Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't see where the rules for casting says that the caster has to be on the face of the cube; PHB only says that the cube's point of origin lies anywhere on a face of the cube. If there is something somewhere else, I'd like to know where. As for the utility, the cantrip Minor Illusion is a 5' cube, which, if you tip it 45 degrees on two axises, would be 8.66' high and 8.66' wide at the highest and widest points, making it far easier to get behind.
According to 5e's distance counting rules, everything within the same 5' cube is within 5' of everything else in that cube, no matter what geometry might tell you the distance is. Any other way of counting distance is really between you and your DM.
According to 5e's distance counting rules, everything within the same 5' cube is within 5' of everything else in that cube, no matter what geometry might tell you the distance is. Any other way of counting distance is really between you and your DM.
I think you're confusing distance rules with "playing on a grid" rules, specifically the "moving diagonally" rules. A cube is a cube, with sides with longer diagonals than edges, and an internal diagonal even longer. A sphere is what you're describing (the collection of points which are no further away than the radius from the origin). The fact that when playing a grid, diagonals are counted the same as orthogonals, and then only if you don't use an optional rule, can make some cubes resemble some spheres (a 10' cube and a 5' sphere affect the same squares, for example) but doesn't make all cubes into spheres (a 20' cube covers more squares than a 10' sphere).
And again, if we're not talking about grids then measurements of distance are... only as meaningful as you can track without coordinates of combatants.
Since you occupy a 5' cube, there is no reason to assume that me being able to hit you within a 5' cube means that you cannot hit me in reverse from the same distance. If I say that I stand 8' from you and point my 5' cube along its corner-corner diagonal, there is no reason that you can't reverse that as well and just say that your 5' cube that you occupy is now pointed toward me, so you gain enough range to hit me back with some feature that requires 5' of range.
So... Anything within a 5' cube adjacent to you is effectively within a range of 5' of your space, even without using the grid variant.
And again, if we're not talking about grids then measurements of distance are... only as meaningful as you can track without coordinates of combatants.
Well, not really, no. Knowing you can fit a 8' door within a 5' cube is meaningful even if you're playing strictly "theater of the mind", since that means a cast can use Minor Illusion to completely obscure themselves, even if they're an average-sized human. You don't need a grid for that, and you don't need exact coordinates. Even for larger areas, like, say, a Fireball, it can be meaningful. If the DM describes two enemies as being "roughly 35' apart", then understanding the area of a 20'-radius sphere will help you determine you can, in fact, catch both enemies with a single Fireball.
And again, if we're not talking about grids then measurements of distance are... only as meaningful as you can track without coordinates of combatants.
Since you occupy a 5' cube, there is no reason to assume that me being able to hit you within a 5' cube means that you cannot hit me in reverse from the same distance. If I say that I stand 8' from you and point my 5' cube along its corner-corner diagonal, there is no reason that you can't reverse that as well and just say that your 5' cube that you occupy is now pointed toward me, so you gain enough range to hit me back with some feature that requires 5' of range.
Ah, gotcha. Sorry, replied before you edited. We're talking about different implications of areas and such.
Can you actually fit an 8' door in a 5' cube? Sure the diagonal of the door will probably be only about 8.38', but you have two of those, crossing and separated by about 2.5' at the ends that you need to fit in the cube that has a longest dimension of only 8.66'. I have no idea if you actually could and you'd need a decent more math to figure it out than I'd be willing to do at the table.
Can you actually fit an 8' door in a 5' cube? Sure the diagonal of the door will probably be only about 8.38', but you have two of those, crossing and separated by about 2.5' at the ends that you need to fit in the cube that has a longest dimension of only 8.66'. I have no idea if you actually could and you'd need a decent more math to figure it out than I'd be willing to do at the table.
You can fit an 8 ft pole going from corner to opposite corner, but definitely not a door!
The best you could probably manage is a 7 ft long door, with one end along one edge and the other end along the opposite edge.
In theory U can. The Fact that anyone can cast spells until a certain range ( deter by the spell description PLUS a feat that grants extra distance )just leave the option to cast the required at the exact area, which it can partially summon the "thing" you are casting it.
