Range vs. area for spells

[Anthrowhale]

The srd unambiguously states that range constrains area in the spell range section.


If any portion of the spell’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted.

Yet, in the spell area section the SRD also says:


When determining whether a given creature is within the area of a spell, count out the distance from the point of origin in squares ...

... which has no exception for range. Furthermore, a quick search for range personal and range touch spells with an area turns up 40 spells, including canonical ones like magic circle against evil.

Is there any RAW resolution of these seemingly contradictory observations? And how do you actually play?

[The Random NPC]

I believe the RAW is the area of a spell can't exceed the range. So if you center a Fireball at the very edge of it's range, you get a half-sphere (quarter-sphere?) of fire, with an invisible line that fire just won't cross.

[Duke of Urrel]

I agree with the Random NPC, if you're taking a straw poll.

[Rubik]

Unfortunately, most of the developers of 3.X did not bother learning the definitions of area and range, or how they interact, and continually created spells that didn't work because of it. Spells like Lightning Bolt, which had no business even having a range, and other spells with ranges even smaller than their areas (including ranges of "Personal" and "0 ft" for spells with large areas).

Which, of course, means that none of those spells work at all, let alone the way they were intended.

Plus, a lot of those FUBARs mean that Widen and Enlarge Spell require both to be applied for either feat to work, or that neither feat works at all.

[Segev]

All of which sums up to it being a reasonable house rule to ignore that particular rule about areas not exceeding ranges. It seems the writers ignored it completely, and I can think of nothing it adds to the game if enforced.

[Anthrowhale]

... a reasonable house rule to ignore that particular rule about areas not exceeding ranges.

I suspect the situation is stronger: a near universal house rule amongst both designers and players. Does anyone play with Magic Circle having no area? Or with Apocalypse from the Sky only doing damage to the caster? I expect not, but would be interested to hear anything contrary.



... Widen and Enlarge Spell require both to be applied for either feat to work, or that neither feat works at all.

I think Enlarge only works on Close, Medium, or Long range spells which makes it not helpful for typical applications of Widen.

[Anthrowhale]

I checked a bit further. There are more spells that seem to make sense than not, so the 'rule' is at least a rule in the sense of being the most common outcome.

The interesting spells (i.e. those I've thought about using) with an area but no range seem to be:

(Greater) Anticipate Teleportation
Apocalypse from the Sky
Erupt
Ghost Trap
(Un)Hallow
Invisibility Sphere
Magic Circle Against X
Planar Bubble

[dextercorvia]

Personally I house rule that only the point of origin needs to be within the Range.

[Dalebert]

Personally I house rule that only the point of origin needs to be within the Range.

I find the rule overly complicated and even a bit counter-intuitive. Range should be distance that can be pictured as a line and AoE should be an area, but this makes you think of range more as an area depicted as a sphere with the range as the radius and forces you to do geometry in your head to calculate the overlap. That's bad enough even before I find out that many spells are broken and don't work because of this complication that some developers don't even follow. I agree with you, Dex. I say "good riddance" to this.

[Andion Isurand]

Yeah, I agree that range should only affect the point of origin in these cases.

What would you guys say about Chain Spell?
Do all the secondary targets need to be in the spell's range?

[dextercorvia]

Yeah, I agree that range should only affect the point of origin in these cases.

What would you guys say about Chain Spell?
Do all the secondary targets need to be in the spell's range?

Yeah, all targets should be within range. Remember that an area spell "targets" the point of origin, so that even stays internally consistent with my houserule.

[nedz]

I believe the RAW is the area of a spell can't exceed the range. So if you center a Fireball at the very edge of it's range, you get a half-sphere (quarter-sphere?) of fire, with an invisible line that fire just won't cross.
This is the 3.5 rule.

Personally I house rule that only the point of origin needs to be within the Range.
This is the AD&D rule.

Unfortunately, most of the developers of 3.X did not bother learning the definitions of area and range, or how they interact, and continually created spells that didn't work because of it. Spells like Lightning Bolt, which had no business even having a range, and other spells with ranges even smaller than their areas (including ranges of "Personal" and "0 ft" for spells with large areas).

Which, of course, means that none of those spells work at all, let alone the way they were intended.

Plus, a lot of those FUBARs mean that Widen and Enlarge Spell require both to be applied for either feat to work, or that neither feat works at all.
The one which gets me is Sculpt Spell
You can apply it to Fireball and get a 120' line effect if you wish
You can also apply it to Lightning Bolt and get a 20' radius spread, but this has a range of 120'

It just seems inconsistent: both spells are basic energy evocations.

[dextercorvia]

This is the AD&D rule.

This probably explains more dysfunctions that anything. My guess is designers just assumed that it worked the way they remembered. I've tried using the 3.5 rule, but there are just too many spells that it doesn't work for.