But the spell doesn't say that the target remains there, if it's been banished to it's home plane. It says "the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane", so the target is sent home. It then says that if the spell ends early "the target reappears in the space it left... Otherwise, the target doesn't return." Nothing says to me that they would be unable to return using their own magic, or be returned by someone else's spell out by a magic item, while the spell is in effect.
The only part of that which could indicate they cannot would be one possible interpretation of "the target doesn't return". I would generally consider it to mean "the target doesn't automatically return at the end of the spell", but I guess it could be read as "the target can never return". However, this would suggest an incredibly powerful spell which could eternally prevent a creature from ever returning to the plane of existence from which it has been banished...
But the spell doesn't say that the target remains there, if it's been banished to it's home plane. It says "the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane", so the target is sent home. It then says that if the spell ends early "the target reappears in the space it left... Otherwise, the target doesn't return." Nothing says to me that they would be unable to return using their own magic, or be returned by someone else's spell out by a magic item, while the spell is in effect.
The only part of that which could indicate they cannot would be one possible interpretation of "the target doesn't return". I would generally consider it to mean "the target doesn't automatically return at the end of the spell", but I guess it could be read as "the target can never return". However, this would suggest an incredibly powerful spell which could eternally prevent a creature from ever returning to the plane of existence from which it has been banished...
I don't think anyone is arguing in favor of the target never being able to return. The issue is what is the caster actually concentrating on, and for what purpose are they concentrating?
There is always the implicit interaction of external features/abilities that can end a spell's effect on a target, such as an Arcana Cleric's 6th level Spell Breaker feature, but that doesn't have any impact on how individual spells function in a vacuum. I.e., we don't care about how a 3rd party could end the spell's effect, because that's an ever-present variable. We want to know how the spell itself functions in a vacuum, and what interactions occur between the caster and target during the duration.
If the target is able to return, via any method, while the caster is maintaining concentration, then what purpose is there in including concentration at all? Earlier I chose to call out Hold Person as being a better analogy because both it and Banishment target a creature, and use concentration to maintain the spell's effect on that creature.
Hold Person has an explicit end condition (pass the saving throw once), and an implicit end condition (removal of the Paralyzed condition) for the spell.
Banishment has an explicit end condition (passing the one-and-only saving throw), and no implicit written end condition. The spell talks about what happens when the spell ends (naturally, or prematurely), not how the spell ends. If it were possible for the target of this spell to prematurely free itself from banishment, I would expect that to be written, or at least alluded to, in the spell text itself. Otherwise, I would expect the spell to not require concentration, as it would then be more similar to Charm Person.
Upon further reflection (this is a good thread, btw), maybe we should go back to the very beginning. Perhaps a target banished to their home plane actually isIncapacitated? Everything adds up nicely if that were the real intent, and it seems like the whole of the spell's text was written from the perspective of the target not being able to do anything about their situation after the initial saving throw--which doesn't preclude the target being freed by a 3rd party.
I know WotC is not in the habit of wasting ink, so I could see the omission of "While there, the target is incapacitated." from both paragraphs as an unforced error. Moving that one sentence to the end of the first paragraph (the general paragraph) would make sense:
You attempt to send one creature that you can see within range to another plane of existence. The target must succeed on a Charisma saving throw or be banished.
If the target is native to the plane of existence you're on, you banish the target to a harmless demiplane. While there, the target is incapacitated. The target remains there until the spell ends, at which point the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied.
If the target is native to a different plane of existence than the one you're on, the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane. If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn't return.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 5th level or higher, you can target one additional creature for each slot level above 4th.
vs
You attempt to send one creature that you can see within range to another plane of existence. The target must succeed on a Charisma saving throw or be banished. While there, the target is incapacitated.
If the target is native to the plane of existence you're on, you banish the target to a harmless demiplane. The target remains there until the spell ends, at which point the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied.
If the target is native to a different plane of existence than the one you're on, the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane. If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn't return.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 5th level or higher, you can target one additional creature for each slot level above 4th.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
My problem with a target being incapacitated while in their home plane is that they are in their home plane - and not a harmless demiplane. This means that for a whole minute some other creature or whatever could be eating them and they would have no way of defending themselves. I think there's a reason why the word harmless is used for the demiplane in conjunction with incapacitated.
