situation. Player grappled by a creature and a player enveloped by an ooze. Evoked casts fireball and want to omit his party members. If grappled or enveloped players occupy same square can the evoker choose the targets with the same square?can he officially ‘see’ his party member that’s enveloped? What rulings are possible here?
The School of Evocation trait Sculpt Spells allows you to practically omit creatures that you can see from your spell's effects. It doesn't care about the space those creatures occupy, just that you can see them.
As such, if the evoker can see a creature when he casts that Fireball, he can omit them, even if they're grappled or in worse situations.
Engulfing (and being Swallowed Whole) may be trickier. For example, it kind of makes sense that a Gelatinous Cube's Transparent trait means that creatures engulfed by it are still visible, but other monsters that can engulf may not share this trait. It's up to the DM if the target is visible to the evoker so that they can be selected for Sculpt Spells.
About swallowed whole and similar abilities, however, keep in mind that if they grant total cover (such as the wording on the Purple Worm's bite: "A swallowed creature is blinded and restrained, it has total cover against attacks and other effects outside the worm"), they are immune to things like the aforementioned fireball anyway.
"Creatures inside the cube can be seen but have total cover." I think this is true of any and all engulfed or swallowed creatures - and so they are immune to a fireball until they escape.
Agree that a grappled creature can be omitted by sculpting while the grappler is targeted, and vice versa. Grappling creatures are usually still in different spaces, but that's not really important. Even if you had three tiny creatures occupying the same space you would be able to omit the sprite while targeting the two pixies.
...and gosh I hope one day I see someone leap into a gelatinous cube to avoid an incoming Meteor Swarm...
I don't think they're elastic enough to save a person from the impact of the physical object if it were to strike the cube directly..the ensuing fire however...
...and gosh I hope one day I see someone leap into a gelatinous cube to avoid an incoming Meteor Swarm...
I don't think they're elastic enough to save a person from the impact of the physical object if it were to strike the cube directly..the ensuing fire however...
I would probably rule that any damage over the gelatinous cube's remaining hit points, would then go onto the creature inside of it, as with the gelatinous cube dying, the creature wouldn't have total cover anymore. At least, that's how I would perceive it to be.
Had an issue occur during last nights session, (I am new to this, so might be a dumb question..)
A PC had a Stirge attached to his neck(draining blood), the wizard (who has sculpt spell) used his cantrip "schocking grasp" to kill the Stirge..even rolling a natural 20.. = fried birdie...
BUT is the PC with the stirge attached to his neck safe ? - Shocking grasp does not prompt a saving-throw, (melee spell attack) therefore it should not apply, but it's a evocation cantrip and can sculpted to not hit the PC. - in this case the PC is also wearing metal armor, which would prompt advantage on the spell attack..
how would you handle the situation ? I ended op giving ½ damage to the PC due to lack of saving throw...
Had an issue occur during last nights session, (I am new to this, so might be a dumb question..)
A PC had a Stirge attached to his neck(draining blood), the wizard (who has sculpt spell) used his cantrip "schocking grasp" to kill the Stirge..even rolling a natural 20.. = fried birdie...
BUT is the PC with the stirge attached to his neck safe ? - Shocking grasp does not prompt a saving-throw, (melee spell attack) therefore it should not apply, but it's a evocation cantrip and can sculpted to not hit the PC. - in this case the PC is also wearing metal armor, which would prompt advantage on the spell attack..
how would you handle the situation ? I ended op giving ½ damage to the PC due to lack of saving throw...
Thanks in advance
Shocking Grasp only hits one target, so should only damage the Stirge. Magic electricity doesn't have to follow the same laws of physics as it does in our would, so it doesn't also zap the attached character.
Well a cantrip is unaffected by sculpt spells. - Ignore
However, I would also rule that you would only deal damage to the target. Otherwise anytime lightning damage is used against creatures touching each other you would have to make the same ruling.
However, with "rule of cool" I have had a blue dragonborn use their breath attack against creatures standing in a shallow lake, so I had some lightning damage be dealt to all of those standing, however not nearly as much as the full blast to those in the radius.
Why do you say that a cantrip is not subject to sculpt spells? Nothing I can see in the wording of the trait suggests that it doesn't work with cantrips. You choose a number of creatures equal to the spell's level +1, so one creature total in case of cantrips.
Not that it matters in most cantrips since they're kind of limited, targeting-wise, but it should work fine with something like Thunderclap if a party member is near you.
I'll agree to the main topic, however - I've seen DMs rule both ways about "physical interactions" with magic, and it generally seems fine either way, as long as the rulings are consistent.
Why do you say that a cantrip is not subject to sculpt spells? Nothing I can see in the wording of the trait suggests that it doesn't work with cantrips. You choose a number of creatures equal to the spell's level +1, so one creature total in case of cantrips.
