If you can't target a creature without a clear path, does that mean Scrying fails unless you can already see the target?What counts as a target for a spell?Do you need line of sight to cast spells on someone?Is it legal to cast a spell with a range of Sight on someone you can see, but without a clear path?Can sacred flame target someone that is behind total cover?Does the range of Message refer to straight-line distance or distance along a clear path?How do targeting and line of sight for spells work in regards to allies?Does a target of the Scrying spell know they were targeted?Can you make a Spell Glyph of a spell that has the potential to target more than one creature?Does the Eyebite Spell Work Through a Wall of Force?Can the Dragon's Breath spell damage enemies with no clear path to the caster?
Was there an original and definitive use of alternate dimensions/realities in fiction?
Why did the VIC-II and SID use 6 µm technology in the era of 3 µm and 1.5 µm?
Could these polynomials be identified?
Blogging in LaTeX
Using font to highlight a god's speech in dialogue
Single vs Multiple Try Catch
How can an F-22 Raptor reach supersonic speeds without having supersonic inlets?
How to have the "Restore Missing Files" function from Nautilus without installing Nautilus?
What is the motivation behind designing a control stick that does not move?
Is torque as fundamental a concept as force?
How can I portray a character with no fear of death, without them sounding utterly bored?
Tasha's Hideous Laughter used on a deaf person?
What is the definition of Product
New coworker has strange workplace requirements - how should I deal with them?
Playing boules... IN SPACE!
Am I required to correct my opponent's assumptions about my morph creatures?
What is causing gaps in logs?
What is the maximal acceptable delay between pilot's input and flight control surface actuation?
Given a specific computer system, is it possible to estimate the actual precise run time of a piece of Assembly code
German equivalent to "going down the rabbit hole"
How did Gollum know Sauron was gathering the Haradrim to make war?
Is it rude to ask my opponent to resign an online game when they have a lost endgame?
Why are CEOs generally fired rather being demoted?
Are there balance issues when allowing attack of opportunity against any creature?
If you can't target a creature without a clear path, does that mean Scrying fails unless you can already see the target?
What counts as a target for a spell?Do you need line of sight to cast spells on someone?Is it legal to cast a spell with a range of Sight on someone you can see, but without a clear path?Can sacred flame target someone that is behind total cover?Does the range of Message refer to straight-line distance or distance along a clear path?How do targeting and line of sight for spells work in regards to allies?Does a target of the Scrying spell know they were targeted?Can you make a Spell Glyph of a spell that has the potential to target more than one creature?Does the Eyebite Spell Work Through a Wall of Force?Can the Dragon's Breath spell damage enemies with no clear path to the caster?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
The section "A Clear Path to the Target", on page 205 of the PHB states "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover."
The spell Scrying, contains the following text:
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw, which is modified by how well you know the target and the sort of physical connection you have to it. If a target knows you're casting this spell, it can fail the saving throw voluntarily if it wants to be observed."
Additionally, it says: "Instead of targeting a creature, you can choose a location you have seen before as the target of this spell. When you do, the sensor appears at that location and doesn't move. "
So, by RAW, does this mean that you can't target a creature or location that you can't already see/ is behind total cover from you? This seems to make the spell entirely useless, along with most spells that are commonly used for spying or long-range communication.
Personally, as a DM I am tempted to just throw out this entire section, it doesn't really add anything and I doubt it's worth the headache or ruining large parts of the game. However, I would like to figure out the RAW just so I know what I'm overriding, if at all. Am I missing something or is Scrying basically useless?
dnd-5e
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The section "A Clear Path to the Target", on page 205 of the PHB states "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover."
The spell Scrying, contains the following text:
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw, which is modified by how well you know the target and the sort of physical connection you have to it. If a target knows you're casting this spell, it can fail the saving throw voluntarily if it wants to be observed."
Additionally, it says: "Instead of targeting a creature, you can choose a location you have seen before as the target of this spell. When you do, the sensor appears at that location and doesn't move. "
So, by RAW, does this mean that you can't target a creature or location that you can't already see/ is behind total cover from you? This seems to make the spell entirely useless, along with most spells that are commonly used for spying or long-range communication.