I think when you say the implicit ending of Hold Person is of the incapacitated condition being removed makes sense and can also be applied to Banishment. I think an implicit ending of Banishment when the target returns to the plane they were banished from makes sense. I stand by that a 7th level spell should be able to counter a 4th level spell - and it would theoretically end Banishment if Lesser Restoration also ends Hold Person.
Yeah, my only issue with the spell itself is that it's trying to do too much without being clear about it. Like, if Banishment were the subject of the "Trolley Dilemma", rather than pick a track and stick to it, they said "**** it" and decided to drift along both tracks at the same time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would say that there is only a very small overlap between "creatures that can be banished" and "creatures with access to teleportation magic" that, combined with the relative power level of the creatures in the second group, could realistically be expected to use teleportation as a counter to Banishment, despite any concentration on the part of the caster (since concentration is certainly not wasted on the 97% of banishable enemies without access to teleportation magic). But beyond that, until you get to gate, the accuracy of teleportation is pretty iffy about a creatures ability to truly return to the area of combat. plane shift only says you arrive "in or near" the destination, and the examples seem to place "near" as within several miles. There is no means using plane shift as written to travel to a specific spot that isn't a teleportation circle, teleport has a chance of failure unless the creature grabbed an associated object prior to their banishment, and other spells of lower level wouldn't work in this application.
Since Banishment doesn't describe limitations on actions, movement, or spells while banished to a home plane (and it does for the demi-plane version via the incapacitated condition), I would rule that it has no effect on those actions, movements, or spells. The caster could choose to drop concentration, or keep concentrating to maintain the spell for other targeted creatures if the creature returned via its own means.
The scenario where I see your ruling (that an active Banishment doesn't stop a creature from returning to the Material Plane using a source other than the ending of the Banishment) being "bad" (illogical, un-fun, etc.) is a fight where for whatever reason, an open Gate has opened up that an extra-planer creature has come through. With your ruling, you cast Banishment and.... they walk back through the Gate, laughing at you. That feels bad and wrong, if you're in a fight against outsiders pouring through a Gate, "banishing them" back to their realm is going to be an obvious and intuitive response.
What I don't see is the scenario where my ruling feels "bad" - if while under an active Banishment a creature "doesn't return," even if there's an open Gate right in front of them that all their demon friends are walking through.... great! The team has bought some time banishing the Big Boss demon while they hold back his trash mobs, while the party works on disrupting the Gate to close it before the spell wears off and Big Bad can walk back through! It's how I would expect that situation to play out with an open Gate and a Banishment, and I don't think it would leave anyone at the table scratching their head and squinting through the spell line by line trying to figure out where they went wrong.
"You banish the demon, he comes back the next round anyway" is going to lead to "wait, what?!?" and feel like DM fiat refusing to allow the party to succeed. "You banish the demon, you've bought yourself a minute if you keep Concentration up, but you feel like he's going to come back if you don't figure something out before the spell is over..." feels entirely different, and is what I'd expect to hear after BanishingDemogorgon or something.
If the target is native to a different plane of existence than the one you're on, the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane. If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn't return.
If we choose to interpret "the target doesn't return" as "the target cannot return" then you are correct. That is not how the rule reads to my eye.
I don't think that's the relevant area of focus. The conditional presented to the caster is in reference to the spell ending. If it were possible for a creature to plane-shift itself back, while the caster is still concentrating on banishment, I would expect that to be explicitly stated as causing the spell to end. Otherwise, it's an ongoing effect--keeping the door blocked.
Conversely, if the target isn't necessarily blocked from plane-shifting back, what happens if they do shift back while the caster is still concentrating? Do they only reappear for a moment before getting sucked back to their home plane again? The spell hasn't ended.
I think you're reading more into the spell that what's on the page. The only mention of keeping the target anywhere is in relation to the demiplane when then target was already in their home plane. Initially, the spell describes how it attempts to "send" (not "keep") the target to another plane. It then goes on to describe what happens when the target is on their home plane (not relevant), and then what happens when the target is not on their home plane. In this case: the target is sent to their home plane, and is returned back if the spell ends before the 1 minute is up. If the spell is concentrated on for its full duration, the target is not automatically returned. What happens if the target makes their way back to where they were before being banished is similar to what happens if enemies somehow find their way through a Wall of Force you cast to keep them out: you can keep concentrating on the spell, but it's not doing anything useful at that point. The intent might have been to prevent the target from coming back... but I doubt it: can the target use Plane Shift to go to a different plane? Could they be plane shifted against their will into the plane they were banished from? Could they plane shift into the Astral Plane, and use a color pool to cross over into the plane they were banished from?
