Party is fighting a few large/gargantuan creatures.
wizard casts fog cloud or sleet storm spell above the ground such that the medium spaces the party is in are not in the spell effects. The large/gargantuan creatures are partially in the spells area do to their size. Are the larger creatures effectively blinded while partially in the area?
If a creature has a clear path from any of the squares of their space to any of the squares of a targets space, they can see them for the same reason that there are no facing rules in 5e. (Accounting for cover as applicable.)
However, if a creatures can't reasonably function under the circumstances, a DM could be reasonably convinced to impose an appropriate penalty.
Fog Cloud creates a 20 ft radius sphere of fog (meaning it's 40 ft from end to end). Even a gargantuan creature can be completely covered by this. Purely for simplicity I'd say that until it's got a portion of itself out of the AoE, it has to deal with the obscuring effect.
The heavily obscured area of a Fog Cloudblocks vision entirely and creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
If any part of a creature's space/square is outside a Fog Cloud, its line of sight is only blocked when trying to see through it and it will effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area. Looking anywhere else should be fine.
Party is fighting a few large/gargantuan creatures.
wizard casts fog cloud or sleet storm spell above the ground such that the medium spaces the party is in are not in the spell effects. The large/gargantuan creatures are partially in the spells area do to their size. Are the larger creatures effectively blinded while partially in the area?
If the effect is placed in such a way that the medium creatures have an unobscured view of the large(r) creature then the large(r) will have an unobscured view of the medium creatures.
If the large/gargantuan creature has uses eyes to see and those eyes are in its head, then Fog Cloud might be used to blind the creature when spell is positioned to creature's head while simultaneously allowing the party to see the non-fogged areas of said creature. Keep in mind that nowhere in the spell does it say that Fog Cloud has to be cast next to the ground.
If the large/gargantuan creature has uses eyes to see and those eyes are in its head, then Fog Cloud might be used to blind the creature when spell is positioned to creature's head while simultaneously allowing the party to see the non-fogged areas of said creature. Keep in mind that nowhere in the spell does it say that Fog Cloud has to be cast next to the ground.
There is no support in the rules to make such a distinction though. There is no facing and nothing that specifies a specific point in a creatures space that it sees from. So as long as the creature has an unobscured view from some part of its space then it can see.
Fine, RAW says Fog Cloud positioning doesn't matter regardless of size of creature or where it's eyes are. Guess what? Many of rules weren't built to accommodate creatures sizes smaller than Small or larger than Large. There's several reasons of why PCs aren't allowed to be Large size even if the actual species/lineage (like Goliath) were more like Large than Medium creatures. It's because the rules are primarily built around balancing PC-centric characters, not around Ancient Dragons or Cloud Giants.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
For particularly large creatures, a DM might find it useful to treat it as multiple smaller creatures in a similar way that a Kraken has separate minis for its tentacles. A gargantuan dragon's head could be treated as a medium creature that is "riding" the rest of the dragon. This would let it be targeted separately and mechanics like these would become more intuitive.
Edit: It also provides a functionality similar to legendary actions.
Fine, RAW says Fog Cloud positioning doesn't matter regardless of size of creature or where it's eyes are. Guess what? Many of rules weren't built to accommodate creatures sizes smaller than Small or larger than Large. There's several reasons of why PCs aren't allowed to be Large size even if the actual species/lineage (like Goliath) were more like Large than Medium creatures. It's because the rules are primarily built around balancing PC-centric characters, not around Ancient Dragons or Cloud Giants.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
I’m not saying a DM can’t rule differently, but the question was asked in the rules section of the forum, ergo most answers are centered around RAW. Really the only way fog cloud works to blind a gargantuan creature is if it’s also completely immobilized; otherwise since a Fog Cloud is 8 5ft squares across and a gargantuan creature fills a 4x4 space, it will at most need to move 3 squares to get clear of the fog. Nearly every gargantuan creature has fly or swim speeds, meaning movement reducing terrain usually won’t do anything to slow them down. People are allowed to come up with clever ideas, but that doesn’t mean a DM is obliged to accommodate their idea if they didn’t think it through.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
Sure thing, if you/the DM/the table wants to make such a ruling go right ahead. I know there are tables that use rules for facing even though there is no RAW to support it.
