Wall of Light spell: I have questions.

[JakOfAllTirades]

My character has the Wall of Light spell now. Good for him. But our next session is in two weeks and I have no idea how this works, because the spell description in Xanathar's Guide is... confusing. Like, extremely confusing. And badly written. Can anyone in the Playground make any sense of this? Help!

Up to a point, it's fine, but right about here, I'm lost: (Spell description in italics, my questions in bold.)

The wall blocks line of sight...

In both directions or just one? If so, which direction?

It emits bright light out to 120 feet and dim light for an additional 120 feet.

Same question: is this happening on both sides of the wall, or just one side. If so, which side?

When the wall appears, each creature in its area must make a Constitution saving throw.

What does "its area" mean? Squares touching the wall itself? Squares in the brightly lit area? AM I JUST OVER-THINKING THIS???

Until the spell ends, you can use an action to launch a beam of radiance from the wall at one creature you can see within 60 feet of it.

But the wall blocks line of sight so how in the **** does this feature work, exactly?

I'd just avoid this whole mess and pick something else, but my group is planning to take on a Beholder and I'm in need of a Warlock spell that inflicts Blindness. I don't have a lot of options for that, so I've got to figure out the proper RAW/RAI for this spell.

[JackPhoenix]

What's so confusing about that? The description is perfectly clear.


The wall blocks line of sight...

In both directions or just one? If so, which direction?

If it blocks line of sight, it blocks line of sight. If it was somehow selective, it would say so.


It emits bright light out to 120 feet and dim light for an additional 120 feet.

Same question: is this happening on both sides of the wall, or just one side. If so, which side?

Anywhere around the wall. Again, if it emitted light in only one direction, the spell would say so.


When the wall appears, each creature in its area must make a Constitution saving throw.

What does "its area" mean? Squares touching the wall itself? Squares in the brightly lit area? AM I JUST OVER-THINKING THIS???

Yes, you are. "Its area" means "area covered by the wall". Squares in the brightly lit area aren't "the wall".


Until the spell ends, you can use an action to launch a beam of radiance from the wall at one creature you can see within 60 feet of it.

But the wall blocks line of sight so how in the **** does this feature work, exactly?

By.... being on the same side as the thing you want to shoot lasers at? Or, you know, in any position where the wall isn't between you and the target...

[Lunali]

I'd just avoid this whole mess and pick something else, but my group is planning to take on a Beholder and I'm in need of a Warlock spell that inflicts Blindness. I don't have a lot of options for that, so I've got to figure out the proper RAW/RAI for this spell.

The original questions were addressed so I'd just like to point out some alternatives that you may or may not have available, hunger of hadar, darkness, greater invisibility and major image can all potentially achieve the desired effect if used correctly.

[JakOfAllTirades]

The original questions were addressed so I'd just like to point out some alternatives that you may or may not have available, hunger of hadar, darkness, greater invisibility and major image can all potentially achieve the desired effect if used correctly.

Those all block or prevent line of sight, but don't necessarily cause the Blind condition. The main difference being that if we're fighting a Beholder, its anti-magic field won't help it if it's blind. Also, this might be meta-gaming, but its Con save is weak, so if I'm luck it'll stay blinded for a few turns. That'll shut down all or most of its eye rays, which require a line of sight. So Wall of Light is probably the best choice.

[JakOfAllTirades]

What's so confusing about that? The description is perfectly clear.



If it blocks line of sight, it blocks line of sight. If it was somehow selective, it would say so.



Anywhere around the wall. Again, if it emitted light in only one direction, the spell would say so.



Yes, you are. "Its area" means "area covered by the wall". Squares in the brightly lit area aren't "the wall".



By.... being on the same side as the thing you want to shoot lasers at? Or, you know, in any position where the wall isn't between you and the target...


This all looks good. Thanks for the clarity.

[ImproperJustice]

It is important to note that the wall can be created in thin air. So at about 10’ above your head in a ceiling type formation, it does wonders to blind giant sized attackers while you and your allies attack their feet unhindered.

It’s also handy against flying foes in this fashion, with you using the edges for cover, or to confound enemies by working at diagonal angles around corners.

