17
\$\begingroup\$

Wall of Sand's description reads as follows (emphasis mine):

You conjure up a wall of swirling sand on the ground at a point you can see within range. You can make the wall up to 30 feet long, 10 feet high, and 10 feet thick, and it vanishes when the spell ends. It blocks line of sight but not movement. A creature is blinded while in the wall’s space and must spend 3 feet of movement for every 1 foot it moves there.

To me, it's unclear whether or not the bolded clause provides total cover to a creature behind the wall, or if the creature is simply heavily obscured. If you and another creature are on the opposite sides of a Wall of Sand, can you perform a ranged weapon or spell attack against the creature?

\$\endgroup\$
0
17
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, you can attack through a Wall of Sand.

A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle. —Player's Handbook, pg. 196

"Obstacle" is not a game term, but all the examples given are of solid objects (walls, trees, creatures, and furniture), which agrees with the dictionary definition "a thing that blocks one's way" (Lexico).

As you've noted, Wall of Sand does not block movement, so it is not an obstacle, and therefore does not provide total cover.

As a side note, the attack would have disadvantage, since

When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. —Player's Handbook, pg. 194

except that the target can't see you either (assuming it doesn't have blindsight or similar abilities), and

When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. —Player's Handbook, pg. 195

so the advantage and disadvantage would cancel out.

\$\endgroup\$
0
10
\$\begingroup\$

Some attacks will be negated, others will not

Any attack that requires the attacker to see the target (the cantrip sacred flame is an example) cannot attack the target. If the line of sight is blocked, so too is the ability to see the target, which would render the target either w