Line Spells / Lightning Bolt

[Oofta]

You are correct that it doesn't say anything explicitly about corners. Neither did I.

Part you didn't quote above from pg 191 says "A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively." When combined with the rules for squeezing into a smaller space (pg 192) where you can not fight effectively, pretty much shows that you are, for game mechanics sense, in your entire space unless you are squeezing into a smaller space.

I can Squeeze (taking the penalties) to have a smaller space, and if that space is now outside the area of effect - then I'm outside the area of effect.

If I'm not Squeezing, then by the rules I don't have a smaller space.

There would not need to be rules for reducing to a smaller space if it was something that you could do on-the-fly and for-free to avoid area of effects.

Is a creature's space a gamist simplification that doesn't match well with how much space people take up in reality? Sure. That's why realism-based arguments aren't particularly relevant - the game has already put them aside to make something easily playable. I'm not saying this to support my argument (so you don't try to refute it and think it affects the stance above), I'm saying it because I understand where you are coming from. It doesn't make perfect real-world sense. Neither do all doors being 5' wide, but we still see that everywhere from the same design decision.

So in other words

• A creature doesn't occupy the whole space, but he does.
• A lightning bolt is instantaneous so it doesn't matter that a person was in it's path a moment ago but then moved to the side because they were doing a feint.
• The lightning bolt just hangs out for the entire round while the creature is forced to leap into it because they must occupy that 2.5 feet of space at some point.
• Assume that in the middle of intense combat a wizard has the time to draw an imaginary line exactly down the middle of the hallway, not off by even an inch or two while an ogre is trying to smash in their face.
• The five foot wide lightning bolt must be imagined as being 100% exactly the same width for the whole length, making it a lightning "tube". No imagining a jagged line where the 5 ft wide is an average approximation. All the drawings we've ever seen of chaotic lightning bolts are lies.
• All rules must be approached exactly as if D&D were a board game that must be literally interpreted or you're doing it wrong. I'm not allowed to look at how big a 5 ft square is in real life because "game"
• The designers really meant to make the lightning bolt 10 ft wide because there's no reason to not thread the needle every time. It's just an intelligence check to see if you can figure out the loophole.

By this logic, all missiles fired into a 5 ft square space should always hit. They may ineffectively bounce off armor, but they will always connect with something.

Anyway, have a good one.

 

[Blue]

So in other words

• A creature doesn't occupy the whole space, but he does.
• A lightning bolt is instantaneous so it doesn't matter that a person was in it's path a moment ago but then moved to the side because they were doing a feint.
• The lightning bolt just hangs out for the entire round while the creature is forced to leap into it because they must occupy that 2.5 feet of space at some point.
• Assume that in the middle of intense combat a wizard has the time to draw an imaginary line exactly down the middle of the hallway, not off by even an inch or two while an ogre is trying to smash in their face.
• The five foot wide lightning bolt must be imagined as being 100% exactly the same width for the whole length, making it a lightning "tube". No imagining a jagged line where the 5 ft wide is an average approximation. All the drawings we've ever seen of chaotic lightning bolts are lies.
• All rules must be approached exactly as if D&D were a board game that must be literally interpreted or you're doing it wrong. I'm not allowed to look at how big a 5 ft square is in real life because "game"
• The designers really meant to make the lightning bolt 10 ft wide because there's no reason to not thread the needle every time. It's just an intelligence check to see if you can figure out the loophole.

By this logic, all missiles fired into a 5 ft square space should always hit. They may ineffectively bounce off armor, but they will always connect with something.

Anyway, have a good one.

Yeap, just about right. Not really, but I know you're being snarky. But in game effects. Game design is a balance trying to maximize fun for it's target audience. Sometimes rules are are more realistic, sometimes they serve the game mechanics better, whatever. Just a fact of life. That a creature takes up a certain space has been around for editions, and I've never seen it brought up on any of those "this needs to be fixed" lists all over the place. Seems like it's pretty accepted.

If you want to rail against the D&D rules, go ahead. By your quotes of "must be approached exactly as if D&D were a board game" it seems that's where you're going in your thrust. That's fine. The game is made to hack, to play with, to make ruling while running that you think fit better.

I have not only not said otherwise, in other threads in this same post I talk about rules, like granting advantage on saves when only partially in the square, or for rolling randomly when using theater of the mind. So you rant goes right past me because it's not what I have endorsed.

But if you ask what the rules say, then I'll tell you what the rules dang well say. Telling me the rules don't say that will get corrected. Feel free not to play that way - it's your table. You should adjust it for your table's sensibilities.

 

[Oofta]

Yeap, just about right. Not really, but I know you're being snarky. But in game effects. Game design is a balance trying to maximize fun for it's target audience. Sometimes rules are are more realistic, sometimes they serve the game mechanics better, whatever. Just a fact of life. That a creature takes up a certain space has been around for editions, and I've never seen it brought up on any of those "this needs to be fixed" lists all over the place. Seems like it's pretty accepted.

