Looking over the class features for my Grave Domain cleric and saw that she will get access to this spell, and so have been reading up on how it's used, and I'm a bit confused with some of the wording, so I'm hoping I can get some clarification here.
Here is the wording of the spell:
A shimmering barrier extends out from you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you, remaining centered on you and hedging out creatures other than undead and constructs. The barrier lasts for the duration.
The barrier prevents an affected creature from passing or reaching through. An affected creature can cast spells or make attacks with ranged or reach weapons through the barrier.
If you move so that an affected creature is forced to pass through the barrier, the spell ends.
So, am I correct in thinking that, while the spell is active and you have the bubble around you, if you move it will push creatures aside, unless they are positioned in such a way as it would force them to pass through the bubble, such as if they backed against a wall?
No, as I understand it if you attempt to push the bubble against a creature, it will break. A spell does what it says and nothing more, and there's no language in this spell for pushing creatures, so we default to the spell ending effect.
That's what I had thought too, but in the first line it says that the shell remains centered on you and hedges out creatures other than undead and constructs, hence my confusion about it pushing aside creatures
It's an instance of mechanics being slightly distinct from the base description for balance. Purely from a narrative point it doesn't really make sense for the barrier to hold if a creature is thrown into it from the outside, but not if you try to move forward into a creature, but they didn't want the spell to be an instant bulldozer for forcing your way through enemies or trying to crush them.
I don't know. It says if you move so that a creature is "forced to pass through the barrier". If you move and it pushes them aside they are not being forced to pass through, unless, as the OP stated, they are backed up against a wall or something. If there are creatures within the radius when you cast the spell, does it just not work? Does it "hedge them out" like push them to the boundary? Or is it basically useless unless you have plenty of room around you to not only cast the spell, but to move without accidentally brushing up against a creature? Seems kind of fragile for a 5th level spell. But I do agree it's not an invitation to bulldoze creatures all over the battlefield.
I think the spell needs some clarification. I mean, if you move and the barrier passes through half a creatures square on a grid, does that bust the bubble? Less than half a square? any part of the square?
Compare this spell to Wall of Force; the latter specifically has language for pushing creatures when it forms, which this spell lacks. Between that and the “a spell does what it says and nothing more” principle, it seems to clearly indicate that Antilife Shell does not have the ability to push creatures aside. It’s not meant to be a spell for someone running around in melee, it’s meant to be a force field so you can stand back and not worry about enemy’s closing to melee with you. Regarding movement, the general rule of thumb is half or more of a space needs to be covered for AoE to effect it, so I’d say the bubble won’t pop if you have less overlap than that.
I’m not trying to argue the case that it does push people around. I’m just saying the wording needs clarification. What exactly does “hedging out creatures other than undead and constructs” mean when you cast the spell? If a creature is inside the radius when you cast it do they remain inside? Does the spell not work or immediately fail? Wall of Force is also a 5th level spell and seems way more effective though it doesn’t move like the shell does.
Looks to me that the caster moving, forced or not, is what would end the spell if it contacts other creatures.
If movement of the caster, in such a way as to reposition the spell affected area into an affected creature, is what causes the spell to end, and movement is a defined game term, only movement would cause the spell the end.
It seems to me that If creatures are in the area at the time of casting it would seem they would somehow be repositioned to accommodate the spell.
At the very least we know that casting the spell isn’t movement, so the spell doesn’t end. So if the spell doesn’t end, yet the spell says creatures are hedged out, we need to reconcile those effects.
Compare this spell to Wall of Force; the latter specifically has language for pushing creatures when it forms, which this spell lacks. Between that and the “a spell does what it says and nothing more” principle, it seems to clearly indicate that Antilife Shell does not have the ability to push creatures aside. It’s not meant to be a spell for someone running around in melee, it’s meant to be a force field so you can stand back and not worry about enemy’s closing to melee with you. Regarding movement, the general rule of thumb is half or more of a space needs to be covered for AoE to effect it, so I’d say the bubble won’t pop if you have less overlap than that.
This is the part, to me at least. that is confusing. As you say, a spell does what it says and nothing more. Antilife shell says it does this: "A shimmering barrier extends out from you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you, remaining centered on you and hedging out creatures other than undead and constructs." Which, as to what I understand, means that, if you move, the bubble moves with you, and it pushes, or hedges aside, creatures as you do.
But it also says "If you move so that an affected creature is forced to pass through the barrier, the spell ends." which, seems to indicate that, if you move so that the bubble passes over a creature that is against a wall, forces them to pass through the bubble, it will end. But, what does "hedging out" mean in this context? which is where I'm getting confusion.
I believe Hedging out is relevant text. It’s not a term used often but it is used in at least 1 other spell.
warding wind:
A strong wind (20 miles per hour) blows around you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you, remaining centered on you. The wind lasts for the spell’s duration. The wind has the following effects:
“It hedges out vapor, gas, and fog that can be dispersed by strong wind.”
so let’s say we cast warding wind in a fog. What would we do with the fog? Any of the other vapor or gas features in the game that reference winds? Would that be different than the creatures affected by anti life shell? If so, why would it be different? Perhaps the difference is a decision actually has to be made on where the creatures are placed since they don’t dissipate.
the cloud spells seem to be easier to adjudicate since they actually specify what happens when the winds hedge out.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
You are correct, the spell doesn't say anything about "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster." Nor does it say anything about what happens if creatures are inside the radius when you cast the spell. The omission would make me think that nothing happens to the creatures inside. So, if you know there are creatures heading your party's way you can cast Antilife Shell around the party and as long as the enemies don't have spells or ranged attacks your party can stand inside casting and shooting away fully protected. Do you take it to mean that as well?
But the description of the spell is very short and could use some clarification in the next iteration of D&D.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
Okay, but if you cast this spell somewhere that has ants within 10' radius of you, do the ants prevent the Shell from appearing? An ant is a a creature after all. What about a Shrieker? If you define a Shrieker as a creature, what about non-statted mushrooms? Are they creatures? Would it be impossible to cast this near the surface of a pond because ponds are full of tiny insects, tadpoles, etc.? So is this spell almost exclusively useful in a "dead" space, like a dungeon or somewhere relatively devoid of life? A strict interpretation of AMShell wherein creatures (other than the caster) inside the shell at the time of casting prevent the spell from taking effect makes it difficult to use at all in a wide variety of outdoor areas.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
Okay, but if you cast this spell somewhere that has ants within 10' radius of you, do the ants prevent the Shell from appearing? An ant is a a creature after all. What about a Shrieker? If you define a Shrieker as a creature, what about non-statted mushrooms? Are they creatures? Would it be impossible to cast this near the surface of a pond because ponds are full of tiny insects, tadpoles, etc.? So is this spell almost exclusively useful in a "dead" space, like a dungeon or somewhere relatively devoid of life? A strict interpretation of AMShell wherein creatures (other than the caster) inside the shell at the time of casting prevent the spell from taking effect makes it difficult to use at all in a wide variety of outdoor areas.
Ignoring the general bad faith of most of these examples, it’s also predicated on a non-issue. There is nothing in the spell that says there cannot be creatures within the dome when the spell is cast, only that if it would pass through a creature’s space due to your movement once it’s up, the spell ends. Ergo the questions are all pointless.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
Okay, but if you cast this spell somewhere that has ants within 10' radius of you, do the ants prevent the Shell from appearing? An ant is a a creature after all. What about a Shrieker? If you define a Shrieker as a creature, what about non-statted mushrooms? Are they creatures? Would it be impossible to cast this near the surface of a pond because ponds are full of tiny insects, tadpoles, etc.? So is this spell almost exclusively useful in a "dead" space, like a dungeon or somewhere relatively devoid of life? A strict interpretation of AMShell wherein creatures (other than the caster) inside the shell at the time of casting prevent the spell from taking effect makes it difficult to use at all in a wide variety of outdoor areas.
Ignoring the general bad faith of most of these examples, it’s also predicated on a non-issue. There is nothing in the spell that says there cannot be creatures within the dome when the spell is cast, only that if it would pass through a creature’s space due to your movement once it’s up, the spell ends. Ergo the questions are all pointless.
How are these bad faith questions? If you are in a forest while trying to cast this spell, chances are there going to be Tiny creatures within 15 feet of the caster. If you are in the 5 feet deep of ocean water, floating on the surface, there are likely Tiny creatures all around. If you are in such an environment and you interpret Anti-Life Shell to be cancelled as soon as you move into another creature's space ("If you move so that the shell is forced to pass through the barrier"), then you effectively cannot move at all while this spell is up unless you want to have your 5th level spell cancelled.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
Okay, but if you cast this spell somewhere that has ants within 10' radius of you, do the ants prevent the Shell from appearing? An ant is a a creature after all. What about a Shrieker? If you define a Shrieker as a creature, what about non-statted mushrooms? Are they creatures? Would it be impossible to cast this near the surface of a pond because ponds are full of tiny insects, tadpoles, etc.? So is this spell almost exclusively useful in a "dead" space, like a dungeon or somewhere relatively devoid of life? A strict interpretation of AMShell wherein creatures (other than the caster) inside the shell at the time of casting prevent the spell from taking effect makes it difficult to use at all in a wide variety of outdoor areas.