Geometry & Area of effect Knowledgements are here the best requirements.
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't see where the rules for casting says that the caster has to be on the face of the cube; PHB only says that the cube's point of origin lies anywhere on a face of the cube. If there is something somewhere else, I'd like to know where. As for the utility, the cantrip Minor Illusion is a 5' cube, which, if you tip it 45 degrees on two axises, would be 8.66' high and 8.66' wide at the highest and widest points, making it far easier to get behind.
I should have been more clear. You are right that the point of origin must be on the face of the cube. I was thinking of certain spells with cubic AoE's and point of origin of the caster (like thunderwave. but there are cube spells that don't work that way).
BTW if you orient the 5' cube that way, you create in planar projection a hexagon with sides approximately 4'3" long and approximately 7' tall ( between parallel edges, its only 8.66' from corner to corner). Not the most ideal shape to hide behind in this orientation (your feet are exposed unless you can fly/float, and you only get that max projection (ie coverage) looking head on at the corner, which means the shape offers much less coverage as you begin to move around it, becoming more rectangular and eventually square, and with a smaller projected area, eventually back to 5'x5'). That means that unless you are in a situation where enemies can only move directly towards you, this trick is much much less effective.
Also note that with minor illusion, it is completely valid and RAW for a DM to say that the illusion can't move out of the original cube it is formed in, so you wouldn't be able to effectively rotate it once cast to maintain the full coverage
I think that the type of information contained in this thread is a lot less useful than it seems on its surface. It makes you think that you have a better handle on something, but probably makes you make more mistakes than before you got that information.
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't see where the rules for casting says that the caster has to be on the face of the cube; PHB only says that the cube's point of origin lies anywhere on a face of the cube. If there is something somewhere else, I'd like to know where. As for the utility, the cantrip Minor Illusion is a 5' cube, which, if you tip it 45 degrees on two axises, would be 8.66' high and 8.66' wide at the highest and widest points, making it far easier to get behind.
I should have been more clear. You are right that the point of origin must be on the face of the cube. I was thinking of certain spells with cubic AoE's and point of origin of the caster (like thunderwave. but there are cube spells that don't work that way).
BTW if you orient the 5' cube that way, you create in planar projection a hexagon with sides approximately 4'3" long and approximately 7' tall ( between parallel edges, its only 8.66' from corner to corner). Not the most ideal shape to hide behind in this orientation (your feet are exposed unless you can fly/float, and you only get that max projection (ie coverage) looking head on at the corner, which means the shape offers much less coverage as you begin to move around it, becoming more rectangular and eventually square, and with a smaller projected area, eventually back to 5'x5'). That means that unless you are in a situation where enemies can only move directly towards you, this trick is much much less effective.
Also note that with minor illusion, it is completely valid and RAW for a DM to say that the illusion can't move out of the original cube it is formed in, so you wouldn't be able to effectively rotate it once cast to maintain the full coverage
Thanks for this, I was trying to do the same thing, but you were quicker and more accurate. I think about the only sensible use case for rotating the cube is for something like covering a roughly circular hole, although I would suppose an imaginative player could find a reason for creating an illusion of an 8' pole.
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't see where the rules for casting says that the caster has to be on the face of the cube; PHB only says that the cube's point of origin lies anywhere on a face of the cube. If there is something somewhere else, I'd like to know where. As for the utility, the cantrip Minor Illusion is a 5' cube, which, if you tip it 45 degrees on two axises, would be 8.66' high and 8.66' wide at the highest and widest points, making it far easier to get behind.
I should have been more clear. You are right that the point of origin must be on the face of the cube. I was thinking of certain spells with cubic AoE's and point of origin of the caster (like thunderwave. but there are cube spells that don't work that way).