I'd just suggest that you remember to apply it consistently because if there are situations where it makes sense that the eyes (head) of a creature is affected by an effect while the rest of the body isn't then there will be situations where it would makes sense that the head (eyes, ears, so on) isn't affected by something that would blind/deafen it even though other parts of the creature still is in range of the effect.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
Sure thing, if you/the DM/the table wants to make such a ruling go right ahead. I know there are tables that use rules for facing even though there is no RAW to support it.
Yea sorry, poorly worded by me. It isn't an "expected to be always on" or even an "most everyone uses it" like many of the optional rules in the PHB but yes, there is a version of it in official books.
If you aren't using mapped combat and you cast fog cloud in a giant's space, you cannot see the giant. Whether the giant can see you is undefined, because the rules are silent on whether obscurement is opaque. Creatures cannot be partially in an area, they are either inside or outside.
If you're using mapped combat, you use the rules for line of sight, and if you can see the giant, the giant can see you.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
Sure thing, if you/the DM/the table wants to make such a ruling go right ahead. I know there are tables that use rules for facing even though there is no RAW to support it.
Hmmm, paywall. So optional rule, often ignored by those of us who either don't use the DMG or who don't pour through it's Optional Rules. Still, that means it CAN be RAW to introduce facing rules, just like it CAN be optional to have Death Clerics and Oathbreaker Paladins in your game.
If you aren't using mapped combat and you cast fog cloud in a giant's space, you cannot see the giant. Whether the giant can see you is undefined, because the rules are silent on whether obscurement is opaque. Creatures cannot be partially in an area, they are either inside or outside.
If you're using mapped combat, you use the rules for line of sight, and if you can see the giant, the giant can see you.
The rules aren't that complicated for vision in this case. Fog Cloud explicitly makes the area it covers heavily obscured, which is an official rule for when vision is completely blocked by a terrain effect, and any creature attempting to look through that area is blinded for the purposes of seeing within or beyond. If a creature is partially in the AoE of Fog Cloud, they can see clearly in a direction where line of sight is completely out of the cloud, while anything where line of sight would pass through the cloud is blocked.
The rules aren't that complicated for vision in this case. Fog Cloud explicitly makes the area it covers heavily obscured, which is an official rule for when vision is completely blocked by a terrain effect, and any creature attempting to look through that area is blinded for the purposes of seeing within or beyond.
The only place it tells you whether heavy obscurement blocks seeing through an area is the mapped combat rules; the basic rules and the rules in the PHB only address seeing things that are actually inside the area (the other problem is that conventional darkness should not block vision through or out of an area, just into).
The description for heavily obscured says it "blocks vision completely". Using a grade school level of reading comprehension, we can then intuit that you cannot magically see around the blocked area.
If you aren't using mapped combat and you cast fog cloud in a giant's space, you cannot see the giant. Whether the giant can see you is undefined, because the rules are silent on whether obscurement is opaque. Creatures cannot be partially in an area, they are either inside or outside.
If you are playing in Theater of the Mind, you can still decide to place an area of effect partially on a creature's space despite not using grid play.
Party is fighting a few large/gargantuan creatures.
wizard casts fog cloud or sleet storm spell above the ground such that the medium spaces the party is in are not in the spell effects. The large/gargantuan creatures are partially in the spells area do to their size. Are the larger creatures effectively blinded while partially in the area?
If a creature has a clear path from any of the squares of their space to any of the squares of a targets space, they can see them for the same reason that there are no facing rules in 5e. (Accounting for cover as applicable.)
However, if a creatures can't reasonably function under the circumstances, a DM could be reasonably convinced to impose an appropriate penalty.
Fog Cloud creates a 20 ft radius sphere of fog (meaning it's 40 ft from end to end). Even a gargantuan creature can be completely covered by this. Purely for simplicity I'd say that until it's got a portion of itself out of the AoE, it has to deal with the obscuring effect.
The heavily obscured area of a Fog Cloud blocks vision entirely and creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
If any part of a creature's space/square is outside a Fog Cloud, its line of sight is only blocked when trying to see through it and it will effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area. Looking anywhere else should be fine.
If the effect is placed in such a way that the medium creatures have an unobscured view of the large(r) creature then the large(r) will have an unobscured view of the medium creatures.
If the large/gargantuan creature has uses eyes to see and those eyes are in its head, then Fog Cloud might be used to blind the creature when spell is positioned to creature's head while simultaneously allowing the party to see the non-fogged areas of said creature. Keep in mind that nowhere in the spell does it say that Fog Cloud has to be cast next to the ground.
