Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
So Total Cover is defined by not having a clear path, which means you can't target them, and a clear path is defined by not having Total Cover, which means you can target them... Thanks bro, this circular reasoning totally helps me understand what a "clear path" is :D
If that's RAW, I'd like to know which rule you are referring to, here. Because I can't think of a rule which explicitly states that (or even implicitly for that matter).
As you are explicitly allowed to target things you cannot see (unless the spell limits targets to things you can see), it should be evident that this is not about visibility. This tells us that "clear path" means "no solid object in the way".
It depends what you mean by "this", because there are many cases to consider. Just because Total Cover would require concealment, it wouldn't necessarily mean that having concealment immediately gives you total cover. Just because a requirement is necessary, doesn't make it sufficient. So I wouldn't say that this is evident.
Okay, then sage advice tells us that Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, which is not opaque, provides total cover.
The only place that assumption is made is in the rules for hide. The rules for tactical maps clearly distinguish between line of sight (stopped by an object or effect that block vision) and cover (stopped by an obstacle).
Yeah, but that spell provides a much stronger protection than Wall of Force, as it explicitly blocks all magical effects. It's not just a transparent panel.
The concept of "targeting" isn't explicitly defined either... If you Misty Step to a location, that location is your target. And since that location has Total Cover behind a Wall of Force, you can't target it either...
Target is explicitly defined for most abilities. The target of misty step is 'self'.
I read "Range/Area", not "Target".
Range/Area is more of an online database thing for convenience. In the books it's just Range and for a description of the Area of an AoE you have to read the spell description. The Range is a restriction regarding how far away from the spellcaster the effect can originate. The clear path is essentially how a spell "travels" FROM the spellcaster TO the place that the effect originates when it is cast. The term "target" is used in kind of an awkward manner in the clear path rule -- they are attempting to refer to the selection process of the place where the spell effect originates as "targeting" which is sort of a holdover from the 2014 rules. Most of the time this is the same as the target of the spell -- the main exception being AoE spells. The section on AoE spellcasting has its own description for what happens when you try to place the point of origin behind a barrier, but unfortunately this rule only refers to when you cannot see the location, which should be changed via errata but it probably won't be. There is a way to interpret the current wording such that a spell such as Fireball can be cast through a Wall of Force to originate on the other side of it, but that's certainly not the intent. The intent is meant to be a restriction such that there must be a clear path between the spellcaster and the place where the spell originates.
No total cover is offered by "an object that covers the whole target", it's in the section about Cover.
The main issue with Wall of Force is that they still seems to hate actually using the terms they set while writing the rules. The spell description should have had an "provides total cover" added to it as that is a term that interacts with other rules, instead writing it as "nothing can physically pass through" means that a DM/player has to make his own determination for each and every rule it might interact with.
Then it's not about having a clear path anymore... Because if you can peek through a key hole, that means there is a clear path through it...
But it doesn’t matter for Misty Step because that spell has a range of “Self” and the description only gives “30 ft to a space you can see” as destination requirements. Thus the general rule of spell targeting is satisfied by the range of “Self”, and the specific language of the spell indicates that you only need LoS to the destination point, even if there’s a barrier like glass or a door that would block something like Fireball.
That feels too abstract... By that definition, if I have Truesight, I can Misty Step 30ft into the Ethereal Plane... Because it would be a space that I can see within 30ft (since Material and Ethereal Planes are parallel).
It's not clear whether the ethereal plane counts as being within 30'. I suspect it isn't intended to, but RAW is debatable.
There’s always some ambiguity to an effect that does more than damage or a straight condition, but yeah I agree the RAI is pretty clear that plane-hopping only occurs when the effect explicitly says so.
That's exactly my point. If we start only caring about RAW, then breaking the game into absurdity is trivial.
"You have Blindsight? Well it doesn't make you immune to the Blinded condition, so even if you can see, you still have disadvantage on your attacks".
Rules have to be coherent, RAW be damned. Saying "You can Misty Step through that window, but you can't cast Toll the Dead at the enemy behind it" is not coherent.
Same with Wall of Force. Either spells get through or they don't. We shouldn't have to go "Rules Lawyer" just to make a basic mechanic work.
It is coherent, because the mechanics are consistently applied, they just create different outcomes between the two because Misty Step was explicitly designed to have fewer restrictions.
Toll the Dead: "You point at one creature you can see within range"
Misty Step: "You teleport up to 30 feet to an unoccupied space you can see"
There's no way that such similar descriptions were actually intended to have so broadly different restrictions.
Here's the thing. When you teleport, you don't go through the wall or the window or whatever. You are on one side, then you are on the other side. You don't actually move through the in between spaces. So, the wall doesn't get in the way of a teleport, because you don't pass through it. You just are on the other side. You don't move really fast between the start and finish. You are never in any of the between spaces. As a result, teleportation magic works a bit differently than other spells, which do often have things that pass through those in between spaces, and therefore can be blocked.
Also, this whole conversation has exactly nothing to do with the idea of potions being dispelled.