Ignoring the general bad faith of most of these examples, it’s also predicated on a non-issue. There is nothing in the spell that says there cannot be creatures within the dome when the spell is cast, only that if it would pass through a creature’s space due to your movement once it’s up, the spell ends. Ergo the questions are all pointless.
How are these bad faith questions? If you are in a forest while trying to cast this spell, chances are there going to be Tiny creatures within 15 feet of the caster. If you are in the 5 feet deep of ocean water, floating on the surface, there are likely Tiny creatures all around. If you are in such an environment and you interpret Anti-Life Shell to be cancelled as soon as you move into another creature's space ("If you move so that the shell is forced to pass through the barrier"), then you effectively cannot move at all while this spell is up unless you want to have your 5th level spell cancelled.
Because, obviously, if they're not being tracked on the board, they aren't relevant to the effects, and no one tracks wildlife in the kind of detail you're describing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Looking over the class features for my Grave Domain cleric and saw that she will get access to this spell, and so have been reading up on how it's used, and I'm a bit confused with some of the wording, so I'm hoping I can get some clarification here.
Here is the wording of the spell:
So, am I correct in thinking that, while the spell is active and you have the bubble around you, if you move it will push creatures aside, unless they are positioned in such a way as it would force them to pass through the bubble, such as if they backed against a wall?
No, as I understand it if you attempt to push the bubble against a creature, it will break. A spell does what it says and nothing more, and there's no language in this spell for pushing creatures, so we default to the spell ending effect.
That's what I had thought too, but in the first line it says that the shell remains centered on you and hedges out creatures other than undead and constructs, hence my confusion about it pushing aside creatures
It's an instance of mechanics being slightly distinct from the base description for balance. Purely from a narrative point it doesn't really make sense for the barrier to hold if a creature is thrown into it from the outside, but not if you try to move forward into a creature, but they didn't want the spell to be an instant bulldozer for forcing your way through enemies or trying to crush them.
I don't know. It says if you move so that a creature is "forced to pass through the barrier". If you move and it pushes them aside they are not being forced to pass through, unless, as the OP stated, they are backed up against a wall or something. If there are creatures within the radius when you cast the spell, does it just not work? Does it "hedge them out" like push them to the boundary? Or is it basically useless unless you have plenty of room around you to not only cast the spell, but to move without accidentally brushing up against a creature? Seems kind of fragile for a 5th level spell. But I do agree it's not an invitation to bulldoze creatures all over the battlefield.
I think the spell needs some clarification. I mean, if you move and the barrier passes through half a creatures square on a grid, does that bust the bubble? Less than half a square? any part of the square?
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Compare this spell to Wall of Force; the latter specifically has language for pushing creatures when it forms, which this spell lacks. Between that and the “a spell does what it says and nothing more” principle, it seems to clearly indicate that Antilife Shell does not have the ability to push creatures aside. It’s not meant to be a spell for someone running around in melee, it’s meant to be a force field so you can stand back and not worry about enemy’s closing to melee with you. Regarding movement, the general rule of thumb is half or more of a space needs to be covered for AoE to effect it, so I’d say the bubble won’t pop if you have less overlap than that.
I’m not trying to argue the case that it does push people around. I’m just saying the wording needs clarification. What exactly does “hedging out creatures other than undead and constructs” mean when you cast the spell? If a creature is inside the radius when you cast it do they remain inside? Does the spell not work or immediately fail? Wall of Force is also a 5th level spell and seems way more effective though it doesn’t move like the shell does.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Looks to me that the caster moving, forced or not, is what would end the spell if it contacts other creatures.
If movement of the caster, in such a way as to reposition the spell affected area into an affected creature, is what causes the spell to end, and movement is a defined game term, only movement would cause the spell the end.
It seems to me that If creatures are in the area at the time of casting it would seem they would somehow be repositioned to accommodate the spell.