Personally, as a DM I am tempted to just throw out this entire section, it doesn't really add anything and I doubt it's worth the headache or ruining large parts of the game. However, I would like to figure out the RAW just so I know what I'm overriding, if at all. Am I missing something or is Scrying basically useless?
dnd-5e
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The section "A Clear Path to the Target", on page 205 of the PHB states "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover."
The spell Scrying, contains the following text:
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw, which is modified by how well you know the target and the sort of physical connection you have to it. If a target knows you're casting this spell, it can fail the saving throw voluntarily if it wants to be observed."
Additionally, it says: "Instead of targeting a creature, you can choose a location you have seen before as the target of this spell. When you do, the sensor appears at that location and doesn't move. "
So, by RAW, does this mean that you can't target a creature or location that you can't already see/ is behind total cover from you? This seems to make the spell entirely useless, along with most spells that are commonly used for spying or long-range communication.
Personally, as a DM I am tempted to just throw out this entire section, it doesn't really add anything and I doubt it's worth the headache or ruining large parts of the game. However, I would like to figure out the RAW just so I know what I'm overriding, if at all. Am I missing something or is Scrying basically useless?
dnd-5e
New contributor
$endgroup$
The section "A Clear Path to the Target", on page 205 of the PHB states "To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover."
The spell Scrying, contains the following text:
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw, which is modified by how well you know the target and the sort of physical connection you have to it. If a target knows you're casting this spell, it can fail the saving throw voluntarily if it wants to be observed."
Additionally, it says: "Instead of targeting a creature, you can choose a location you have seen before as the target of this spell. When you do, the sensor appears at that location and doesn't move. "
So, by RAW, does this mean that you can't target a creature or location that you can't already see/ is behind total cover from you? This seems to make the spell entirely useless, along with most spells that are commonly used for spying or long-range communication.
Personally, as a DM I am tempted to just throw out this entire section, it doesn't really add anything and I doubt it's worth the headache or ruining large parts of the game. However, I would like to figure out the RAW just so I know what I'm overriding, if at all. Am I missing something or is Scrying basically useless?
dnd-5e
dnd-5e
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 8 hours ago
KaielOfThothKaielOfThoth
275 bronze badges
275 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Technically, yes, the spell might be nearly useless; but nobody would rule that way
The rules on "A Clear Path to the Target" state:
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover...
You are correct that if the creature being spied on by scrying counts as a target then the rule above would mean that they cannot be behind total cover. However, whether or not that creature counts as a target of scrying is up to your GM.
We have now run into the nearly unsolvable problem of "What counts as a target for a spell". As my answer there explains, assuming that something is a target whenever a spell's description says so does not end up working. In the end, it would be up to a GM to define the term and decide what counts as a target of the scrying spell (or any spell).
If a GM really ruled that the "target" mentioned in the spell's description counts as a target for the spell and is then subject to the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, this would indeed make the spell nearly useless. This shows that these rules are not meant to be used to come to this conclusion.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The range of Scrying is "self", so the caster targets him/herself first
The spellcasting rules says that the target must be withing range:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range
However, range of Scrying is "self", so initially the caster is targeting self, not the creature he/she is scrying:
Scrying
5th-leveI divination
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Self
You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you...
After you target self and cast the spell, the spell effect gives you an ability to "see and hear a particular creature you choose". The "target" mentioned afterwards clearly does not obey the general rules for spellcasting — it has its own specific rules based on the target familiarity.
Furthermore, RAW a clear path to the target is required when the spell affects the target:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect
The Scrying spell does not affect the target, it "creates a sensor", it's another reason why this rule does not apply:
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the scrying spell the line
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the
same plane of existence as you."
gives you the range. You can use the spell on any creature, anywhere on that plane, as long as it is the same plane as you are currently on.
The use of the word target is simply used to designate the creature you are making the subject of the spell. It is incorrect to think that the same restrictions for a combat target apply. One is a noun 'the target', the other is a verb 'to target'.
As intended the spell is meant to be allow remote viewing of a creature or place that you know of in some way. The spell is most definitely not useless.
Here's another example from the Sending spell:
You can send the message across any distance and even to other planes
of existence, but if the target is on a different plane than you,
there is a 5 percent chance that the message doesn’t arrive.
