Poll of the Day > does this cantrip hit allies as well

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/1/9/9/AAbbn0AAEDFP.png

or is this a "dm interpretation" thing

Technically "anything" can be subject to dm interpretation by being called a house rule. So if fireball can hit your allies that sounds like it can too.

Yes.

"Each creature within range" so yes.

Unless your allies aren't creatures.

Pretty much every spell unless it specifically says you can exclude allies also targets your allies if they are in range. Unless you have an attribute known as "careful spell". Even then, that only works on spells with saving throws, not attack spells.

Edit: Never mind that last part, forgot it had a constitution save.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/5/9/AAbbn0AAEDK3.jpg

Thunderclap sucks

Zareth posted...

Thunderclap sucks

not when the campaign has essentially become dynasty warriors

Enjoy all those passed con saves

Dikitain posted...

Pretty much every spell unless it specifically says you can exclude allies also targets your allies if they are in range.

This. D&D is not kind when it comes to magical AoE friendly fire.

Any spell that says "every creature" or something similar targets every creature, friend or foe. If you only want to hit enemies, stick to spells that say "target creature" or "all enemies in X range" or something along those lines.

That being said, a very kind DM could rule that you don't hit allies. But it's definitely counter to the spirit of the rules, and there are actually builds that revolve around deliberately targeting your allies, or at least mitigating the damage you do when they get caught in the crossfire.

Basically, be really, really careful where you're flinging those Fireballs.

Part of the technique of playing a good spell caster is positioning spells well to make it so they hit 0 members of the party or at most 1. This is not like most video games where friendly fire is either turned off or hard to do.

An example of good placement would be orienting a fireball to the corner of the room so the blast only hits enemies or something.

My favorite part of thunderclap is alerting every other enemy nearby.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

That being said, a very kind DM could rule that you don't hit allies.

Kind? That is just shitting on the School of Evocation, their entire stick is excluding allies from AoE spells.

Monopoman posted...

Part of the technique of playing a good spell caster is positioning spells well to make it so they hit 0 members of the party or at most 1. This is not like most video games where friendly fire is either turned off or hard to do.

I'd say the differentiation is in implementation. In a tactical video game or tabletop, you have time to deliberately line up shots and calculate how any given spell is going to hit, so the onus is more on the players to not cast at their allies and try to "angle" shots correctly. But in more action-oriented video games you're generally casting on the fly while moving (and possibly while a stupid AI is moving your allies around and directly into the path of your spells), so it's better to be a bit more forgiving and turn the friendly fire off.

Which is why you get games like Divinity: Original Sin where casting doesn't just hit allies, it also does environmental damage that lasts over time, which you have to tactically plan around. Because strategizing is a large part of the game.



Nichtcrawler-X posted...

Kind? That is just shitting on the School of Evocation, their entire stick is excluding allies from AoE spells.

And Sorcerers in general, who get Careful Spell as a Metamagic effect.

But it doesn't really matter all that much unless you've got players at the table using those abilities. If your group is three Rogues and a Necromancer Wizard, it isn't really necessary to strictly adhere to all possible aspects of class balance for classes that aren't even in the game.

The goal is to make the game more fun for the people who are actually playing it, not hypothetical players who aren't there. Even high-level DMs are willing to do this - professional DM and D&D dev Chris Perkins fudged things in his Dice Camera Action game so that the Sorcerer player was essentially getting the Evoker bonus from Careful Spell (when they shouldn't have been, because Spell Sculpting is actually more powerful than Careful Spell). Because he felt like it made the game more fun for the players... and because no one was playing an Evoker Wizard to contrast against.

It's like a DM house-ruling that prepared casters can act more like spontaneous casters. Sure, it craps on spontaneous casters, but that doesn't really matter if no one is playing a spontaneous caster. And hell, WotC themselves have been shitting on spontaneous casters lately, so it's not like anything is 100% sacrosanct even at the highest levels of play (or game design). If a given table finds it more fun to allow spellcasters to cast any spell they know (or even shitcan spell slots entirely in favor of point-cast MP/mana-style systems), that's up to them. If everyone playing is having fun, then the game is being played "correctly", regardless of the rules.

This is also the same sort of reason why some groups with ignore things like Encumbrance or Fatigue entirely (possibly because they want to run a more cinematic-style game), while others look for ways to make it even more punishing (likely because they want to run a survival-style game). Or completely ignore Alignment. Or ammunition requirements. Or spellcasting components. Or whatever else they think makes for a better game.

As long as the DM and players all agree, pretty much anything is fair game.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Basically, be really, really careful where you're flinging those Fireballs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dPNYL5DjEc

FellWolf posted...

My favorite part of thunderclap is alerting every other enemy nearby.

And maybe even doing 1d6 damage if you're lucky!

PSA: 1E is better.

FellWolf posted...

PSA: 1E is better.

It really isn't.











BECMI is where it's at.

BECMI is fake. No one plays past the B.

I'll never understand WotC. They removed line of sight rules for physical projectiles, so now I can shoot my bow from behind a 4-man allied stack of PCs, but I still have to account for magic AoEs? You're telling me a level 2 Ranger has Legolas-tier archery skills that allows me to bend an arrow around 20ft of allied space without hitting any of them and then smacking my target well enough to do damage? Or that the whole party leaned to one side which allowed me to get a clean shot? 5e got a lot right, it also got a lot wrong, it's too difficult to get my group to play 3.5 though as they can barely recall how damage rolls work without three reminders each session.

GanglyKhan posted...

I'll never understand WotC. They removed line of sight rules for physical projectiles, so now I can shoot my bow from behind a 4-man allied stack of PCs, but I still have to account for magic AoEs? You're telling me a level 2 Ranger has Legolas-tier archery skills that allows me to bend an arrow around 20ft of allied space without hitting any of them and then smacking my target well enough to do damage? Or that the whole party leaned to one side which allowed me to get a clean shot? 5e got a lot right, it also got a lot wrong, it's too difficult to get my group to play 3.5 though as they can barely recall how damage rolls work without three reminders each session.

That sounds like a situation where cover rules should come into play.

GanglyKhan posted...

I'll never understand WotC. They removed line of sight rules for physical projectiles, so now I can shoot my bow from behind a 4-man allied stack of PCs, but I still have to account for magic AoEs?

The main problem with those 5e complaints is that it's trying to straddle the line between being a grid-based miniatures game (the way 4e was) while simultaneously being a "theater of the mind" style game (the way White Wolf popularized in the 90s and the way most people actually play D&D these days).

A lot of D&Ds flaws have always been rooted in the fact that it was a miniatures wargame at heart, and on some level still wants to be that - but tons of players just want to play it purely in their imagination without maps or grids or figures or a DM having to whip out a plastic cone protractor to see what you hit and what you don't with your spell. So there's always a bit of conflict between the two, and DMs always sort of have to fudge things to make it work.

my dm does line of sight things, but it's literally just a flat "you can't hit behind the guy to hit another guy"

Hard_Light posted...

my dm does line of sight things, but it's literally just a flat "you can't hit behind the guy to hit another guy"

Depending on the situation, that should be a half/partial cover situation and not a full cover situation.

we literally only do cover if you're in a building peeking out of a window thing

which i am often, because i am a giff and i have an armory

I keep reading the title as "catnip."

I try not to trip over cans.