Blink and ongoing effects

[Spectre9000]

I've been reading quite a bit on this spell, and many seem to take it to mean that you can't be targeted 50% of the time and can't target other creatures when it's not your turn 50% of the time. However, I've seen a number of others who say you lose any ongoing effects you have in play on other creatures if you go to the ethereal plane.


For example, a wizard casts Hold Person and is under the effect of Blink. If that wizard goes to the ethereal plane, some would say that Hold Person ends because of the clause "You can only affect and be affected by other creatures on the Ethereal Plane." You are affecting a person whilst using Hold Person, so I can certainly understand the reasoning.

I've also seen tweets from Jeremy Crawford beating around the bush of this issue saying vague, non-helpful things like "Blink doesn't break the caster's concentration, since the spell doesn't require concentration.", which is very obvious and any anyone reading the Duration line would know. Mike Mearls clarified an example where a person Hasted their teammate and he said it would not break concentration, which isn't exactly clear as it's true it wouldn't break concentration, but since you can't affect a person on another plane, would that teammate lose the affect of Haste? It seems to imply no, but is again, vague.

So, my questions is this: What is your reasoning for ongoing affects to continue even though the spell explicitly states you cannot affect creatures on another plane?

I ask because I can't come up with any valid reasoning for affects to not end, but it seems that RAI (Crawford and Mearls) and the larger community hold that effects sustained through concentration continue to affect creatures despite the spells description.

[Solunaris]

I'd rule it as any ongoing effects are still in play. You've already cast the spell, and now you are just hold concentration on it. You aren't affecting something, the spell is. And the spell didn't transfer to the Ethereal Plane with you. Though if you were casting something like Witch Bolt I'd rule the other way.

[Spectre9000]

I'd rule it as any ongoing effects are still in play. You've already cast the spell, and now you are just hold concentration on it. You aren't affecting something, the spell is. And the spell didn't transfer to the Ethereal Plane with you. Though if you were casting something like Witch Bolt I'd rule the other way.

With Witch Bolt, I feel it's more obvious due to its requirements of range to maintain it, and that it specifies it maintains a line from you to the target.

It's an interesting line of thought that the spell is affecting the creature, not you. However, like you say the spell remains on the other plane, and your concentration is affecting it, though it does specify creatures when talking about what you cannot affect. A spell is not a creature, but I feel at this point we're stretching things some. If you were to hold that to be true, and I don't have an example right now where this is relevant, but theoretically for all spells you would be targeting the spell, and the spell would be targeting whatever it specifies, which is an odd way of thinking about it.

[Erys]

I've been reading quite a bit on this spell, and many seem to take it to mean that you can't be targeted 50% of the time and can't target other creatures when it's not your turn 50% of the time. However, I've seen a number of others who say you lose any ongoing effects you have in play on other creatures if you go to the ethereal plane.


For example, a wizard casts Hold Person and is under the effect of Blink. If that wizard goes to the ethereal plane, some would say that Hold Person ends because of the clause "You can only affect and be affected by other creatures on the Ethereal Plane." You are affecting a person whilst using Hold Person, so I can certainly understand the reasoning.

I've also seen tweets from Jeremy Crawford beating around the bush of this issue saying vague, non-helpful things like "Blink doesn't break the caster's concentration, since the spell doesn't require concentration.", which is very obvious and any anyone reading the Duration line would know. Mike Mearls clarified an example where a person Hasted their teammate and he said it would not break concentration, which isn't exactly clear as it's true it wouldn't break concentration, but since you can't affect a person on another plane, would that teammate lose the affect of Haste? It seems to imply no, but is again, vague.

So, my questions is this: What is your reasoning for ongoing affects to continue even though the spell explicitly states you cannot affect creatures on another plane?

I ask because I can't come up with any valid reasoning for affects to not end, but it seems that RAI (Crawford and Mearls) and the larger community hold that effects sustained through concentration continue to affect creatures despite the spells description.

The only stipulation for casting a spell with concentration is to make sure the target is in range at time of casting and you hold concentration afterwards. Once cast, the range no longer matters.

So, if you are whisked to another plane (via blink, for example), so long as you hold concentration on that spell, it is still active. The only exceptions are ones that expressly break if you leave range while the spell is active... like Witchbolt.

[Solunaris]

With Witch Bolt, I feel it's more obvious due to its requirements of range to maintain it, and that it specifies it maintains a line from you to the target.

