Accurately centering a spell... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Accurately centering a spell... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Maladaar
02-04-05, 03:55 PM How accurate do you allow a spellcaster to place a spell?

Let's use the entangle spell as an example:

Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)

Area: Plants in a 40-ft.-radius spread

At 1st-level the caster can cast this spell up to 440 feet away.

Do you let the player sit there and count out the squares to position the spell? I have a player that will count it out two or three times to try to maximize the effect of the spell.

I personally don't think that someone casting a spell that distance is going to get the spell in the exact location, but I wanted to hear some input.
MrkGrismer
02-04-05, 04:04 PM Yes, these people put far more practice into their casting then we put into anything (pretty much).
Maladaar
02-04-05, 04:10 PM At what cost to game speed though? When it slows down the combat so drastically that it affects the flow of the game.

Also, in the heat of combat with arrows flying by I still have to wonder how accurate (to a distant point) the spell would be cast.
primemover003
02-04-05, 04:30 PM If it takes your player more than a minute to target his spell, in real time, he's obviously not ready on his turn. You've generally got 3 to 4 creatures (including the DM's monsters) going before you... Tell your players to be ready on their turn. This includes targetting the spell.
Phrennzy
02-04-05, 04:52 PM I let them be as accurate as they want. But I kinda step up the pace if they are hemming and hawing.

I simply say, "Where is it going to be." in my command voice.

When he says, "I think right here." Then I step in with, "Okay, there." and continue on.

You might address this idea with you player. Another thing - we use templates for the area effect spells - a wire frame for the 20' radius. It's great.

If he's always counting out squares, get him a little 6 inch ruler. That's the distance of 6 squares. He can use that to count faster.

I mean, if you were the wizard, wouldn't you want to get the most out of that entangle?
Maladaar
02-04-05, 04:53 PM There are 5 PCs in the group.

In just the last encounter the PCs had there were 3 wizards as foes.

One of wizards cast summon monster, which now made 4 foes.

For the first few rounds there was a total of 8 allies/foes going between the caster's turn. More than enough to figure out about where to cast the spell. Obviously movement changes things, but still plenty of time to have one or two ideas of where to cast the spell.
PenderGrass
02-04-05, 04:54 PM I would say that since most Spellcasters are limited to one set of spells per day, have lousy "set-in-stone" spell saving throw DCs, and have their spell "radii" reduced to squares, let them have something.

I, personally, allow spellcasters the ability to measure out their spells (we don't use squares) in most instances. After all, it is magic and their PC spellcasters are either blessed by the gods or supremely intelligent.

Having them take time from the game in an overabudance is usually curtailed by my own group - they police their own. If the majority agree that the person is taking too long (usually much more than about 45 seconds or a minute), then we move on. But, I have seen - and allowed some people to take as much as 5-10 minutes to decide what they want to do.

I usually take advantage of this and go to the restroom, crack another beer, relax, plan out my guys' new strategy, converse about the nuances of Star Wars, Matrix, or South Park with other Players.

But, then again, my group seems to be an exception to the generalized groups of envious, back-stabbing, immature, whiny, simpering, small-brained, groups that seem to be highlighted at times on these boards.

****
Thailfi
02-04-05, 05:07 PM Well, we don't play 3e so I don't know what type of skill check we would require, but there certainly would be one involved. In our 1e/2e campaign, we require the caster to make a wisdom check. A failed check in combat means we consult the chart used for missile weapon attacks that miss the target (basically a radial diagram around the intended target area - you roll and find out you were short and to the left for example). The caster runs the risk of not getting any desired targets with their spell or even effecting party members.

Combat is chaotic and spell casters are powerful enough as it is. Allowing them to exactly place spells like entangle so as to get the two orcs that the party fighter is fighting and not have a chance of getting the fighter is too much for us.
Valdar
02-04-05, 07:31 PM I allow them to place it accurately wherever they want, but I also assume that if your spell affects a given target, then it also affects anyone that target is currently in melee with. As listed somewhere in the rules, combatants aren't actually standing in neatly defined squares like they're playing hopscotch- they're weaving and sidestepping to get a positional advantage on their foes, so they can both be considered to be in both squares.

This would have to be moderated for larger opponents, though- if you launched your fireball so it only encompassed half of an opponent, someone could fight from the other side without being affected.
satyrgrrrrl
02-04-05, 09:21 PM I let them measure out and accurately place a spell.

I think making them make a check (or worse, not being able to plan out the area of effect) would be like having the Fighter make an additional check to see where exactly he hit his enemy--which, to me, is overly complicated.

I don't have the above poster's attitude to the area of effect, mostly because I don't have the melee fighters have a chance to hit someone who is also engaged in melee with the opponent, and I don't think spellcasting should be treated differently in this instance.

While everyone is dodging and weaving in a combat, I think 5 feet for each combatant is more than enough room to miss your friends with a fireball.

I think you need to help your player out, perhaps with the templates Phrennzy uses. Most of the time, it's just a matter of practice. Just make a point to try to speed up this player; tell him to plan it out before hand, or make some templates for his spells. They are in the back of the PHB (or DMG, I don't remember right now); you could copy & cut them out, or map them out yourself.

