Burst and Emanation for large creatures [Archive] - Wizards Community

Burst and Emanation for large creatures [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Valharic
01-23-06, 11:16 AM This argument came up recently in one of our latest gaming sessions...I'm looking for claraifications.

Here's the setup:
A large troll that takes up a ten foot square casts the spell blasphemy. The spell has a 40ft radius that starts from the caster.

Here's the question and the argument that arose:
When counting the radius do you start counting from the center of the 10 ft. square that the troll takes up or do you start counting from the edge of the 10 ft. square? The difference is an extra 5 feet and it mattered to the affected PC because he was reduced to 0 STR at the time.
The DM argued that you started counting squares from the edge of the 10 ft square, and we eventually went with the DM ruling, as that is what one should always do so we don't bog down the game. We said we would come back to discuss it at a later time and I would post on the boards to see what others were saying.

Arguements
I argued that the radius should be counted from the center of the 10 ft. square according to the charts in the back of the DMG. It clearly shows on the radius charts that it starts from the center of the caster.

The DM argued that it should be from the edge of the 10 ft square. Say for example a fire dragon that takes up a 20 ft square centers a fireball on himself to get most number of enemies in the FB radius. If it was as the I interpreted the DMG to say, he would be the only one affected by the fireball, being it only has a 20 ft radius. I argued against it that if you counted from the end of the creature, you essentiall have turned the radius from 20ft to 40ft.

So what do you guys think? We both have valid points, in my opinion, but if we went with the DM's argument you give an unfair advantage to the large creature.
tarkin
01-23-06, 01:09 PM 1) DM is always right.

2) Your DM madeup a House Rule, ignoring the WoTC printed rules, which you followed

Burst, Spreads, and Emnation have a point as the center, not a creature.

From the SRD.

Most spells that affect an area function as a burst, an emanation, or a spread. In each case, you select the spell’s point of origin and measure its effect from that point.

The creatures do not get to increase the range by their own size.

3) Certain spells do act the way the DM described, but are not burst, spreads, or emnations. They are generally spells labelled Range: Personal and Target: You.

A good example of such a spell is Invisibility Purge. You can read it here at the Hypertext SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/invisibilityPurge.htm)
Talon Stormwarden
01-23-06, 02:09 PM I agree with everything you said, Tarkin, except the last bit. The spell says you surround yourself with a sphere with a certain radius. That seems pretty clear to me that the sphere will have a fixed radius independant of the caster's size.

Perhaps there are spells that work the way you describe, but is Invisibility Purge a good example? I just don't see how it can be interpretted that way. I'd be interested in seeing any rules support for such, as I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything about 3.5.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Valharic 01-23-06, 11:16 AM	This argument came up recently in one of our latest gaming sessions...I'm looking for claraifications. Here's the setup: A large troll that takes up a ten foot square casts the spell blasphemy. The spell has a 40ft radius that starts from the caster. Here's the question and the argument that arose: When counting the radius do you start counting from the center of the 10 ft. square that the troll takes up or do you start counting from the edge of the 10 ft. square? The difference is an extra 5 feet and it mattered to the affected PC because he was reduced to 0 STR at the time. The DM argued that you started counting squares from the edge of the 10 ft square, and we eventually went with the DM ruling, as that is what one should always do so we don't bog down the game. We said we would come back to discuss it at a later time and I would post on the boards to see what others were saying. Arguements I argued that the radius should be counted from the center of the 10 ft. square according to the charts in the back of the DMG. It clearly shows on the radius charts that it starts from the center of the caster. The DM argued that it should be from the edge of the 10 ft square. Say for example a fire dragon that takes up a 20 ft square centers a fireball on himself to get most number of enemies in the FB radius. If it was as the I interpreted the DMG to say, he would be the only one affected by the fireball, being it only has a 20 ft radius. I argued against it that if you counted from the end of the creature, you essentiall have turned the radius from 20ft to 40ft. So what do you guys think? We both have valid points, in my opinion, but if we went with the DM's argument you give an unfair advantage to the large creature.
tarkin 01-23-06, 01:09 PM	1) DM is always right. 2) Your DM madeup a House Rule, ignoring the WoTC printed rules, which you followed Burst, Spreads, and Emnation have a point as the center, not a creature. From the SRD. Most spells that affect an area function as a burst, an emanation, or a spread. In each case, you select the spell’s point of origin and measure its effect from that point. The creatures do not get to increase the range by their own size. 3) Certain spells do act the way the DM described, but are not burst, spreads, or emnations. They are generally spells labelled Range: Personal and Target: You. A good example of such a spell is Invisibility Purge. You can read it here at the Hypertext SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/invisibilityPurge.htm)
Talon Stormwarden 01-23-06, 02:09 PM	I agree with everything you said, Tarkin, except the last bit. The spell says you surround yourself with a sphere with a certain radius. That seems pretty clear to me that the sphere will have a fixed radius independant of the caster's size. Perhaps there are spells that work the way you describe, but is Invisibility Purge a good example? I just don't see how it can be interpretted that way. I'd be interested in seeing any rules support for such, as I'll be the first to admit I don't know everything about 3.5.