Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 6830314" data-attributes="member: 32740">Assuming the creature is declared large enough to completely block that hole and in fact IS declared to be blocking it.  Just because it's a big creature and a tiny hole it might not.  But that determination would be largely up to a DM's judgement.Again, the rules don't care about movement.  Either the hole is obstructed or it isn't and that's a DM's call.  There aren't mechanics for making that kind of determination.  If there's a 5' wide wall, with a 3' wide door, and a 12"x12" hole in that door, but a monster standing in the 5' square on the other side of that door - there isn't a rule that determines whether that creature IS or ISN'T blocking that hole in the door.  Fireball has a specific reference to attempting to cast it through an arrow slit or "narrow passage".  That is NOT meant to be a rule generally applied to a busy, confused battlefield.  It means that in a 50 square foot wall - if there's a hole that's only 1 square foot you need to make a ranged touch attack to get it through it.  Doesn't talk about people dancing in front of it. occupying the space in front of it, or the space 40' in front of it between the caster and the wall... etc.  The rest of the time you'd just follow normal rules for targeting a spell.  Now I may be getting those incorrect as I'm hardly a rules lawyer of 3.5 mechanics, but I'm pretty sure that if you're the DM and you believe there needs to be difficulties in targeting a Fireball added on for whatever reasons then that's your own lookout.  The rules don't call for any special difficulties for it over and above any other spell.What matters is what YOU say if you're the DM.  The rules say nothing about it.  For myself, yeah, as a DM I'd say that a 1 foot square opening needs to be AN OPENING.  By definition, if there are substantive bars dividing that 12"x12" hole then it's NOT a 12"x12" hole - it's four 6"x6" holes and therefore does not qualify.Completely NOT covered by the rules.  DM's should adjudicate as they see fit.  Myself, I'd probably just assign a % chance that the spell is incorrectly timed, but maybe adjust that for the caster's dexterity, or level or something.To repeat, the fact that a fireball CAN detonate prematurely between caster and point of origin IS ABOUT the possibility of UNSEEN things.If the caster truly has line-of-effect (which is functionally equivalent to line-of-sight) to the point of origin then it gets to where the caster wanted it to go.  Since the ogre is invisible, as DM I'd make the determination about line-of-effect, same as line-of-sight.  To wit: draw an imaginary line between the caster's space and the target space.  If the line is not blocked then the spell gets through.  If the ogre blocks it then the spell impacts on the ogre and the fun begins.  Given the description of the situation that sounds like it'd be the case.Again, the rules have nothing to say about things being blocked "part of the time."  It's either blocked or it isn't.  There is either cover, or there isn't.  A creature is either in the square or it isn't.  If the DM insists that the situation is something not covered by those rules then it's the DM's position to decide how to handle that.What I am attempting to do is present the answer that the rules indicate - or to demonstrate that the rules simply do not HAVE an answer.  If you determine that I've read and applied the rules incorrectly then good for you.  Frankly, I'd personally be as likely to ignore RULES and just go with what seems sensible, because rules don't know or care about my game or the details of a given situation.  They present defaults of what to do in as many COMMON situations as are reasonable to address.  INEVITABLY, you'll either be forced to alter conditions to something the rules DO cover, or forced to supply your own rules to cover what the written rules don't.And that's why I mentioned that in circumstances where the rules DO want to take into account movement for something, then they do.  Flanking is changed from a physical POSITION to a CIRCUMSTANCE.Yes, however spells don't generally function by hitting AC.  They function by either being successfully cast or completely disrupted, and then the consideration of a saving throw.  Fireball has a special LIMITATION in that it requires clear line-of-effect to the point of origin or detonates prematurely.  That's unusual.  Most spells simply FAIL if there is a line of effect requirement.  And it literally has a loophole!  A square foot sized loophole that it can be cast through.  That's 49 square foot out of 50 square feet can be SOLID WALL and you can still get that spell through (with a ranged touch attack).  That's 98% solid wall.  If it's 48 square feet out of 50... well it has nothing to really say about that specifically.It is meant as an indication that creatures just do not block as much of a space as many people seem to think they do (or want them to).  I say that a size L, 4-square occupying creature still doesn't block 96% of it's squares and you can still get spells, arrows, and even tiny creatures past them without needing to leap through DM-specially-added hoops.  As I read them, the rules say so too.  By all means, correct me if I'm wrong.  This isn't a matter of pride or one-upsmanship.  I'm honestly trying to help.Again, I believe I pointed out that where the rules DO want to take into account simultaneous movement they do so.The 3.5 rules are all about making it more mechanical.  Pretty sure the intention was to ELIMINATE confusion and arguments about who is where, and "but he's MOVING AROUND the whole time...", and so forth.No.  A character's hide and move silent checks are generally made on the characters own turn.  On other individuals turns in the initiative order, those results may be used in opposed checks or whatnot.  If my PC comes across another character that was not ALREADY moving silently - and thus had already made the required OPPOSED check - then that character IS where it is, and is NOT moving silently.  If I want to attack him then it does not matter where he was, where he's going, how fast he's moving, etc.  He is where he is.  My PC can then move into range to attack, if he is not in range already.  Barring special abilities to act out of initiative the player of that other character doesn't get to object and say, "But I'm MOVING AROUND!  In fact, I'm moving 100 times faster than you!  There's no way you could possibly catch me!"  The rules don't care.  NEXT round that character can be out of range.  THIS ROUND he's mine.  That's simply how the rules work because it's easier than the alternatives.Well the important answers to those questions have to be largely supplied by you.  WAS there a stalagmite in the way or not?  Was there line of effect or not?  Was the caster to be permitted to accurately remember what he saw before the darkness came down or not?  3.5 uses squares and battlemats and so forth to eliminate those questions.  When the DM lays out the battlefield, the locations of everything are obvious to everyone at the game table.  If the player is allowed to see the battlefield, and then due to darkness part of that battlefield becomes hidden, how are you as DM supposed to FORCE a player to forget what HE saw?  3E would basically take the position that as long as the PLAYER can remember what was where then he gets to have his PC place a spell where he wants it for maximum effect.  If the DM wanted to prevent that then maybe the DM needed a better plan for how the encounter was going to unfold.Yep.  He places it where he wanted to, even though he couldn't SEE it through the illusionary wall - unless things moved behind that wall, unseen, to be able to block line of effect.  Assume that illusionary wall WASN'T there at all.  Would he have been able to place it as desired?  Sure.  So then it should NOT impact on anything unexpected - unless between the time of having SEEN what was behind the wall to the time of when he actually cast the Fireball through it something moved that DID block line of effect - in which case it would hit that instead.</blockquote>

Verification