Hope it helps!

:angel:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Maladaar 02-04-05, 03:55 PM	How accurate do you allow a spellcaster to place a spell? Let's use the entangle spell as an example: Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level) Area: Plants in a 40-ft.-radius spread At 1st-level the caster can cast this spell up to 440 feet away. Do you let the player sit there and count out the squares to position the spell? I have a player that will count it out two or three times to try to maximize the effect of the spell. I personally don't think that someone casting a spell that distance is going to get the spell in the exact location, but I wanted to hear some input.
MrkGrismer 02-04-05, 04:04 PM	Yes, these people put far more practice into their casting then we put into anything (pretty much).
Maladaar 02-04-05, 04:10 PM	At what cost to game speed though? When it slows down the combat so drastically that it affects the flow of the game. Also, in the heat of combat with arrows flying by I still have to wonder how accurate (to a distant point) the spell would be cast.
primemover003 02-04-05, 04:30 PM	If it takes your player more than a minute to target his spell, in real time, he's obviously not ready on his turn. You've generally got 3 to 4 creatures (including the DM's monsters) going before you... Tell your players to be ready on their turn. This includes targetting the spell.
Phrennzy 02-04-05, 04:52 PM	I let them be as accurate as they want. But I kinda step up the pace if they are hemming and hawing. I simply say, "Where is it going to be." in my command voice. When he says, "I think right here." Then I step in with, "Okay, there." and continue on. You might address this idea with you player. Another thing - we use templates for the area effect spells - a wire frame for the 20' radius. It's great. If he's always counting out squares, get him a little 6 inch ruler. That's the distance of 6 squares. He can use that to count faster. I mean, if you were the wizard, wouldn't you want to get the most out of that entangle?
Maladaar 02-04-05, 04:53 PM	There are 5 PCs in the group. In just the last encounter the PCs had there were 3 wizards as foes. One of wizards cast summon monster, which now made 4 foes. For the first few rounds there was a total of 8 allies/foes going between the caster's turn. More than enough to figure out about where to cast the spell. Obviously movement changes things, but still plenty of time to have one or two ideas of where to cast the spell.
PenderGrass 02-04-05, 04:54 PM	I would say that since most Spellcasters are limited to one set of spells per day, have lousy "set-in-stone" spell saving throw DCs, and have their spell "radii" reduced to squares, let them have something. I, personally, allow spellcasters the ability to measure out their spells (we don't use squares) in most instances. After all, it is magic and their PC spellcasters are either blessed by the gods or supremely intelligent. Having them take time from the game in an overabudance is usually curtailed by my own group - they police their own. If the majority agree that the person is taking too long (usually much more than about 45 seconds or a minute), then we move on. But, I have seen - and allowed some people to take as much as 5-10 minutes to decide what they want to do. I usually take advantage of this and go to the restroom, crack another beer, relax, plan out my guys' new strategy, converse about the nuances of Star Wars, Matrix, or South Park with other Players. But, then again, my group seems to be an exception to the generalized groups of envious, back-stabbing, immature, whiny, simpering, small-brained, groups that seem to be highlighted at times on these boards. ****
Thailfi 02-04-05, 05:07 PM	Well, we don't play 3e so I don't know what type of skill check we would require, but there certainly would be one involved. In our 1e/2e campaign, we require the caster to make a wisdom check. A failed check in combat means we consult the chart used for missile weapon attacks that miss the target (basically a radial diagram around the intended target area - you roll and find out you were short and to the left for example). The caster runs the risk of not getting any desired targets with their spell or even effecting party members. Combat is chaotic and spell casters are powerful enough as it is. Allowing them to exactly place spells like entangle so as to get the two orcs that the party fighter is fighting and not have a chance of getting the fighter is too much for us.
Valdar 02-04-05, 07:31 PM	I allow them to place it accurately wherever they want, but I also assume that if your spell affects a given target, then it also affects anyone that target is currently in melee with. As listed somewhere in the rules, combatants aren't actually standing in neatly defined squares like they're playing hopscotch- they're weaving and sidestepping to get a positional advantage on their foes, so they can both be considered to be in both squares. This would have to be moderated for larger opponents, though- if you launched your fireball so it only encompassed half of an opponent, someone could fight from the other side without being affected.
satyrgrrrrl 02-04-05, 09:21 PM	I let them measure out and accurately place a spell. I think making them make a check (or worse, not being able to plan out the area of effect) would be like having the Fighter make an additional check to see where exactly he hit his enemy--which, to me, is overly complicated. I don't have the above poster's attitude to the area of effect, mostly because I don't have the melee fighters have a chance to hit someone who is also engaged in melee with the opponent, and I don't think spellcasting should be treated differently in this instance. While everyone is dodging and weaving in a combat, I think 5 feet for each combatant is more than enough room to miss your friends with a fireball. I think you need to help your player out, perhaps with the templates Phrennzy uses. Most of the time, it's just a matter of practice. Just make a point to try to speed up this player; tell him to plan it out before hand, or make some templates for his spells. They are in the back of the PHB (or DMG, I don't remember right now); you could copy & cut them out, or map them out yourself. Hope it helps! :angel: