Area Spells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Area Spells [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Fanix2112
03-13-07, 05:53 PM The other night I was playing DnD and a caster cast Ice Storm against me and my teammate.
The Dm rolled dmg for each person seperatly.
I know its pretty much however the Dm wants to play it, but as a general rule do you roll one set of damage and work off it? Or individually for each target?

I personally think you roll one set of dice, but it would be nice for some more feedback.
Vegepygmy
03-13-07, 06:45 PM One damage roll for everyone. Combat already takes long enough that way.
cwslyclgh
03-13-07, 07:24 PM for me one damage roll and apply it to everybody in cases like that... it would take way to much time otherwise.
SALDAR
03-13-07, 07:34 PM An area spell is a single attack so you would roll damage once.
Seeker95
03-13-07, 09:16 PM There is no explicit rule indicating your DM did anything wrong. But as others said, it would probably take too long to make this the norm. I would rule against it, not for "correctness" but rather, for efficiency.
Myree
03-18-07, 02:13 AM Not counting the valid "takes too long" argument, I would (and have) personally lean towards a separate roll for each. The reason is that I like to keep a realistic feel to the encounters, and anytime something like this happens, not everyone is effected equally. For example, the <explenitive withheld> individuals who blew up the chlorine gas attack in Iraq -- roughly equivalent to a Cloud Kill spell in my mind (and the same applies to any fireball/rocket-powered grenade, etc.). Well, some people near ground zero got the full brunt, where others didn't -- maybe they had a little extra cover, or were a few feet (but not a whole square) further, or maybe an errant breeze gave them more or less dose than someone else. This is more than just the case where a saving throw halves or eliminates damage -- no some of them took a serious hit like all high rolls, and others seemed to include a few ones in those rolls. Each individual can be impacted or avoid the force in an individual manner, so an individual roll best indicates how that would be done in "game mechanics".

But that is just my 2 cp...
DrMorganes
03-18-07, 02:33 AM In my opinion, Myree, that's what the saving throw covers. I'm in the "one damage roll for everyone" camp.
Firestick42
03-18-07, 02:38 AM Not that Neverwinter Nights is by any means an official source, but it rolls damage for each creature separately.

As for myself, I always thought you should roll damage for each creature separately as well. It's not one attack, it's a separate attack against each creature affected by the spell. As for speeding up the damage calculations for spells, I'd suggest something I read in one of the articles on the main site: take the average of 2/3 of the dice you deal, and roll the last 1/3. So a 9d6 fireball would deal 3d6+21. Less dice rolling anyway, though it reduces randomness and therefore favors the PC's.
Seeker95
03-18-07, 08:52 AM Not that Neverwinter Nights is by any means an official source, but it rolls damage for each creature separately.A computer has the advantage of being able to do this in much less time than a living DM.
SunTzuWarmaster
03-18-07, 11:24 AM I think damage should be rolled separately for everyone sometimes, and group-wise at other times. What is important is that you decide before you roll. If the DM cast a spell, rolled bad and then decided to roll separately, that is bad. If you e the time, I think individual damage is more fun/flavorful.

However, if my DM told me that I had to roll individual damage against the goblin horde from a 9th level fireball, I would tell him which pier is the shortest.
mvincent
03-19-07, 03:51 PM I believe the 'official' (i.e. WotC and RPGA) method is to roll once for all creatures affected at the same time. However, the rules seems seem to allow for either interpretation.
Lanoitakude
03-19-07, 04:39 PM I definately believe in rolling once, not only for ease, but I believe it also makes more sense.

If Mr. Wizard shoots a fireball into a crowd of goblins, he is shooting one spell. The power of that spell does not vary between the goblins, only their ability to dodge out of the way. It's not like Mr. Wizard is shooting a different mini-fire attack at each one, it is a single spell affecting them all simultaneously.