[Jerrykhor]

All the OP's questions can be answered by 'It mean what it says'.

Maybe its your first time seeing a wall spell, but this is one of the simpler ones. Wall of Fire completely breaks verisimilitude by dealing damage to only one side of the wall. Wall of Force have the problem of whether its considered 'full cover' or not, and whether spells can be cast through it. Wall of Light is, by comparison, pretty straight forward in its meaning and application.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Those all block or prevent line of sight, but don't necessarily cause the Blind condition. The main difference being that if we're fighting a Beholder, its anti-magic field won't help it if it's blind. Also, this might be meta-gaming, but its Con save is weak, so if I'm luck it'll stay blinded for a few turns. That'll shut down all or most of its eye rays, which require a line of sight. So Wall of Light is probably the best choice.

Hunger of Hadar do inflict blind.

[MrStabby]

I have some sympathy with the OP. Sure you can read it as written and there isn't a lot of ambiguity there... but it does seem a bit counterintuitive.

You have a wall that has a specific effect to illuminate things - so you expect it to be able to be used to help you see things. But it also blocks visibility, so maybe, if one of the intended effects of the wall is to help see things there is something asymmetric about this effect?

What is the area of the wall? Does the wall have a 2d footprint or is it a line? If the projection of the wall is a line on the ground then it suggests that area is not a good way to measure it. At your table to you put walls with no defined volume on squares or between squares? How does this work with TotM? This seems to raise a sufficient number of problems to seriously consider that this was not what was intended by the spell. This is particularly true when there are other areas/regions that the spell does describe - as the OP noted there is a region defined by illumination as well.

And the whole wall blocking line of sight / shooting a ray of light thing... yeah, that comes across as messy. There is an association with walls, that they keep enemies from you. Having to be on the same side as the enemy (or doing something equally counter-intuitive with the wall) gives me further sympathy with the OP.

I am not saying that anyone else's interpretation is wrong - I am in agreement, but also the spell seems a little poorly designed.

[JackPhoenix]

I have some sympathy with the OP. Sure you can read it as written and there isn't a lot of ambiguity there... but it does seem a bit counterintuitive.

You should read is as written... that's why it is written in the first place. Why would the text be there if you were supposed to invent things? Spells do what their description says they do, what you consider intuitive is irrelevant.


You have a wall that has a specific effect to illuminate things - so you expect it to be able to be used to help you see things. But it also blocks visibility, so maybe, if one of the intended effects of the wall is to help see things there is something asymmetric about this effect?

So does a flashlight. It helps to see things at night by illuminating them. Yet, there's a flashlight on my shelf, and it certainly blocks my line of sight, as I can't see what's behind it due to it being solid metal object.

You're also making assumptions that the wall's purpose is to help you see things, when there are spells much better for that purpose, and most of the spell's text describe how it could be used against your enemies.


What is the area of the wall? Does the wall have a 2d footprint or is it a line? If the projection of the wall is a line on the ground then it suggests that area is not a good way to measure it. At your table to you put walls with no defined volume on squares or between squares? How does this work with TotM? This seems to raise a sufficient number of problems to seriously consider that this was not what was intended by the spell. This is particularly true when there are other areas/regions that the spell does describe - as the OP noted there is a region defined by illumination as well.

"The wall can be up to 60 feet long, 10 feet high, and 5 feet thick.". How about reading the description? The iluminated area is separated from the wall itself in the text: "It (the wall) emits bright light out to 120 feet and dim light for an additional 120 feet."


And the whole wall blocking line of sight / shooting a ray of light thing... yeah, that comes across as messy. There is an association with walls, that they keep enemies from you. Having to be on the same side as the enemy (or doing something equally counter-intuitive with the wall) gives me further sympathy with the OP.

Your associations are your problem. Again, your intuition is irrelevant.

[MrStabby]

You should read is as written... that's why it is written in the first place. Why would the text be there if you were supposed to invent things? Spells do what their description says they do, what you consider intuitive is irrelevant.



