Fireball/Lightning Bolt Abuse?

[Ridley's Cohort]

I played both where players get to exploit the grid and where they do not. It really hardly matters.

If there is no square counting for the PCs, then there should be no square counting for the NPCs. Because the players effectively have more time to plan moves they will usually be more efficient whichever way you do it.

The real question is if the DM wants to bother square counting for NPCs. It is a little faster not to do so. If not, then it makes sense to fudge rules to discourage it for PCs.

As for accuracy of placing missiles, a professional baseball player can tag a trashcan at a 100' with a baseball all day and all night without missing. I do not see why, say, a 7th level Sorceror couldn't do the equivalent stunt. Estimating distances is not that difficult if you take time to practice every day.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

I let them use the grid. Heck, I as DM do, so why shouldn't they? It's fair for all, it's faster, and it keeps the focus on things that are more fun that guessitimating guestimation ability.

For that matter, I don't worry about PCs knowing each other's hp total. Clearly, they should only have an approximation based on how bad they look, but I've found it's faster and more fun if they just play with that knowledge, and as DM I have the monsters and NPCs do likewise.

For many aspects of the game, things work out fine if everyone plays by the same rules. The question then becomes less about balance and more about whether the added realism is worth the price in slowing down combat or creating frustration.

Anywho, I have a related question regarding the fireball thing. Let's assume that you can pinpoint your destination perfectly, but that you are in a room or corridor with enemies occupying squares between you and your intended target point. This is not as gnarly as an arrow slit situation, but would you argue that a ranged attack is needed to avoid accidentally hitting one of the creatures in a square along the line of effect? If so, how would you adjudicate the DC (AC) to pull it off properly?

Gratzi,

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Anywho, I have a related question regarding the fireball thing. Let's assume that you can pinpoint your destination perfectly, but that you are in a room or corridor with enemies occupying squares between you and your intended target point. This is not as gnarly as an arrow slit situation, but would you argue that a ranged attack is needed to avoid accidentally hitting one of the creatures in a square along the line of effect? If so, how would you adjudicate the DC (AC) to pull it off properly?

Pelor only knows!

In a pinch the caster can usually just aim 4 or 5 feet above the victims heads and the line of sight is pretty clear. A 5' shift upwards will change the radius from 20 feet to 19.4 feet, hardly worth mentioning.

I would suggest a ranged touch attack against an unmoving 5'x5' square is a large-sized target (AC 9) with zero Dex (-5 adjustment). Then you have to figure cover. 25% cover would be +2. 50% cover would be +4. So you are probably looking at a AC of 6 or 8, although it could be higher.

The real question is who does it hit? I would just count off all the possible obstructors, and dice for it randomly.

 

[kreynolds]

Anywho, I have a related question regarding the fireball thing. Let's assume that you can pinpoint your destination perfectly, but that you are in a room or corridor with enemies occupying squares between you and your intended target point. This is not as gnarly as an arrow slit situation, but would you argue that a ranged attack is needed to avoid accidentally hitting one of the creatures in a square along the line of effect? If so, how would you adjudicate the DC (AC) to pull it off properly?

Gratzi,

If the space the bead needs to pass through is larger than an arrow slit...I would say...let it pass through. Stop jacking with the rules and let the wizard play as he should. Unless, of course, you would like to start granting a fighter's opponent a cover bonus because the fighter's sword is held out in front of himself, blocking his vision.

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

If the space the bead needs to pass through is larger than an arrow slit...I would say...let it pass through. Stop jacking with the rules and let the wizard play as he should. Unless, of course, you would like to start granting a fighter's opponent a cover bonus because the fighter's sword is held out in front of himself, blocking his vision.

Whoa, easy there killer! To ask this question is not to jack with anything. The PHB says "If you attempt to send the bead through a narrow passage, such as through an arrow slit, you must "hit" the opening with a ranged touch attack, or else the bead strikes the barrier and detonates prematurely" (p. 204) Now, this tidbit raises the question or 1) how narrow is narrow, and 2) how is the AC for such a ranged touch attack determined?