I'm definitely reading into things... we all are... kinda have to when the description is incomplete, but comparing the concentration of Banishment to that of Wall of Force isn't analogous.
When you concentrate on WoF, you're concentrating on the maintenance of an ongoing effect that maintains its purpose & potency all throughout, and the target of the spell itself is a location. If an enemy, or any creature, teleports from one side of the WoF to the other, the effect being concentrated on has not been impacted in any way; creatures were never the target of the spell to begin with. WoF remains entirely intact.
Banishment targets a specific creature, and concentrating on the spell maintains the ongoing effect against that specific creature. If that creature plane-shifts (anywhere) while concentration is ongoing, that directly conflicts with the purpose of the spell itself. There is no purpose to maintaining concentration if this can happen, and the possibility (if actually possible) would constitute an explicit condition for concentration to be broken. Thus, I would expect that to be stated in the spell description itself. A better relative analogy to concentration on Banishment would be concentration on Hold Person.
Well, no, Hold Person is not a good analogy, because it explicitly keeps a target under a condition throughout its duration. Banishment, on the other hand, when used against targets not on their home plane, does not keep the target under a condition. Rather, it moves the target to another plane, then back, unless its duration elapses completely. If it helps, think of the spell as attaching a dimensional "rubber band" to the target, the other end tied to its current location, then moving the target to its home plane. The effort expended is to prevent the rubber band from snapping the target back, not to keep the target where it is, nor to keep the target from coming back using other means.
The scenario where I see your ruling (that an active Banishment doesn't stop a creature from returning to the Material Plane using a source other than the ending of the Banishment) being "bad" (illogical, un-fun, etc.) is a fight where for whatever reason, an open Gate has opened up that an extra-planer creature has come through. With your ruling, you cast Banishment and.... they walk back through the Gate, laughing at you. That feels bad and wrong, if you're in a fight against outsiders pouring through a Gate, "banishing them" back to their realm is going to be an obvious and intuitive response.
What I don't see is the scenario where my ruling feels "bad" - if while under an active Banishment a creature "doesn't return," even if there's an open Gate right in front of them that all their demon friends are walking through.... great! The team has bought some time banishing the Big Boss demon while they hold back his trash mobs, while the party works on disrupting the Gate to close it before the spell wears off and Big Bad can walk back through! It's how I would expect that situation to play out with an open Gate and a Banishment, and I don't think it would leave anyone at the table scratching their head and squinting through the spell line by line trying to figure out where they went wrong.
"You banish the demon, he comes back the next round anyway" is going to lead to "wait, what?!?" and feel like DM fiat refusing to allow the party to succeed. "You banish the demon, you've bought yourself a minute if you keep Concentration up, but you feel like he's going to come back if you don't figure something out before the spell is over..." feels entirely different, and is what I'd expect to hear after BanishingDemogorgon or something.
That scenario is only "bad" if your players are used to Banishment as an "I win" button. I would suggest quite the contrary: that scenario is a GREAT scenario, which demonstrates the limitations of an otherwise powerful spell, and gets the players thinking creatively for other solutions.
Some very interesting insights & thoughtful, being offered all around. Why not take this into a different direction and reverse roles:
say the party is on a plane of existence that isnt the material plane and an enemy cast Banishment on the PC wizard (sending wizard back to material plane), do we want to allow or deny the PC wizard the ability to plane shift back? Because if not, and assuming the enemy maintains the concentration for a full in-game minute (have fun sitting at the table with nothing to do for about an hour+ in real life). Rules, or rather good faith interpretation of the rules, must be applied evenly and consistently. And my opinion isn't to make interpretations that would be detrimental to anyone's fun. I did have an Androsphinx cast Banishment on a PC once; and it sucked for him from a fun perspective because the party rolled terribly for a long time never hurting the sphinx or breaking its concentration for a very long while.