If you want to rail against the D&D rules, go ahead. By your quotes of "must be approached exactly as if D&D were a board game" it seems that's where you're going in your thrust. That's fine. The game is made to hack, to play with, to make ruling while running that you think fit better.

I have not only not said otherwise, in other threads in this same post I talk about rules, like granting advantage on saves when only partially in the square, or for rolling randomly when using theater of the mind. So you rant goes right past me because it's not what I have endorsed.

But if you ask what the rules say, then I'll tell you what the rules dang well say. Telling me the rules don't say that will get corrected. Feel free not to play that way - it's your table.

The rule is that a creature controls a 5 ft space, not that they are 5 ft cubes. Well unless they are unusually small gelatinous cubes of course. Because who doesn't like jello monsters?

Have a good one.

 

[Blue]

It does not 'take it up' in the sense of physically occupying the entire space at all times. It controls the space and others (unfriendlies) can't move into/through it. If you aim a 5' wide lightning bolt at it you will hit it. If you deliberately aim a bolt NOT at it there is no reason for the GM to rule you still hit it.

The game makes some game design decisions, some of which favor play over realism. One of which is the space characters take up. They need that much space to fight effectively (PHB 191).

There are rules for squeezing (PHB 192) where a creature takes up less space and doesn't fight effectively.

So right here we have what the game is saying - they are considered anywhere in their space, unless they are doing a certain thing (squeezing) which reduces the space. There would be no need for rules for squeezing if you could at any time and at no penalty decide to cut down where a creature is in order to avoid area of effects.

Now, want to make a ruling "hey, it's only passing through part of your space, take advantage on your save"? Go for it. I've endorsed DMs making ruling elsewhere in this thread. I'm just commenting on what the rules actually say.

Re cake - you want to treat monsters as abstract 5x5x5 cubes while treating the lightning bolt as a real thing that is really 5' wide in-world. You are applying two different paradigms in order to have cake and eat it.

If you are going to treat monsters as 5x5x5 cubes then you should treat lightning bolt as a sequence of 5x5x5 cubes on the grid. If you are going to treat one as real then you should treat the other as real, too. Otherwise you are just abusing the system by cherrypicking.

I do treat lightning bolt as a series of 5x5x5 cubes. What I don't do is snap-fit them to a grid. I just use a template. Much easier and much more accurate, especially when not firing in one of the ordinal directions.

 

[KarinsDad]

I do treat lightning bolt as a series of 5x5x5 cubes. What I don't do is snap-fit them to a grid. I just use a template. Much easier and much more accurate, especially when not firing in one of the ordinal directions.

But the question is, do you allow those cubes to target any creature where a cube touches his space, or only if the cube takes up 50% or more of his space (as per the DMG circular area rules)?

 

[Blue]

But the question is, do you allow those cubes to target any creature where a cube touches his space, or only if the cube takes up 50% or more of his space (as per the DMG circular area rules)?

Sure. Or maybe I make a ruling and open it up a bit more - granting advantage on the save for the "looks like half, not sure if a little over or a little under" area.

 

[Azzy]

See, if people stop using grids this wouldn't be a problem.

 

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

It's perfectly reasonable to rule it either way. Thinking of the roughly two feet of space a human might physically occupy in a 5-foot area, threading the needle between two targets could easily miss both, or at least would be unlikely to deal full damage IMO. I see several options (and I am sure others would come up with more) that could work depending on how the DM rules it:

1. you rule both targets have to make saves as normal
2a. you rule both targets makes saves, but have advantage
2b. you rule one makes a save as normal, the other has advantage
3a. you rule both targets take half damage, and a successful save indicates no damage
3b. you rule one makes a save as normal, the other takes half and makes a save for no damage
4. the DM rolls 50/50 to see which of the two is actually affected by the spell. that single target makes their save as normal
5. the DM has the player roll a special "spell attack" to determine if they can place the lightning bolt so that both targets are affected
and so on...

Pick an option, they are all within the parameters of the rules and how you interpret them and wish to rule the results.

See, if people stop using grids this wouldn't be a problem.

Or each group could choose one of the suggested options (see above) for how they want to rule on the situation and then it wouldn't be a problem either.

 

[aco175]

If the caster wants to target down a diagonal instead of a straight line on the grid, I tend to spot allow or deny a set of monsters and make him choose how his PC wants to target them. I tend to allow more than rather than less than what may be the true number. It is a fast solution to move on and play.

 

[KarinsDad]

See, if people stop using grids this wouldn't be a problem.

As if totm without grids doesn't have a plethora of problems. Go to the bathroom and you're suddenly clueless.