BTW if you orient the 5' cube that way, you create in planar projection a hexagon with sides approximately 4'3" long and approximately 7' tall ( between parallel edges, its only 8.66' from corner to corner). Not the most ideal shape to hide behind in this orientation (your feet are exposed unless you can fly/float, and you only get that max projection (ie coverage) looking head on at the corner, which means the shape offers much less coverage as you begin to move around it, becoming more rectangular and eventually square, and with a smaller projected area, eventually back to 5'x5'). That means that unless you are in a situation where enemies can only move directly towards you, this trick is much much less effective.
Also note that with minor illusion, it is completely valid and RAW for a DM to say that the illusion can't move out of the original cube it is formed in, so you wouldn't be able to effectively rotate it once cast to maintain the full coverage
Thanks for this, I was trying to do the same thing, but you were quicker and more accurate. I think about the only sensible use case for rotating the cube is for something like covering a roughly circular hole, although I would suppose an imaginative player could find a reason for creating an illusion of an 8' pole.
I think the biggest takeaway is that it is possible to create an illusion with minor illusion where one of the dimensions exceeds 5'. The door from one of the above posts is a good example of that...since its so narrow, you could make a door of standard height (80", some are 84") up to 4' wide by rotating the cube a certain way, or the aforementioned 8' pole. And, in a situation where the projection would be more effective (long corridor, hole, etc), I might grant additional perceived cover if someone had the thought to creatively position the cube while creating the illusion.
Can you actually fit an 8' door in a 5' cube? Sure the diagonal of the door will probably be only about 8.38', but you have two of those, crossing and separated by about 2.5' at the ends that you need to fit in the cube that has a longest dimension of only 8.66'. I have no idea if you actually could and you'd need a decent more math to figure it out than I'd be willing to do at the table.
Can you actually fit an 8' door in a 5' cube? Sure the diagonal of the door will probably be only about 8.38', but you have two of those, crossing and separated by about 2.5' at the ends that you need to fit in the cube that has a longest dimension of only 8.66'. I have no idea if you actually could and you'd need a decent more math to figure it out than I'd be willing to do at the table.
You can fit an 8 ft pole going from corner to opposite corner, but definitely not a door!
The best you could probably manage is a 7 ft long door, with one end along one edge and the other end along the opposite edge.
Thank you, yes, I was gonna correct that. :D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you enjoy the math, know you can fit something that is 8.66 ft long inside a 5 ft cube by going diagonal corner to corner
Check out my Disabled & Dragons Youtube Channel for 5e Monster and Player Tactics. Helping the Disabled Community and Players and DM’s (both new and experienced) get into D&D. Plus there is a talking Dragon named Quill.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPPmyTI0tZ6nM-bzY0IG3ww
That's good, I know I can sit in the corner of the cube and still fit, even with my ridiculously long...
halberd!
Can you cast a spell with a cubic area of effect on an angle? That is, without the bottom face touching or being parallel to the ground?
The rule for casting is the caster has to be on a face of the cube. So if you could angle your body to align with an angled face, feasibly yes.
(unless your DM rules that spell AoEs snap to the grid)
im not fully sure how there is a benefit to doing so though...and the math involved to determine what squares are affected would be pretty onerous...most DMs would probably simplify the situation just to keep okay moving
I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't see where the rules for casting says that the caster has to be on the face of the cube; PHB only says that the cube's point of origin lies anywhere on a face of the cube. If there is something somewhere else, I'd like to know where. As for the utility, the cantrip Minor Illusion is a 5' cube, which, if you tip it 45 degrees on two axises, would be 8.66' high and 8.66' wide at the highest and widest points, making it far easier to get behind.
According to 5e's distance counting rules, everything within the same 5' cube is within 5' of everything else in that cube, no matter what geometry might tell you the distance is. Any other way of counting distance is really between you and your DM.
I think you're confusing distance rules with "playing on a grid" rules, specifically the "moving diagonally" rules. A cube is a cube, with sides with longer diagonals than edges, and an internal diagonal even longer. A sphere is what you're describing (the collection of points which are no further away than the radius from the origin). The fact that when playing a grid, diagonals are counted the same as orthogonals, and then only if you don't use an optional rule, can make some cubes resemble some spheres (a 10' cube and a 5' sphere affect the same squares, for example) but doesn't make all cubes into spheres (a 20' cube covers more squares than a 10' sphere).
