Antilife Shell [Archive] - Wizards Community

Antilife Shell [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Upstarter
11-04-07, 09:09 PM The spell Antilife Shell creates an hemispherical energy field that prevents the ENTRANCE of most types of living creatures with 10-ft radius centered on you. But can a living creature with a reach superior to 10-ft attack you, since that creature will not ENTER the energy field?

Some creatures also have reach attacks using parts of their living bodies that can be detached and thrown against their opponents. Do those "missiles" enter the enegy fild created by the Antilife Shell?
ArcTan
11-04-07, 09:27 PM It specifically says "entrance", so no, I think they can still attack you. Protection from evil *specifies* that it has a "can't attack you with natural weapons" proviso.

Also, a missile that's been detached from a creature and flung isn't a living creature anymore.
zeratulcraft
11-04-07, 09:38 PM When you attack someone, your appendage enters their square. I'd say no. Unless they had a reach weapon such as a spear who's reach goes from outside the shell and can hit you.
ArcTan
11-05-07, 02:21 AM It is very clear that a part of you entering something is not the same thing as you entering it. Many effects depend on this (like traps that trigger when you enter a square, or the way AMF works).
BW0222
11-05-07, 10:40 AM Upstarter

Some creatures also have reach attacks using parts of their living bodies that can be detached and thrown against their opponents. Do those "missiles" enter the enegy fild created by the Antilife Shell?

You mean like manticore spines, breath weapons, or mag-men tossing blobs of magma at folks? If so, these body parts are not living and are not affected by the spell.
Tordak
11-05-07, 11:53 AM A creature cannot use it's natural weapons to attack even with reach, but can use a weapon with reach or ranged attack, including breath weapons or spikes. The shell edges out the creatures listed and there body parts, no portion of the creature affected can go inside the barrier. Of part of the creature 'detached' and lunch is not a creature in it's own right and is unaffected by the spell (unless it's an extremely ambiguous situation, in which case it calls for DM judgement like any ambiguous situation).
mvincent
11-05-07, 05:58 PM The spell Antilife Shell creates an hemispherical energy field that prevents the ENTRANCE of most types of living creatures with 10-ft radius centered on you. But can a living creature with a reach superior to 10-ft attack youTechnically someone with a normal 5' reach could still attack you, if they attacked from the correct spot (since a 10' radius is centered on a grid intersection rather than truly centered on you).

OXXE
XXCX
XXXX
OXXO

E=enemy, C=caster, X = 10' radius template
PhaedrusXY
11-05-07, 06:17 PM Technically someone with a normal 5' reach could still attack you, if they attacked from the correct spot (since a 10' radius is centered on a grid intersection rather than truly centered on you).

OXXE
XXCX
XXXX
OXXO

E=enemy, C=caster, X = 10' radius template

I hate grids... Anyone actually trying to pull off a "trick" like that using them deserves a DMG to the face.

A guy in our game yesterday was trying to argue that you can't charge or run diagonally, or in any direction that doesn't follow directly along a grid line, since technically that isn't a straight line on a grid. Thankfully he's not the DM.
mvincent
11-05-07, 06:39 PM I hate grids... Anyone actually trying to pull off a "trick" like that using them deserves a DMG to the face.This isn't a "trick" so much as simply what the battlegrid gives you via the standard rules. If you are using miniatures and a 10' radius template (from say, steel sqwire), this option will always present itself when facing things like antilife shell, anti-magic field, circle of protection from evil, etc.

I personally house-rule that effects centered on a caster are centered on their square rather than on a grid intersection... but some gamers follow the actual rules on this.

A guy in our game yesterday was trying to argue that you can't charge or run diagonally, or in any direction that doesn't follow directly along a grid line, since technically that isn't a straight line on a grid. Those are not the actual rules.
Upstarter
11-06-07, 02:14 PM There is a giant spider (I cant remember its name) that lunches a harpoon from it's body. The harpoon is still linked to its body by a thread and come back to it after it's launched. Does this harpoon pass through the antilfe shell?

I know that a creature using a weapon with range superior to the radius of the spell can pass that magic barrier with it, but I am asking only about natural weapons.

Thank you for the answers.
Tordak
11-06-07, 03:06 PM There is a giant spider (I cant remember its name) that lunches a harpoon from it's body. The harpoon is still linked to its body by a thread and come back to it after it's launched. Does this harpoon pass through the antilfe shell?