Clearly, in this case, even though the word target is used, the spell is not intended to blocked by line of sight or cover.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
This is probably a case where a specific rule (for how you select Scrying's target) overrides a general rule (that you must be able to see your spell's targets). The spell has rules about the target, and for it to be of any value to the caster, those rules must replace the normal targeting rules. It's useless to scry on somebody you can already see after all!
Alas, the writers of 5e spells are not always consistent when something related to a spell as a target and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules. So, as in all unclear situations, the DM at your table will probably need to make a ruling on how it works for your game. I think that for Scrying it will be fairly easy for them to say you don't need to see a creature or location target (since becoming able to see around them is the whole point of the spell), but for other spells there may be more than one reasonable interpretation.
It may be worth while for the players of spellcasting characters to ask their DM for interpretations of spells before they pick them for their characters. If an unusual situation comes up with a new spell and the player and DM haven't discussed it in advance, it may make sense for the player to be allowed to pick a different spell if the DM rules that it works differently than the player expected.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
KaielOfThoth is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154565%2fif-you-cant-target-a-creature-without-a-clear-path-does-that-mean-scrying-fail%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Technically, yes, the spell might be nearly useless; but nobody would rule that way
The rules on "A Clear Path to the Target" state:
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover...
You are correct that if the creature being spied on by scrying counts as a target then the rule above would mean that they cannot be behind total cover. However, whether or not that creature counts as a target of scrying is up to your GM.
We have now run into the nearly unsolvable problem of "What counts as a target for a spell". As my answer there explains, assuming that something is a target whenever a spell's description says so does not end up working. In the end, it would be up to a GM to define the term and decide what counts as a target of the scrying spell (or any spell).
If a GM really ruled that the "target" mentioned in the spell's description counts as a target for the spell and is then subject to the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, this would indeed make the spell nearly useless. This shows that these rules are not meant to be used to come to this conclusion.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Technically, yes, the spell might be nearly useless; but nobody would rule that way
The rules on "A Clear Path to the Target" state:
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover...
You are correct that if the creature being spied on by scrying counts as a target then the rule above would mean that they cannot be behind total cover. However, whether or not that creature counts as a target of scrying is up to your GM.
We have now run into the nearly unsolvable problem of "What counts as a target for a spell". As my answer there explains, assuming that something is a target whenever a spell's description says so does not end up working. In the end, it would be up to a GM to define the term and decide what counts as a target of the scrying spell (or any spell).
If a GM really ruled that the "target" mentioned in the spell's description counts as a target for the spell and is then subject to the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, this would indeed make the spell nearly useless. This shows that these rules are not meant to be used to come to this conclusion.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Technically, yes, the spell might be nearly useless; but nobody would rule that way
The rules on "A Clear Path to the Target" state:
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover...
You are correct that if the creature being spied on by scrying counts as a target then the rule above would mean that they cannot be behind total cover. However, whether or not that creature counts as a target of scrying is up to your GM.
We have now run into the nearly unsolvable problem of "What counts as a target for a spell". As my answer there explains, assuming that something is a target whenever a spell's description says so does not end up working. In the end, it would be up to a GM to define the term and decide what counts as a target of the scrying spell (or any spell).
If a GM really ruled that the "target" mentioned in the spell's description counts as a target for the spell and is then subject to the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, this would indeed make the spell nearly useless. This shows that these rules are not meant to be used to come to this conclusion.
$endgroup$
Technically, yes, the spell might be nearly useless; but nobody would rule that way
The rules on "A Clear Path to the Target" state:
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can't be behind total cover...
You are correct that if the creature being spied on by scrying counts as a target then the rule above would mean that they cannot be behind total cover. However, whether or not that creature counts as a target of scrying is up to your GM.
We have now run into the nearly unsolvable problem of "What counts as a target for a spell". As my answer there explains, assuming that something is a target whenever a spell's description says so does not end up working. In the end, it would be up to a GM to define the term and decide what counts as a target of the scrying spell (or any spell).
If a GM really ruled that the "target" mentioned in the spell's description counts as a target for the spell and is then subject to the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule, this would indeed make the spell nearly useless. This shows that these rules are not meant to be used to come to this conclusion.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 7 hours ago
Medix2Medix2
9,1882 gold badges30 silver badges94 bronze badges
9,1882 gold badges30 silver badges94 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Why did you ignore the specific over-ride of the general rule that's in the spell itself? Namely: "You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you."