Interestingly, Plane Shift can also be used to "banish" a target:
"You can use this spell to banish an unwilling creature to another plane. Choose a creature within your reach and make a melee spell attack against it. On a hit, the creature must make a Charisma saving throw. If the creature fails this save, it is transported to a random location on the plane of existence you specify. A creature so transported must find its own way back to your current plane of existence."
So if a 7th level spell that also "banishes" a target allows for said target to return back to its origin ("find its own way back...") [and, yes, wording and semantics are different between the two spells, but allow for the framework of establishing a constructive dialogue], I scratch my head to somehow convince myself that the 4th level Banishment spell would somehow perma-ban a target from ever being able to return if there's a method to do so whether or not the full minute or full concentration is maintained.
I think overall the banishment spell is fine and dandy, definitely extremely useful. It simply cannot work 100% of the time or else it's a mid level spell insta-win button
Also, for even more consideration, if there's any reason to suspect that casting Banishment would somehow prevent a plane traveller from returning via magic then there's no point in the 8th level spell Maze to exist or ever choose or prepare it as a PC. It also banishes, it is also a concentration spell. It even gives a non plane traveller a way to get out without expending a spell slot at all (just a DC Int check). So, when weighing the differences b/w the 4th level Banishment and Maze, to me the former shouldn't in any way be far more powerful than an 8th level spell.
Maze
"You banish a creature that you can see within range into a labyrinthine demiplane. The target remains there for the duration or until it escapes the maze.
The target can use its action to attempt to escape. When it does so, it makes a DC 20 Intelligence check. If it succeeds, it escapes, and the spell ends (a minotaur or goristro demon automatically succeeds).
When the spell ends, the target reappears in the space it left or, if that space is occupied, in the nearest unoccupied space:
"The issue is what is the caster actually concentrating on, and for what purpose are they concentrating?"
I see it like this:
Banishment is basically like opening a door, kicking someone through it, slamming it shut and locking it. The concentration is the locking it part, if you don't finish this, the target can just walk back through. This applies to any banished creature (from another plane).
Another plane shifting spell would be like opening another door which happens to lead back into your room (or smashing a hole in the wall). They can't come back through the door you are holding shut or have successfully locked, but they can come back another way.
If the problem is the casters concentration despite the creature being able to come back, think of it this way:
Dropping concentration will still move the targeted creature back to where it first left. That has some crazy utility. Imagine your party encircling the area the creature was banished from, then your caster dropping concentration on the spell, forcing it to now be surrounded by PCs. That guy is probably dead, especially if it already used a 7th level spell to return to your plane of existence.
Wait, How does this work on half-breeds like Genasi or Eladrin, If you cast banishment on them while in the feywild or the Elemental Planes, Would that send them to the material plane or a demiplane?
Wait, How does this work on half-breeds like Genasi or Eladrin, If you cast banishment on them while in the feywild or the Elemental Planes, Would that send them to the material plane or a demiplane?
It would depend on where they were "native" to...Eladrin (at least the variant version) are stated as hailing from the Feywild, but your character (or an NPC) could not be if they were born in the Material Plane or elsewhere. Genasi are per the text mostly native to the Material Plane (although their ancestors/parents might not be), but again, that could differ from individual to individual based on where they were actually born.
This is a lot easier with certain creature types than others. fiends, fey, and celestials, which by their nature hail from the outer planes/feywild, and elementals, which hail from the inner planes, are pretty easy to determine. Other creature types, like humanoids or undead, might vary from individual to individual based on the place of their birth.
It certainly does raise questions whether "native to" means "was born on," "considers home," "is associated with," or only "has the phrase "native to ____" contained within their monster manual entry" :)
It certainly does raise questions whether "native to" means "was born on," "considers home," "is associated with," or only "has the phrase "native to ____" contained within their monster manual entry" :)
I don't think the text specifies, so, the player (or the DM) is free to pick whatever definition of "native" best suits the story. I would advise being consistent with whatever ruling is made though.
I am sorry if I missed this in the thread but have to ask as I cannot find it anywhere and this seems to be the most similar type conversation I can find. What if one is banished to their home plane and are able to teleport to a safe location and don't want to come back. If the spell ends and the caster is in a different location, are they (the creature that is banished, not the caster) forced back (from their home realm) regardless of any situation? Is it possible for the banished to go to a protected location where they cannot be forced back? Like a temple if they are a priestess or a wizards tower with wards?