To roll seperately for each target within the area implies seperate attacks, not a single, all encompassing attack.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Fanix2112 03-13-07, 05:53 PM	The other night I was playing DnD and a caster cast Ice Storm against me and my teammate. The Dm rolled dmg for each person seperatly. I know its pretty much however the Dm wants to play it, but as a general rule do you roll one set of damage and work off it? Or individually for each target? I personally think you roll one set of dice, but it would be nice for some more feedback.
Vegepygmy 03-13-07, 06:45 PM	One damage roll for everyone. Combat already takes long enough that way.
cwslyclgh 03-13-07, 07:24 PM	for me one damage roll and apply it to everybody in cases like that... it would take way to much time otherwise.
SALDAR 03-13-07, 07:34 PM	An area spell is a single attack so you would roll damage once.
Seeker95 03-13-07, 09:16 PM	There is no explicit rule indicating your DM did anything wrong. But as others said, it would probably take too long to make this the norm. I would rule against it, not for "correctness" but rather, for efficiency.
Myree 03-18-07, 02:13 AM	Not counting the valid "takes too long" argument, I would (and have) personally lean towards a separate roll for each. The reason is that I like to keep a realistic feel to the encounters, and anytime something like this happens, not everyone is effected equally. For example, the <explenitive withheld> individuals who blew up the chlorine gas attack in Iraq -- roughly equivalent to a Cloud Kill spell in my mind (and the same applies to any fireball/rocket-powered grenade, etc.). Well, some people near ground zero got the full brunt, where others didn't -- maybe they had a little extra cover, or were a few feet (but not a whole square) further, or maybe an errant breeze gave them more or less dose than someone else. This is more than just the case where a saving throw halves or eliminates damage -- no some of them took a serious hit like all high rolls, and others seemed to include a few ones in those rolls. Each individual can be impacted or avoid the force in an individual manner, so an individual roll best indicates how that would be done in "game mechanics". But that is just my 2 cp...
DrMorganes 03-18-07, 02:33 AM	In my opinion, Myree, that's what the saving throw covers. I'm in the "one damage roll for everyone" camp.
Firestick42 03-18-07, 02:38 AM	Not that Neverwinter Nights is by any means an official source, but it rolls damage for each creature separately. As for myself, I always thought you should roll damage for each creature separately as well. It's not one attack, it's a separate attack against each creature affected by the spell. As for speeding up the damage calculations for spells, I'd suggest something I read in one of the articles on the main site: take the average of 2/3 of the dice you deal, and roll the last 1/3. So a 9d6 fireball would deal 3d6+21. Less dice rolling anyway, though it reduces randomness and therefore favors the PC's.
Seeker95 03-18-07, 08:52 AM	Not that Neverwinter Nights is by any means an official source, but it rolls damage for each creature separately.A computer has the advantage of being able to do this in much less time than a living DM.
SunTzuWarmaster 03-18-07, 11:24 AM	I think damage should be rolled separately for everyone sometimes, and group-wise at other times. What is important is that you decide before you roll. If the DM cast a spell, rolled bad and then decided to roll separately, that is bad. If you e the time, I think individual damage is more fun/flavorful. However, if my DM told me that I had to roll individual damage against the goblin horde from a 9th level fireball, I would tell him which pier is the shortest.
mvincent 03-19-07, 03:51 PM	I believe the 'official' (i.e. WotC and RPGA) method is to roll once for all creatures affected at the same time. However, the rules seems seem to allow for either interpretation.
Lanoitakude 03-19-07, 04:39 PM	I definately believe in rolling once, not only for ease, but I believe it also makes more sense. If Mr. Wizard shoots a fireball into a crowd of goblins, he is shooting one spell. The power of that spell does not vary between the goblins, only their ability to dodge out of the way. It's not like Mr. Wizard is shooting a different mini-fire attack at each one, it is a single spell affecting them all simultaneously. To roll seperately for each target within the area implies seperate attacks, not a single, all encompassing attack.