$endgroup$
– Lino Frank Ciaralli
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli As always with "specific / general" situations: Is this a "specific override of the general rule", or is it an independent rule, that is, you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise?
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@LinoFrankCiaralli MarkWell's interpretation is the one I've used. It is simply a further restriction, the creature must be on your plane of existence as well as a valid target otherwise
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Medix2 I actually wouldn't interpret it that way, both because the general targeting rules already imply that the target must be on your plane of existence (so, as an additional restriction, it would be redundant), and because I don't take the exact wording of the rules very seriously.
$endgroup$
– Mark Wells
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@MarkWells huh, okay, then I guess I believe that "you must choose a creature on the same plane of existence that is also a valid target for the spell otherwise? " which is something you proposed
$endgroup$
– Medix2
3 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The range of Scrying is "self", so the caster targets him/herself first
The spellcasting rules says that the target must be withing range:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range
However, range of Scrying is "self", so initially the caster is targeting self, not the creature he/she is scrying:
Scrying
5th-leveI divination
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Self
You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you...
After you target self and cast the spell, the spell effect gives you an ability to "see and hear a particular creature you choose". The "target" mentioned afterwards clearly does not obey the general rules for spellcasting — it has its own specific rules based on the target familiarity.
Furthermore, RAW a clear path to the target is required when the spell affects the target:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect
The Scrying spell does not affect the target, it "creates a sensor", it's another reason why this rule does not apply:
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The range of Scrying is "self", so the caster targets him/herself first
The spellcasting rules says that the target must be withing range:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range
However, range of Scrying is "self", so initially the caster is targeting self, not the creature he/she is scrying:
Scrying
5th-leveI divination
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Self
You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you...
After you target self and cast the spell, the spell effect gives you an ability to "see and hear a particular creature you choose". The "target" mentioned afterwards clearly does not obey the general rules for spellcasting — it has its own specific rules based on the target familiarity.
Furthermore, RAW a clear path to the target is required when the spell affects the target:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect
The Scrying spell does not affect the target, it "creates a sensor", it's another reason why this rule does not apply:
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The range of Scrying is "self", so the caster targets him/herself first
The spellcasting rules says that the target must be withing range:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range
However, range of Scrying is "self", so initially the caster is targeting self, not the creature he/she is scrying:
Scrying
5th-leveI divination
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Self
You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you...
After you target self and cast the spell, the spell effect gives you an ability to "see and hear a particular creature you choose". The "target" mentioned afterwards clearly does not obey the general rules for spellcasting — it has its own specific rules based on the target familiarity.
Furthermore, RAW a clear path to the target is required when the spell affects the target:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect
The Scrying spell does not affect the target, it "creates a sensor", it's another reason why this rule does not apply:
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target
$endgroup$
The range of Scrying is "self", so the caster targets him/herself first
The spellcasting rules says that the target must be withing range:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range
However, range of Scrying is "self", so initially the caster is targeting self, not the creature he/she is scrying:
Scrying
5th-leveI divination
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: Self
You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the same plane of existence as you...
After you target self and cast the spell, the spell effect gives you an ability to "see and hear a particular creature you choose". The "target" mentioned afterwards clearly does not obey the general rules for spellcasting — it has its own specific rules based on the target familiarity.
Furthermore, RAW a clear path to the target is required when the spell affects the target:
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect
The Scrying spell does not affect the target, it "creates a sensor", it's another reason why this rule does not apply:
the spell creates an invisible sensor within 10 feet of the target
edited 6 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
enkryptorenkryptor
29.2k14 gold badges116 silver badges221 bronze badges
29.2k14 gold badges116 silver badges221 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
edited the answer @Medix2
$endgroup$
– enkryptor
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the scrying spell the line
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the
same plane of existence as you."
gives you the range. You can use the spell on any creature, anywhere on that plane, as long as it is the same plane as you are currently on.
The use of the word target is simply used to designate the creature you are making the subject of the spell. It is incorrect to think that the same restrictions for a combat target apply. One is a noun 'the target', the other is a verb 'to target'.
As intended the spell is meant to be allow remote viewing of a creature or place that you know of in some way. The spell is most definitely not useless.
