There's a wall of force between the two of us. Would Flame Strike be blocked by Wall of Force, as it does not originate from me, I just point and it goes off?
I would argue that you need line of effect (the magic needs to travel from you to the spot where the spell detonates to cause the effect). Just like trying to cast Silence on the other side of a Wall of Force, I would argue that you can't. Exceptions would be spells that say the only requirement is to see the target, etc.
But it's hard to tell from your diagram if there are 3 walls of force or just one? If one, you can drop it in over the wall of force if you can see the area above and behind it (without passing thru it) - isn't Flame Strike 40' tall (if I recall).
It is a single wall of force. The horizonta --- lines are a wall. The / marks is a single wall of force. It is an indoors passage, with a roof and floor above and below.
If there were no roof blocking the path for Flame Strike, you could target the point of origin over the Wall of Force (it's 10-foot-high, 1/4 inch thick)
I agree with the above answers. The spell description describes the effect of the Flame Strike spell as "A vertical column of brilliant fire roars down from above." The spell target (or, the origin point of this effect if you prefer) is simply "a point within range" (you don't even have to see this location, although you can in this case anyway since the Wall is invisible). However, the Clear Path rule of general spellcasting will prevent this effect from being able to "originate" at the desired location.
The design intent of how this is supposed to work is that the spell is cast "from" the spellcaster. The spell then "travels" in a straight line along a clear path "to" the location where the spell effect originates into existence. This is true even for spells such as Magic Missile where we picture in our minds the spell effect actually originating from the spellcaster and streaking through the air -- even then, the effect technically originates "at" the target location. That location where the effect originates is meant to be either the origin point of an AoE spell or the creature or object that is being directly targeted by the spell. It was actually more obvious that it works this way under the 2014 rules. The 2024 rules have sort of butchered what is meant by "targeting" and "origin points" and so on which has resulted in sort of opening the door to debate about whether the clear path rule actually applies in situations like this in the way that we all know that it should.
For reference:
A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate
. . .
Distance. The range is expressed in feet.
Targets
A typical spell requires the caster to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description says whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or something else.
A Clear Path to the Target. To target something with a spell, a caster must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind Total Cover.
Areas of Effect. Some spells, such as Thunderwave, cover an area called an area of effect, which is defined in the rules glossary. The area determines what the spell targets. The description of a spell specifies whether it has an area of effect, which is typically one of these shapes: Cone, Cube, Cylinder, Emanation, Line, or Sphere.
A Cylinder is an area of effect that extends in straight lines from a point of origin located at the center of the circular top or bottom of the Cylinder . . .
If the creator of an area of effect places it at an unseen point and an obstruction—such as a wall—is between the creator and that point, the point of origin comes into being on the near side of the obstruction.
Interestingly, this last rule doesn't technically apply in this situation since the Wall is invisible, so you actually CAN see the point in space that you are attempting to target with your spell. So, something like the above result wouldn't happen -- instead, the DM should probably just tell you that you cannot cast your spell in that manner, with no loss of spell slot or action. The "invalid targets" rule doesn't really apply either, since you cannot actually cast the spell "on" the thing that you are trying to cast it on in the first place.
For completeness, note that the Clear Path rule makes mention of the concept of Total Cover.
First, let's look at the key phrases within the spell description for the Wall of Force:
The wall appears in any orientation you choose, as a horizontal or vertical barrier or at an angle.
. . .
Nothing can physically pass through the wall.
and now some rules for Cover:
Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover
. . .
Total Cover: An object that covers the whole target. A target behind total cover can't be targeted directly.
Again, just be aware that because of the new wording of some of these rules, a player might claim that the point of origin of an AoE spell isn't technically a "target" of anything and therefore the Clear Path rule doesn't apply to these spells. There is still that other rule about the origin point appearing on the near side of an obstruction when you cannot see the point in space that you are intending as your origin point. But for these situations where the wall is invisible, these players might claim that you can just drop any AoE spell wherever you want. This idea has been put forward in some recent previous threads. This is obviously not the design intent of the game. Keep in mind that even under that interpretation, you could create your Flame Strike effect at the desired location, but all of the actual creatures within the AoE would actually have Total Cover with respect to the spellcaster. That leads to further arguments about whether or not the rules of Total Cover apply in that way in this case or if we should only be considering Total Cover with respect to the point of origin which appears in this rule about AoE spells:
If all straight lines extending from the point of origin to a location in the area of effect are blocked, that location isn’t included in the area of effect. To block a line, an obstruction must provide Total Cover.
In other words, is the spellcaster targeting the creatures that are affected by an AoE spell, or is the Area itself actually targeting these creatures just because of this statement in the rules, potentially taken out of context:
The area determines what the spell targets.
Again, in 2014 it was clear and obvious that the concept of Cover applies to BOTH cases -- the clear path from the spellcaster to the origin point of the AoE, AND from the origin point of the AoE to the creature. In 2024 this is less obvious and creates some wiggle room for an alternate (and in my opinion, unintended) interpretation.
To solve this, the creators should probably update the Clear Path rule via errata to be brought more in line with the new way in which the term "target" is being used throughout the rest of the 2024 rules to improve that consistency and to make it more clear how the Clear Path rule is intended to interact with AoE points of origin.
I haven't listened to it, but apparently in a podcast, Jeremy Crawford confirmed that you can't target enemies behind transparent obstacles. I assume this also applies to are of effect spells. I think this same podcast says the effect triggers on the near side of the obstacle, so in the original post, casting flame strike on the bad guy, not knowing the wall of force was there would trigger it on the caster's side, potentially affecting them instead of the enemy.
Jeremy Crawford tweeted: Cover is a physical obstruction, not necessarily a visual one.
There's also this conversation (link to sageadvice.eu), but it's basically the same, just with the addition of the Misty Step, that it works because it has Range: Self.
So the layout is like this.
me
/----------------
/
/
-------/ Bad guy
There's a wall of force between the two of us. Would Flame Strike be blocked by Wall of Force, as it does not originate from me, I just point and it goes off?
I would argue that you need line of effect (the magic needs to travel from you to the spot where the spell detonates to cause the effect). Just like trying to cast Silence on the other side of a Wall of Force, I would argue that you can't. Exceptions would be spells that say the only requirement is to see the target, etc.
But it's hard to tell from your diagram if there are 3 walls of force or just one? If one, you can drop it in over the wall of force if you can see the area above and behind it (without passing thru it) - isn't Flame Strike 40' tall (if I recall).
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
It is a single wall of force. The horizonta --- lines are a wall. The / marks is a single wall of force. It is an indoors passage, with a roof and floor above and below.
Ah, in that case I would say, "no" a flamestrike would not work in that case.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I agree with the above answers. The spell description describes the effect of the Flame Strike spell as "A vertical column of brilliant fire roars down from above." The spell target (or, the origin point of this effect if you prefer) is simply "a point within range" (you don't even have to see this location, although you can in this case anyway since the Wall is invisible). However, the Clear Path rule of general spellcasting will prevent this effect from being able to "originate" at the desired location.
The design intent of how this is supposed to work is that the spell is cast "from" the spellcaster. The spell then "travels" in a straight line along a clear path "to" the location where the spell effect originates into existence. This is true even for spells such as Magic Missile where we picture in our minds the spell effect actually originating from the spellcaster and streaking through the air -- even then, the effect technically originates "at" the target location. That location where the effect originates is meant to be either the origin point of an AoE spell or the creature or object that is being directly targeted by the spell. It was actually more obvious that it works this way under the 2014 rules. The 2024 rules have sort of butchered what is meant by "targeting" and "origin points" and so on which has resulted in sort of opening the door to debate about whether the clear path rule actually applies in situations like this in the way that we all know that it should.
For reference:
Interestingly, this last rule doesn't technically apply in this situation since the Wall is invisible, so you actually CAN see the point in space that you are attempting to target with your spell. So, something like the above result wouldn't happen -- instead, the DM should probably just tell you that you cannot cast your spell in that manner, with no loss of spell slot or action. The "invalid targets" rule doesn't really apply either, since you cannot actually cast the spell "on" the thing that you are trying to cast it on in the first place.
For completeness, note that the Clear Path rule makes mention of the concept of Total Cover.
First, let's look at the key phrases within the spell description for the Wall of Force:
and now some rules for Cover:
Again, just be aware that because of the new wording of some of these rules, a player might claim that the point of origin of an AoE spell isn't technically a "target" of anything and therefore the Clear Path rule doesn't apply to these spells. There is still that other rule about the origin point appearing on the near side of an obstruction when you cannot see the point in space that you are intending as your origin point. But for these situations where the wall is invisible, these players might claim that you can just drop any AoE spell wherever you want. This idea has been put forward in some recent previous threads. This is obviously not the design intent of the game. Keep in mind that even under that interpretation, you could create your Flame Strike effect at the desired location, but all of the actual creatures within the AoE would actually have Total Cover with respect to the spellcaster. That leads to further arguments about whether or not the rules of Total Cover apply in that way in this case or if we should only be considering Total Cover with respect to the point of origin which appears in this rule about AoE spells:
In other words, is the spellcaster targeting the creatures that are affected by an AoE spell, or is the Area itself actually targeting these creatures just because of this statement in the rules, potentially taken out of context:
Again, in 2014 it was clear and obvious that the concept of Cover applies to BOTH cases -- the clear path from the spellcaster to the origin point of the AoE, AND from the origin point of the AoE to the creature. In 2024 this is less obvious and creates some wiggle room for an alternate (and in my opinion, unintended) interpretation.
To solve this, the creators should probably update the Clear Path rule via errata to be brought more in line with the new way in which the term "target" is being used throughout the rest of the 2024 rules to improve that consistency and to make it more clear how the Clear Path rule is intended to interact with AoE points of origin.
Support from 2014:
How to add Tooltips.
There's also this conversation (link to sageadvice.eu), but it's basically the same, just with the addition of the Misty Step, that it works because it has Range: Self.
We had also this thread in DDB Wall of force and spells - Rules & Game Mechanics