Casting spells from prone? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Casting spells from prone? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
starchildren3317
01-24-07, 11:27 AM Hello everyone.

I had a rules question that I need a ruling on and I don't have my books on me at the moment.

Can you cast spells from prone? If so, are there any penalties? Do you have to make a check to do so?

Thanks all.
Zherog
01-24-07, 11:29 AM Yes, you can cast while prone. While prone, you suffer a -4 AC penalty vs melee attacks and receive a +4 AC bonus vs ranged attacks. You do not need to make any special checks to cast while prone.
High Octane
01-24-07, 11:46 AM Personally I think there should be a concentration check involved, but the RAW say there is none.
Seeker95
01-24-07, 01:19 PM the RAW say there is none.Does RAW explicitly say a concentration check is not needed?
Or does RAW simply not mention that one is needed?

If the former, then it is clearly RAW.
If the latter, then this could easily fall under the rules for circumstance bonuses and penalties.
High Octane
01-24-07, 01:51 PM Does RAW explicitly say a concentration check is not needed?
Or does RAW simply not mention that one is needed?

If the former, then it is clearly RAW.
If the latter, then this could easily fall under the rules for circumstance bonuses and penalties.
Nothing in the RAW suggests it or prevents it. By default most people assume that the penalties associated with a condition are limited to those stated in the conditions summary.

Rule 0 however, is universal.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
starchildren3317 01-24-07, 11:27 AM	Hello everyone. I had a rules question that I need a ruling on and I don't have my books on me at the moment. Can you cast spells from prone? If so, are there any penalties? Do you have to make a check to do so? Thanks all.
Zherog 01-24-07, 11:29 AM	Yes, you can cast while prone. While prone, you suffer a -4 AC penalty vs melee attacks and receive a +4 AC bonus vs ranged attacks. You do not need to make any special checks to cast while prone.
High Octane 01-24-07, 11:46 AM	Personally I think there should be a concentration check involved, but the RAW say there is none.
Seeker95 01-24-07, 01:19 PM	the RAW say there is none.Does RAW explicitly say a concentration check is not needed? Or does RAW simply not mention that one is needed? If the former, then it is clearly RAW. If the latter, then this could easily fall under the rules for circumstance bonuses and penalties.
High Octane 01-24-07, 01:51 PM	Does RAW explicitly say a concentration check is not needed? Or does RAW simply not mention that one is needed? If the former, then it is clearly RAW. If the latter, then this could easily fall under the rules for circumstance bonuses and penalties. Nothing in the RAW suggests it or prevents it. By default most people assume that the penalties associated with a condition are limited to those stated in the conditions summary. Rule 0 however, is universal.