Can I make a really 'frilly' Wall of Force?

[Gez]

Any surface with a hole, or inward curves, would not apply since it's not an unbroken plane in my definition.

A narrow and wide wall of force could be vertical, I don't see the problem. Or are you suggesting that the verticality implies the longest length must be the vertical one?


If you cast a wall of force -- or any other immobile effect, for that matter -- on a large moving thing like a ship, just ask you the question -- if you were yourself standing on said thing, would you move with it? If the answer is yes, then it's true for the wall of force too.
Otherwise, you would have wall of forces tearing through the ground and eventually opening volcanoes. Because it would be immobile, right? But the planet move around the sun. And the solar system around the center of the galaxy. And the galaxy around the cluster. And the cluster is moving away from all others.

If you set the wall of force so that it connects to a moving unchanging objects, like a chariot or a ship, then it moves with it.

 

[Bauglir]

so what if I'm floating in a raft near the ship (relatively) stationary and I plant a wall of force at about water level in front of the ship? Will it tear a nice big (possibly fractal shaped ) hole in the hull?

 

[Norfleet]

Good old monofilament wall trick. How I love thee.

The requirements are that the wall must be "continuous and unbroken". I believe the requirement for "continuous and unbroken" means that the wall must not be physically seperated at any point. If the restriction meant that the wall had to be be a completely convex structure where internally contained lines could be drawn from any point, then the wall of force would be unable to plug, say, a hourglass-shaped opening. Therefore, the continuous restriction must mean that the wall of force cannot be seperated into multiple parts, although it CAN, in fact, be a fractal structure that covers a large area leaving holes. You cannot create a wall of force which is "broken" by an object, such as trying to create a wall of force that simultaneously blocks the center of two parallel tunnels.

Of course, the really amusing abuse isn't a fractal wall of force: It's a monofilament grate consisting of a wall of force formed into a grate pattern, where each of the "bars" is a single molecule wide. Such a structure would be quite amusing, since walls of force are inherently invisible as is, and at a single molecule wide, even walking into it will dice you apart into small cubes. Even if you think the "unbroken" rule is violated by this, or "vertical" rule by the neck-high version, it's certainly NOT violated by a monofilament line running vertically through the center of a doorway.

 

[Davek]

Or multiple permanent monofilament lines criss-crossing the opening of a tunnel, pit, doorway, etc...

Me thinks as a DM I will institute some Minimum values on wall of force.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Probably a good idea, Davek, but generally players aren't so crass as to actually try these stunts.

A minimum size of 2' x 2' should do.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

so what if I'm floating in a raft near the ship (relatively) stationary and I plant a wall of force at about water level in front of the ship? Will it tear a nice big (possibly fractal shaped ) hole in the hull?

As long as you can actually attach the wall to something (and not just have it float underwater), yes.

AR

 

[MerakSpielman]

A wall of force doesn't need to be anchored. It can float, immobile and immovible, in mid-air if need be.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Or multiple permanent monofilament lines criss-crossing the opening of a tunnel, pit, doorway, etc...

You could walk through it with no effect.

Cyberpunk is called science fiction for a reason.

Geoff.

 

[Norfleet]

Probably a good idea, Davek, but generally players aren't so crass as to actually try these stunts.

The entire point of these spells *IS* to abuse them. What the hell would be the point of always using tools in predictable, orthodox ways? That'd just be too obvious. It's like entering a building through a door: It's predictable, obvious, and everyone expects it. That's why you surprise them by going in through a wall instead.

In my campaigns, players are ENCOURAGED to innovate and try stunts like this. As long as the trick is good, rather than simply stupid, I allow, encourage, and sometimes even require it. I happen to enjoy putting parties through situations which are completely unsurvivable by normal standards, and then seeing how, or if, they get it out of it. It's boring otherwise: Who wants to play through situations which are obviously intended to be won? Where's the challenge in that? No, true fun is when you use the tools at your disposal in ways that the DM never thought of it.

At the same time, however, I remove the spells which contain really stupid, well-publicized exploits. Players should think of nifty ways to use things, not silly ways.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

IMNSHO, all these fancy, kooky geometries are not "walls" and therefore will cause the spell to fail outright.

Furthermore, many people are assuming that the Wall of Force is very hard or infinitely hard. It could be that objects slamming into the WoF are slowed down gently. That boat might take very minor damage or it might take massive damage; the spell description is unilluminating on this point.