I was talking with another DM on discord about something his players did which was cast a Wall of Fire inside a Wall of Force. I'd like to say that this shouldn't be possible because it seems game breaking to me, but it seems like it could work by the wording so I'm looking for more input on it please.
The Wall of Fire spell says "You create a wall of fire on a solid surface within range." so the idea is that you can see the ground or whatever that's inside the Wall of Force so you can cast the Wall of Fire inside while the Wall of Force is already up. That means that anyone who's trapped inside a Wall of Force and unable to get out could easily just be roasted. I know that a spell like Magic Missile or whatever that needs to physically pass through the Wall of Force would not work because it has to pass through it, but the idea is that they start the Wall of Fire inside the Wall of Force at a spot that they can see so it doesn't pass through the Wall of Force.
I see no reason why I wouldn't allow it. It is something that requires teamwork since one player cannot concentrate on both Wall of Fire and Wall of Force and you cannot pull it off until at least level 9. And if done at level 9 you are using a lot of high level resources for that level (a 5th and a 4th level spell slot) to pull it off. And as Mog_Dracov pointed out doing it in reverse is most certainly legal and creates a similar if not the same effect.
I think the confusion with this comes from the fact that Wall of Force in previous editions blocked all spells, which it doesn't do in fifth edition. In 5e, given that the wall is invisible and specifically only blocks physical objects, there's no obstacle to casting a spell that targets a point that you can see behind the wall - so casting Wall of Fire through it is perfectly in line with RAW.
I'd rule no spell can be cast through a Wall of Force as you don't have a clear path to the other side of it where you want to make the point of origin appear, it would instead come into being on the near side of the Wall of Force.
A Clear Path To The Target: To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.
I would allow it. Wall of force blocks anything physical passing through it so a person, sword, fireball etc would get blocked, but it says nothing specific about blocking magic so a saving throw spell like toll the dead, wall of fire etc should be fine. Compare the wording with Leomunds tiny hut which explicitly calls out that spells and other magical effects can’t extend through the dome or be cast through it and the difference seems fairly obvious.
Of course they are both concentration so would require 2 casters but still. Ooh, just had an evil idea, wall of force and then blade barrier. A Yuan-Ti’s lunch time people blender
It's worth noting that Mearls' tweets on the subject contradict this as well, so there doesn't seem to be a definite view amongst the devs.
I'd also be minded to look at the second part of the Rules of Targeting;
"To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction."
So, for a target point to be invalid, the player must;
Be unable to see the intended point of origin, and
Have an obstruction between their character and the intended point of origin
In terms of Wall of Force, it's clear that it meets the second requirement; it's very definitely an obstruction, hence its blocking physical objects and direct-targeting spells like Firebolt. However, the spell description explicitly states that the wall is invisible, and therefore the first requirement isn't met.
The RoT make it fairly clear that you need to check both boxes in order for a target point to become invalid ("...point that you can't see andan obstruction...") Since one of them isn't met, the point of origin for a spell like Wall of Fire can be on the other side of a Wall of Force. The alternative is that any transparent barrier, such as a window, would block the casting of a spell.
Thanks for all of the input. It seems reasonable that it could go either way.
I'm just trying to avoid having this be the go-to strategy for every fight vs any enemies that have no way to get out of Wall of Force. Also, don't want to have to always have every creature able to get out of Wall of Force, etc.
Thanks for all of the input. It seems reasonable that it could go either way.
I'm just trying to avoid having this be the go-to strategy for every fight vs any enemies that have no way to get out of Wall of Force. Also, don't want to have to always have every creature able to get out of Wall of Force, etc.
Wall of force is very powerful, as it should be, but it's not infallible. Teleportation spells that target the caster, rather than the location, are fair game. Magic as low-level as misty step can get the caster to the other side of a wall of force, as long as the caster can see the other side.
Thanks for all of the input. It seems reasonable that it could go either way.
I'm just trying to avoid having this be the go-to strategy for every fight vs any enemies that have no way to get out of Wall of Force. Also, don't want to have to always have every creature able to get out of Wall of Force, etc.
Wall of force is very powerful, as it should be, but it's not infallible. Teleportation spells that target the caster, rather than the location, are fair game. Magic as low-level as misty step can get the caster to the other side of a wall of force, as long as the caster can see the other side.
