Can Web be cast amongst trees?

*laughs*

Ok, ok.. you've persuaded me.. I'm still not sure that given the description of the spell that there'd be enough webs in any particular square to impede movement, when cast in a forest.. but I'm willing to allow it given your persuasive arguments..

'course, fair game for your opponents now..

ttyl,
Videssian

Videssian said:

basically, we just were treating the terrain as a flat plain, even though there were technically trees around.. I think I should probably fix that for next session..

Click to expand...

Yeah. If everyone was working on the assumption that "there are trees here, but there aren't", I can see where this would get confusing.

You know, I could bring those forest grid maps with me, and you could bring the plexiglass......

Nail said:

You know, I could bring those forest grid maps with me...

Click to expand...

Or you could just upload them to the group board like you've been promising you would, then we'd all have our own.

I've always permitted Web to be cast between even things that aren't solidly rooted. The web just draws them together and vanishes (nasty manuever against flying creatures, BTW).

Two trees would be more than sufficient to establish the web, although depending on the strength of the intended victims, saplings might give way before the strands do. Just something to consider.

As a DM-call I think it went very well. For the purposes of that one encounter the terrain was more or less a featureless plain and for continuity's sake it is best to have it remain so it all cases. Continuity is very important for games in general while running.

The validity of the points made concerning a lightly wooded area and the number of trees as possible anchor points is a great discussion for the refinement of encounter terrain for your guys' game. I love having discussions like this brought up in the games I run. Some really great points are brought up and as a DM I adjudicate the most workable-reasonable solution mechanically for future game sessions, to the greater satisfaction of all.

Sounds like you guys have a great group & game going!

Web is great indoors.. but outside, in many circumstances, it just doesn't work well. Cases where it would would include a narrow ravine (anchored on both sides, if the ravine walls are adequately high). One could make a case I know for any two particular thin trees to be the anchor points, since those trees are opposite each other (by definition).. but while the web would be there, there wouldn't be enough anchorage to provide a real barrier.. hence, for practical purposes, the Web isn't really there..

Click to expand...

As a DM, I've personally never allowed Web to work as normal in a forest either, for exactly the same reason.

The spell's desciption is meant to keep people from using it on two humaniods or creatures or just plain as a net to hold creatures in position. Most forest i can think of that qualify as a forest would be quite useful for this spell. I would not get too technical with the spell as to what the size and high of a tree would be to qualify it for the spell. If it's not a tree just say so, but i think the trees in question from the original posting (whether 5 or 10 inches or 5-10 feet) should work. Not to pick on the GM in question but if your going to be this picky with a spell as such there are a few more spells that should draw your attention in the PHB. That said, if it's a instance like someone proposed where this will shortcut an campaign or adventure then plan for it on the fly.

That's my 2 cents anyways.

I also dislike trying to get too real-world specific when debating rules calls. so I start with the rulebooks.

A quick peek at my handy DMG discusses the trees in forest terrain. Basically, many "squares" (50%) have at least a smallish tree that can support your weight (i.e., that you can climb).

Note also that the web spell says it must be anchored to "two or more" points. A forest, to my reading, is actually a better place to use web than in a corridor.

I think the problem is exactly as Videssian described -- saying it was forest but really thinking of it as plains. The (3.5) DMG's distribution of trees pretty clearly considers even light forest to have about 5-10 feet between any two trees -- more that sufficient closeness for the web. I would agree that trees that were fairly far apart might weaken the effect of the web, but I think the clusters would be just fine for web.

I would have the outer edges of the web be limited by the availability of trees. For an example, see the attached JPG. The gray circle is the normal area covered by the web, the brown circles are tree trunks, and the black polygon is the area where the web actually works, on account of being supported by trees.