At the very least we know that casting the spell isn’t movement, so the spell doesn’t end. So if the spell doesn’t end, yet the spell says creatures are hedged out, we need to reconcile those effects.
This is the part, to me at least. that is confusing. As you say, a spell does what it says and nothing more. Antilife shell says it does this: "A shimmering barrier extends out from you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you, remaining centered on you and hedging out creatures other than undead and constructs." Which, as to what I understand, means that, if you move, the bubble moves with you, and it pushes, or hedges aside, creatures as you do.
But it also says "If you move so that an affected creature is forced to pass through the barrier, the spell ends." which, seems to indicate that, if you move so that the bubble passes over a creature that is against a wall, forces them to pass through the bubble, it will end. But, what does "hedging out" mean in this context? which is where I'm getting confusion.
Which is why it needs clarification. Hopefully 1D&D will do so
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The "hedges out" bit is basically just prosaic flavor text. The second paragraph explains the mechanical effects of the shell.
I believe Hedging out is relevant text. It’s not a term used often but it is used in at least 1 other spell.
warding wind:
A strong wind (20 miles per hour) blows around you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you, remaining centered on you. The wind lasts for the spell’s duration. The wind has the following effects:
“It hedges out vapor, gas, and fog that can be dispersed by strong wind.”
so let’s say we cast warding wind in a fog. What would we do with the fog? Any of the other vapor or gas features in the game that reference winds? Would that be different than the creatures affected by anti life shell? If so, why would it be different? Perhaps the difference is a decision actually has to be made on where the creatures are placed since they don’t dissipate.
the cloud spells seem to be easier to adjudicate since they actually specify what happens when the winds hedge out.
Except the thing is that most if not all instances of gases, fogs, vapors, and the like have a specific mechanical description of how long it takes them to disperse at various wind speeds, whereas Antilife Shell has exactly no language describing how a creature might be forcefully moved by the effect, as opposed to one of the solid Wall spells. Given the 1 hour duration, I believe the assumption behind it is that it's meant as more of a preemptive cast than one you use when you're already surrounded. You can argue semantics of language all you want, and some DM's might agree, but purely by a RAW reading of the spell, there is no language in the description to the effect of "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster.
You are correct, the spell doesn't say anything about "affected creatures besides the caster inside the radius when you cast this spell are moved directly back until they are 10 ft away from the caster." Nor does it say anything about what happens if creatures are inside the radius when you cast the spell. The omission would make me think that nothing happens to the creatures inside. So, if you know there are creatures heading your party's way you can cast Antilife Shell around the party and as long as the enemies don't have spells or ranged attacks your party can stand inside casting and shooting away fully protected. Do you take it to mean that as well?
But the description of the spell is very short and could use some clarification in the next iteration of D&D.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yeah, that's my read as well.
So it’s like a different leomunds tiny hut that can move with the party but the entire party gotta say inside instead of the caster?
Okay, but if you cast this spell somewhere that has ants within 10' radius of you, do the ants prevent the Shell from appearing? An ant is a a creature after all. What about a Shrieker? If you define a Shrieker as a creature, what about non-statted mushrooms? Are they creatures? Would it be impossible to cast this near the surface of a pond because ponds are full of tiny insects, tadpoles, etc.? So is this spell almost exclusively useful in a "dead" space, like a dungeon or somewhere relatively devoid of life? A strict interpretation of AMShell wherein creatures (other than the caster) inside the shell at the time of casting prevent the spell from taking effect makes it difficult to use at all in a wide variety of outdoor areas.
Ignoring the general bad faith of most of these examples, it’s also predicated on a non-issue. There is nothing in the spell that says there cannot be creatures within the dome when the spell is cast, only that if it would pass through a creature’s space due to your movement once it’s up, the spell ends. Ergo the questions are all pointless.
How are these bad faith questions? If you are in a forest while trying to cast this spell, chances are there going to be Tiny creatures within 15 feet of the caster. If you are in the 5 feet deep of ocean water, floating on the surface, there are likely Tiny creatures all around. If you are in such an environment and you interpret Anti-Life Shell to be cancelled as soon as you move into another creature's space ("If you move so that the shell is forced to pass through the barrier"), then you effectively cannot move at all while this spell is up unless you want to have your 5th level spell cancelled.
Because, obviously, if they're not being tracked on the board, they aren't relevant to the effects, and no one tracks wildlife in the kind of detail you're describing.