I understand how to get around Wall of Force. I'm saying that there's many high CR creatures or NPCs (etc) that don't have those things and this tactic makes an encounter with them trivial. Just took a moment to look at CR 15 creatures and just glancing at the first page I see Jarlaxle Baenre and a Mummy Lord in it's lair would both die vs this tactic without any defense vs it. I'm not going through and looking at more creatures because I have limited time right now. Yes, I understand that I can write in that either of them have whatever magic item that allows them to port. I guess I could just give a Cape of the Mountebank or something like that to every creature from the point that the party has two level 9 casters and forever after, or say that that tactic doesn't work.
Sure, the tactic where the player casts the Wall of Fire first and then the second caster casts a Wall of Force would still work, but in the cases of both of the above mentioned creatures that I found in a one minute search they both could move out of the Wall of Fire via legendary action before the Wall of Force was cast therefore not instantly making the encounter trivial.
I'd rule no spell can be cast through a Wall of Force as you don't have a clear path to the other side of it where you want to make the point of origin appear, it would instead come into being on the near side of the Wall of Force.
A Clear Path To The Target: To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can't see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.
How many times does it need to be said? Jeremy is not God of d&d? He is just some rando bloke that got lucky in an interview. His tweets are his own personal opinions only. He doesn’t speak for WoTC, the tweets are not rules. They are just his opinions. They are irrelevant. The publishers have said this in writing numerous times. Stop treating him like he IS D&D
Thanks for all of the input. It seems reasonable that it could go either way.
I'm just trying to avoid having this be the go-to strategy for every fight vs any enemies that have no way to get out of Wall of Force. Also, don't want to have to always have every creature able to get out of Wall of Force, etc.
Wall of force is very powerful, as it should be, but it's not infallible. Teleportation spells that target the caster, rather than the location, are fair game. Magic as low-level as misty step can get the caster to the other side of a wall of force, as long as the caster can see the other side.
I understand how to get around Wall of Force. I'm saying that there's many high CR creatures or NPCs (etc) that don't have those things and this tactic makes an encounter with them trivial. Just took a moment to look at CR 15 creatures and just glancing at the first page I see Jarlaxle Baenre and a Mummy Lord in it's lair would both die vs this tactic without any defense vs it. I'm not going through and looking at more creatures because I have limited time right now. Yes, I understand that I can write in that either of them have whatever magic item that allows them to port. I guess I could just give a Cape of the Mountebank or something like that to every creature from the point that the party has two level 9 casters and forever after, or say that that tactic doesn't work.
Sure, the tactic where the player casts the Wall of Fire first and then the second caster casts a Wall of Force would still work, but in the cases of both of the above mentioned creatures that I found in a one minute search they both could move out of the Wall of Fire via legendary action before the Wall of Force was cast therefore not instantly making the encounter trivial.
Then I genuinely don't understand what your problem is. If you understand how to counter Wall of Force, and you understand that you can give those counters to whatever monsters you want, you have all the information and power you need. No one is forcing you to give every monster ever misty step. Only give monsters misty step when you want to make your encounter more resilient to a wall of force strategy. That's just encounter design, which is one of the primary jobs of the DM.
...Jarlaxle Baenre and a Mummy Lord in it's lair would both die vs this tactic without any defense vs it...
As a point of note, Mummy Lords have access to several spells that target a point within range (and could therefore be cast through the Wall of Force) to break concentration. They also have Dreadful Glare as an action and Blasphemous Word as a Legendary Action, both of which can incapacitate a spellcaster. Lastly, they have access to Dispel Magic, and whilst the Wall of Force can't be dispelled, the Wall of Fire absolutely can.
As for Jarlaxle, he's a very specific encounter that isn't really intended to devolve into combat. On the off-chance that you do end up fighting him, he has a crew for support (which makes isolating and immolating Jarlaxle significantly more difficult) and;
If you kill him, Bregan D’aerthe raises him from the dead again.
Most high CR creatures have mechanisms to prevent simple cheesing tactics like this. The Wall of Force/Wall of Fire combo is cool, but it's really not the nuclear option some posts have made it out to be.