There is no support in the rules to make such a distinction though. There is no facing and nothing that specifies a specific point in a creatures space that it sees from. So as long as the creature has an unobscured view from some part of its space then it can see.
Fine, RAW says Fog Cloud positioning doesn't matter regardless of size of creature or where it's eyes are. Guess what? Many of rules weren't built to accommodate creatures sizes smaller than Small or larger than Large. There's several reasons of why PCs aren't allowed to be Large size even if the actual species/lineage (like Goliath) were more like Large than Medium creatures. It's because the rules are primarily built around balancing PC-centric characters, not around Ancient Dragons or Cloud Giants.
It makes total sense, narratively-speaking, for the DM to rule that Fog Cloud can work by obscuring part of a creature's space when that creature is Huge or bigger. Also, since the creature can move out of the Fog Cloud space, there is nothing broken about that tactic. If the party wants to get creative and combine multiple effects like Fog Cloud plus Plant Growth to slow their ability to exit Fog Cloud, let them. That's what the game is for: to provide a dynamic world where RAI is more important than RAW (unless where it clearly breaks the game).
For particularly large creatures, a DM might find it useful to treat it as multiple smaller creatures in a similar way that a Kraken has separate minis for its tentacles. A gargantuan dragon's head could be treated as a medium creature that is "riding" the rest of the dragon. This would let it be targeted separately and mechanics like these would become more intuitive.
Edit: It also provides a functionality similar to legendary actions.
I’m not saying a DM can’t rule differently, but the question was asked in the rules section of the forum, ergo most answers are centered around RAW. Really the only way fog cloud works to blind a gargantuan creature is if it’s also completely immobilized; otherwise since a Fog Cloud is 8 5ft squares across and a gargantuan creature fills a 4x4 space, it will at most need to move 3 squares to get clear of the fog. Nearly every gargantuan creature has fly or swim speeds, meaning movement reducing terrain usually won’t do anything to slow them down. People are allowed to come up with clever ideas, but that doesn’t mean a DM is obliged to accommodate their idea if they didn’t think it through.
Sure thing, if you/the DM/the table wants to make such a ruling go right ahead. I know there are tables that use rules for facing even though there is no RAW to support it.
I'd just suggest that you remember to apply it consistently because if there are situations where it makes sense that the eyes (head) of a creature is affected by an effect while the rest of the body isn't then there will be situations where it would makes sense that the head (eyes, ears, so on) isn't affected by something that would blind/deafen it even though other parts of the creature still is in range of the effect.
Um, DMG, "Optional Rule: Facing" - see https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/running-the-game#OptionalRuleFacing
Yea sorry, poorly worded by me. It isn't an "expected to be always on" or even an "most everyone uses it" like many of the optional rules in the PHB but yes, there is a version of it in official books.
5e vision and light is a mess.
If you aren't using mapped combat and you cast fog cloud in a giant's space, you cannot see the giant. Whether the giant can see you is undefined, because the rules are silent on whether obscurement is opaque. Creatures cannot be partially in an area, they are either inside or outside.
If you're using mapped combat, you use the rules for line of sight, and if you can see the giant, the giant can see you.
Hmmm, paywall. So optional rule, often ignored by those of us who either don't use the DMG or who don't pour through it's Optional Rules. Still, that means it CAN be RAW to introduce facing rules, just like it CAN be optional to have Death Clerics and Oathbreaker Paladins in your game.
The rules aren't that complicated for vision in this case. Fog Cloud explicitly makes the area it covers heavily obscured, which is an official rule for when vision is completely blocked by a terrain effect, and any creature attempting to look through that area is blinded for the purposes of seeing within or beyond. If a creature is partially in the AoE of Fog Cloud, they can see clearly in a direction where line of sight is completely out of the cloud, while anything where line of sight would pass through the cloud is blocked.
The only place it tells you whether heavy obscurement blocks seeing through an area is the mapped combat rules; the basic rules and the rules in the PHB only address seeing things that are actually inside the area (the other problem is that conventional darkness should not block vision through or out of an area, just into).
The description for heavily obscured says it "blocks vision completely". Using a grade school level of reading comprehension, we can then intuit that you cannot magically see around the blocked area.
If you are playing in Theater of the Mind, you can still decide to place an area of effect partially on a creature's space despite not using grid play.
I'd rule on the side of simplicity: Is the giant obscured, yes or no? No "partial" answers allowed.
I don't want to get into the maths of partial cover, especially when the 3rd dimension is applied.