D&D 5E Wall of Force and Mind Blast

[Werebat]

It's possible that D&D should not have dropped the distinction between "Line of Sight" and "Line of Effect".

 

[Caliban]

It's possible that D&D should not have dropped the distinction between "Line of Sight" and "Line of Effect".

It's possible that Gaze Attack don't care about cover - just Heavy Obscurement. I.e. if you can see their eyes (or they can see you for some of them) that's enough. In that case it would work through a pane of glass or a Wall of Force (unless you rule that being a magical barrier it will still block magical effects).

The rules are kind of vague on the subject. It's basically up to the DM.

 

[jaelis]

You can obviously see through spectacles, but how would you have a clear path to the eyes through them? Unless gaze attacks swerve around barriers en route to their target -- which would make them more like AoE attacks.

There's no reason (beside DM ruling) to say that gaze attacks need a clear path to your eyes. You can say they need a clear path to your body like any other effect, plus the ability to see the source. That lines up better with how many spells work.

 

[Werebat]

There's no reason (beside DM ruling) to say that gaze attacks need a clear path to your eyes. You can say they need a clear path to your body like any other effect, plus the ability to see the source. That lines up better with how many spells work.

This would make sense if closing one's eyes did NOT protect one from gaze attacks. Is this the case?

 

[jaelis]

This would make sense if closing one's eyes did NOT protect one from gaze attacks. Is this the case?

No, my suggestion would still allow you to avoid a gaze attack by closing your eyes. (As the rules indicate.) But it would be because you can't see the monster, not because you are gaining any sort of cover.

Normal: you are looking at a monster right in front of you
Do you have cover? No
Can you see it? Yes
Therefore the gaze works.

Averted gaze: the monster is right in front of you, but your eyes are closed
Do you have cover? No
Can you see it? No
The gaze does not work

Window: the monster is behind a glass window
Do you have cover? Yes
Can you see it? Yes
The gaze does not work

Wall: the monster is behind a stone wall
Do you have cover? Yes
Can you see it? No
The gaze does not work.

Which is not to say you have to play this way. But you can and be consistent with the rules. It seems the simplest interpretation to me.

 

[jaelis]

It's possible that D&D should not have dropped the distinction between "Line of Sight" and "Line of Effect".

I would say they still have that distinction, they just don't give "line of sight" special rules. I don't think they need them, a DM can usually decide easily enough what you can see.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

This 'clear window blocks effects'-thing has got to be one of the dumbest things I've seen in D&D. Magic can move mountains but can't penetrate an 1/8" of glass?

 

[Caliban]

This 'clear window blocks effects'-thing has got to be one of the dumbest things I've seen in D&D. Magic can move mountains but can't penetrate an 1/8" of glass?

What, you expect magic to obey the laws of physics?

 

[jaelis]

This 'clear window blocks effects'-thing has got to be one of the dumbest things I've seen in D&D. Magic can move mountains but can't penetrate an 1/8" of glass?

Actually it is up to you as DM to decide whether 1/8" of glass blocks magic, or whether the magic is powerful enough to break the glass. Just like an arrow shot.

All the rules suggest is that magical effects can't normally pass through glass without breaking it.