Other GMs may have just had the fire automatically go out.

Next the Magus tried Magic Missile. Blam blam the missiles hit at precisely the right place on the surface of the water. None reached the creature. The player was a little surprised that Magic Missile wasn't a magic bullet.

Finally the Sorcerer tried Summon Animal for a Snapping Turtle. Yep the turtle could attack and did hit and hold. But the turtle was promptly eaten.

Then then rogue leapt in for an underwater strike at penalty, missing.

Then the inventor leapt in next to the creature then exploded. As the GM I could have gone either way on that effect. But I decided to let it the range 0 blast to work, ruling less than a foot of water was not an effective barrier. The creature was cooked and floated to the surface.

Post encounter the players checked the rules - sigh yep this is my home group. They agreed I got the line of effects rules right. Plus they all said it was fun.

Hope this example is useful. Cheers.

[Nelzy]

Im not sure i would rule that Water is a "solid physical barrier" so it could block line of effect

[breithauptclan]

It's a better example than a thin pane of glass blocking Strikes from a firearm.

[Gortle]

Nelzy wrote:

Im not sure i would rule that Water is a "solid physical barrier" so it could block line of effect

This sorts of thing is a GM judgement calls. Perfectly fine to go either way. But you are right it would make underwater adventure tricky. I'd have to do something different there.

[Guntermench]

A good example of line of sight vs line of effect is just Wall of Force. You can see through it just fine, but you aren't shooting someone on the other side.

[Ascalaphus]

I wouldn't rule water as a solid barrier blocking line of effect.

I could see being 10ft underwater granting some concealment though, especially if it's either rushing whitewater or cloudy mucky water. That would force a flat check to target spells too.

However, I'd rate immersion in water as immediately ending persistent fire damage. Perhaps also persistent acid damage. There's a reason modern chemistry labs have emergency showers.

[Nelzy]

Ascalaphus wrote:

However, I'd rate immersion in water as immediately ending persistent fire damage. Perhaps also persistent acid damage. There's a reason modern chemistry labs have emergency showers.

It up to you but i would not, since they have added that being under water give a creature resistance to acid and fire

Aquatic combat wrote:

"You gain resistance 5 to acid and fire."

[Ascalaphus]

Nelzy wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

However, I'd rate immersion in water as immediately ending persistent fire damage. Perhaps also persistent acid damage. There's a reason modern chemistry labs have emergency showers.

It up to you but i would not, since they have added that being under water give a creature resistance to acid and fire

Aquatic combat wrote:

"You gain resistance 5 to acid and fire."

Yeah, but the rules for persistent damage also mention:

Quote:

Automatically end the condition due to the type of help,

such as healing that restores you to your maximum HP
to end persistent bleed damage, or submerging yourself
in a lake to end persistent fire damage.

[Fumarole]

I would absolutely not have water block line of effect for electricity.

[Grimmerling]

For 10’ of water to be or not to be a physical barrier: It will stop a bullet.

And, a reasonably sized body of water will disperse an electrical charge quite effectively. This is not the hairdryer in a bathtub scenario.

[Fumarole]

Water is a better conductor of electricity than air. If a lightning bolt travels 120' through the air, it travels 120' through water at my table.

[Nelzy]

And any Lightning spell is prob alot stronger then a "Hairdryer in the bathtub" since a level 1 Arch lightning can kill a commoner (10hp) and that is an instant short burst not a prolonged electrocution

[Errenor]

Gortle wrote:

Nelzy wrote:

Im not sure i would rule that Water is a "solid physical barrier" so it could block line of effect

This sorts of thing is a GM judgement calls. Perfectly fine to go either way.

No it's not at all. That's all there is:

Use these rules for battles in water or underwater:
• You’re flat-footed unless you have a swim Speed.
• You gain resistance 5 to acid and fire.
• You take a –2 circumstance penalty to melee slashing or bludgeoning attacks that pass through water.
• Ranged attacks that deal bludgeoning or slashing damage automatically miss if the attacker or target is underwater, and piercing ranged attacks made by an underwater creature or against an underwater target have their range increments halved.
• You can’t cast fire spells or use actions with the fire trait underwater.
• At the GM’s discretion, some ground-based actions might not work underwater or while floating.
I don't see any mention that LoE is broken. Then it's definitely not. (Apart from fire effects).