Not that it matters in most cantrips since they're kind of limited, targeting-wise, but it should work fine with something like Thunderclap if a party member is near you.
I'll agree to the main topic, however - I've seen DMs rule both ways about "physical interactions" with magic, and it generally seems fine either way, as long as the rulings are consistent.
Disregard. I thought I had saw a previously ruling that said this was true, but I just double checked and you are correct.
Well, I have no problem with making the same ruling when people are touching, or connected by water for example. Seems logical and easy to remember for a rookie DM like me ;) The issue is more if sculpt spell applies if the spell used does not require a saving throw ? Shocking crasp would only hit one target but if this target was in the same body water as the rest of the party, they would take some damage unless sculpt spell applies..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
situation. Player grappled by a creature and a player enveloped by an ooze. Evoked casts fireball and want to omit his party members. If grappled or enveloped players occupy same square can the evoker choose the targets with the same square?can he officially ‘see’ his party member that’s enveloped? What rulings are possible here?
thanks for the advice.
The School of Evocation trait Sculpt Spells allows you to practically omit creatures that you can see from your spell's effects. It doesn't care about the space those creatures occupy, just that you can see them.
As such, if the evoker can see a creature when he casts that Fireball, he can omit them, even if they're grappled or in worse situations.
Engulfing (and being Swallowed Whole) may be trickier. For example, it kind of makes sense that a Gelatinous Cube's Transparent trait means that creatures engulfed by it are still visible, but other monsters that can engulf may not share this trait. It's up to the DM if the target is visible to the evoker so that they can be selected for Sculpt Spells.
About swallowed whole and similar abilities, however, keep in mind that if they grant total cover (such as the wording on the Purple Worm's bite: "A swallowed creature is blinded and restrained, it has total cover against attacks and other effects outside the worm"), they are immune to things like the aforementioned fireball anyway.
"Creatures inside the cube can be seen but have total cover." I think this is true of any and all engulfed or swallowed creatures - and so they are immune to a fireball until they escape.
Agree that a grappled creature can be omitted by sculpting while the grappler is targeted, and vice versa. Grappling creatures are usually still in different spaces, but that's not really important. Even if you had three tiny creatures occupying the same space you would be able to omit the sprite while targeting the two pixies.
...and gosh I hope one day I see someone leap into a gelatinous cube to avoid an incoming Meteor Swarm...
I would probably rule that any damage over the gelatinous cube's remaining hit points, would then go onto the creature inside of it, as with the gelatinous cube dying, the creature wouldn't have total cover anymore. At least, that's how I would perceive it to be.
Published Subclasses
HI
Had an issue occur during last nights session, (I am new to this, so might be a dumb question..)
A PC had a Stirge attached to his neck(draining blood), the wizard (who has sculpt spell) used his cantrip "schocking grasp" to kill the Stirge..even rolling a natural 20.. = fried birdie...
BUT is the PC with the stirge attached to his neck safe ? - Shocking grasp does not prompt a saving-throw, (melee spell attack) therefore it should not apply, but it's a evocation cantrip and can sculpted to not hit the PC. - in this case the PC is also wearing metal armor, which would prompt advantage on the spell attack..
how would you handle the situation ? I ended op giving ½ damage to the PC due to lack of saving throw...
Thanks in advance
Shocking Grasp only hits one target, so should only damage the Stirge. Magic electricity doesn't have to follow the same laws of physics as it does in our would, so it doesn't also zap the attached character.
:) ahh... well, makes sense :) I think I just over complicated things.. Thanks and may your dices always roll 20's ;)
Well a cantrip is unaffected by sculpt spells.- IgnoreHowever, I would also rule that you would only deal damage to the target. Otherwise anytime lightning damage is used against creatures touching each other you would have to make the same ruling.
However, with "rule of cool" I have had a blue dragonborn use their breath attack against creatures standing in a shallow lake, so I had some lightning damage be dealt to all of those standing, however not nearly as much as the full blast to those in the radius.
Published Subclasses
Why do you say that a cantrip is not subject to sculpt spells? Nothing I can see in the wording of the trait suggests that it doesn't work with cantrips. You choose a number of creatures equal to the spell's level +1, so one creature total in case of cantrips.
Not that it matters in most cantrips since they're kind of limited, targeting-wise, but it should work fine with something like Thunderclap if a party member is near you.
I'll agree to the main topic, however - I've seen DMs rule both ways about "physical interactions" with magic, and it generally seems fine either way, as long as the rulings are consistent.
Disregard. I thought I had saw a previously ruling that said this was true, but I just double checked and you are correct.
Published Subclasses
Well, I have no problem with making the same ruling when people are touching, or connected by water for example. Seems logical and easy to remember for a rookie DM like me ;) The issue is more if sculpt spell applies if the spell used does not require a saving throw ? Shocking crasp would only hit one target but if this target was in the same body water as the rest of the party, they would take some damage unless sculpt spell applies..