I have another question on this thread. If a character is banished by a monster from that monsters home plane, where does that character go? To their home village/nation? If they came in through a gate and then were banished, would they be nearby and able to walk back through or would they be far away?
I have another question on this thread. If a character is banished by a monster from that monsters home plane, where does that character go? To their home village/nation? If they came in through a gate and then were banished, would they be nearby and able to walk back through or would they be far away?
Thank you,
Evan
Entirely up to the DM since the spells involved don't state where on a plane you arrive. The DM could decide place of birth, or a large town, or a powerful temple or magical site, or just a randomly determined location that could include the middle of an ocean.
Banishment says: "If the target is native to a different plane of existence than the one you’re on, the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane. If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn’t return."
It doesn't say where on its home plane the creature appears.
Even the Plane Shift spell doesn't allow transportation to a specific location (except a teleportation circle) ... only a general one.
Plane Shift: "You can specify a target destination in general terms, such as the City of Brass on the Elemental Plane of Fire or the palace of Dispater on the second level of the Nine Hells, and you appear in or near that destination. If you are trying to reach the City of Brass, for example, you might arrive in its Street of Steel, before its Gate of Ashes, or looking at the city from across the Sea of Fire, at the GM's discretion.
Alternatively, if you know the sigil sequence of a teleportation circle on another plane of existence, this spell can take you to that circle. If the teleportation circle is too small to hold all the creatures you transported, they appear in the closest unoccupied spaces next to the circle."
So, even if a banished creature that can cast Plane Shift won't be returning to where they left unless that is what the DM wants to allow.
Finally, as mentioned earlier in the thread:
"If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn’t return"
This can be interpreted in different ways. Either the creature is not allowed to return while the caster is concentrating on Banishment or the target, if Banished to their home plane, might be able to use Plane Shift to return to the Plane they were banished from but only in the very general area. However, I personally would rule, that the target of Banishment can not return to the plane they were banished from until concentration on the spell ends either early (for a variety of reasons) or after 1 minute has passed. In part, I would rule this way because of the effect of Banishment ending early, if Banishment ends early and the target has returned to the plane from which they were banished then the target is teleported to the location they were banished from and not plane shifted because they are now again on the same plane they were banished from. I tend to interpret "Banished" as being just that - while the spell is in effect, the creature can't return to that plane.
Another poster also asked about whether it was possible for a creature to be able to avoid being forced to return if the spell ended in less than 1 minute. One circumstance I can think of would be the creature entering an Antimagic sphere on their home plane. Ending banishment would not be able to transport the creature back to the plane they were banished from if they are inside an anti-magic sphere or other area without magic. Since the duration of magical effects continues while the creature is inside the Antimagic sphere, the effect of Banishment would end after a minute and be unable to return the targeted creature to the plane they left.
But the spell doesn't say that the target remains there, if it's been banished to it's home plane. It says "the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane", so the target is sent home. It then says that if the spell ends early "the target reappears in the space it left... Otherwise, the target doesn't return." Nothing says to me that they would be unable to return using their own magic, or be returned by someone else's spell out by a magic item, while the spell is in effect.
The only part of that which could indicate they cannot would be one possible interpretation of "the target doesn't return". I would generally consider it to mean "the target doesn't automatically return at the end of the spell", but I guess it could be read as "the target can never return". However, this would suggest an incredibly powerful spell which could eternally prevent a creature from ever returning to the plane of existence from which it has been banished...
I don't think anyone is arguing in favor of the target never being able to return. The issue is what is the caster actually concentrating on, and for what purpose are they concentrating?
There is always the implicit interaction of external features/abilities that can end a spell's effect on a target, such as an Arcana Cleric's 6th level Spell Breaker feature, but that doesn't have any impact on how individual spells function in a vacuum. I.e., we don't care about how a 3rd party could end the spell's effect, because that's an ever-present variable. We want to know how the spell itself functions in a vacuum, and what interactions occur between the caster and target during the duration.
If the target is able to return, via any method, while the caster is maintaining concentration, then what purpose is there in including concentration at all? Earlier I chose to call out Hold Person as being a better analogy because both it and Banishment target a creature, and use concentration to maintain the spell's effect on that creature.