I wanted to get opinions and input from other DMs on the tactic so I could judge if it would be reasonable or overbearing for me to disallow it.
Thanks everyone for the help :)
Completely up to you :) .. its your game. I know a number of DMs who make different decisions on this and all their games are fine.
Keep in mind that IF such a tactic is so easy and effective, then ANY powerful and intelligent opponent WILL know about it and will be equipped to counter it - even if it is just a ring of spell storing with dispel magic and misty step. All Dragons are particularly vulnerable to this combination unless you use the optional spell casting dragon variants. Even Ancient Dragons, unless the DM gives them some magic (and they should whether or not this tactic is available) can be defeated by two 9th level characters using Sickening Radiance + Wall of Force.
Also, no matter what you rule about casting spells through Wall of Force - all of these combinations are totally legit if Wall of Force is cast second. Depending on the initiative order, character abilities and the abilities of the target ... one could ready Wall of Force, waiting until another character casts Sickening Radiance on the target as the trigger ... trapping the target before it can use a Legendary action to move or escape.
-----
In terms of rules ...
Depending on whether the DM rules Wall of Force as total cover (there are a large number of varied opinions on this AND the raw is certainly not clear or decisive) then the DM can decide whether spells can be cast through a Wall of Force or not.
The DM could also just say that spells can't be cast through a Wall of Force as homebrew for their game. The reason I'd call it homebrew is because the spell doesn't say that at all - the only reasoning for Wall of Force blocking spells in RAW are the total cover rules and a "Clear Path to the Target" requirement.
One thing to note, Sacred Flame gains no benefit to the saving throw from cover but that doesn't affect targeting and the "Clear Path" requirement - so even Sacred Flame should be stopped if a DM rules a Wall of Force as total cover.
P.S. Keep in mind that if you rule Wall of Force as total cover - i.e. blocking magic - you'll also want to decide on whether windows or transparent tissue paper and similar also block magic. Wall of force blocks anything physical but it isn't stated to impede magic. The cover rules only talk about "obstacles" and the DM will need to decide on what constitutes an obstacle in terms of physical attacks vs magic. Many spells only require "a target you can see", so it becomes a DM call on whether something transparent provides total cover and thus blocks the targeting of spells and physical attacks. (e.g. transparent tissue paper could prevent targeting of a crossbow attack if it is considered to be total cover since total cover prevents targeting both physical and spell attacks. "A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly by an attack or a spell." - same with a thin pane of glass - if it is total cover, characters aren't even permitted to target something on the other side of it - so a heavy crossbow bolt that punches through plate armor - can't be targeted at a creature behind a thin glass window. On the other hand, if a thin glass window doesn't provide total cover then both spells and weapon attacks could be made through a window. The ruling is easy to make with Wall of Force since it explicitly blocks all physical attacks anyway - the ruling is less clear when applied to anything where a physical attack could penetrate - leading to the DM having to decide what specific types of physical or spell attacks might work through a window - very unclear rules in my opinion since what constitutes a "obstacle" isn't well defined - all of the examples listed are heavy solid items that could be expected to block physical attacks).
I was talking with another DM on discord about something his players did which was cast a Wall of Fire inside a Wall of Force. I'd like to say that this shouldn't be possible because it seems game breaking to me, but it seems like it could work by the wording so I'm looking for more input on it please.
The Wall of Fire spell says "You create a wall of fire on a solid surface within range." so the idea is that you can see the ground or whatever that's inside the Wall of Force so you can cast the Wall of Fire inside while the Wall of Force is already up. That means that anyone who's trapped inside a Wall of Force and unable to get out could easily just be roasted. I know that a spell like Magic Missile or whatever that needs to physically pass through the Wall of Force would not work because it has to pass through it, but the idea is that they start the Wall of Fire inside the Wall of Force at a spot that they can see so it doesn't pass through the Wall of Force.
Is this a thing?
Anyone on one side of a Wall of Force could definitely cast a wall of Fire on his same side.
I would rule RAI that the Wall of Fire cannot be cast through a wall of force.
Note, I would allow someone to cast Wall of Fire FIRST then cast Wall of Force, which would have almost the exact same effect as you desire.
