Can you do a "diamond" shaped blast?

[Dracorat]

If you wish to bind yourself to the pictures, go ahead, but you can only cast blasts two ways. In which case the pictures already contradict the text blocks.

The text blocks are the closest thing you have to a definition of what those areas are, and I completely agree the rules are lacking around this topic.

However, the text block is more liberal than the pictures are.

How liberal is exactly what this thread is about.

 

[Branduil]

I disagree. It can be reasonably interpreted as the area that fills a shape with three squares on a side. In the case of a diagonal, that's more than 9 squares.

It can be interpreted that way, but it's not reasonable, any more than feeding your friends infinite oregano is reasonable.

 

[Dracorat]

I find it quite reasonable. I find the infinite oregano an invalid comparison. If this said "add squares to taste" then sure. But it doesn't.

 

[rhm001]

Oh that part. Sure there is.

But doesn't that very definition create a problem with what some (perhaps not all) people are advocating? Some people seem to be pushing for a reading that says any square touched by the diamond is subject to the attack. Given such a reading, more than three squares will be affected in some direction.

There are other variations that would still be 3x3 (the trapezoid mentioned above), or less, but if any square touched at all is hit, the area is guaranteed to be bigger than 3x3.

 

[Torg Smith]

Actually I will concede that the example does say ‘which means’ as a valid use as a rule.

 

[Branduil]

If you look at a 2 by 2 blast, it looks like one really big square. Therefore, by the RAW I can use a 3x3 blast to cover 36 squares. They're just really big squares.

Filled with infinite oregano.

 

[Dracorat]

To Torg: Then we agree that with two different ways of interpreting what was written, we both disagree on implementation?

 

[Dracorat]

There are other variations that would still be 3x3 (the trapezoid mentioned above), or less, but if any square touched at all is hit, the area is guaranteed to be bigger than 3x3.

It's not a matter of any square touched - the earlier point about it was a tangent from the issue at hand.

Considering how it is worded, it does seem that a trapezoid would fit the bill as well.

And if someone had argued that point to me in game it would be conceded and accepted.

 

[Torg Smith]

To Torg: Then we agree that with two different ways of interpreting what was written, we both disagree on implementation?

Actually I believe there is an unlimited number of ways to interpret the rules. I believe the rules are merely guidelines to run your game. I do not see a problem with the way you want to run it as you are doing the same for both the players as the monsters. I made my decision on how I was going to run it before my first post. I have never been in a rules lawyer discussion before so I thought I would try it out. It has been quite interesting. I will have to do it some more.

 

[Dracorat]

=) Peace and good will to you.