Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 1040713" data-attributes="member: 284">No problem.&nbsp;&nbsp; But I do think you are making this far more complicated than it needs to be. The line is only 120' long.&nbsp;&nbsp; Can't affect anything beyond that range (as stated in range definition on page 174-175 of the PHB). PHB, page 175, last paragraph: &quot;A line spell shoots away from you in a line in the direction you designate&quot;&nbsp; Hitting the two squares to the side of the origin, or the casters square, would not be &quot;away from you&quot;, it would be towards you or to your side.&nbsp;&nbsp; I acknowledged that &quot;fact&quot; in my last post.&nbsp; I just don't think it's contradictory evidence, because the line extends away from the point of origin. And that doesn't contradict my position, it's simply a different rule that limits the area.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm concerned about the&nbsp; area within the range, not any square that might theoretically extend beyond it.&nbsp; In fact, this supports my case.&nbsp; 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..&nbsp; &nbsp; By mine, it would afect 46 squares. By both our definitions, a line that extends straight out along the gridline would affect 48 squares.&nbsp;&nbsp; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Caliban, post: 1040713, member: 284"] No problem. But I do think you are making this far more complicated than it needs to be. [b][/b] 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). [b][/b] PHB, page 175, last paragraph: "A line spell [b]shoots away from you[/b] 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. [b][/b] I acknowledged that "fact" in my last post. I just don't think it's contradictory evidence, because the line extends [b]away[/b] from the point of origin. [b][/b] 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, [b]in either direction[/b], 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification