How wide is a "line", i.e. Lightning Bolt?

[Waldo]

A line isn't really an area, being 1 dimensional instead of two-dimensional (when viewed on the 2-D grid).

The "Line" effect is new to 3.5, and uses a different rule than those for other "Area" effects.

Drivel.

We all know what a lightning bolt is supposed to look like, it is hardly one-dimensional. And there's nothing in the rules to suggest it behaves differently from other 'area' types.

Lightning Bolt
Evocation [Electricity]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 120 ft.
Area: 120-ft. line
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes

"Line" is not an effect. It is an area, regardless on the technical aspects of your grid. It is listed in the 'Area' section of the magic overview, almost immediately after "If the spell’s area only touches the near edge of a square, however, anything within that square is unaffected by the spell".

It then goes on to say:

A line-shaped spell shoots away from you in a line in the direction you designate. It starts from any corner of your square and extends to the limit of its range or until it strikes a barrier that blocks line of effect. A line-shaped spell affects all creatures in squares that the line passes through.

The diagram on PH pg. 176 that you reference so often doesn't show the four squares around the origin of the spell being affected. If your assumption was true, then all those squares would be part of the spell's area. The line needs to reach the far side of a square to affect it. I will grant that it affects four squares at intersections.

 

[Caliban]

Drivel.

No, actually it's mathematical fact. Sorry if that's difficult for you to accept.

We all know what a lightning bolt is supposed to look like, it is hardly one-dimensional. And there's nothing in the rules to suggest it behaves differently from other 'area' types.

I though I said it was one-dimensional when viewed on the 2-dimensional battle-grid. I'm almost certain I said that.

"Line" is not an effect. It is an area, regardless on the technical aspects of your grid. It is listed in the 'Area' section of the magic overview, almost immediately after "If the spell’s area only touches the near edge of a square, however, anything within that square is unaffected by the spell".

Sorry, I used incorrect terminolgy in the interest of brevity. However, it is true that the "Line" area is defined differently than other areas.

It then goes on to say:

Or touches, as the text in the diagram states, and the diagram itself illustrates.

The diagram on PH pg. 176 that you reference so often doesn't show the four squares around the origin of the spell being affected.

That would probably be because the spell states that it starts at your hand and continues out from there. Really, you should pay attention to these little details. Especially if you are going to be using loaded terms like "ridiculous" and "drivel" in your response. They really don't help to promote a reasoned discussion, you know.

But I suppose you think that's just more ridiculous drivel.

If your assumption was true, then all those squares would be part of the spell's area.

Afraid not. The origin point isn't included, as indicated by the diagram.

The line needs to reach the far side of a square to affect it. I will grant that it affects four squares at intersections.

Wow, thank you for granting that, since it specifically shows that in the diagram.

And speaking of "ridiculous drivel", your interpretation would mean that if the line extended straight out from your square, it wouldn't affect any of the squares between the origin and the selected 4-way intersection...

 

[Waldo]

First, I'd like to cool it down. I had bad day and I was feeling argumentive. I apologize for that. But...

Sorry, I used incorrect terminolgy in the interest of brevity. However, it is true that the "Line" area is defined differently than other areas.

You keep saying this, but I don't see where this is actually stated. The diagram is the only place that contains "Or touches" and it doesn't say, "The origin point isn't included" nor does the text, and it doesn't show the end of the line affecting squares beyond its reach, even though the tip of the arrow reaches the other end of the last square. If we assume it affects any square it touches, ignoring the rest of the area rules, that would include the two squares to the side of the origin, and the square at the tip of arrow (and the caster's square, but that's obviously not the case).

That would probably be because the spell states that it starts at your hand and continues out from there. Really, you should pay attention to these little details.

A line begins at an intersection, like all spells. You could cast it from any body part or anywhere else and the intersection is all that's important. Your hand probably isn't at the intersection, it's in the square somewhere. It's also a 5' wide path of destruction at your fingertips. All random things we can't really determine from rules. Either way, you're not acknowledging the fact that the line touches those squares and doesn't affect them. You're using the diagram both ways. It's contradictory evidence.

In addition, the range of Lightning Bolt, as well and the area, is 120 feet. "If any portion of the spell’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted", so those squares at the end are out of range and aren't affected. I haven't found another line spell in my quick glance to see if some have larger ranges than areas.

And speaking of "ridiculous drivel", your interpretation would mean that if the line extended straight out from your square, it wouldn't affect any of the squares between the origin and the selected 4-way intersection...

Not true. The line would touch the 'far side' of all of those squares. That's all that matters in my interpretation, since intersections count, as our diagram shows. The diagram doesn't show the line just meeting an intersection and then affecting the far squares. That's all.

