Diagonal area of spells

[Hussar]

This is odd, since the OP's issue is with a square area of effect instead of a circle.

Not really though. It's not the square that's the problem, it's the notion that you can manipulate the square to the point where you can use what is effectively a grenade as a sniper weapon.

Fixed squares solves all those shenanigans.

 

[Horwath]

Well there are 2 ways about AoE spell.

1. Treat it as a granade or bazooka, and determine precise accuracy if needed by attack roll. Dex or spellcasting stat, your choice. Lets say you need to hit AC 15 to place the edge of the AoE between the two targets. One to be affected, other will not.

2. It's magic. Fireball is not a hand granade or RPG(not the roleplayinggameRPG ). Then you can say that every caster "see" the target cube, sphere, line, cone, pillar or whatever as an HUD overlay over his/hers normal sight. That way caster can ALWAYS target where he wants to.

It's your choice, and by the rules they are both correct.

You can even go with option 1 and make option to available via feat: +1 to casting ability and training in perfect AoE accuracy.

 

[Imaculata]

I generally allow magic to be as accurate as the players (or my monsters) want it to be. If a player wants to land a fireball in such a way that it only hits the enemies and not his allies, and he is able to do so in regards to the positions on the grid, then by all means. Why would you feel a need to restrict this? Why make combat more complicated?

I like that such strategies are possible with magic. Sometimes my players come up with really weird ideas. "Can I use the Create Water spell, and then have my ally freeze it in mid air with a cold spell, to create a wall of ice?". "Sure" , I would reply, "What is the size of the area of water that the spell can produce?".

I like that my players try to think outside what is literally written in the book, and be more creative. I WANT them to be this creative. And I try to be just as creative as them with my monsters, and how they use magic against the players.

 

[Hussar]

I generally allow magic to be as accurate as the players (or my monsters) want it to be. If a player wants to land a fireball in such a way that it only hits the enemies and not his allies, and he is able to do so in regards to the positions on the grid, then by all means. Why would you feel a need to restrict this? Why make combat more complicated?

I like that such strategies are possible with magic. Sometimes my players come up with really weird ideas. "Can I use the Create Water spell, and then have my ally freeze it in mid air with a cold spell, to create a wall of ice?". "Sure" , I would reply, "What is the size of the area of water that the spell can produce?".

I like that my players try to think outside what is literally written in the book, and be more creative. I WANT them to be this creative. And I try to be just as creative as them with my monsters, and how they use magic against the players.

For me, it's needlessly mickey mouse. And, again, this is a proud nail thing for me, so, it's not entirely rational. But, think about it. You need to hit a point 50 feet away from you that is exactly 20 feet away from point A and 25 feet from point B. And the wizard can do it EVERY time. We don't allow fighters to do that. But, as soon as it's maaaaaaagic, then it's perfectly fine? Bugs me far more than it really should.

Thing is, [MENTION=6801286]Imaculata[/MENTION], I'd agree with the idea of weird ideas. That's groovy. But, playing silly buggers because the grid creates pixelated circles, or "rotating" the cube so that it becomes a pin point smart spell just rubs me very much the wrong way.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I'm usually not so strict when it comes to AoE as long as my player gives a reasonable explanation. Often my players just ask me: "Can I do it so the fireball spell hits Monster A and Monster B, but not PC A?" and then I just say "Yes" (or sometimes "No, but...") and problem solved.

 

[Imaculata]

For me, it's needlessly mickey mouse. And, again, this is a proud nail thing for me, so, it's not entirely rational. But, think about it. You need to hit a point 50 feet away from you that is exactly 20 feet away from point A and 25 feet from point B. And the wizard can do it EVERY time. We don't allow fighters to do that. But, as soon as it's maaaaaaagic, then it's perfectly fine? Bugs me far more than it really should.

I do think about it. Perhaps I even overthink it.

But the way I imagine it, accuracy is not a requirement for casting a spell. It is the magic of the spell that does that for you, and what makes magic special. So arguably the spellcaster could be blind, and still land the spell perfectly, provided he knows exactly where he wants the spell to land.

 

[Hussar]

Well, technically no he can’t since you need to be able to see to target by RAW, no?

But yeah, it’s maaaaaaaagic just flies straight up my nose.

 

[Imaculata]

Well, technically no he can’t since you need to be able to see to target by RAW, no?

Of course. But what I meant is, you don't need to be accurate, you just need to define the target. Magic doesn't require accuracy, strength or dexterity. If you know where you want the spell to go, then that is exactly where it goes.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Of course. But what I meant is, you don't need to be accurate, you just need to define the target.

That kind of magic is almost like programing... OK, it's like sympathy & contagion. You just have to uniquely identify a target, not see it or point precisely at it. Maybe with it's full name, or it's position in society, or whether it's bearing a specific item, or by making a campy voodoo doll of it, or by having a clipping of it's hair or nails, etc...

Most D&D magic, though, doesn't work that way. You pick an exact point in space as the origin for your AE (so it'll really help to be able to see what's going on near that exact point in space) or you do, indeed, point precisely the path of your magical attack and roll to hit AC (mostly with cantrips, but they're still magic).

 

[MNblockhead]

I often do not use a grid and even when I do I have spell effect templates. If you can position it in such a way that it works this way--hey good on you! Why no reward this kind of thinking?

I often forgo templates and "wing it". I like to say yes to interesting ideas. At the same time, I will sometimes make judgments based on the terrain, how close the enemy is to the other characters, positioning, etc. that are based more on "feel" than pure RAW. My players have not expressed any issues with this and I think that is because I let them have their way a lot.

Having creative and engaged players is more fun for me as I DM and I love those, "hmm, you want to do *what* ? Uh, yeah, okay. Let's see what happens..."