Hold Person has an explicit end condition (pass the saving throw once), and an implicit end condition (removal of the Paralyzed condition) for the spell.
Banishment has an explicit end condition (passing the one-and-only saving throw), and no implicit written end condition. The spell talks about what happens when the spell ends (naturally, or prematurely), not how the spell ends. If it were possible for the target of this spell to prematurely free itself from banishment, I would expect that to be written, or at least alluded to, in the spell text itself. Otherwise, I would expect the spell to not require concentration, as it would then be more similar to Charm Person.
Upon further reflection (this is a good thread, btw), maybe we should go back to the very beginning. Perhaps a target banished to their home plane actually is Incapacitated? Everything adds up nicely if that were the real intent, and it seems like the whole of the spell's text was written from the perspective of the target not being able to do anything about their situation after the initial saving throw--which doesn't preclude the target being freed by a 3rd party.
I know WotC is not in the habit of wasting ink, so I could see the omission of "While there, the target is incapacitated." from both paragraphs as an unforced error. Moving that one sentence to the end of the first paragraph (the general paragraph) would make sense:
vs
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
My problem with a target being incapacitated while in their home plane is that they are in their home plane - and not a harmless demiplane. This means that for a whole minute some other creature or whatever could be eating them and they would have no way of defending themselves. I think there's a reason why the word harmless is used for the demiplane in conjunction with incapacitated.
I think when you say the implicit ending of Hold Person is of the incapacitated condition being removed makes sense and can also be applied to Banishment. I think an implicit ending of Banishment when the target returns to the plane they were banished from makes sense. I stand by that a 7th level spell should be able to counter a 4th level spell - and it would theoretically end Banishment if Lesser Restoration also ends Hold Person.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Yeah, my only issue with the spell itself is that it's trying to do too much without being clear about it. Like, if Banishment were the subject of the "Trolley Dilemma", rather than pick a track and stick to it, they said "**** it" and decided to drift along both tracks at the same time.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would say that there is only a very small overlap between "creatures that can be banished" and "creatures with access to teleportation magic" that, combined with the relative power level of the creatures in the second group, could realistically be expected to use teleportation as a counter to Banishment, despite any concentration on the part of the caster (since concentration is certainly not wasted on the 97% of banishable enemies without access to teleportation magic). But beyond that, until you get to gate, the accuracy of teleportation is pretty iffy about a creatures ability to truly return to the area of combat. plane shift only says you arrive "in or near" the destination, and the examples seem to place "near" as within several miles. There is no means using plane shift as written to travel to a specific spot that isn't a teleportation circle, teleport has a chance of failure unless the creature grabbed an associated object prior to their banishment, and other spells of lower level wouldn't work in this application.
Since Banishment doesn't describe limitations on actions, movement, or spells while banished to a home plane (and it does for the demi-plane version via the incapacitated condition), I would rule that it has no effect on those actions, movements, or spells. The caster could choose to drop concentration, or keep concentrating to maintain the spell for other targeted creatures if the creature returned via its own means.
The scenario where I see your ruling (that an active Banishment doesn't stop a creature from returning to the Material Plane using a source other than the ending of the Banishment) being "bad" (illogical, un-fun, etc.) is a fight where for whatever reason, an open Gate has opened up that an extra-planer creature has come through. With your ruling, you cast Banishment and.... they walk back through the Gate, laughing at you. That feels bad and wrong, if you're in a fight against outsiders pouring through a Gate, "banishing them" back to their realm is going to be an obvious and intuitive response.
What I don't see is the scenario where my ruling feels "bad" - if while under an active Banishment a creature "doesn't return," even if there's an open Gate right in front of them that all their demon friends are walking through.... great! The team has bought some time banishing the Big Boss demon while they hold back his trash mobs, while the party works on disrupting the Gate to close it before the spell wears off and Big Bad can walk back through! It's how I would expect that situation to play out with an open Gate and a Banishment, and I don't think it would leave anyone at the table scratching their head and squinting through the spell line by line trying to figure out where they went wrong.
