Diagram 2.5 details the token method, which isn't relevant to this thread. This thread is about templates. A different method will naturally produce different results.
Also, the only reason the cones in D&D are not equilateral is because of the language they are using. They are defining length to be the altitude (or length of perpendicular bisector) of the triangle - not what the length actually is mathematically. I am fine with that; however, this means that a 60-foot cone (which has a maximum perpendicular bisector length of 60 feet) can damage/affect targets along its edges up to 67 feet away from the caster. This gives an extra 10 feet (since the AoE bleed into those extra squares) along the edges.
In other words:
PLAYER: How far away is the enemy?
DM: 70 feet... sorry, he is outside of the area of your Cone of Cold.
PLAYER: That's fine, I will aim 26 degrees to his left so I hit him.
That exchange isn't really problematic. Templates are only useful when playing with a map, and the player will just drop their template and position it how they like, with no need to ask the GM anything (except maybe permission to interact with the map). But it's also not practically likely. If a player has to ask how far away an enemy is, they're probably playing in theater of the mind, in which case entirely different guidelines are provided to the GM that don't rely on templates or even positioning.
I am curious if there would be any ramification (mechanically) to simplify and say cone spells act as as sectors. That is, a 30-foot cone affects a sector 30 feet in radius with edge 30 feet (think of a slice of pizza). This way, all come spells affect an angle of roughly 60 degrees and the effects hit all creatures within 30 feet in that sector.
@TheDungeonMathster oh! you were referring to the token diagram! 😶
Ok, ok, yes, as @SagaTympana mentioned, it's the other option in XGtE. As an alternative, you choose at your table the one that you and your players like the most. Theater of the Mind, grid rules from DMG, grid rules from XGtE, something else?... no problem!
Each table is different, but personally speaking, we use the template method from XGtE, and we allow different angles for the Areas of Effect. For us it's just a tool to better represent the battlefield or a particular scenario, and to simplify the expression of actions and movements. We avoid complex maths, unnecessary discussions or extra overheads calculating exact pixel ranges 😅
I am curious if there would be any ramification (mechanically) to simplify and say cone spells act as as sectors. That is, a 30-foot cone affects a sector 30 feet in radius with edge 30 feet (think of a slice of pizza). This way, all come spells affect an angle of roughly 60 degrees and the effects hit all creatures within 30 feet in that sector.
This wouldn't simplify things as it'd require a much more complicated measurement that would be impossible to do without either a physical template or some way of measuring the angle. The current method (width at a given point of the cone equals the distance from the caster) doesn't require anything other than a ruler; you draw the line the cone is being aimed in and then measure the distance of any creature to that line. If that distance is half the distance from the caster, they're in range.
Here's an example
The red line is where the cone is being aimed and four perpendicular lines have been drawn. At the green and blue line, that's 16 ft from the caster, so as long as each of those lines is less than 8 feet, the bandits are in the cone. The green line is less than 8 feet and the blue line is greater than that, so the green is in the cone and the blue isn't. The orange line is clearly less than half the length of the red line at that point, so that bandit is in the cone. The pink line is 25 feet from the caster and 12 feet long, so that bandit is also in range.
This method is easier for making templates as there's no curved lines required. You just draw the midline, draw the 'base' which is equal to the midline, and then join everything up:
I think it is important to remember that not all squares are created equal in the strange world of WOTC DND. The odd ball 90 degree cone in XTG is likely based on using MOVEMENT where the 1st Square on a diagonal cost 5 ft of movement but the 2nd one costs 10 ft.
Thus the 90 degree diagram in XTG extends, along the diagonal, 5ft then 15ft, then 20ft, then 30ft (but weirdly that square is not included in the XTG diagram). The sides are 30ft long and most of the distant hexes cost exactly 30ft of movement to reach, while the others cost 25ft movement.
I'd also note that the movement to go from the right most distant square directly to the left most distant square happens to be 30ft (length of the cone) of diagonal movement!!!!
