Only spells that say they don't require a clear path don't require a clear path. An obstacle that blocks the physical path blocks a spell otherwise.
You're welcome to homebrew this rule. Maybe in your games all spell effects burst out of the spellcaster's ocular sockets. Neato. But, in 5e that's just not the case.
.
Let's take a look at cover. What does it even do? Well, it provides a bonus to AC and Dex saves. So if you're partially blocked by a wall of force, you're getting an AC and Dex save bonus from the cover. But let's look at a couple of the example spells from the OP's list.
Would being half covered by a wall of force help against fire bolt?
Would being half covered by a wall of force help against frostbite?
Firebolt relies on an attack roll, as you "hurl" your fire attack at the target. So that half cover of the wall, giving you a +2 bonus to your AC, is going to help block that effect.
But what about frostbite? For frostbite they only need to see you, and then you make a con save. Cover doesn't help with con saves, and they can see you. Looks like partial cover isn't helping here.
Okay okay, but maybe you have even more of the wall protecting you, and now you have three-quarters cover. Now a whoppin +5 bonus to AC and Dex saves.
Would being almost entirely covered by a wall of force help against fire bolt?
Would being almost entirely covered by a wall of force help against frostbite?
You now have a +5 to your existing AC against that firebolt being hurled at you since it may very well strike the wall and not even hit you.
But... what about that frostbite? Well, you can see them cowering behind the wall, and, they still just make a con save, which cover doesn't provide a bonus to. So, yeah, no help from being almost entirely behind the wall. No benefit whatsoever since nothing you're doing could accidentally hit or be blocked by that wall. They save or they get cold. You're not shooting something, or hurling something, you just look at them and they chill.
You see where we're going yeah?
Cover is only cover if it actually helps block the effect. The rules for cover itself talk all about this. Is air cover? Is an illusion of a wall cover? Is a sheet of paper cover? Something is only cover if it is an obstacle.
Firebolt can be blocked by wall of force because it is an obstacle against the spell. Frostbite cannot.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Total cover has no effect on AC. That is only half or 3/4ths cover.
Something only acts as cover if it is an obstacle. Looking at half and 3/4 cover demonstrates that a wall of force is not an obstacle for spells like frostbite.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Total cover has no effect on AC. That is only half or 3/4ths cover.
Something only acts as cover if it is an obstacle. Looking at half and 3/4 cover demonstrates that a wall of force is not an obstacle for spells like frostbite.
Nonetheless, if the Wall of Force entirely blocks every straight line from you to your target, (what would usually just be called total cover), then you can't target them. You need a clear path. Even if it's not a projectile or beam, and in no way resembles one.
Edit: For clarity, here's the exact quote: "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover." The part about total cover is a consequence of, not a cause of, the part about a clear path.
Maybe it can help to think of the Weave. Like, you need a metaphysical thread from you to your target. Only then can the magic take hold.
Total cover has no effect on AC. That is only half or 3/4ths cover.
Something only acts as cover if it is an obstacle. Looking at half and 3/4 cover demonstrates that a wall of force is not an obstacle for spells like frostbite.
Nonetheless, if the Wall of Force entirely blocks every straight line from you to your target, (what would usually just be called total cover), then you can't target them. You need a clear path. Even if it's not a projectile or beam, and in no way resembles one.
Maybe it can help to think of the Weave. Like, you need a metaphysical thread from you to your target. Only then can the magic take hold.
Total cover requires an obstacle. frostbite only requires sight. wall of force is invisible an is not an obstacle to sight.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
frostbite does not say that it avoids cover like sacred flame; frostbite requires a clear path to the target. I don’t understand where you get the idea that not allowing spells to pass doesn’t qualify as an obstacle. A spell must indicate that it doesn’t follow a general rule for it to not follow a general rule; I also don't get where you are having a problem with this part.
You can cast sacred flame through a window. You cannot cast frostbite through a window. This is absolutely is RAW. It is homebrew to make spells not follow general rules for no reason other than whim.
Total cover has no effect on AC. That is only half or 3/4ths cover.
Something only acts as cover if it is an obstacle. Looking at half and 3/4 cover demonstrates that a wall of force is not an obstacle for spells like frostbite.
Nonetheless, if the Wall of Force entirely blocks every straight line from you to your target, (what would usually just be called total cover), then you can't target them. You need a clear path. Even if it's not a projectile or beam, and in no way resembles one.
Maybe it can help to think of the Weave. Like, you need a metaphysical thread from you to your target. Only then can the magic take hold.
