In a session (d&d 5e) I see a tall tower in front of me. I count the squares on the grid we play on, and see that its 140ft away. I ask about the height of the tower and my DM says I can’t figure the exact height. On the tower there is an enemy and I want to cast Fireball at him without moving. The tower's real height is 100ft, so the real distance between me and the target is 172ft.
But my PC can’t know this. But can I ask the DM, if I cast Fireball (150ft +20ft blast) would it hit the target? My DM said my PC isn’t sure the target is in range for the spell and thinks there could be a chance he’s out of range.
After the session we discussed about the matter. I thought he had to tell me beforehand either that the spell can reach the target or that the spell wont reach the target. He thought that my PC cant be sure about that.
Is this matter covered by some rule we're missing? If not how would you deal with this situation?
I'd rule that if you attempted to target a spell outside of its range, then its effect would occur at the edge of the range. So the fireball would detonate at the 150 radius. Even something that is not evocation, I'd rule that the spell must be used if you attempt to use it to determine the distance something is away from you. (Something like Detect Thoughts can be used to great effect with like this.)
All of this is made confusing if you consider diagonal movement being 5' on a grid. That method gets crazy when you add the z axis.
No, there is no rule that demands the DM tell you exactly how far away something is.....
Why because PCs are not super computers who know exactly where everything is and how far away it all is. Can a PC with a higher INT make a better educated guess? sure. But DMs are under no obligation to inform you something is out of range.... especially when you did the math to determine if it was or not. Your PC made an educated guess that the fireball would hit, the DM is the one to adjudicate if that is true or not. on a grid you can count the squares, but your PC isn't sitting there in the game actually counting them, they are making an educated guess and since normally things are in range it is not a problem. But if something is on the cusp, personally I call for a INT check to see if the character can guess well enough of the distance.
I would say that PCs have enough experience to know when something is out of range (at least when dealing with ranges less than 300 feet). Even level 1 you are considered more skilled than a layman and many people can estimate range with a little practice.
No body would accuse football players of being good at calculations and they can aim a throw tens of yards (100+ feet) away. No reason a PC proficient in spellcasting or ranged weapons shouldn't be able to accomplish the same thing.
Estimating range in the real world is part of proficiency with weapons. Knowing how to shoot is to take into account the distance to the target and account for gravity, wind, etc within the limits of normal perception. I would imagine in a world where spellcasting is real that that same requirement for proficiency would carry over.
I DM with battlemaps 95% of the time, and I 100% allow my players in-combat to count squares/hexes to determine ranges up to the limit of the map (usually around 100-150 feet), and I give them a simple yes/no on angled/z-axis ranges in the same, without requiring any sort of check; this usually covers standard ranges for ranged weapons and most spells. My houserule for gauging distances beyond that is a bonus action Wisdom (Perception Check) with varying degrees of success:
9 or lower: you are unable to determine the distance (failure)
10 to 14: you know the hundreds place of the dimension (so "you believe the target to be between 100 and 200 feet away")
15 to 19: you know the tens place of the dimension (so " you believe the target to be between 180 and 190 feet away")
20 or higher: you know the ones place of the dimension (so "the target is 185 feet away)
using a spyglass or a scope gives advantage on the roll.
We use battlemaps with a few factors that make the determining of distance still interesting. You have to decide your action before your turn and you can't touch the map when it isn't your turn. This means you can count the distance exactly, but you have to rely on your own eyes to count it out. For elevation, the same rules as ground, take the largest of xyz, add 5ft for every 10 ft of the other two.
In this case, the edge of the fireball would extend 170' from the caster at maximum range.
The creature is 172' away depending on how the DM decides to calculate diagonal distances.
Can a character estimate by eye a distance of 150'+20' to within 2' so that they would know whether the creature is just inside or just outside the area of effect?