If you have one person in the 5' square in front of you it seems tough to consider that firing though a narrow passage, but what if you have layers of opponents in front of you, or larger creatures that take up a lot of space?

I'm asking about the exceptional case where tight confines might create a situation where the preferred detonation point can only be reached by shooting the firepea through a narrow line of sight through various obstacles like people. How about firing past a crowded marketplace? How about firing through and beyond a web effect?

See where I'm coming from? This is hardly analagous to considering a weapon to provide cover to its target. We're not talking about the pea or the caster's hand, but about interposed obstacles.

A fighter with a reach weapon suffers cover penalties when fighting past someone directly in front of him, after all. Same for an archer. Again, I'm not saying that one creature in the way should create the same situation for a fireball as for melee/ranged attacks, but those are certainly more appropriate comparisons than your weapon serving as cover!

 

[kreynolds]

A fighter with a reach weapon suffers cover penalties when fighting past someone directly in front of him, after all. Same for an archer. Again, I'm not saying that one creature in the way should create the same situation for a fireball as for melee/ranged attacks, but those are certainly more appropriate comparisons than your weapon serving as cover!

My mentioning of the weapon providing cover was just an example of how ridiculous this entire thread is. If the space is the size of an arrow slit, you must roll to "hit". If the space is bigger, leave it alone. The AC of an arrow slit is based on the size, probably Fine or Diminutive.

Naturally, you may need to make judgement calls about shooting a fireball through the space of someone in front of you to hit someone behind them. The way I see it, unless that creature is a gelatnous cube, you should have no problem launching the fireball through their square.

 

[kamosa]

Errr... what he said. Good post Petrosian.

Well... lets carry this further...

GENERAL PRINCIPLE: Some GMs do not like their players using the grid too precisely gauge distances.

Now perhaps the GMs are honest enough to say "we just want to stick it to the mages" but most will rush back to "oh no it should apply to everyone".

So for those who are honest and just want the mage to have to roll to see if he judges the distances by the grid correctly, you do not need to read further. You and your bias can rest warm at night.

For those who want to pretend to appear impartial and thus are stuck with "gauging distance accurately is tough" for EVERYONE then start your dice warming up.

Fighter player says "cool, the enemy is 40' away. i charge him and strike as he is just in reach."

GM responds: "Roll a die, lets see if you got that right, otherwise you might come up 5' short. Oh man, bad roll. you mis judged the distance between you and the bad guy. You stop 5' short. Ok that ends your round with a double move. Now its his turn. lets see a 5' step and he gets to nail you with a FULL ATTACK!! yeah baby oh man both claws and now a rend."

Rogue player says "Oh cripes, while he is picking up his innards i will move to just inside my sneak attack range and shoot. Since I am invisible my arrow will be a sneak shot doing an additional 6d6. that ought to nail the troll since he is already somewhat hurt."

GM again "Roll to see if you judge it right. Oh man! What lousy dice. Ok you are 5' outside of the range for the sneak bonus. you end up just doing your usual 1d6+2. now the troll notices you and looks really ticked off."

WHATS THE MORAL?

pretty much for combat after combat and decision after decision the GRID and its UNFAILING measurements fit into every character's, PC and NPC alike, decision making. in rule after rule after rule a 5' error is the difference between life and death.

So, unless you wanna say " i just want to hose the spellcasters" dont go all out of shape when they, like the fighter who decides his move or the rogue who plans his sneakattack or the monk who judges his spring attack exit, use the grid and its measurements to cast their friggin' spells.

If i were in a game where the Gm made me make a spellcraft check to CHOOSE my spells placement routinely, i would also be insisting that EVERY OTHER CHARACTER have to make a similar roll to guess whether its a double move or double move +5' to the bad guy or whether they stop 30' or 35' for their arrow etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

Maybe after one run of having to make a "gauge distance roll" before every action of every character in every round... we could get back to doing what we were their to do... play the game... as opposed to this nonsense.