So does a flashlight. It helps to see things at night by illuminating them. Yet, there's a flashlight on my shelf, and it certainly blocks my line of sight, as I can't see what's behind it due to it being solid metal object.

You're also making assumptions that the wall's purpose is to help you see things, when there are spells much better for that purpose, and most of the spell's text describe how it could be used against your enemies.



"The wall can be up to 60 feet long, 10 feet high, and 5 feet thick.". How about reading the description? The iluminated area is separated from the wall itself in the text: "It (the wall) emits bright light out to 120 feet and dim light for an additional 120 feet."



Your associations are your problem. Again, your intuition is irrelevant.

Yeah... not quite sure what your problem is. Just because I can understand where the OP is coming from doesn't really warrant this kind of response.

[KorvinStarmast]

Those all block or prevent line of sight, but don't necessarily cause the Blind condition. The main difference being that if we're fighting a Beholder, its anti-magic field won't help it if it's blind. Also, this might be meta-gaming, but its Con save is weak, so if I'm luck it'll stay blinded for a few turns. That'll shut down all or most of its eye rays, which require a line of sight. So Wall of Light is probably the best choice. Indeed. Beholders are hard to beat: neutralizing a beholder's eyes would seem to be a key to beating one.

It is important to note that the wall can be created in thin air. So at about 10’ above your head in a ceiling type formation, it does wonders to blind giant sized attackers while you and your allies attack their feet unhindered. Hmm, our giants campaign might could use a little of this.
Yeah... not quite sure what your problem is. Just because I can understand where the OP is coming from doesn't really warrant this kind of response. Welcome to the internet. :smallbiggrin:

[Chronos]

Wall of Fire, Wall of Ice, and even Wall of Force are all a lot simpler than this. Those are all clearly designed to be used as barriers. But Wall of Light doesn't make any sense as a barrier. Anyone who reads the spell description is going to see the word "wall", and that's going to be confusing, because it's going to make you think it's useful as a barrier. When one gets to the end of the description and still hasn't found anything wall-like about it, it's natural to wonder what one missed, or to assume that there's something else about it.

[stoutstien]

Wall of Fire, Wall of Ice, and even Wall of Force are all a lot simpler than this. Those are all clearly designed to be used as barriers. But Wall of Light doesn't make any sense as a barrier. Anyone who reads the spell description is going to see the word "wall", and that's going to be confusing, because it's going to make you think it's useful as a barrier. When one gets to the end of the description and still hasn't found anything wall-like about it, it's natural to wonder what one missed, or to assume that there's something else about it.

Rename it holy disco dance floor

[MrStabby]

Rename it holy disco dance floor

Heh, a good name.

And it really seems like you need something to force people into it - gravity will do the trick.

[Nonah_Me]

Seems to me it'd work like a bank of LED lights. You can't see through it, it provides bright illumination, and blinds folks that are too close.

[Talsin]

Rename it holy disco dance floor

Funny you mention that...since it can act as a 2D plane, you can place it on the ground as such - shooting out laserbeams from the ground and blinding anyone standing on it.

Another great function I've found with this wall is that it doesn't require a surface to place it on to begin with. You can use it in a siege to block arrow-slits, or blind that really annoying aaracokra when they try to fly away after leaving a fist-sized yogurt-surprise on your shoulder.

Honestly, instead of lasers, I'd have preferred just being able to move the damn thing around - Action: Move the wall to a new point in range as if casting it for a second time. or something like that.

[tieren]

I would recommend dropping the wall right behind the beholder and push him into it. The anti magic cone emanates from the front so the wall should form fine and not be neutralized til he's in it and its too late.

Then use your turns to fire the radiant beams at his back while he faces the group, or repelling blasting him back into the wall.

[Talsin]

I would recommend dropping the wall right behind the beholder and push him into it. The anti magic cone emanates from the front so the wall should form fine and not be neutralized til he's in it and its too late.

Then use your turns to fire the radiant beams at his back while he faces the group, or repelling blasting him back into the wall.

I don't recall if this is laid out in the books... I know you can't cast in it, but can you concentrate on a spell whilst in a zone of antimagic?