I see no reason why I wouldn't allow it. It is something that requires teamwork since one player cannot concentrate on both Wall of Fire and Wall of Force and you cannot pull it off until at least level 9. And if done at level 9 you are using a lot of high level resources for that level (a 5th and a 4th level spell slot) to pull it off. And as Mog_Dracov pointed out doing it in reverse is most certainly legal and creates a similar if not the same effect.
I think the confusion with this comes from the fact that Wall of Force in previous editions blocked all spells, which it doesn't do in fifth edition. In 5e, given that the wall is invisible and specifically only blocks physical objects, there's no obstacle to casting a spell that targets a point that you can see behind the wall - so casting Wall of Fire through it is perfectly in line with RAW.
I'd rule no spell can be cast through a Wall of Force as you don't have a clear path to the other side of it where you want to make the point of origin appear, it would instead come into being on the near side of the Wall of Force.
I would allow it. Wall of force blocks anything physical passing through it so a person, sword, fireball etc would get blocked, but it says nothing specific about blocking magic so a saving throw spell like toll the dead, wall of fire etc should be fine. Compare the wording with Leomunds tiny hut which explicitly calls out that spells and other magical effects can’t extend through the dome or be cast through it and the difference seems fairly obvious.
Of course they are both concentration so would require 2 casters but still. Ooh, just had an evil idea, wall of force and then blade barrier. A Yuan-Ti’s lunch time people blender
Here's what the Dev said regarding Wall of Force and spellcasting;
Their tweets are meaningless though, and certainly not to be considered as being RAW
They aren't Rules As Written but opinions that can mean something to DMs discussing rulingand asking for inputs like the OP.
It's worth noting that Mearls' tweets on the subject contradict this as well, so there doesn't seem to be a definite view amongst the devs.
I'd also be minded to look at the second part of the Rules of Targeting;
So, for a target point to be invalid, the player must;
In terms of Wall of Force, it's clear that it meets the second requirement; it's very definitely an obstruction, hence its blocking physical objects and direct-targeting spells like Firebolt. However, the spell description explicitly states that the wall is invisible, and therefore the first requirement isn't met.
The RoT make it fairly clear that you need to check both boxes in order for a target point to become invalid ("...point that you can't see and an obstruction...") Since one of them isn't met, the point of origin for a spell like Wall of Fire can be on the other side of a Wall of Force. The alternative is that any transparent barrier, such as a window, would block the casting of a spell.
Thanks for all of the input. It seems reasonable that it could go either way.
I'm just trying to avoid having this be the go-to strategy for every fight vs any enemies that have no way to get out of Wall of Force. Also, don't want to have to always have every creature able to get out of Wall of Force, etc.
Wall of force is very powerful, as it should be, but it's not infallible. Teleportation spells that target the caster, rather than the location, are fair game. Magic as low-level as misty step can get the caster to the other side of a wall of force, as long as the caster can see the other side.
I understand how to get around Wall of Force. I'm saying that there's many high CR creatures or NPCs (etc) that don't have those things and this tactic makes an encounter with them trivial. Just took a moment to look at CR 15 creatures and just glancing at the first page I see Jarlaxle Baenre and a Mummy Lord in it's lair would both die vs this tactic without any defense vs it. I'm not going through and looking at more creatures because I have limited time right now. Yes, I understand that I can write in that either of them have whatever magic item that allows them to port. I guess I could just give a Cape of the Mountebank or something like that to every creature from the point that the party has two level 9 casters and forever after, or say that that tactic doesn't work.
Sure, the tactic where the player casts the Wall of Fire first and then the second caster casts a Wall of Force would still work, but in the cases of both of the above mentioned creatures that I found in a one minute search they both could move out of the Wall of Fire via legendary action before the Wall of Force was cast therefore not instantly making the encounter trivial.
Hell, you cannot cast a spell through a window (https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/803404321484247040) I would agree with you not allowing casting through the Wall of Force.
How many times does it need to be said? Jeremy is not God of d&d? He is just some rando bloke that got lucky in an interview. His tweets are his own personal opinions only. He doesn’t speak for WoTC, the tweets are not rules. They are just his opinions. They are irrelevant. The publishers have said this in writing numerous times. Stop treating him like he IS D&D
Then I genuinely don't understand what your problem is. If you understand how to counter Wall of Force, and you understand that you can give those counters to whatever monsters you want, you have all the information and power you need. No one is forcing you to give every monster ever misty step. Only give monsters misty step when you want to make your encounter more resilient to a wall of force strategy. That's just encounter design, which is one of the primary jobs of the DM.