"You banish the demon, he comes back the next round anyway" is going to lead to "wait, what?!?" and feel like DM fiat refusing to allow the party to succeed. "You banish the demon, you've bought yourself a minute if you keep Concentration up, but you feel like he's going to come back if you don't figure something out before the spell is over..." feels entirely different, and is what I'd expect to hear after Banishing Demogorgon or something.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Well, no, Hold Person is not a good analogy, because it explicitly keeps a target under a condition throughout its duration. Banishment, on the other hand, when used against targets not on their home plane, does not keep the target under a condition. Rather, it moves the target to another plane, then back, unless its duration elapses completely. If it helps, think of the spell as attaching a dimensional "rubber band" to the target, the other end tied to its current location, then moving the target to its home plane. The effort expended is to prevent the rubber band from snapping the target back, not to keep the target where it is, nor to keep the target from coming back using other means.
That scenario is only "bad" if your players are used to Banishment as an "I win" button. I would suggest quite the contrary: that scenario is a GREAT scenario, which demonstrates the limitations of an otherwise powerful spell, and gets the players thinking creatively for other solutions.
Some very interesting insights & thoughtful, being offered all around. Why not take this into a different direction and reverse roles:
say the party is on a plane of existence that isnt the material plane and an enemy cast Banishment on the PC wizard (sending wizard back to material plane), do we want to allow or deny the PC wizard the ability to plane shift back? Because if not, and assuming the enemy maintains the concentration for a full in-game minute (have fun sitting at the table with nothing to do for about an hour+ in real life). Rules, or rather good faith interpretation of the rules, must be applied evenly and consistently. And my opinion isn't to make interpretations that would be detrimental to anyone's fun. I did have an Androsphinx cast Banishment on a PC once; and it sucked for him from a fun perspective because the party rolled terribly for a long time never hurting the sphinx or breaking its concentration for a very long while.
Interestingly, Plane Shift can also be used to "banish" a target:
"You can use this spell to banish an unwilling creature to another plane. Choose a creature within your reach and make a melee spell attack against it. On a hit, the creature must make a Charisma saving throw. If the creature fails this save, it is transported to a random location on the plane of existence you specify. A creature so transported must find its own way back to your current plane of existence."
So if a 7th level spell that also "banishes" a target allows for said target to return back to its origin ("find its own way back...") [and, yes, wording and semantics are different between the two spells, but allow for the framework of establishing a constructive dialogue], I scratch my head to somehow convince myself that the 4th level Banishment spell would somehow perma-ban a target from ever being able to return if there's a method to do so whether or not the full minute or full concentration is maintained.
I think overall the banishment spell is fine and dandy, definitely extremely useful. It simply cannot work 100% of the time or else it's a mid level spell insta-win button
Boldly go
Also, for even more consideration, if there's any reason to suspect that casting Banishment would somehow prevent a plane traveller from returning via magic then there's no point in the 8th level spell Maze to exist or ever choose or prepare it as a PC. It also banishes, it is also a concentration spell. It even gives a non plane traveller a way to get out without expending a spell slot at all (just a DC Int check). So, when weighing the differences b/w the 4th level Banishment and Maze, to me the former shouldn't in any way be far more powerful than an 8th level spell.
Maze
"You banish a creature that you can see within range into a labyrinthine demiplane. The target remains there for the duration or until it escapes the maze.
The target can use its action to attempt to escape. When it does so, it makes a DC 20 Intelligence check. If it succeeds, it escapes, and the spell ends (a minotaur or goristro demon automatically succeeds).
When the spell ends, the target reappears in the space it left or, if that space is occupied, in the nearest unoccupied space:
Boldly go
"The issue is what is the caster actually concentrating on, and for what purpose are they concentrating?"
I see it like this:
Banishment is basically like opening a door, kicking someone through it, slamming it shut and locking it. The concentration is the locking it part, if you don't finish this, the target can just walk back through. This applies to any banished creature (from another plane).
Another plane shifting spell would be like opening another door which happens to lead back into your room (or smashing a hole in the wall). They can't come back through the door you are holding shut or have successfully locked, but they can come back another way.
If the problem is the casters concentration despite the creature being able to come back, think of it this way:
Dropping concentration will still move the targeted creature back to where it first left. That has some crazy utility. Imagine your party encircling the area the creature was banished from, then your caster dropping concentration on the spell, forcing it to now be surrounded by PCs. That guy is probably dead, especially if it already used a 7th level spell to return to your plane of existence.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Wait, How does this work on half-breeds like Genasi or Eladrin, If you cast banishment on them while in the feywild or the Elemental Planes, Would that send them to the material plane or a demiplane?