Here's another example from the Sending spell:
You can send the message across any distance and even to other planes
of existence, but if the target is on a different plane than you,
there is a 5 percent chance that the message doesn’t arrive.
Clearly, in this case, even though the word target is used, the spell is not intended to blocked by line of sight or cover.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
In the scrying spell the line
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the
same plane of existence as you."
gives you the range. You can use the spell on any creature, anywhere on that plane, as long as it is the same plane as you are currently on.
The use of the word target is simply used to designate the creature you are making the subject of the spell. It is incorrect to think that the same restrictions for a combat target apply. One is a noun 'the target', the other is a verb 'to target'.
As intended the spell is meant to be allow remote viewing of a creature or place that you know of in some way. The spell is most definitely not useless.
Here's another example from the Sending spell:
You can send the message across any distance and even to other planes
of existence, but if the target is on a different plane than you,
there is a 5 percent chance that the message doesn’t arrive.
Clearly, in this case, even though the word target is used, the spell is not intended to blocked by line of sight or cover.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
In the scrying spell the line
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the
same plane of existence as you."
gives you the range. You can use the spell on any creature, anywhere on that plane, as long as it is the same plane as you are currently on.
The use of the word target is simply used to designate the creature you are making the subject of the spell. It is incorrect to think that the same restrictions for a combat target apply. One is a noun 'the target', the other is a verb 'to target'.
As intended the spell is meant to be allow remote viewing of a creature or place that you know of in some way. The spell is most definitely not useless.
Here's another example from the Sending spell:
You can send the message across any distance and even to other planes
of existence, but if the target is on a different plane than you,
there is a 5 percent chance that the message doesn’t arrive.
Clearly, in this case, even though the word target is used, the spell is not intended to blocked by line of sight or cover.
$endgroup$
In the scrying spell the line
"You can see and hear a particular creature you choose that is on the
same plane of existence as you."
gives you the range. You can use the spell on any creature, anywhere on that plane, as long as it is the same plane as you are currently on.
The use of the word target is simply used to designate the creature you are making the subject of the spell. It is incorrect to think that the same restrictions for a combat target apply. One is a noun 'the target', the other is a verb 'to target'.
As intended the spell is meant to be allow remote viewing of a creature or place that you know of in some way. The spell is most definitely not useless.
Here's another example from the Sending spell:
You can send the message across any distance and even to other planes
of existence, but if the target is on a different plane than you,
there is a 5 percent chance that the message doesn’t arrive.
Clearly, in this case, even though the word target is used, the spell is not intended to blocked by line of sight or cover.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
SteveSteve
5371 silver badge9 bronze badges
5371 silver badge9 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I feel that if you target something it becomes a target, and if something is a target then you've targeted it
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Do you disagree with the range part of the question though? And do you really think the Scrying spell is only to be used on things in visual range? I think you're getting overly hung up on the semantics of your interpretation.
$endgroup$
– Steve
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I definitely agree that your answers expresses the intent of the spell, the asker was just wondering strictly about what happens if you over-apply/abuse/strictly_follow the Rules As Written
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
The spell is called sending, not send message.
$endgroup$
– Szega
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
This question is about Rules As Written, not Rules As Intended. Therefore, the intent of this spell, which I already knew, isn't relevant. RAW, it seems that Sending also fails automatically if you don't have a clear path to the target, and is functionally useless by RAW except for covert messages only heard by the speaker and target, something which most likely could be accomplished with Message.
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
This is probably a case where a specific rule (for how you select Scrying's target) overrides a general rule (that you must be able to see your spell's targets). The spell has rules about the target, and for it to be of any value to the caster, those rules must replace the normal targeting rules. It's useless to scry on somebody you can already see after all!
Alas, the writers of 5e spells are not always consistent when something related to a spell as a target and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules. So, as in all unclear situations, the DM at your table will probably need to make a ruling on how it works for your game. I think that for Scrying it will be fairly easy for them to say you don't need to see a creature or location target (since becoming able to see around them is the whole point of the spell), but for other spells there may be more than one reasonable interpretation.