I wanted to get opinions and input from other DMs on the tactic so I could judge if it would be reasonable or overbearing for me to disallow it.
Thanks everyone for the help :)
As a point of note, Mummy Lords have access to several spells that target a point within range (and could therefore be cast through the Wall of Force) to break concentration. They also have Dreadful Glare as an action and Blasphemous Word as a Legendary Action, both of which can incapacitate a spellcaster. Lastly, they have access to Dispel Magic, and whilst the Wall of Force can't be dispelled, the Wall of Fire absolutely can.
As for Jarlaxle, he's a very specific encounter that isn't really intended to devolve into combat. On the off-chance that you do end up fighting him, he has a crew for support (which makes isolating and immolating Jarlaxle significantly more difficult) and;
If you kill him, Bregan D’aerthe raises him from the dead again.
Most high CR creatures have mechanisms to prevent simple cheesing tactics like this. The Wall of Force/Wall of Fire combo is cool, but it's really not the nuclear option some posts have made it out to be.
Completely up to you :) .. its your game. I know a number of DMs who make different decisions on this and all their games are fine.
Keep in mind that IF such a tactic is so easy and effective, then ANY powerful and intelligent opponent WILL know about it and will be equipped to counter it - even if it is just a ring of spell storing with dispel magic and misty step. All Dragons are particularly vulnerable to this combination unless you use the optional spell casting dragon variants. Even Ancient Dragons, unless the DM gives them some magic (and they should whether or not this tactic is available) can be defeated by two 9th level characters using Sickening Radiance + Wall of Force.
Also, no matter what you rule about casting spells through Wall of Force - all of these combinations are totally legit if Wall of Force is cast second. Depending on the initiative order, character abilities and the abilities of the target ... one could ready Wall of Force, waiting until another character casts Sickening Radiance on the target as the trigger ... trapping the target before it can use a Legendary action to move or escape.
-----
In terms of rules ...
Depending on whether the DM rules Wall of Force as total cover (there are a large number of varied opinions on this AND the raw is certainly not clear or decisive) then the DM can decide whether spells can be cast through a Wall of Force or not.
The DM could also just say that spells can't be cast through a Wall of Force as homebrew for their game. The reason I'd call it homebrew is because the spell doesn't say that at all - the only reasoning for Wall of Force blocking spells in RAW are the total cover rules and a "Clear Path to the Target" requirement.
One thing to note, Sacred Flame gains no benefit to the saving throw from cover but that doesn't affect targeting and the "Clear Path" requirement - so even Sacred Flame should be stopped if a DM rules a Wall of Force as total cover.
P.S. Keep in mind that if you rule Wall of Force as total cover - i.e. blocking magic - you'll also want to decide on whether windows or transparent tissue paper and similar also block magic. Wall of force blocks anything physical but it isn't stated to impede magic. The cover rules only talk about "obstacles" and the DM will need to decide on what constitutes an obstacle in terms of physical attacks vs magic. Many spells only require "a target you can see", so it becomes a DM call on whether something transparent provides total cover and thus blocks the targeting of spells and physical attacks. (e.g. transparent tissue paper could prevent targeting of a crossbow attack if it is considered to be total cover since total cover prevents targeting both physical and spell attacks. "A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly by an attack or a spell." - same with a thin pane of glass - if it is total cover, characters aren't even permitted to target something on the other side of it - so a heavy crossbow bolt that punches through plate armor - can't be targeted at a creature behind a thin glass window. On the other hand, if a thin glass window doesn't provide total cover then both spells and weapon attacks could be made through a window. The ruling is easy to make with Wall of Force since it explicitly blocks all physical attacks anyway - the ruling is less clear when applied to anything where a physical attack could penetrate - leading to the DM having to decide what specific types of physical or spell attacks might work through a window - very unclear rules in my opinion since what constitutes a "obstacle" isn't well defined - all of the examples listed are heavy solid items that could be expected to block physical attacks).