I know that a creature using a weapon with range superior to the radius of the spell can pass that magic barrier with it, but I am asking only about natural weapons.

Thank you for the answers.

If it's attached to the spider kind of in the same way a tentacle is attach to a squid, then I'd say no. But that's a very particular monster, and I don't think there's many situation like that, so DM ruling is not much work if it's only for one monster.
ArcTan
11-06-07, 03:59 PM A creature cannot use it's natural weapons to attack even with reach, but can use a weapon with reach or ranged attack, including breath weapons or spikes.

No. That's *not* the rule for antilife shell. It doesn't say that anywhere in the description of antilife shell.

That *is* a rule for protection from evil and magic circle against evil, but those are *different spells*.
Tordak
11-06-07, 05:23 PM No. That's *not* the rule for antilife shell. It doesn't say that anywhere in the description of antilife shell.

That *is* a rule for protection from evil and magic circle against evil, but those are *different spells*.

I don't think you can get any part of yourself within the area of antilife shell and so cannot make use of reach to attack a creature within if that reach is provided exclusively by your natural weapon, and cannot 'reach' inside the area of the spell to attack (even if someone is within 5 ft of you but in the area of the spell). The particular example provided above work if your holding a manufactured weapon I'd say, not if you use a natural weapon. It's not because creatures can't attack you with their natural weapons(like protection from evil) but because they can't reach in to use their natural weaponary.

This is MY interpretation of it. Anyone can have a different interpretation. Whether you say 'edges out' means prevent from entering the area (a part of you or the whole you) or only forces you to occupy squares outside of the area of effect is up to the DM to decide (and the players to contest). The later could mean you can reach in and attack while being located in a square outside of the area of the spell's effect, with natural weapon or not, while the former mean you cannot reach inside at all an therefore cannot attack someone within the area of the spell, if you're one of the excluded creatures' type, with only your natural appendage (as noted before, weapon (improvised or manufactured) will reach into the shell to attack someone you can reach with it).