Total cover requires an obstacle. frostbite only requires sight. wall of force is invisible an is not an obstacle to sight.
You missed my edit. The thing blocking the spell isn't the presence of total cover, it's the absence of a clear path to the target. This has nothing to do with Frostbite and everything to do with the general rules for spellcasting.
If nothing can physically pass through something, it's pretty much an obstacle to me! Wall of Force doesn't say it provide total cover itself but can surly be treated as such. You don't have a clear path to any target on the opposite side of a Wall of Force, so i don't think you can target one with Frostbite, or most spell as it blocks spells path and point of origin, as well as physical effects. Jeremy Crawford even say nothing can pass through it, even incorporeal movement. I assume even Sacred Flame wouldn't.
Teleportation effects should usually works as they're meant to take you to space you don't necessarily have a clear path to, but targeting still must be possible in the first place.
You're welcome to homebrew this rule. Maybe in your games all spell effects burst out of the spellcaster's ocular sockets. Neato. But, in 5e that's just not the case.
.
Let's take a look at cover. What does it even do? Well, it provides a bonus to AC and Dex saves. So if you're partially blocked by a wall of force, you're getting an AC and Dex save bonus from the cover. But let's look at a couple of the example spells from the OP's list.
Firebolt relies on an attack roll, as you "hurl" your fire attack at the target. So that half cover of the wall, giving you a +2 bonus to your AC, is going to help block that effect.
But what about frostbite? For frostbite they only need to see you, and then you make a con save. Cover doesn't help with con saves, and they can see you. Looks like partial cover isn't helping here.
Okay okay, but maybe you have even more of the wall protecting you, and now you have three-quarters cover. Now a whoppin +5 bonus to AC and Dex saves.
You now have a +5 to your existing AC against that firebolt being hurled at you since it may very well strike the wall and not even hit you.
But... what about that frostbite? Well, you can see them cowering behind the wall, and, they still just make a con save, which cover doesn't provide a bonus to. So, yeah, no help from being almost entirely behind the wall. No benefit whatsoever since nothing you're doing could accidentally hit or be blocked by that wall. They save or they get cold. You're not shooting something, or hurling something, you just look at them and they chill.
You see where we're going yeah?
Cover is only cover if it actually helps block the effect. The rules for cover itself talk all about this. Is air cover? Is an illusion of a wall cover? Is a sheet of paper cover? Something is only cover if it is an obstacle.
Firebolt can be blocked by wall of force because it is an obstacle against the spell. Frostbite cannot.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
[REDACTED] Total cover has no effect on AC. That is only half or 3/4ths cover.
Something only acts as cover if it is an obstacle. Looking at half and 3/4 cover demonstrates that a wall of force is not an obstacle for spells like frostbite.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Nonetheless, if the Wall of Force entirely blocks every straight line from you to your target, (what would usually just be called total cover), then you can't target them. You need a clear path. Even if it's not a projectile or beam, and in no way resembles one.
Edit: For clarity, here's the exact quote: "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover." The part about total cover is a consequence of, not a cause of, the part about a clear path.
Maybe it can help to think of the Weave. Like, you need a metaphysical thread from you to your target. Only then can the magic take hold.
Total cover requires an obstacle. frostbite only requires sight. wall of force is invisible an is not an obstacle to sight.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
frostbite does not say that it avoids cover like sacred flame; frostbite requires a clear path to the target. I don’t understand where you get the idea that not allowing spells to pass doesn’t qualify as an obstacle. A spell must indicate that it doesn’t follow a general rule for it to not follow a general rule; I also don't get where you are having a problem with this part.
You can cast sacred flame through a window. You cannot cast frostbite through a window. This is absolutely is RAW. It is homebrew to make spells not follow general rules for no reason other than whim.
You missed my edit. The thing blocking the spell isn't the presence of total cover, it's the absence of a clear path to the target. This has nothing to do with Frostbite and everything to do with the general rules for spellcasting.
If nothing can physically pass through something, it's pretty much an obstacle to me! Wall of Force doesn't say it provide total cover itself but can surly be treated as such. You don't have a clear path to any target on the opposite side of a Wall of Force, so i don't think you can target one with Frostbite, or most spell as it blocks spells path and point of origin, as well as physical effects. Jeremy Crawford even say nothing can pass through it, even incorporeal movement. I assume even Sacred Flame wouldn't.
Teleportation effects should usually works as they're meant to take you to space you don't necessarily have a clear path to, but targeting still must be possible in the first place.