[Crgaston]

I don't recall if this is laid out in the books... I know you can't cast in it, but can you concentrate on a spell whilst in a zone of antimagic?

Yes.

Spells Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.

[Talsin]

Yes.

Spells Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it.

So then an active spell or magical effect is on both the creature/object that casts it, even it it's far away?

[Crgaston]

So then an active spell or magical effect is on both the creature/object that casts it, even it it's far away?

Not sure exactly what you're asking.

[Talsin]

Not sure exactly what you're asking.

I'm saying if, for example, there is a field of antimagic NEAR me, and I cast a spell requiring concentration, lets say Darkness in regular space (NOT in the antimagic).
After casting, I move into the antimagic field. Does my Darkness, which is not in the antimagic field, end?

If it ends, this would imply that concentration is akin to an active spell itself, or a magical effect outside of the spell that it is creating because the description of Antimagic field doesn't include concentration from what I have available (non-errata edition).

[Segev]

What level is wall of light, and on whose lists is it?

[Galithar]

What level is wall of light, and on whose lists is it?

5
Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard

[Segev]

5
Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard

Sounds like it really shines (pun intended) as a Warlock spell, then, since it's usable about once every other encounter. Good crowd control.

The fact that it's 5 feet thick means answering the "what does it mean to intersect it?" question is easily answered: if it shares any of your squares.

Is it Evocation? Would the Evoker's Sculpt Spell class feature let them leave holes in it to shoot through?

[Chronos]

The Evoker's Shape Spells feature, despite its name, doesn't let you leave holes in any spell. It works by designating creatures who are protected, not locations.

And pushing a Beholder into it is completely pointless, because it doesn't do anything to creatures passing into or through it (that's part of the "not acting like a wall" thing). It damages and potentially blinds creatures that are in the area at the time it's cast, it damages (but does not blind) creatures that end their turn inside of it (but why would they do that?), and it damages (but does not blind) creatures that are hit by the bolts shot off from it.

EDIT: "Holy Disco Dance Floor" would indeed be a much better name for the spell.

[JackPhoenix]

Wall of Fire, Wall of Ice, and even Wall of Force are all a lot simpler than this. Those are all clearly designed to be used as barriers. But Wall of Light doesn't make any sense as a barrier. Anyone who reads the spell description is going to see the word "wall", and that's going to be confusing, because it's going to make you think it's useful as a barrier. When one gets to the end of the description and still hasn't found anything wall-like about it, it's natural to wonder what one missed, or to assume that there's something else about it.

Wall of Fire doesn't work as barrier either... you can walk right through (and take damage), just like with Wall of Light. In fact, the spells are remarkably similar. Neither is solid, but both block LoS, both cause damage, and have some weirdness (light allows you to shoot lasers, fire only causes damage on one side).

In fact, there's more Wall of X spells that don't act as a barrier than those that do, if your definition of barrier is only "it blocks movement": Fire, light, sand, water, and even thorns don't stop creatures from moving through. Only force, ice and stone do. All of them are wall-shaped, which in itself is enough to fulfill at least one of the dictionary definitions of a wall (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wall): "something resembling a wall (as in appearance, function, or effect) especially : something that acts as a barrier or defense".

[JakOfAllTirades]

Hunger of Hadar do inflict blind.

Creatures fully within the AoE are blinded, but the condition ends when they move out of it, so for my purposes I'd prefer Wall of Light's end-on-save Blindness.

[Segev]

Against a Large creature - like a Beholder - the "low ceiling" positioning would force it to either take damage or fly above it (and for non-fliers, just take damage) if you can restrict the horizontal movement to within the "wall area" of it. Not trivial, but at least can provide some crowd control. And, if the Beholder is flying above it, it can't see through it to you. Not without using its anti-magic cone, which then prevents it from zapping, while letting your archers fire up through the visible gap.

[Chronos]

You can walk right through a Wall of Fire, but you might not want to, because if you do, you'll take damage. Wall of Light has no such restriction. If you walk through a Wall of Light, nothing happens. It doesn't do damage to you, it doesn't make you save vs. some effect, it doesn't even slow you down.