I'd personally rule no and tell the character considering it that the creature is at the very edge of the possible range of effect and they are not sure whether it will be affected. I would also emphasize that if they are in the area then it will be by a very small margin at the very edge of the 20' radius.
The character then has two choices. Use their movement to move closer across the ground toward the tower hoping to bring the creature at the top into a range they are more confident about or cast the spell where they are and hope (and in this case miss). I think the way the DM ran this makes sense to me. Characters aren't equipped with laser range finders. They probably aren't capable of estimating distances reliably to within 1' at a distance of 170'. So I don't think the DM needs to tell the player that the creature is 172' away and is thus 2' outside the region that could be affected by their fireball.
I would say the DM should at least offer the chance to roll an ability check(either Perception to just eyeball it, or maybe Intelligence to do the math), unless there is actually some property of the environment that is preventing you from estimating distance(perception warping effect from being on another plane, illusion spell cast on the tower to obscure its true appearance, that sort of thing). I do think there are cases where the DM is justified in limiting who can try an ability check(like limiting a History check to people proficient in it, due to the obscure nature of the information, etc), but a basic thing like estimating distance shouldn't be one of those cases, especially when it's related to the range of your spells, something you're pretty familiar with. Making it difficult is one thing, not even letting you try is something else.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well that’s a large leap from a PC side of the story. We don’t know the whole scenario so let’s not make comments on the party that can’t defend its self currently. Again this is a post where we should not be judging the actions claimed and simply look at the question of should PCs know all distances.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
If you read the OP you will see that the horizontal distance was known, but the vertical height of the tower was unknown. Thus squares weren't visible in the vertical dimension for the player to count.
When I'm DMing, I just use a quick calculation of add half the length of the shorter distance to the longer distance when determining 3D direction. So 140 ft to the tower and 100 ft tall tower would be roughly 190 ft range to the top of the tower - not precise, but quick enough to keep combat going.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
If you read the OP you will see that the horizontal distance was known, but the vertical height of the tower was unknown. Thus squares weren't visible in the vertical dimension for the player to count.
Yep, and I've never had a DM who had a problem telling the players how tall something was. I still think the DM just didn't want the player to do it, as it could have caused a disruption in how the DM planned things out, and he didn't want to adjust anything on the fly.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
If you read the OP you will see that the horizontal distance was known, but the vertical height of the tower was unknown. Thus squares weren't visible in the vertical dimension for the player to count.
Yep, and I've never had a DM who had a problem telling the players how tall something was. I still think the DM just didn't want the player to do it, as it could have caused a disruption in how the DM planned things out, and he didn't want to adjust anything on the fly.
Nothing good comes of assuming the actions of the DM. We have the player's version of the story and in it, the DM simply says "you are unsure if he is in or out of the range" - that is NOT the same as refusing to tell the PC distance like you keep saying.
There are plenty of scenarios where even people who are very good at judging distance can not actually tell if something is 170 or 180. So in certain instances (especially when the range of the spell is really just on the cusp and not even the actual targetable range but instead the explosion radius) where it might be imperfect.
But to keep chiming in the the DM just didn't want his plans messed up in unconstructive and frankly pulling away from the core of the thread and topic: "how accurately can PCs know a distance?"
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
If you read the OP you will see that the horizontal distance was known, but the vertical height of the tower was unknown. Thus squares weren't visible in the vertical dimension for the player to count.
Yep, and I've never had a DM who had a problem telling the players how tall something was. I still think the DM just didn't want the player to do it, as it could have caused a disruption in how the DM planned things out, and he didn't want to adjust anything on the fly.
Nothing good comes of assuming the actions of the DM. We have the player's version of the story and in it, the DM simply says "you are unsure if he is in or out of the range" - that is NOT the same as refusing to tell the PC distance like you keep saying.
There are plenty of scenarios where even people who are very good at judging distance can not actually tell if something is 170 or 180. So in certain instances (especially when the range of the spell is really just on the cusp and not even the actual targetable range but instead the explosion radius) where it might be imperfect.
