D&D books are very well written, but I was wondering if this specific paragraph could be improved (PHB, p. 204). Maybe (probably) I'm alone in this 😅, but I would like to know your opinion anyway.

If no unblocked straight line extends from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn't included in the spell's area.

Here is my humble suggestion for clarity:

"If there is a blocked straight line from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn't included in the spell's area."

But that would be a change to the rule.  Although D&D does not have to be played on a grid, concepts like this are sometimes illustrated in the books by using a grid.  They draw four lines from the origin, one to each corner of the proposed grid square.  Currently all of these lines must be blocked in order for that grid square to not be included.  With your change, if ANY of those lines are blocked then the grid square would be excluded.

This sort of thing also comes up when discussing attacks and degrees of cover.  All lines need to be blocked for full cover.  If only some are blocked then you might have half cover or 3/4 cover.

Quote from up2ng >>

But that would be a change to the rule.  Although D&D does not have to be played on a grid, concepts like this are sometimes illustrated in the books by using a grid.  They draw four lines from the origin, one to each corner of the proposed grid square.  Currently all of these lines must be blocked in order for that grid square to not be included.  With your change, if ANY of those lines are blocked then the grid square would be excluded.

Oh, man... You have opened my eyes.

Maybe my problem is I haven't played using grids yet 😕 I should give it a try.

Thanks mate!