The Sage speaks re: Blade Barrier

[Sagiro]

I considered putting this in the Rules forum, but it also contains a micro-spoiler for 3.5e.

In this thread there was speculation on the specific rules for the blade barrier spell, particularly concerning ongoing damage for creatures who remain in the area of effect over multiple rounds.

Since blade barrier is used fairly often in both games with which I'm involved, I sent this question to the Sage:

A strict letter-of-the-law interpretation of the blade barrier spell indicates that a creature standing in its area (and who fails a save) only takes damage a single time. (The wording "entering or passing through" doesn't seem to include "remaining in.")

This leads to the counterintuitive notion that a character can stand in a horizontal waist-high blade barrier for round after round and take no damage beyond that suffered on the round the spell was cast. Is this correct?

The Sage's answer was terse as usual, but it included a 3.5e spoiler:

No. After the revision comes out, blade barriers have to be vertical.

Make of that what you will!

-Sagiro

 

[paulewaug]

Now it is more like an actual barrier than it was in 3.0,
more of a "Blade Wall".

I'm good with that

 

[RangerWickett]

I bet there's one poor Trillith that wishes he'd fought the PCs during 3.5 edition rules.

 

[Hypersmurf]

After the revision comes out, blade barriers have to be vertical.

So... if a 3.5 ogre with the 10x10 face stands in a 2x2 square block which is bisected by a vertical 3.5 Blade Barrier for several rounds, does he take damage each round?

-Hyp.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The Sage's answer was terse as usual, but it included a 3.5e spoiler:

No. After the revision comes out, blade barriers have to be vertical.

Make of that what you will!

It sounds like good news to me - it turns the spell into a fantastic defensive spell rather than one of the most dangerous attack spells in the spell lexicon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: The Sage speaks re: Blade Barrier

It sounds like good news to me - it turns the spell into a fantastic defensive spell rather than one of the most dangerous attack spells in the spell lexicon.

Although with the change, I'd like to see it dropped to a 1 action casting time...

-Hyp.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I agree like this it doesn't need more than a 1 aciton casting time. Before if you read it the hypersmurf way it was roughly balanced, read the caliban way it was insanely overpowered for its level. I stil think the caliban way was the intent of the spell, but that was way too much for a 6th level cleric spell.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

No. After the revision comes out, blade barriers have to be vertical.

well, that at least makes the save language sound sane... under the prior use, you could move up to 20 feet as a reflex save, or wait for a move equivelent action to drop prone...

Kahuna Burger

 

[Caliban]

I agree like this it doesn't need more than a 1 aciton casting time. Before if you read it the hypersmurf way it was roughly balanced, read the caliban way it was insanely overpowered for its level. I stil think the caliban way was the intent of the spell, but that was way too much for a 6th level cleric spell.

I don't know, every time I've encountered an enemy cleric who tried to cast the spell, they got clobbered before they could get it off.

Most PC clerics I've seen don't bother preparing it for that reason.

 

[Piratecat]

I don't know, every time I've encountered an enemy cleric who tried to cast the spell, they got clobbered before they could get it off.

Most PC clerics I've seen don't bother preparing it for that reason.

Unless.. ahem.. both the experienced player AND the experienced DM didn't notice that it took a full round to cast.

Not that this would ever happen.

Or anything.