But to keep chiming in the the DM just didn't want his plans messed up in unconstructive and frankly pulling away from the core of the thread and topic: "how accurately can PCs know a distance?"
Whether the DM refuses to indicate distance, or just says the player isn't sure, the net effect is the same.
In real life people usually aren't great at accurately judging far away distances.
But D&D isn't real life.
It's a war game where distance is a key factor in tactical decision making, and the DM's refusal to indicate distance strikes me as strange given my personal experience. (40+ years)
Without additional details from the OP or the DM chiming in, all we can do is speculate. If you choose not to speculate, that's your decision.
We have grid squares on the horizontal, in my game and in many other games. In those games, on battle maps, you can see exactly how far away something is in the horizontal direction.
Why would distance on the Z-axis be any harder to judge? In other words -- if the characters can judge exact distance in X-Y, they should be able to do the same in Z.
The only exception would be something small that is hovering in the air away from anything else. This would be different because by itself with no reference, it may be hard to judge. But that would be true both for horizontal and vertical positioning.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Tactical decisions need to be made in real life all the time without exactly knowing how much distance is needed for something. Ever watched a football game? The best, most accurate throwers in the world still misjudge distances all the time. They don't know it until they try it.
At that distance, I think there's no reason for the DM to be required to give the info. To answer OP's question, it basically is completely at the discretion of the DM of what they want to reveal. I think saying land distances (whether on a grid or not) are fair game to say an experienced PC can assess them at a glance, but once you go into the third dimension it becomes harder to do.
I think giving broad ideas about the height of the tower ("it is less than 100' tall" or "it is about as tall as you are far from it") is fine, and then requiring a perception check to see if the PC can more precisely judge the distance.
It's the same reason there's a "long range" distance for ranged weapons. At a certain distance, it becomes harder to accurately judge whether or not you can hit something.
Judging height vertically by eye is actually extremely difficult. You only have to look into observer accounts of low flying aircraft, crashes, near misses and even ufo reports to see that. I give approximate heights for really tall objects at 100 feet or more, with precise heights for castle walls and towers of up to 30 - 40 foot ish. The other possibility is that the DM did not know how to work it out that accurately. Not every one that plays D&D is a math whiz or can do more than basic math. I have played at tables where players where adding up a d20 dice roll and modifier on their fingers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In a session (d&d 5e) I see a tall tower in front of me. I count the squares on the grid we play on, and see that its 140ft away. I ask about the height of the tower and my DM says I can’t figure the exact height. On the tower there is an enemy and I want to cast Fireball at him without moving. The tower's real height is 100ft, so the real distance between me and the target is 172ft.
But my PC can’t know this. But can I ask the DM, if I cast Fireball (150ft +20ft blast) would it hit the target? My DM said my PC isn’t sure the target is in range for the spell and thinks there could be a chance he’s out of range.
After the session we discussed about the matter. I thought he had to tell me beforehand either that the spell can reach the target or that the spell wont reach the target. He thought that my PC cant be sure about that.
Is this matter covered by some rule we're missing? If not how would you deal with this situation?
I don't believe there's a rule about it.
I'd rule that if you attempted to target a spell outside of its range, then its effect would occur at the edge of the range. So the fireball would detonate at the 150 radius. Even something that is not evocation, I'd rule that the spell must be used if you attempt to use it to determine the distance something is away from you. (Something like Detect Thoughts can be used to great effect with like this.)
All of this is made confusing if you consider diagonal movement being 5' on a grid. That method gets crazy when you add the z axis.
No, there is no rule that demands the DM tell you exactly how far away something is.....
