D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Bigger Cones

[3d6]

Does anyone know if it was the designer's intent to make the area of cones un-increasable by metamagic feats? It seems unfair for all other area-effect spells to be alterable, but not cones.

 

[DreamChaser]

cone's already have a pretty big area and when they were variable they were harder to adjudicate. I like the fixed range.


fireball (3rd level) = 20 foot radius = about 50 squares max

cone of cold (5th level) = 60 foot range = about 110 squares max

widened fireball (6th level) = 40 ft radius = about 200 squares max

were it possible
widened cone of cold (8th level) = 120 ft range = about 450 squares max. that is equivalent to a 100 ft square!!! ouch!

Considering that they both do d6 damage, casting into an army in tight formation, you can hit more than twice as many with the cone, even standing 20 feet away you only lose around 12 squares.

I don't mind that they are not alterable.

DC

 

[Dr. Zoom]

Does anyone know if it was the designer's intent to make the area of cones un-increasable by metamagic feats? It seems unfair for all other area-effect spells to be alterable, but not cones.

I would say yes, it was their intent, since it was also one of the reasons why they made the ability score buffs a non-variable +4.

 

[Pax]

Does anyone know if it was the designer's intent to make the area of cones un-increasable by metamagic feats? It seems unfair for all other area-effect spells to be alterable, but not cones.

What are you talking about? You can still increase Cone's affected area; you simply have to use Widen Spell to do so. Just like with a Fireball.

The limitation is that you have to use the [+3 level] Widen to gain a 100% increase in area, rather than the [+1 level] Enlarge to gain a 100% increase in area. IOW, it is now no easier and no cheaper to get a godawful-huge Cone of Cold than it is to get a godawful-huge Fireball.

Two snippets from the SRD for you:

WIDEN SPELL [METAMAGIC]
Benefit: You can alter a burst, emanation, line, or spread shaped spell to increase its area. Any numeric measurements of the spell's area increase by 100%.A widened spell uses up a spell slot three levels higher than the spell's actual level.
Spells that do not have an area of one of these four sorts are not affected by this feat.

Cone of Cold
Evocation [Cold]
Level: Sor/Wiz 5, Water 6
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Area: Cone-shaped burst
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes
Cone of cold creates an area of extreme cold, originating at your hand and extending outward in a cone. It drains heat, dealing 1d6 points of cold damage per caster level (maximum 15d6).
Arcane Material Component: A very small crystal or glass cone.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Re: Re: [3.5] Bigger Cones

Sure but increasing the area of a cone requires using the widen spell feat and the enlarge spell feat to increase the range. Otherwise, you get a cone with an effect twice the original size that cuts off abruptly at the listed range.

What are you talking about? You can still increase Cone's affected area; you simply have to use Widen Spell to do so. Just like with a Fireball.

The limitation is that you have to use the [+3 level] Widen to gain a 100% increase in area, rather than the [+1 level] Enlarge to gain a 100% increase in area. IOW, it is now no easier and no cheaper to get a godawful-huge Cone of Cold than it is to get a godawful-huge Fireball.

Two snippets from the SRD for you:

 

[Pax]

Re: Re: Re: [3.5] Bigger Cones

Sure but increasing the area of a cone requires using the widen spell feat and the enlarge spell feat to increase the range. Otherwise, you get a cone with an effect twice the original size that cuts off abruptly at the listed range.

Unless you simply apply logic to the situation, and realise that Widen alone should suffice.

That is, after all, what Rule 0 was intended for.

 

[drnuncheon]

You don't even need Rule 0, just read the book. "Any numeric measurements of the spell's area increase by 100%." Is the 60' range a numeric measurement of the spell's area? Yes. Therefore, it increases by 100%.

J
Next, we discuss what the meaning of the word 'is' is.
...or was that too political?

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

One might think so but you should have seen some of the arguments generated by the suggestion that the 40' cone from 3.0 Sculpt Spell enabled a spell to have a 40' cone effect regardless of the range.

You don't even need Rule 0, just read the book. "Any numeric measurements of the spell's area increase by 100%." Is the 60' range a numeric measurement of the spell's area? Yes. Therefore, it increases by 100%.

 

[drnuncheon]

One might think so but you should have seen some of the arguments generated by the suggestion that the 40' cone from 3.0 Sculpt Spell enabled a spell to have a 40' cone effect regardless of the range.

I'm foggy on the relevance of a poorly worded 3.0 feat, especially when this one is so clear. It's a simple test: Is the 60' a numeric measurement of the spell's area? I don't think that anyone will deny that it is numeric or that it is a measurement of the spell's area.

Now, should they have not put the area measurements in the range? Yeah, that was a screwup. Someone will probably find a way to misinterpret it. They should all be submitted as errata.

J

 

[Hackenslash]

Yes I think it was intentional...

Primarily because all cone effect spells have a fixed "quarter circle" emanating from a corner of the characters square see page 175 PHB(I think thats the right page but it's definitely around that number at the beginning of the spells chapter in the new 3.5 PH). Thus when you take into consideration the new spell ranges you end up with some of these spells having quite a large area of effect. A good example would be Cone of Cold etc... Hope this helps....