Push+Wall=save

[Henry]

Its all hindering terrain. Breaking this rule makes all sorts of ridiculous crazy possible. Breaking this rule makes wizards ridiculously overpowered.

CS is wrong.

So are you saying that if a saving throw isn't allowed, people will suddenly rush to play wizards who otherwise wouldn't?

In my experience, Wizards have been the "cleric" of 4th edition: A class that a group probably should have one of, but it seems NO ONE wants to play one. I suspect it's because some DMs aren't using minions often enough, but it's true. I had to give the Wizard player in our game a few perks (like allowing him to cast his dailies and utilities like a 3e sorcerer, basically) so that he didn't quit in frustration.

That said, it's correct -- hindering terrain of ANY sort should get a save.

 

[useridunavailable]

Breaking this rule makes wizards ridiculously overpowered.

There are other ways to make wizards ridiculously overpowered, such as the way I described in the post above yours - you just have to get a little more creative. My wizard routinely deals way more damage than anyone else in the party, which includes 2 optimized strikers, albeit generally distributed among several creatures. Of course, you could consider some of the Blood Pulse damage as theirs for causing the movement in some cases, but I still make it possible. However, ignoring the hindering terrain rules makes it far too easy.

CS is wrong.

This is quite obvious. The definition of hindering terrain very, very clearly pertains to damaging zones and walls. It would absolutely require official errata for any argument with this fact to hold any water - WotC CS emails just won't cut it because it's totally contradictory to RAW.

There is, however, another way to abuse Wall of Fire in a similar fashion. It's not quite as nasty, but neither is pushing creatures into it really if you remember that squares containing Wall of Fire cost 4 to enter (even through forced movement):

1. Make sure you have an action point. If you're a Human or Half-Elf with Action Surge, all the better.

2. Cast Wall of Fire on top of as many enemies as you can hit.

3. Spend and action point (again, Action Surge is nice here).

4. Cast any spell which immobilizes creatures on as many creatures in the Wall of Fire as you can hit (Blast of Cold, Evard's Black Tentacles, and of course Legion's Hold all work nicely, although Mesmeric Hold will do in a pinch). In most cases, Spell Focus is a nice feat to have here.

5. Get your allies to help you immobilize anything you miss.

6. Watch your enemies burn to a crisp.

 

[Goumindong]

Once they see the power of ongoing effects, yes. The power of stinking cloud, firewall, et all is such that if you can push into them without issue, the ability of a group of wizards to produce these effects for every battle you can reasonably expect them to fight in simply makes them too strong.

Your optimal party would be a pair of 20 int, str/con staff wizard up front(or a 18 int dwarf). Two high wisdom good dex elves in the rear[for arcane reach and high quality push effects]. Everyone takes a leader multi-class to shore up healing.

It makes wizards into strikers. Its a bad idea.

 

[Caliban]

I agree that damaging spell effects meet the definition of Hindering Terrain on page 61 of the DMG. That doesn't necessarily mean that they ARE Hindering Terrain though.

Since the PHB doesn't mention anything at all about Hindering Terrain I thought that there was a chance it didn't apply to player created effects, because it's poor design to have a rule that directly impacts a player power in a completely different book without even making a reference to it in the PHB.

So I asked CS to see if I could get a clarification. I got one, and I happen to agree with it. And until I see something more official, that's what I'm going with, inspite of how awesomely, ridiculously, overpowered and broken wizards instantly become.

(Although in many cases giving all your allies combat advantage against somone you knocked prone because they made their save would probably be even better than the damage the spell effect would have done. At least in my opinion. I mainly wanted to know what tactics I should be using with my high-wisdom wizard - I'm not emotionally invested in the answer.)

 

[useridunavailable]

I agree that damaging spell effects meet the definition of Hindering Terrain on page 61 of the DMG. That doesn't necessarily mean that they ARE Hindering Terrain though.

Since the PHB doesn't mention anything at all about Hindering Terrain I thought that there was a chance it didn't apply to player created effects, because it's poor design to have a rule that directly impacts a player power in a completely different book without even making a reference to it in the PHB.

So I asked CS to see if I could get a clarification. I got one, and I happen to agree with it. And until I see something more official, that's what I'm going with, inspite of how awesomely, ridiculously, overpowered and broken wizards instantly become.

(Although in many cases giving all your allies combat advantage against somone you knocked prone because they made their save would probably be even better than the damage the spell effect would have done. At least in my opinion. I mainly wanted to know what tactics I should be using with my high-wisdom wizard - I'm not emotionally invested in the answer.)

That's fine, although you're admitting to ignoring a clearly stated rule in favor of a CSR response. That said, you can play it however you want - it is your badwrongfun, after all.
[/sarcasm]

 

[Caliban]

That's fine, although you're admitting to ignoring a clearly stated rule in favor of a CSR response. That said, you can play it however you want - it is your badwrongfun, after all.
[/sarcasm]

Wow, your being quite rude. The fake sarcasm tag doesn't make any less rude.

It is not a clearly stated rule. If it was, would actually state that damaging spell effects are Hindering Terrain. It does not state that anywhere.

If it was a clearly stated rule, it would also be mentioned in the PHB, on page 285 under the Forced Movement rules.

If it was a clearly stated rule, the Hindering Terrain definition on page 61 of the DMG would mention that you get a save. It does not.

And the whole section on terrain features is in the Building Encounters - do you use PC spells to build encounters?

Instead, the rule is mentioned on page 44 in the section on forced movement and terrain.

The more I look into it, the more it seems like a few people are taking a rule out of its context and trying to apply it universally when it's meant specifically apply to terrain features, not temporary spell effects.

So no, I don't think that Customer Service is wrong in this instance. They have actually had a pretty good track record with 4e questions, which is a big improvement of their 3e answers.

And quite frankly, I trust CS more than I trust your opinion right now. So far all you and Goumin have done is chant "I'm right! I''m right! Your wrong! Your wrong!". Hardly convincing.

 

[useridunavailable]

I agree that damaging spell effects meet the definition of Hindering Terrain on page 61 of the DMG.

Does it meet the definition of hindering terrain? Yes. Do you admit that it does? Yes. Therefore, the definition of hindering terrain - and the rules surrounding it - clearly apply to damaging spell effects, regardless of where they're printed. It is your decision to ignore what you yourself have stated to be true. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably not a pig.

Wow, your being quite rude. The fake sarcasm tag doesn't make any less rude.

The "fake" sarcasm was intended to apply to the "badwrongfun" part of my post. I was totally kidding about it. It's your fun - if you like it that way, then please go ahead and play it that way. I have absolutely no problem with it. I apologize for offending you.

 

[Caliban]

Does it meet the definition of hindering terrain? Yes. Do you admit that it does? Yes. Therefore, the definition of hindering terrain - and the rules surrounding it - clearly apply to damaging spell effects, regardless of where they're printed.

No they don't clearly appy, and the location of the rule is relevent. If damaging spell effects were terrain, then they would be hindering terrain. To me, it was unclear whether or not spell effects were intended to be considered terrain features. You assume spell effects are terrain features, and will not accept any other answer and have been quite rude when anyone suggests otherwise.

I asked CS, their response indicates that damaging spell effects are not considered terrain features for the purposes of the forced movement rules. You may disagree with that, but telling me I'm wrong and ignoring the clearly stated rules is innaccurate and rude. The rules are not as clear as you assume they are, and where the rule in question is located is indeed relevent.

The "fake" sarcasm was intended to apply to the "badwrongfun" part of my post. I was totally kidding about it. It's your fun - if you like it that way, then please go ahead and play it that way. I have absolutely no problem with it. I apologize for offending you.

apology accepted.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I play (and run) in the RPGA and we have to stick to official rulings as much as possible.

I thoguht the RPGA were relying more on individual discretion of the DM at the table, these days?

-Hyp.

 

[keterys]

They are, but that doesn't mean "use whatever house rules you want". So there's a bit of give and take there.