Why because PCs are not super computers who know exactly where everything is and how far away it all is. Can a PC with a higher INT make a better educated guess? sure. But DMs are under no obligation to inform you something is out of range.... especially when you did the math to determine if it was or not. Your PC made an educated guess that the fireball would hit, the DM is the one to adjudicate if that is true or not. on a grid you can count the squares, but your PC isn't sitting there in the game actually counting them, they are making an educated guess and since normally things are in range it is not a problem. But if something is on the cusp, personally I call for a INT check to see if the character can guess well enough of the distance.
I would say that PCs have enough experience to know when something is out of range (at least when dealing with ranges less than 300 feet). Even level 1 you are considered more skilled than a layman and many people can estimate range with a little practice.
No body would accuse football players of being good at calculations and they can aim a throw tens of yards (100+ feet) away. No reason a PC proficient in spellcasting or ranged weapons shouldn't be able to accomplish the same thing.
Estimating range in the real world is part of proficiency with weapons. Knowing how to shoot is to take into account the distance to the target and account for gravity, wind, etc within the limits of normal perception. I would imagine in a world where spellcasting is real that that same requirement for proficiency would carry over.
I DM with battlemaps 95% of the time, and I 100% allow my players in-combat to count squares/hexes to determine ranges up to the limit of the map (usually around 100-150 feet), and I give them a simple yes/no on angled/z-axis ranges in the same, without requiring any sort of check; this usually covers standard ranges for ranged weapons and most spells. My houserule for gauging distances beyond that is a bonus action Wisdom (Perception Check) with varying degrees of success:
9 or lower: you are unable to determine the distance (failure)
10 to 14: you know the hundreds place of the dimension (so "you believe the target to be between 100 and 200 feet away")
15 to 19: you know the tens place of the dimension (so " you believe the target to be between 180 and 190 feet away")
20 or higher: you know the ones place of the dimension (so "the target is 185 feet away)
using a spyglass or a scope gives advantage on the roll.
We use battlemaps with a few factors that make the determining of distance still interesting. You have to decide your action before your turn and you can't touch the map when it isn't your turn. This means you can count the distance exactly, but you have to rely on your own eyes to count it out. For elevation, the same rules as ground, take the largest of xyz, add 5ft for every 10 ft of the other two.
In this case, the edge of the fireball would extend 170' from the caster at maximum range.
The creature is 172' away depending on how the DM decides to calculate diagonal distances.
Can a character estimate by eye a distance of 150'+20' to within 2' so that they would know whether the creature is just inside or just outside the area of effect?
I'd personally rule no and tell the character considering it that the creature is at the very edge of the possible range of effect and they are not sure whether it will be affected. I would also emphasize that if they are in the area then it will be by a very small margin at the very edge of the 20' radius.
The character then has two choices. Use their movement to move closer across the ground toward the tower hoping to bring the creature at the top into a range they are more confident about or cast the spell where they are and hope (and in this case miss). I think the way the DM ran this makes sense to me. Characters aren't equipped with laser range finders. They probably aren't capable of estimating distances reliably to within 1' at a distance of 170'. So I don't think the DM needs to tell the player that the creature is 172' away and is thus 2' outside the region that could be affected by their fireball.
I would say the DM should at least offer the chance to roll an ability check(either Perception to just eyeball it, or maybe Intelligence to do the math), unless there is actually some property of the environment that is preventing you from estimating distance(perception warping effect from being on another plane, illusion spell cast on the tower to obscure its true appearance, that sort of thing). I do think there are cases where the DM is justified in limiting who can try an ability check(like limiting a History check to people proficient in it, due to the obscure nature of the information, etc), but a basic thing like estimating distance shouldn't be one of those cases, especially when it's related to the range of your spells, something you're pretty familiar with. Making it difficult is one thing, not even letting you try is something else.
I guess I don't understand the issue. If you're playing on a grid map, calculating the distance should be easy.
If it's a theater of the mind game, IMO, the DM should indicate the distance.
The issue is that calculating the distance is easy, but DM wasn't giving measurements wanting the player to waste a slot.
