Spells Centered on You

[sam500]

I'm a collosal dragon.
I cast antimagic field.
Does it extend 10 feet from me or does it only cause 10 feet of the space I take up to be antimagic?
Thanks guys,
Sam

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I don't think its very clear. I always played it as 10 feet from creatures furthest square.

Vortex of teeth is also one of those odd ones. its a 40 foot radius from a 5 foot square. if truly playing as a radius from the 5 foot square its shape is much different then the entangle spell.

 

[entr0py]

We run into this situation rarely, but keeping it simple, the rules are the rules as written. Nothing says a spell must be useful for all casters. (a good example is water breathing)

Therefore, a larger than normal caster must use a new spell, with a larger Area but similar effect. And this spell is typically a higher level than the original due to its larger AoE.

Believe me, being a Huge or Colossal creature carries enough benefit without automatically granting them larger spell areas in addition.

 

[Someone]

Actually the rules are clear. You pick a grid intersection as the spells' point of origin (or, I suppose, a point in space, if you don't use a grid) and the spell bursts/emanates from there, whithout provisions or special rules for big casters.

 

[MarkB]

Actually the rules are clear. You pick a grid intersection as the spells' point of origin (or, I suppose, a point in space, if you don't use a grid) and the spell bursts/emanates from there, whithout provisions or special rules for big casters.

I'd rather these spells be useful to casters of all sizes. One possible house-rule I'm considering is having creature-centred emanation spells emanate from each grid-intersection within/bordering their space, their radii overlapping.

 

[entr0py]

I'd rather these spells be useful to casters of all sizes. One possible house-rule I'm considering is having creature-centred emanation spells emanate from each grid-intersection within/bordering their space, their radii overlapping.

wonderful, then kindly move your idea to the "house rules" section.

 

[Plane Sailing]

wonderful, then kindly move your idea to the "house rules" section.

Moderator:
Putting a winky in doesn't make this kind of comment any less dismissive. Please don't do it again.

 

[Plane Sailing]

An interesting note - Magic Circle against Evil has the following additional note:

If a creature too large to fit into the spell’s area is the subject of the spell, the spell acts as a normal protection from evil spell for that creature only.

- however, this isn't a 'centred on you' spell, so I'm not claiming that this is definitive - only interesting.

 

[entr0py]

Moderator:
Putting a winky in doesn't make this kind of comment any less dismissive. Please don't do it again.

'twas no offense intended. My apology for seeming harsh.

It is, however, disappointing when searching this forum for actual Q/A on Rules, and discussion is muddied with multiple house rule interpretations and various likes and dislikes. There are separate forums for that after all.

I'll attempt to phrase my reminders friendlier in the future. (winky appropriate here)

 

[MarkB]

'twas no offense intended. My apology for seeming harsh.

It is, however, disappointing when searching this forum for actual Q/A on Rules, and discussion is muddied with multiple house rule interpretations and various likes and dislikes. There are separate forums for that after all.

I'll attempt to phrase my reminders friendlier in the future. (winky appropriate here)

When someone opens a discussion upon how to interpret a ruling, there's every chance he's doing so because he's not entirely happy with the way he thinks that ruling is supposed to work - especially if the rule in question is, indeed, cumbersome. Offering suggestions for alternative methods can be useful in such situations, and the polite place to do that is wherever the question was asked, not in some other forum that the OP may not even read.

I did state clearly that my suggestion was a houserule, so that there was no chance of it being mistaken for an interpretation of how the rules actually work.