From XTG Cones.
A cone is represented by rows of tokens on the grid, extending from the cone's point of origin. In the rows, the squares are adjoining side by side or corner to corner, as shown in diagram 2.5. To determine the number of rows a cone contains, divide its length by 5. For example, a 30-foot cone contains six rows.
Here's how to create the rows. Starting with a square adjacent to the cone's point of origin, place one token. The square can be orthogonally or diagonally adjacent to the point of origin. In every row beyond that one, place as many tokens as you placed in the previous row, plus one more token. Place this row's tokens so that their squares each share a side with a square in the previous row. If the cone is orthogonally adjacent to the point of origin, you'll have one more token to place in the row; place it on one end or the other of the row you just created (you don't have to pick the side chosen in diagram 2.5). Keep placing tokens in this way until you've created all of the cone's rows.
So that weird 90 degree cone is actually correct based on the above. Not sure that is the way I'd play it but it weirdly fits.
Since this thread has been resurrected and people are sharing templates and tips, I might as well re-post my templates for 15 feet, 30 feet and 60 feet cones. These help when dealing with both grounded and flying enemies because each color change indicates a 5 foot increase in cone height. They're also color-coded for their most common use cases (Burning Hands, Fear, and Cone of Cold.)
Hi InquisitiveCoder. This is very nice as it accounts for flying, and the colour coding is a nice touch. I first thought it would be more immediately useful if the cones were drawn on a 5 foot grid template, but then realised it's on a transparent background! 😅 Thanks 👍🏽
The diameter of the base of the cone should be equal to the height of the cone so the circles (from above) should have a diameter equal to the cone length, not a radius of the cone length.
So assuming that the cone is placed so that it covers the maximum amount of surface area on the grid (at or near the ground) , the maximum height would be 1/2 the relivent distance/number that describes the cone (10ft, 15ft, 30ft 60ft etc), (plus any height off the ground - probably the max would be similar to the height of the creature emitting it) right? But then, that probably isn't necessarily a safe assumption, because the cone could be angled upwards (not parallel to the ground) .
(Asking for a flying creature.)
Generally wondering about the best practices for positioning of the party in combat, especially re: considerations for spreading out, in order to avoid having the whole party/most of the party hit by a large Area of Effect spell..
The diameter of the base of the cone should be equal to the height of the cone so the circles (from above) should have a diameter equal to the cone length, not a radius of the cone length.
So assuming that the cone is placed so that it covers the maximum amount of surface area on the grid (at or near the ground) , the maximum height would be 1/2 the relivent distance/number that describes the cone (10ft, 15ft, 30ft 60ft etc), (plus any height off the ground - probably the max would be similar to the height of the creature emitting it) right? But then, that probably isn't necessarily a safe assumption, because the cone could be angled upwards (not parallel to the ground) .
(Asking for a flying creature.)
For example, with a 30 ft cone, if you angle it upward, you can get a total diameter of 30 ft at the cone's end.
For a flying creature, a valid option would be to orient the cone straight downward and take advantage of having no blocking lines.
Diagram 2.5 details the token method, which isn't relevant to this thread. This thread is about templates. A different method will naturally produce different results.
That exchange isn't really problematic. Templates are only useful when playing with a map, and the player will just drop their template and position it how they like, with no need to ask the GM anything (except maybe permission to interact with the map). But it's also not practically likely. If a player has to ask how far away an enemy is, they're probably playing in theater of the mind, in which case entirely different guidelines are provided to the GM that don't rely on templates or even positioning.
I am curious if there would be any ramification (mechanically) to simplify and say cone spells act as as sectors. That is, a 30-foot cone affects a sector 30 feet in radius with edge 30 feet (think of a slice of pizza). This way, all come spells affect an angle of roughly 60 degrees and the effects hit all creatures within 30 feet in that sector.