It would depend on where they were "native" to...Eladrin (at least the variant version) are stated as hailing from the Feywild, but your character (or an NPC) could not be if they were born in the Material Plane or elsewhere. Genasi are per the text mostly native to the Material Plane (although their ancestors/parents might not be), but again, that could differ from individual to individual based on where they were actually born.
This is a lot easier with certain creature types than others. fiends, fey, and celestials, which by their nature hail from the outer planes/feywild, and elementals, which hail from the inner planes, are pretty easy to determine. Other creature types, like humanoids or undead, might vary from individual to individual based on the place of their birth.
It certainly does raise questions whether "native to" means "was born on," "considers home," "is associated with," or only "has the phrase "native to ____" contained within their monster manual entry" :)
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I don't think the text specifies, so, the player (or the DM) is free to pick whatever definition of "native" best suits the story. I would advise being consistent with whatever ruling is made though.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I am sorry if I missed this in the thread but have to ask as I cannot find it anywhere and this seems to be the most similar type conversation I can find. What if one is banished to their home plane and are able to teleport to a safe location and don't want to come back. If the spell ends and the caster is in a different location, are they (the creature that is banished, not the caster) forced back (from their home realm) regardless of any situation? Is it possible for the banished to go to a protected location where they cannot be forced back? Like a temple if they are a priestess or a wizards tower with wards?
Thank you for any observations or opinions
I have another question on this thread. If a character is banished by a monster from that monsters home plane, where does that character go? To their home village/nation? If they came in through a gate and then were banished, would they be nearby and able to walk back through or would they be far away?
Thank you,
Evan
Entirely up to the DM since the spells involved don't state where on a plane you arrive. The DM could decide place of birth, or a large town, or a powerful temple or magical site, or just a randomly determined location that could include the middle of an ocean.
Banishment says: "If the target is native to a different plane of existence than the one you’re on, the target is banished with a faint popping noise, returning to its home plane. If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn’t return."
It doesn't say where on its home plane the creature appears.
Even the Plane Shift spell doesn't allow transportation to a specific location (except a teleportation circle) ... only a general one.
Plane Shift: "You can specify a target destination in general terms, such as the City of Brass on the Elemental Plane of Fire or the palace of Dispater on the second level of the Nine Hells, and you appear in or near that destination. If you are trying to reach the City of Brass, for example, you might arrive in its Street of Steel, before its Gate of Ashes, or looking at the city from across the Sea of Fire, at the GM's discretion.
Alternatively, if you know the sigil sequence of a teleportation circle on another plane of existence, this spell can take you to that circle. If the teleportation circle is too small to hold all the creatures you transported, they appear in the closest unoccupied spaces next to the circle."
So, even if a banished creature that can cast Plane Shift won't be returning to where they left unless that is what the DM wants to allow.
Finally, as mentioned earlier in the thread:
"If the spell ends before 1 minute has passed, the target reappears in the space it left or in the nearest unoccupied space if that space is occupied. Otherwise, the target doesn’t return"
This can be interpreted in different ways. Either the creature is not allowed to return while the caster is concentrating on Banishment or the target, if Banished to their home plane, might be able to use Plane Shift to return to the Plane they were banished from but only in the very general area. However, I personally would rule, that the target of Banishment can not return to the plane they were banished from until concentration on the spell ends either early (for a variety of reasons) or after 1 minute has passed. In part, I would rule this way because of the effect of Banishment ending early, if Banishment ends early and the target has returned to the plane from which they were banished then the target is teleported to the location they were banished from and not plane shifted because they are now again on the same plane they were banished from. I tend to interpret "Banished" as being just that - while the spell is in effect, the creature can't return to that plane.
Another poster also asked about whether it was possible for a creature to be able to avoid being forced to return if the spell ended in less than 1 minute. One circumstance I can think of would be the creature entering an Antimagic sphere on their home plane. Ending banishment would not be able to transport the creature back to the plane they were banished from if they are inside an anti-magic sphere or other area without magic. Since the duration of magical effects continues while the creature is inside the Antimagic sphere, the effect of Banishment would end after a minute and be unable to return the targeted creature to the plane they left.
Thank you.
Evan