Ok. Let me rephrase it then. Everything within a 5' cube is within a 5' cube.
Ok, I won't disagree with a tautology... but would you mind expanding on your point?
And again, if we're not talking about grids then measurements of distance are... only as meaningful as you can track without coordinates of combatants.
Since you occupy a 5' cube, there is no reason to assume that me being able to hit you within a 5' cube means that you cannot hit me in reverse from the same distance. If I say that I stand 8' from you and point my 5' cube along its corner-corner diagonal, there is no reason that you can't reverse that as well and just say that your 5' cube that you occupy is now pointed toward me, so you gain enough range to hit me back with some feature that requires 5' of range.
So... Anything within a 5' cube adjacent to you is effectively within a range of 5' of your space, even without using the grid variant.
Well, not really, no. Knowing you can fit a 8' door within a 5' cube is meaningful even if you're playing strictly "theater of the mind", since that means a cast can use Minor Illusion to completely obscure themselves, even if they're an average-sized human. You don't need a grid for that, and you don't need exact coordinates. Even for larger areas, like, say, a Fireball, it can be meaningful. If the DM describes two enemies as being "roughly 35' apart", then understanding the area of a 20'-radius sphere will help you determine you can, in fact, catch both enemies with a single Fireball.
Ah, gotcha. Sorry, replied before you edited. We're talking about different implications of areas and such.
Can you actually fit an 8' door in a 5' cube? Sure the diagonal of the door will probably be only about 8.38', but you have two of those, crossing and separated by about 2.5' at the ends that you need to fit in the cube that has a longest dimension of only 8.66'. I have no idea if you actually could and you'd need a decent more math to figure it out than I'd be willing to do at the table.
You can fit an 8 ft pole going from corner to opposite corner, but definitely not a door!
The best you could probably manage is a 7 ft long door, with one end along one edge and the other end along the opposite edge.
In theory U can. The Fact that anyone can cast spells until a certain range ( deter by the spell description PLUS a feat that grants extra distance )just leave the option to cast the required at the exact area, which it can partially summon the "thing" you are casting it.
Geometry & Area of effect Knowledgements are here the best requirements.
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
I should have been more clear. You are right that the point of origin must be on the face of the cube. I was thinking of certain spells with cubic AoE's and point of origin of the caster (like thunderwave. but there are cube spells that don't work that way).
BTW if you orient the 5' cube that way, you create in planar projection a hexagon with sides approximately 4'3" long and approximately 7' tall ( between parallel edges, its only 8.66' from corner to corner). Not the most ideal shape to hide behind in this orientation (your feet are exposed unless you can fly/float, and you only get that max projection (ie coverage) looking head on at the corner, which means the shape offers much less coverage as you begin to move around it, becoming more rectangular and eventually square, and with a smaller projected area, eventually back to 5'x5'). That means that unless you are in a situation where enemies can only move directly towards you, this trick is much much less effective.
Also note that with minor illusion, it is completely valid and RAW for a DM to say that the illusion can't move out of the original cube it is formed in, so you wouldn't be able to effectively rotate it once cast to maintain the full coverage
I think that the type of information contained in this thread is a lot less useful than it seems on its surface. It makes you think that you have a better handle on something, but probably makes you make more mistakes than before you got that information.
Thanks for this, I was trying to do the same thing, but you were quicker and more accurate. I think about the only sensible use case for rotating the cube is for something like covering a roughly circular hole, although I would suppose an imaginative player could find a reason for creating an illusion of an 8' pole.
I think the biggest takeaway is that it is possible to create an illusion with minor illusion where one of the dimensions exceeds 5'. The door from one of the above posts is a good example of that...since its so narrow, you could make a door of standard height (80", some are 84") up to 4' wide by rotating the cube a certain way, or the aforementioned 8' pole. And, in a situation where the projection would be more effective (long corridor, hole, etc), I might grant additional perceived cover if someone had the thought to creatively position the cube while creating the illusion.
Thank you, yes, I was gonna correct that. :D