From the wording of the spell alone there's no way to decide which one is correct. Maybe from the particular use of 'entering' and 'entrance' (in a D&D term if such thing is defined) or something about the 10ft template we could find which interpretation is more accurate.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Upstarter 11-04-07, 09:09 PM	The spell Antilife Shell creates an hemispherical energy field that prevents the ENTRANCE of most types of living creatures with 10-ft radius centered on you. But can a living creature with a reach superior to 10-ft attack you, since that creature will not ENTER the energy field? Some creatures also have reach attacks using parts of their living bodies that can be detached and thrown against their opponents. Do those "missiles" enter the enegy fild created by the Antilife Shell?
ArcTan 11-04-07, 09:27 PM	It specifically says "entrance", so no, I think they can still attack you. Protection from evil specifies that it has a "can't attack you with natural weapons" proviso. Also, a missile that's been detached from a creature and flung isn't a living creature anymore.
zeratulcraft 11-04-07, 09:38 PM	When you attack someone, your appendage enters their square. I'd say no. Unless they had a reach weapon such as a spear who's reach goes from outside the shell and can hit you.
ArcTan 11-05-07, 02:21 AM	It is very clear that a part of you entering something is not the same thing as you entering it. Many effects depend on this (like traps that trigger when you enter a square, or the way AMF works).
BW0222 11-05-07, 10:40 AM	Upstarter Some creatures also have reach attacks using parts of their living bodies that can be detached and thrown against their opponents. Do those "missiles" enter the enegy fild created by the Antilife Shell? You mean like manticore spines, breath weapons, or mag-men tossing blobs of magma at folks? If so, these body parts are not living and are not affected by the spell.
Tordak 11-05-07, 11:53 AM	A creature cannot use it's natural weapons to attack even with reach, but can use a weapon with reach or ranged attack, including breath weapons or spikes. The shell edges out the creatures listed and there body parts, no portion of the creature affected can go inside the barrier. Of part of the creature 'detached' and lunch is not a creature in it's own right and is unaffected by the spell (unless it's an extremely ambiguous situation, in which case it calls for DM judgement like any ambiguous situation).
mvincent 11-05-07, 05:58 PM	The spell Antilife Shell creates an hemispherical energy field that prevents the ENTRANCE of most types of living creatures with 10-ft radius centered on you. But can a living creature with a reach superior to 10-ft attack youTechnically someone with a normal 5' reach could still attack you, if they attacked from the correct spot (since a 10' radius is centered on a grid intersection rather than truly centered on you). OXXE XXCX XXXX OXXO E=enemy, C=caster, X = 10' radius template
PhaedrusXY 11-05-07, 06:17 PM	Technically someone with a normal 5' reach could still attack you, if they attacked from the correct spot (since a 10' radius is centered on a grid intersection rather than truly centered on you). OXXE XXCX XXXX OXXO E=enemy, C=caster, X = 10' radius template I hate grids... Anyone actually trying to pull off a "trick" like that using them deserves a DMG to the face. A guy in our game yesterday was trying to argue that you can't charge or run diagonally, or in any direction that doesn't follow directly along a grid line, since technically that isn't a straight line on a grid. Thankfully he's not the DM.
mvincent 11-05-07, 06:39 PM	I hate grids... Anyone actually trying to pull off a "trick" like that using them deserves a DMG to the face.This isn't a "trick" so much as simply what the battlegrid gives you via the standard rules. If you are using miniatures and a 10' radius template (from say, steel sqwire), this option will always present itself when facing things like antilife shell, anti-magic field, circle of protection from evil, etc. I personally house-rule that effects centered on a caster are centered on their square rather than on a grid intersection... but some gamers follow the actual rules on this. A guy in our game yesterday was trying to argue that you can't charge or run diagonally, or in any direction that doesn't follow directly along a grid line, since technically that isn't a straight line on a grid. Those are not the actual rules.
Upstarter 11-06-07, 02:14 PM	There is a giant spider (I cant remember its name) that lunches a harpoon from it's body. The harpoon is still linked to its body by a thread and come back to it after it's launched. Does this harpoon pass through the antilfe shell? I know that a creature using a weapon with range superior to the radius of the spell can pass that magic barrier with it, but I am asking only about natural weapons. Thank you for the answers.
Tordak 11-06-07, 03:06 PM	There is a giant spider (I cant remember its name) that lunches a harpoon from it's body. The harpoon is still linked to its body by a thread and come back to it after it's launched. Does this harpoon pass through the antilfe shell? I know that a creature using a weapon with range superior to the radius of the spell can pass that magic barrier with it, but I am asking only about natural weapons. Thank you for the answers. If it's attached to the spider kind of in the same way a tentacle is attach to a squid, then I'd say no. But that's a very particular monster, and I don't think there's many situation like that, so DM ruling is not much work if it's only for one monster.
ArcTan 11-06-07, 03:59 PM	A creature cannot use it's natural weapons to attack even with reach, but can use a weapon with reach or ranged attack, including breath weapons or spikes. No. That's not the rule for antilife shell. It doesn't say that anywhere in the description of antilife shell. That is a rule for protection from evil and magic circle against evil, but those are different spells.
Tordak 11-06-07, 05:23 PM	No. That's not the rule for antilife shell. It doesn't say that anywhere in the description of antilife shell. That is a rule for protection from evil and magic circle against evil, but those are different spells. I don't think you can get any part of yourself within the area of antilife shell and so cannot make use of reach to attack a creature within if that reach is provided exclusively by your natural weapon, and cannot 'reach' inside the area of the spell to attack (even if someone is within 5 ft of you but in the area of the spell). The particular example provided above work if your holding a manufactured weapon I'd say, not if you use a natural weapon. It's not because creatures can't attack you with their natural weapons(like protection from evil) but because they can't reach in to use their natural weaponary. This is MY interpretation of it. Anyone can have a different interpretation. Whether you say 'edges out' means prevent from entering the area (a part of you or the whole you) or only forces you to occupy squares outside of the area of effect is up to the DM to decide (and the players to contest). The later could mean you can reach in and attack while being located in a square outside of the area of the spell's effect, with natural weapon or not, while the former mean you cannot reach inside at all an therefore cannot attack someone within the area of the spell, if you're one of the excluded creatures' type, with only your natural appendage (as noted before, weapon (improvised or manufactured) will reach into the shell to attack someone you can reach with it). From the wording of the spell alone there's no way to decide which one is correct. Maybe from the particular use of 'entering' and 'entrance' (in a D&D term if such thing is defined) or something about the 10ft template we could find which interpretation is more accurate.