It may be worth while for the players of spellcasting characters to ask their DM for interpretations of spells before they pick them for their characters. If an unusual situation comes up with a new spell and the player and DM haven't discussed it in advance, it may make sense for the player to be allowed to pick a different spell if the DM rules that it works differently than the player expected.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is probably a case where a specific rule (for how you select Scrying's target) overrides a general rule (that you must be able to see your spell's targets). The spell has rules about the target, and for it to be of any value to the caster, those rules must replace the normal targeting rules. It's useless to scry on somebody you can already see after all!
Alas, the writers of 5e spells are not always consistent when something related to a spell as a target and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules. So, as in all unclear situations, the DM at your table will probably need to make a ruling on how it works for your game. I think that for Scrying it will be fairly easy for them to say you don't need to see a creature or location target (since becoming able to see around them is the whole point of the spell), but for other spells there may be more than one reasonable interpretation.
It may be worth while for the players of spellcasting characters to ask their DM for interpretations of spells before they pick them for their characters. If an unusual situation comes up with a new spell and the player and DM haven't discussed it in advance, it may make sense for the player to be allowed to pick a different spell if the DM rules that it works differently than the player expected.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is probably a case where a specific rule (for how you select Scrying's target) overrides a general rule (that you must be able to see your spell's targets). The spell has rules about the target, and for it to be of any value to the caster, those rules must replace the normal targeting rules. It's useless to scry on somebody you can already see after all!
Alas, the writers of 5e spells are not always consistent when something related to a spell as a target and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules. So, as in all unclear situations, the DM at your table will probably need to make a ruling on how it works for your game. I think that for Scrying it will be fairly easy for them to say you don't need to see a creature or location target (since becoming able to see around them is the whole point of the spell), but for other spells there may be more than one reasonable interpretation.
It may be worth while for the players of spellcasting characters to ask their DM for interpretations of spells before they pick them for their characters. If an unusual situation comes up with a new spell and the player and DM haven't discussed it in advance, it may make sense for the player to be allowed to pick a different spell if the DM rules that it works differently than the player expected.
$endgroup$
This is probably a case where a specific rule (for how you select Scrying's target) overrides a general rule (that you must be able to see your spell's targets). The spell has rules about the target, and for it to be of any value to the caster, those rules must replace the normal targeting rules. It's useless to scry on somebody you can already see after all!
Alas, the writers of 5e spells are not always consistent when something related to a spell as a target and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules. So, as in all unclear situations, the DM at your table will probably need to make a ruling on how it works for your game. I think that for Scrying it will be fairly easy for them to say you don't need to see a creature or location target (since becoming able to see around them is the whole point of the spell), but for other spells there may be more than one reasonable interpretation.
It may be worth while for the players of spellcasting characters to ask their DM for interpretations of spells before they pick them for their characters. If an unusual situation comes up with a new spell and the player and DM haven't discussed it in advance, it may make sense for the player to be allowed to pick a different spell if the DM rules that it works differently than the player expected.
answered 7 hours ago
BlckknghtBlckknght
2,4331 gold badge10 silver badges21 bronze badges
2,4331 gold badge10 silver badges21 bronze badges
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
It is notable that there are other spells which explicitly remove the cover requirement such as sacred flame " The target gains no benefit from cover for this saving throw." Or rather, is there evidence to support your statement "and they seldom call out when a spell's specific rules override the general targeting rules." which is precisely what sacred flame does
$endgroup$
– Medix2
7 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think this answer is the most accurate: the specific ("on the same plane of existence") overrides the general requirement of needing a clear path. However, I would edit the second paragraph: the rules do not include many such overrides, not because the writers were lazy or sloppy, but because there are so few of them.
$endgroup$
– Rykara
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What is there to stop the multitude of spells that say "Choose a target within range" or "Choose a creature you can see within range" from applying the same rule and being applicable to any target that fulfills those conditions? If this were the case of specific beats general, it should work in both situations. If not, it should be an additional restriction in both situations(can't scry on a target even with a clear path but on another plane, ie path goes through a portal). How would you reconcile your answer with these identical situations that are implied to be ruled oppositely?
$endgroup$
– KaielOfThoth
2 hours ago
add a comment |
KaielOfThoth is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
KaielOfThoth is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
KaielOfThoth is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
KaielOfThoth is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154565%2fif-you-cant-target-a-creature-without-a-clear-path-does-that-mean-scrying-fail%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Related: "What counts as a target for a spell"
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago