Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rel" data-source="post: 1389768" data-attributes="member: 99">I don't strongly disagree with your position, Michael, but it seems like it could lead to some rather odd and potentially abusive situations.  If the player can simply indicate that he casts it "down the passage", sight unseen, is there anything stopping him from further defining the area of effect?  Can he say, "I cast it down the passage.  If the passage forks or there's an intersection, I want the spell to extend down each side passage equally.  If there are any rooms along the passage, I want it to fill those too."If that is allowable, I think it makes spells like this much more powerful.  What if you Enlarged it?  At that point, a Druid (or Earth Cleric) could walk up to the mouth of a cave, without ever having been inside it, and simply cast this spell inside, effecting the first 8,800 square feet (I'm assuming an 11th level caster like the PC in my group).  This renders the cave pretty much uninhabitable for non-flying creatures for the next 11 hours!I'm leaning pretty strongly away from that interpretation.  What I allowed in the actual event was for him to cast the spell "in a straight line down the passage".  That meant that it effected an area further than he could actually see or knew about.  But the spell did not adapt itself to local conditions without the guidance of the caster.  When the passage curved, the effects of the spell did not curve with it.I'd love to hear any other opinions on this matter.</blockquote>

Verification