Fireball vs. Wind Wall

[Vexed]

i think there is always an exception to any rule. Circumstance can present a scenario where it changs the effect of a rule.

I thnk of when people, for example, email the sage for him to elaborate on a stated rule and get more or less of what they expect. IF that is taken as "cannon" or rules then this would be an example of questioning or asking info regarding a spell can be different from what is "printed" when its is questioned. (i.e. revisions are done becuase of these things) So perhaps this could be having its effect or wording changed, vs perception of what is written.

I do see the point with the rules printing vs dm ruling.

good thread : )

 

[TheBaron]

Hookay I understand this is a rules forum, but from my understanding and what I've seen of posts rules are open to debate and interpretation within this forum or am I incorrect?

I think asking if a scenario is possible within rules and asking what the rule is are two different things. If I want to know what the rule is I can go to SRD or refer to my books or I might ask here if I don't have time to do that research myself.
If I want feedback as to whether something is possible within the rules I'm going to ask other people how they interpret the rule.

House rules from my view are when your making a ruling that changes the mechanics of a rule. I don't think anything is being changed about either spells text or how they work. We are just determining the parameters of their effects. They both still work the same way far as their effects were just determining if it's possible there could be other scenarios possible based on those effects.

<We know that a Wind Wall is not a solid barrier. It is made of gas. It cannot be solid unless the spell states that it is solid.

So, we have to determine if it is a material body. Typically, the word material means something composed of matter (i.e. corporeal). Well, air is composed of matter and it obviously does not stop a Fireball. A Wind Wall is composed of air, so it too would appear on the surface to not stop a Fireball.>

If interpretation of text is allowed and we are allowed to try to deterimine whether wind wall is material or solid. I don't think it's far fetched to view the force of wind wall described as a "barrier" within text as semi solid for purposes of qualifying as solid for contact purposes. Air can't be felt, but Wind can be felt.

I think the fact that the firey bead explodes upon impact of a solid barrier is enough to determine it is material or solid in nature.

If we are not allowed to determine all possible paramters of these spells outside of what is written within the text. Then I would have to conced it's not within rules as it does not clearly state in text anywhere.

The Baron~
P.S. I appologize for not maintaining the integrity of others. I let my ego get the best of me and behaved like a savage.

 

[KarinsDad]

If interpretation of text is allowed and we are allowed to try to deterimine whether wind wall is material or solid. I don't think it's far fetched to view the force of wind wall described as a "barrier" within text as semi solid for purposes of qualifying as solid for contact purposes. Air can't be felt, but Wind can be felt.

To be more precise, I would state that the Wind Wall might be considered a material body in this case (it is still not a solid barrier).

However, if you rule this way (i.e. the Wind Wall is a material body), the Fireball would have to detonate as soon as it hits the Wind Wall. It still would not be deflected.

Also, if you rule this way, than a caster readying a Gust of Wind could force a Fireball to detonate right away as it leaves the finger of the caster.

However, both of these are a real stretch since Fireball does not state that it is affected by Wind and none of the other rules state that either.

PS. And actually, air can be felt. If I remove all of the air from around you, you would feel the lack of that air around you real fast. Air has pressure. Air has temperature. It can be felt without it moving.

I think the fact that the firey bead explodes upon impact of a solid barrier is enough to determine it is material or solid in nature.

As we discussed before, this is total speculation on your part.

In fact, the bead is not even "firey". It is glowing and pea sized, but nothing indicates that it is on fire.

Just because it triggers against a solid object does not mean that it too is a solid object.

Light falling on a solar panel triggers the creation of electricity, but just because the solar panel is solid does not make the light striking it solid.

It's magic. We do not know that the bead is solid. The bead could be just magical light. We don't know one way or the other.

What we do know is that the bead detonates when it contacts something solid.

If we are not allowed to determine all possible paramters of these spells outside of what is written within the text. Then I would have to conced it's not within rules as it does not clearly state in text anywhere.

It is not that you cannot determine those parameters. It is that you cannot assume what those parameters are and still state that you are following the rules.

If you consider the bead to be a "normal missile" but it does not act like a normal missile, I would question why you consider it to be that way.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Hookay I understand this is a rules forum, but from my understanding and what I've seen of posts rules are open to debate and interpretation within this forum or am I incorrect?

...snip...

House rules from my view are when your making a ruling that changes the mechanics of a rule.

Exactly. The rules forum is about the actual rules and also sussing out amongst friends possible interpretations of the rules.

House Rules is for new or different mechanics.

Occasionally I see people get a little zealous in declaring "you're house ruling!!!" when actually it is just a discussion around the boundaries of existing rules, or thinking about interactions between a couple of rules which may not be spelt out.

Cheers,

 

[Terath Ninir]

I know I shouldn't be performing thread necromancy like this, but this has to be the SILLYEST attempt to use flavour text to break the rules that I have ever seen. Wind wall taking out fireball, indeed. Yeah, I'm really sure that the authors of 3e intended a spell available to clerics with the Air domain at 3rd character level to be able to take out a 3rd level spell. Whatever!

 

[IanB]

I would just like to add that inexpensive material components should never be considered as a factor in a debate like this, because it leads to the very strange situation of a fireball cast by a caster with the Eschew Material Components feat behaving differently than one cast by a caster without the feat.

And I'll second the notion that if the fireball missile was a tangible object with mass, surface area, inertia, etc, to allow the wind to affect it, the spell would be of the conjuration school, not evocation.