@TheDungeonMathster oh! you were referring to the token diagram! 😶
Ok, ok, yes, as @SagaTympana mentioned, it's the other option in XGtE. As an alternative, you choose at your table the one that you and your players like the most. Theater of the Mind, grid rules from DMG, grid rules from XGtE, something else?... no problem!
Each table is different, but personally speaking, we use the template method from XGtE, and we allow different angles for the Areas of Effect. For us it's just a tool to better represent the battlefield or a particular scenario, and to simplify the expression of actions and movements. We avoid complex maths, unnecessary discussions or extra overheads calculating exact pixel ranges 😅
This wouldn't simplify things as it'd require a much more complicated measurement that would be impossible to do without either a physical template or some way of measuring the angle. The current method (width at a given point of the cone equals the distance from the caster) doesn't require anything other than a ruler; you draw the line the cone is being aimed in and then measure the distance of any creature to that line. If that distance is half the distance from the caster, they're in range.
Here's an example
The red line is where the cone is being aimed and four perpendicular lines have been drawn. At the green and blue line, that's 16 ft from the caster, so as long as each of those lines is less than 8 feet, the bandits are in the cone. The green line is less than 8 feet and the blue line is greater than that, so the green is in the cone and the blue isn't. The orange line is clearly less than half the length of the red line at that point, so that bandit is in the cone. The pink line is 25 feet from the caster and 12 feet long, so that bandit is also in range.
This method is easier for making templates as there's no curved lines required. You just draw the midline, draw the 'base' which is equal to the midline, and then join everything up:
Instant cone template
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I think it is important to remember that not all squares are created equal in the strange world of WOTC DND. The odd ball 90 degree cone in XTG is likely based on using MOVEMENT where the 1st Square on a diagonal cost 5 ft of movement but the 2nd one costs 10 ft.
Thus the 90 degree diagram in XTG extends, along the diagonal, 5ft then 15ft, then 20ft, then 30ft (but weirdly that square is not included in the XTG diagram). The sides are 30ft long and most of the distant hexes cost exactly 30ft of movement to reach, while the others cost 25ft movement.
I'd also note that the movement to go from the right most distant square directly to the left most distant square happens to be 30ft (length of the cone) of diagonal movement!!!!
So that weird 90 degree cone is actually correct based on the above. Not sure that is the way I'd play it but it weirdly fits.
Since this thread has been resurrected and people are sharing templates and tips, I might as well re-post my templates for 15 feet, 30 feet and 60 feet cones. These help when dealing with both grounded and flying enemies because each color change indicates a 5 foot increase in cone height. They're also color-coded for their most common use cases (Burning Hands, Fear, and Cone of Cold.)
The Forum Infestation (TM)
And here are all the possible 15ft cones on a square grid using XGtE's token method:
https://imgur.com/a/1BpZbbR
Hi InquisitiveCoder. This is very nice as it accounts for flying, and the colour coding is a nice touch. I first thought it would be more immediately useful if the cones were drawn on a 5 foot grid template, but then realised it's on a transparent background! 😅 Thanks 👍🏽
So assuming that the cone is placed so that it covers the maximum amount of surface area on the grid (at or near the ground) , the maximum height would be 1/2 the relivent distance/number that describes the cone (10ft, 15ft, 30ft 60ft etc), (plus any height off the ground - probably the max would be similar to the height of the creature emitting it) right? But then, that probably isn't necessarily a safe assumption, because the cone could be angled upwards (not parallel to the ground) .
(Asking for a flying creature.)
Generally wondering about the best practices for positioning of the party in combat, especially re: considerations for spreading out, in order to avoid having the whole party/most of the party hit by a large Area of Effect spell..
For example, with a 30 ft cone, if you angle it upward, you can get a total diameter of 30 ft at the cone's end.
For a flying creature, a valid option would be to orient the cone straight downward and take advantage of having no blocking lines.
what do the yellow blocks mean?