As for being "wall-shaped", you'll almost always want to cast it so it's oriented horizontally, so the area of effect is 60' long, 10' wide, and 5' high (which the spell explicitly lets you do), so it's not even "wall-shaped".

In fact, it's actually quite a powerful spell (especially if you're in appropriate terrain, like a 10' wide dungeon corridor), as long as you use it in completely un-wall-like ways.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Many thanks to all for your insights on this. I think I can put this spell to good use now, in some ways I hadn't thought of.

[Sparky McDibben]

As for being "wall-shaped", you'll almost always want to cast it so it's oriented horizontally, so the area of effect is 60' long, 10' wide, and 5' high (which the spell explicitly lets you do), so it's not even "wall-shaped".

I had actually wondered about this - I had a visual of casting it as a low ceiling and then using the lasers to create a Rave of Death effect.

[Tharkun]

Great thread. This clears up a lot and I had never fully read everything on this spell. I now can visualize how to use this giant carpet of light to good effect.

[Lunali]

Those all block or prevent line of sight, but don't necessarily cause the Blind condition. The main difference being that if we're fighting a Beholder, its anti-magic field won't help it if it's blind. Also, this might be meta-gaming, but its Con save is weak, so if I'm luck it'll stay blinded for a few turns. That'll shut down all or most of its eye rays, which require a line of sight. So Wall of Light is probably the best choice.

The beholder's anti-magic field is only a problem if you rely on magic for your damage. The field only suppresses spells while they are in the cone, it doesn't end them so they'll still be there if the beholder doesn't keep looking at them. Most importantly, if it's using its anti-magic field against you, its only attack is an unimpressive bite.

[JakOfAllTirades]

The beholder's anti-magic field is only a problem if you rely on magic for your damage. The field only suppresses spells while they are in the cone, it doesn't end them so they'll still be there if the beholder doesn't keep looking at them. Most importantly, if it's using its anti-magic field against you, its only attack is an unimpressive bite.

It also makes summoned objects go away, which is VERY bad for BladeLocks. When your Pact Weapon AND all your spells are gone, then what?

[BloodSnake'sCha]

It also makes summoned objects go away, which is VERY bad for BladeLocks. When your Pact Weapon AND all your spells are gone, then what?

Backup weapon or Backup Hex weapon?

[NNescio]

It also makes summoned objects go away, which is VERY bad for BladeLocks. When your Pact Weapon AND all your spells are gone, then what?

It can't do jack to you if you're inside the Antimagic Cone. Other than that piddly Bite attack with poor accuracy and damage, and if you're within range for Bite the Beholder is screwed anyway because you can just maneuver around the AMF cone (and drop a spell that blocks vision).

So... duck behind cover or circle around the Beholder, cast Darkness on an object on your person. Hopefully you can see it magical darkness, but it still works even if you can't. If the Beholder can't fly away from you, it's No-Save-GG-Beholder (if it can, grapple it). Proceed to whittle it down with mundane weapons with the help of your party members (even the Wizard can operate a crossbow or whack it with a staff); its Bite sucks. You might as well play Beholder soccer; by that point it's practically an overgrown balloon with a toothy grin.

If you can't maneuver around the Antimagic Cone, then try to move away from it. Cast Darkness, then banzai charge the Beholder and hope the DM isn't thinking fast enough to have it run away with Disintegrate (-ing ceilings and walls). If it tries to play keep away by hovering with its AMF eye pointed at you, have your party take out mundane ranged weapons and pelt it with projectiles. Make sure you are grouped up together with everyone so the Beholder can't target anyone with its eye rays if it drops its AMF cone (your Darkness will come back up).

[Crgaston]

I'm saying if, for example, there is a field of antimagic NEAR me, and I cast a spell requiring concentration, lets say Darkness in regular space (NOT in the antimagic).
After casting, I move into the antimagic field. Does my Darkness, which is not in the antimagic field, end?

If it ends, this would imply that concentration is akin to an active spell itself, or a magical effect outside of the spell that it is creating because the description of Antimagic field doesn't include concentration from what I have available (non-errata edition).