Well that’s a large leap from a PC side of the story. We don’t know the whole scenario so let’s not make comments on the party that can’t defend its self currently. Again this is a post where we should not be judging the actions claimed and simply look at the question of should PCs know all distances.
Well, that's strange. I've played with many DM's over the years, and none of them ever had an issue with telling the players the grid scale. I suspect that the DM didn't anticipate that the player may try something like that, and didn't want the encounter to end so quickly.
If you read the OP you will see that the horizontal distance was known, but the vertical height of the tower was unknown. Thus squares weren't visible in the vertical dimension for the player to count.
When I'm DMing, I just use a quick calculation of add half the length of the shorter distance to the longer distance when determining 3D direction. So 140 ft to the tower and 100 ft tall tower would be roughly 190 ft range to the top of the tower - not precise, but quick enough to keep combat going.
Yep, and I've never had a DM who had a problem telling the players how tall something was. I still think the DM just didn't want the player to do it, as it could have caused a disruption in how the DM planned things out, and he didn't want to adjust anything on the fly.
Nothing good comes of assuming the actions of the DM. We have the player's version of the story and in it, the DM simply says "you are unsure if he is in or out of the range" - that is NOT the same as refusing to tell the PC distance like you keep saying.
There are plenty of scenarios where even people who are very good at judging distance can not actually tell if something is 170 or 180. So in certain instances (especially when the range of the spell is really just on the cusp and not even the actual targetable range but instead the explosion radius) where it might be imperfect.
But to keep chiming in the the DM just didn't want his plans messed up in unconstructive and frankly pulling away from the core of the thread and topic: "how accurately can PCs know a distance?"
Whether the DM refuses to indicate distance, or just says the player isn't sure, the net effect is the same.
In real life people usually aren't great at accurately judging far away distances.
But D&D isn't real life.
It's a war game where distance is a key factor in tactical decision making, and the DM's refusal to indicate distance strikes me as strange given my personal experience. (40+ years)
Without additional details from the OP or the DM chiming in, all we can do is speculate. If you choose not to speculate, that's your decision.
I would give exact distance, on this basis:
We have grid squares on the horizontal, in my game and in many other games. In those games, on battle maps, you can see exactly how far away something is in the horizontal direction.
Why would distance on the Z-axis be any harder to judge? In other words -- if the characters can judge exact distance in X-Y, they should be able to do the same in Z.
The only exception would be something small that is hovering in the air away from anything else. This would be different because by itself with no reference, it may be hard to judge. But that would be true both for horizontal and vertical positioning.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Tactical decisions need to be made in real life all the time without exactly knowing how much distance is needed for something. Ever watched a football game? The best, most accurate throwers in the world still misjudge distances all the time. They don't know it until they try it.
At that distance, I think there's no reason for the DM to be required to give the info. To answer OP's question, it basically is completely at the discretion of the DM of what they want to reveal. I think saying land distances (whether on a grid or not) are fair game to say an experienced PC can assess them at a glance, but once you go into the third dimension it becomes harder to do.
I think giving broad ideas about the height of the tower ("it is less than 100' tall" or "it is about as tall as you are far from it") is fine, and then requiring a perception check to see if the PC can more precisely judge the distance.
It's the same reason there's a "long range" distance for ranged weapons. At a certain distance, it becomes harder to accurately judge whether or not you can hit something.
If the PC isn't sure, I don't see much wrong with them saying, "I want to shoot it as far as it can go and explode there."
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Judging height vertically by eye is actually extremely difficult. You only have to look into observer accounts of low flying aircraft, crashes, near misses and even ufo reports to see that. I give approximate heights for really tall objects at 100 feet or more, with precise heights for castle walls and towers of up to 30 - 40 foot ish. The other possibility is that the DM did not know how to work it out that accurately. Not every one that plays D&D is a math whiz or can do more than basic math. I have played at tables where players where adding up a d20 dice roll and modifier on their fingers.