 

[Waldo]

The only other spells with line areas that I found (I could have easily missed some) were:

Repel Metal or Stone
Abjuration [Earth]
Level: Drd 8
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Area: 60-ft. line from you
Duration: 1 round/level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

Repel Wood
Transmutation
Level: Drd 6, Plant 6
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Area: 60-ft. line-shaped emanation from you
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

Sunbeam
Evocation [Light]
Level: Drd 7, Sun 7
Components: V, S, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Area: Line from your hand
Duration: 1 round/level or until all beams are exhausted
Saving Throw: Reflex negates and Reflex half; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

None of them list an area greater than that of the range. I would suggest that to mean the furthest such a spell could reach would be that range, just like the other spells.

I have no further arguement if people don't agree with that. I wouldn't know where to start.

 

[Andion Isurand]

Gust of Wind is another such line spell.

And many Dragon Breath Weapons have 'line' areas of effect.

My favorite Breath Weapon is Bahamut's Disitigration Beam.
( 5 ft. x 5 ft. x 180 ft. long ) & ( Fort DC 60 )

 

[Waldo]

Thanks, Andion,

Gust of Wind
Evocation [Air]
Level: Drd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 60 ft.
Effect: Line-shaped gust of severe wind emanating out from you to the extreme of the range
Duration: 1 round
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
This spell creates a severe blast of air (approximately 50 mph) that originates from you, affecting all creatures in its path.
A Tiny or smaller creature on the ground is knocked down and rolled 1d4x10 feet, taking 1d4 points of nonlethal damage per 10 feet. If flying, a Tiny or smaller creature is blown back 2d6x10 feet and takes 2d6 points of nonlethal damage due to battering and buffeting.
Small creatures are knocked prone by the force of the wind, or if flying are blown back 1d6x10 feet.
Medium creatures are unable to move forward against the force of the wind, or if flying are blown back 1d6x5 feet.
Large or larger creatures may move normally within a gust of wind effect.
A gust of wind can’t move a creature beyond the limit of its range.

Interestingly enough, I missed this spell because it lists its line as an 'effect', not an area. I'm not sure why they would list it that way, perhaps there's a nuance I'm missing. Hopefully not one that will invalidate earlier assumptions. But again, it can't effect creatures beyond its range.

My favorite Breath Weapon is Bahamut's Disitigration Beam that is ( 5 ft. x 5 ft. x 180 ft. ) long ( Fort DC 60 )

3.0, right? It's interesting that they changed the way lines work for 3.5. Maybe they felt this way was less confusing

And Bahamut has always been a personal favorite, though I never acquired a 3.5 stat block for him.

 

[Caliban]

First, I'd like to cool it down. I had bad day and I was feeling argumentive. I apologize for that. But...

No problem. But I do think you are making this far more complicated than it needs to be.

You keep saying this, but I don't see where this is actually stated. The diagram is the only place that contains "Or touches" and it doesn't say, "The origin point isn't included" nor does the text, and it doesn't show the end of the line affecting squares beyond its reach, even though the tip of the arrow reaches the other end of the last square.

The line is only 120' long. Can't affect anything beyond that range (as stated in range definition on page 174-175 of the PHB).

If we assume it affects any square it touches, ignoring the rest of the area rules, that would include the two squares to the side of the origin, and the square at the tip of arrow (and the caster's square, but that's obviously not the case).

PHB, page 175, last paragraph: "A line spell shoots away from you in a line in the direction you designate" Hitting the two squares to the side of the origin, or the casters square, would not be "away from you", it would be towards you or to your side.

A line begins at an intersection, like all spells. You could cast it from any body part or anywhere else and the intersection is all that's important. Your hand probably isn't at the intersection, it's in the square somewhere. It's also a 5' wide path of destruction at your fingertips. All random things we can't really determine from rules. Either way, you're not acknowledging the fact that the line touches those squares and doesn't affect them. You're using the diagram both ways. It's contradictory evidence.

I acknowledged that "fact" in my last post. I just don't think it's contradictory evidence, because the line extends away from the point of origin.

In addition, the range of Lightning Bolt, as well and the area, is 120 feet. "If any portion of the spell’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted", so those squares at the end are out of range and aren't affected.

And that doesn't contradict my position, it's simply a different rule that limits the area. I'm concerned about the area within the range, not any square that might theoretically extend beyond it.

In fact, this supports my case. range of the spell is exactly 120', starting at one of the corners of the casters square, and can't extend beyond that range, in either direction, which would preclude if from hitting the caster's square, or the adjacent squares.

Also, try looking at it another way:

By your interpretation, a line that extends exactly from diagonal to diagonal out to the limit of it's range would only affect 16 squares, missing everything in eveyr ajacent square.. By mine, it would afect 46 squares.

By both our definitions, a line that extends straight out along the gridline would affect 48 squares.

Do you really think it is intended that a diagonal line should only affect 1/3 the area of a straight line?

I would tend to think the interpretation that gives nearly equal area of effect no matter which direction you shoot the line in is most likely to be correct.