If you mean literally end, Then no, at worst it would be suppressed while you were in the cone.

As to whether or not it affects concentration at all, that's a really good question, and something that I don't have a RAW or RAI reference for. It would make sense to me either way, so I wouldn't have a problem whichever way a DM ruled it.

if I were running a session, I'd probably say that any effect being sustained by concentration is suppressed while the caster is in the cone.

Does anyone have any insight here?

[NNescio]

If you mean literally end, Then no, at worst it would be suppressed while you were in the cone.

As to whether or not it affects concentration at all, that's a really good question, and something that I don't have a RAW or RAI reference for. It would make sense to me either way, so I wouldn't have a problem whichever way a DM ruled it.

if I were running a session, I'd probably say that any effect being sustained by concentration is suppressed while the caster is in the cone.

Does anyone have any insight here?

All spells are temporarily suppressed while within an Antimagic Field or similar effect (e.g. Antimagic Cone).


...Spells and other magical Effects, except those created by an artifact or a deity, are suppressed in the Sphere and can't protrude into it. ... While an effect is suppressed, it doesn't function, but the time it spends suppressed counts against its Duration.


... Spells: Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the Sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it. ...

It doesn't matter if it requires concentration or not; if it's a (currently active) spell (or magical effect), it's suppressed. But suppression doesn't end the spell! It is still active and its Duration ticks down, and its effects will reemerge when it's no longer within the area of an AMF.

So, things like Spiritual Weapon, Sanctuary, Death Ward, Mind Blank, Mirror Image, et al. will be suppressed while within an AMF. Concentration doesn't come into it.

(But instantaneous effects of spells [damage, for example] and some post-spell permanent effects like permanent Wall of Stone and the animating undead part of Animate Dead [but not the control aspect] do not get suppressed by an AMF, because these changes have only occurred and do not revert even after the spell ends.)

[Crgaston]

All spells are temporarily suppressed while within an Antimagic Field or similar effect (e.g. Antimagic Cone).





It doesn't matter if it requires concentration or not; if it's a (currently active) spell (or magical effect), it's suppressed. But suppression doesn't end the spell! It is still active and its Duration ticks down, and its effects will reemerge when it's no longer within the area of an AMF.

So, things like Spiritual Weapon, Sanctuary, Death Ward, Mind Blank, Mirror Image, et al. will be suppressed while within an AMF. Concentration doesn't come into it.

(But instantaneous effects of spells [damage, for example] and some post-spell permanent effects like permanent Wall of Stone and the animating undead part of Animate Dead [but not the control aspect] do not get suppressed by an AMF, because these changes have only occurred and do not revert even after the spell ends.)

The question here is if the caster is in the cone but the spell effect is not. So say, if a Paladin is concentrating on Bless and steps into the cone, is the Bless spell still active on party members who are not in the cone?

[NNescio]

The question here is if the caster is in the cone but the spell effect is not. So say, if a Paladin is concentrating on Bless and steps into the cone, is the Bless spell still active on party members who are not in the cone?

Yes, it still is. There is nothing in AMF that says it ends concentration, and concentration in if itself is not inherently magical. This is RAW, and it is confirmed by Crawford.




@JeremyECrawford I always ruled Antimagic Field suppresses a caster's concentration while inside it. How do you rule it?

— Michael Kurz (@rayirshien) May 25, 2016

Antimagic field has no effect on concentration. If it did, its description would say so. #DnD https://t.co/Dfqsh0arFf

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) May 25, 2016

[Crgaston]

Yes, it still is. There is nothing in AMF that says it ends concentration, and concentration in if itself is not inherently magical. This is RAW, and it is confirmed by Crawford.

Sweet. Thanks!

[tieren]

Yes, it still is. There is nothing in AMF that says it ends concentration, and concentration in if itself is not inherently magical. This is RAW, and it is confirmed by Crawford.

And to be clear. AMF talks about the effect being "suppressed" and durations still continuing to run which likely wouldn't happen if concentration was broken. So if you are concentrating on a self buff spell and enter the AMF, the buff will be suppressed while you are in there, but as soon as you step out again, if your concentration was not broken, it would resume.