First time rules question that's come up between me and a fellow DM, in regards to a situation that may come up in my campaign.
An encounter planned for my next session includes a monster that possesses Rogue-like Sneak Attack, including hiding from players in an obscuring cloud of smoke, and simply turning invisible.
One of our players possesses the Shield spell and took the new Metallic Dragon's Favor feat from Fizban's, thus, he has access to two different variations of reaction-based Shields.
My question is simply, should a player be allowed to cast a reaction-based spell to defend against an attack that they cannot see? The attacks would be various tail strikes and claw swipes, NOT anged attacks that fire a physical object, like an arrow.
Any advice or actual ruling would be much appreciated! I've been told that Chris Perkins read these, so that'd be a sweet response!
The trigger for the Shield spell does not specify being hit by an attack "that can be seen", so by RAW, visibility is irrelevant.
Separately, being "invisible" does not mean that the assassin can not be tracked, they simply can't be pinpointed. So, even though the tail swipe and claw attacks may not be seen, the player may still hear the footwork of the assassin and act preemptively.
If the assassin is subject to both Invisibility and Silence, there is still no RAW reason that casting Shield should be prevented. However, a DM is empowered to make rulings on the fly as appropriate for their table.
The shield spell can be cast after you know you are hit by an attack
Though the specifics of how the shield spell actually plays out varies table-to-table the spell states that the reaction is taken (emphasis mine):
[...] when you are hit by an attack [...]
It does not occur when you are targeted, or when an attack roll is made; it occurs when you are actually hit. Once the attack roll has already beat out your AC. You could explain this by saying shield involves time travel or perhaps your caster is waiting to know whether the attack would hit them. Some sort of interpretation is required here if you want the spell to actually make sense.
Personally, I say it's just magic and for some reason the caster can use this after they are hit but it can also prevent that same hit. This is similar to absorb elements granting resistance to the triggering attack as well.
The shield spell does not require you to see your attacker
The spell is already doing some extraordinary things and looking at the description, the spell does not state that you need to see the attacker and so you do not need to see them.
So you can cast shield even after being hit by and invisible attacker and that same hit can be turned into a miss.
So, the player can use their reaction to cast shield if they're already mid-combat no problem. But, if they're getting ambushed by the invisible enemy the first round of combat they might end up being surprised, and, if so, they'd be unable to use their reaction until after their first turn.
So if round 1, and the invisible and as-of-yet undetected ambusher attacks before their turn, they'd be unable to shield against that attack.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Personally, I get dubious if a character casts shield after the player has seen the damage roll and encourage either a quick response from the player or a request to delay the damage roll.
Personally, I get dubious if a character casts shield after the player has seen the damage roll and encourage either a quick response from the player or a request to delay the damage roll.
Shield has to be used after the attack roll but before the damage roll. So the caster won't get to see the damage roll at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First time rules question that's come up between me and a fellow DM, in regards to a situation that may come up in my campaign.
An encounter planned for my next session includes a monster that possesses Rogue-like Sneak Attack, including hiding from players in an obscuring cloud of smoke, and simply turning invisible.
One of our players possesses the Shield spell and took the new Metallic Dragon's Favor feat from Fizban's, thus, he has access to two different variations of reaction-based Shields.
My question is simply, should a player be allowed to cast a reaction-based spell to defend against an attack that they cannot see? The attacks would be various tail strikes and claw swipes, NOT anged attacks that fire a physical object, like an arrow.
Any advice or actual ruling would be much appreciated! I've been told that Chris Perkins read these, so that'd be a sweet response!
The trigger for the Shield spell does not specify being hit by an attack "that can be seen", so by RAW, visibility is irrelevant.
Separately, being "invisible" does not mean that the assassin can not be tracked, they simply can't be pinpointed. So, even though the tail swipe and claw attacks may not be seen, the player may still hear the footwork of the assassin and act preemptively.
If the assassin is subject to both Invisibility and Silence, there is still no RAW reason that casting Shield should be prevented. However, a DM is empowered to make rulings on the fly as appropriate for their table.
Though the specifics of how the shield spell actually plays out varies table-to-table the spell states that the reaction is taken (emphasis mine):
It does not occur when you are targeted, or when an attack roll is made; it occurs when you are actually hit. Once the attack roll has already beat out your AC. You could explain this by saying shield involves time travel or perhaps your caster is waiting to know whether the attack would hit them. Some sort of interpretation is required here if you want the spell to actually make sense.
Personally, I say it's just magic and for some reason the caster can use this after they are hit but it can also prevent that same hit. This is similar to absorb elements granting resistance to the triggering attack as well.
The shield spell does not require you to see your attacker
The spell is already doing some extraordinary things and looking at the description, the spell does not state that you need to see the attacker and so you do not need to see them.
So you can cast shield even after being hit by and invisible attacker and that same hit can be turned into a miss.
So, the player can use their reaction to cast shield if they're already mid-combat no problem. But, if they're getting ambushed by the invisible enemy the first round of combat they might end up being surprised, and, if so, they'd be unable to use their reaction until after their first turn.
So if round 1, and the invisible and as-of-yet undetected ambusher attacks before their turn, they'd be unable to shield against that attack.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Personally, I get dubious if a character casts shield after the player has seen the damage roll and encourage either a quick response from the player or a request to delay the damage roll.
Shield has to be used after the attack roll but before the damage roll. So the caster won't get to see the damage roll at all.