 

[Andion Isurand]

A spell from the WotC web site (Pre - 3.5)

Sonic Blast
Evocation [Sonic]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Area: 5 ft. wide to close range (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes

You generate a deadly beam of sonic energy from your outstretched hand that deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 10d6) to each creature within its area.

The sonic blast may shove creatures in the area back along the path of the spell. Any creature failing its saving throw must make a Strength check (DC equal to damage inflicted by the spell); those who fail find themselves bull rushed directly away from the caster as if by a Large creature with a Strength score equal to the damage the spell inflicted. The spell moves with the target; see the bull rush description in Chapter Eight of the Player's Handbook for details on attacks of opportunity, stability modifiers, etc.

If a creature is shoved back into a solid barrier such as a wall or a strong door, the creature sustains an additional 1d4 points of bludgeoning damage.

Like a lightning bolt, the sonic blast damages or destroys objects in its path. If the damage caused to an interposing barrier such as a closed door shatters or breaks through it, the sonic blast may continue beyond the barrier if the spell's range permits; otherwise, it stops at the barrier.

Material Components: A tiny glass cone.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Also, check the Shout and Great Shout spells.... I am not sure, but I think they have a primary "line" area effect centered within a secondary "cone" area effect.

 

[allenw]

Lots of interesting replies here; thanks!

Gust of Wind is another such line spell.

And many Dragon Breath Weapons have 'line' areas of effect.

My favorite Breath Weapon is Bahamut's Disitigration Beam.
( 5 ft. x 5 ft. x 180 ft. long ) & ( Fort DC 60 )

As I noted in my original post, the MM 3.5 lists a Dragon breath weapon "line" as being "5' wide and 5' high"... but it also lists a Dragon breath weapon "cone" as being "as high and wide as it's length," rather than a quarter-circle like a 3.5 "cone" spell, so it's apparent that it's still using the 3.0 definitions.

Apart from the issue of what happens at the endpoints, are we agreed that the conceptual effect of a "line" spell is supposed to be a line 10' wide out to the maximum range of the spell? That's what I get from the picture on PHB p. 176 and its accompanying text. None of which is in the SRD, alas.

 

[Waldo]

Caliban... we totally agree. That's sort of sad.

My response with problems about range came from:

Ah, right! The same thing applies to the second line: it should be affecting all the squares that touch its endpoints. That makes it affect 13 squares, which is close enough for me. (Watch me conveniently ignore the way this includes the caster's space.)

This number includes the squares around the caster and the 4 squares at the final intersection. I thought you were supporting this theory when you disagreed with my next post, in which I wasn't specific about why the 'far side' was important. You aren't. My fault. I was trying to maintain that the line couldn't affect squares it just touched at the end of its area or range simply by the means of "squares it touches" rule in the illustration. I was not saying that the first diagram didn't affect 14 squares, I had decided this was correct. I attempted to use the fact that the line 'touched' the other squares near the caster, and they were still unaffected according to the PH illustration, to invalidate the former idea. Unfortunately, you didn't have that idea at all.

PHB, page 175, last paragraph: "A line spell shoots away from you in a line in the direction you designate" Hitting the two squares to the side of the origin, or the casters square, would not be "away from you", it would be towards you or to your side.

I've always agreed with this, but the rules seem inconsistent. So this doesn't follow the 'touching' rule because of a somantic rule? Dicey way to write rules. I guess that's why we get pictures.

By your interpretation, a line that extends exactly from diagonal to diagonal out to the limit of it's range would only affect 16 squares, missing everything in eveyr ajacent square.. By mine, it would afect 46 squares.

No no. The reason I initially refuted the intersection rule was because it made the numbers so different according to the diagrams in this thread. Once I accepted that a 10' wide line was affected when going straight (18 squares in my example), I accepted that intersections include all 4 squares, because the number of affected squares remained close with those assumptions. That was way back at:

Well, that's interesting. If you let it affect 18 in both scenarios, then the numbers would be the same.

Assuming that fireball fills 40 squares as a 20 foot radius, and lightning bolt is 120' line. If lightning bolt affected both sides of the line, then it would affect (120/5 * 2) 48 squares. About the same number. Being similarly powered spells, that seems reasonable.

I'm willing to go with that.

Although now the diagonal is 16, because of the range limitation.

I would tend to think the interpretation that gives nearly equal area of effect no matter which direction you shoot the line in is most likely to be correct.

I thought that's what I was trying to do That's exactly why I joined this thread. I thought it silly that a straight version of the 4th illustration was 9 squares at best and a diagonal version was 18. That seemed absurd. Now that the straight version does 18 and the diagonal does 16, everything's groovy. But I note that some non-straight versions (that aren't at 45 degrees) will still have varying numbers of squares, most even further below the 45 degree angle.

Man, we could have finished this a long time ago. I wish I had realized that your first assessment actually matched what I came to agree with during the beginning of the thread. Sorry about the confusion, and the earlier snippiness. At least I learned from this thread, unlike many others.