It's an interesting line of thought that the spell is affecting the creature, not you. However, like you say the spell remains on the other plane, and your concentration is affecting it, though it does specify creatures when talking about what you cannot affect. A spell is not a creature, but I feel at this point we're stretching things some. If you were to hold that to be true, and I don't have an example right now where this is relevant, but theoretically for all spells you would be targeting the spell, and the spell would be targeting whatever it specifies, which is an odd way of thinking about it.

Well, to put it directly into RAW terms the limit only applies to targeting and effecting. I can concentrate on a spell from any plane, but I need to be on the same plane to target with a spell.

[Joe the Rat]

If you had to stay on the same plane, Banish wouldn't work. You cast, they fail the save, they are on another plane. Oop! Out of range, effect broken, they instantly return.

[DivisibleByZero]

You need to be on the same plane and be able to see them in order to cast the spell. Once the spell has been cast and has taken effect, distance/range/plane no longer matters. The spell lasts as long as you are concentrating on it unless something like a dispel removes the spell.

[Ninja_Prawn]

The only stipulation for casting a spell with concentration is to make sure the target is in range at time of casting and you hold concentration afterwards. Once cast, the range no longer matters.

So, if you are whisked to another plane (via blink, for example), so long as you hold concentration on that spell, it is still active. The only exceptions are ones that expressly break if you leave range while the spell is active... like Witchbolt.

This is how I'd rule it. It feels intuitively right that once a person has been paralysed by Hold Person, they stay frozen regardless of what happens to them, unless it involves antimagic fields or dead magic zones or something.

[Spectre9000]

I've had some time to think about the fact that the spell is affecting a creature instead of you. If this were true, and spells affect creatures, not you, then you could cast spells from the other plane targeting creatures (you also have LoS on them via Blink), and conversely creatures could cast spells at you (though they may not have LoS on you). You cannot affect creatures, but your spells can. This seems a strange take on this, but is a possible interpretation of it depending on how you view spells; as an extension of yourself, or as separate to you. I've been viewing them as an extension of my character, rather than a separate thing.


The arguments so far are speaking of general rules. I'm talking about the specific explicit rule of Blink that states you cannot affect creatures on another plane. Citing other spells and general rules does nothing to negate that specific rule. Specific trumps general.

The rule about range not affecting concentration spells is a general rule, and this isn't a question about concentration or range. It's a question about that specific rule of Blink. There's nothing in blink that would end concentration, so you could obviously maintain a Haste spell on yourself. However, Blink does explicitly state you cannot affect creatures on the plane you came from while in the ethereal plane. Ongoing effects from spells do affect a creature on the other plain and thus violate Blinks explicit rule as I'm reading it. If it's a concentration effect, then as I typically view spells, which is as an extension of myself (unless it's a cast it and forget it spell such as magic circle, or mage armor, or some-such), the affect of that spell upon another creature is, as an extension of character, my character affecting that creature, which is in direct violation of Blink's specific rule.

The only thing concentration has to do with this, is in determining whether the spell is an extension to myself, or a stand alone effect. This means that while, yes, concentration is not broken by Blink, the effects of a spell that happens to require concentration could be forced to end, thus ending the spell, and subsequently the need for concentration. The end affect is that concentration would be broken, not because your concentration itself is broken, but because the spell effectively ended, and there's nothing left to concentrate on. Normally, the spell fails because you lost concentration. This time, your concentration fails because you lost the spell.

An example how I view this working is Mage Armor and Haste. Say a wizard casts Mage Armor on another character. That character then has Mage Armor without regard to you in any capacity. I thus view this spell as no longer being associate with the wizard. Now, say the same wizard casts Haste on the same character. I view that spell as still being associated to that wizard, via concentration. Since Haste is viewed, by myself, as still being associated to the wizard, I would view it as being an effect of that wizard as its continued existence is wholly dependent on that wizard. What this means is that the wizard is affecting the other character via Haste, though not Mage Armor. When Blink activates, Haste would then end, but not Mage Armor, as the wizard is affecting the other character with Haste, which is in direct violation of a specific rule of Blink.



All of this is built off the concept of a spell as an extension of the character that cast it, if that spell has some continued connection to that wizard, such as the connection via concentration. This may be a wrong assumption, but the alternative is that, if spells tied to your character do not fall under the concept of you affecting creatures, then you can still cast spells against creatures even from the ethereal plane.


There seem to be two outcomes based upon different perspectives. One, spells are extensions of yourself, and thus any spell requiring some aspect of you to maintain it end when you Blink into the ethereal plane. Two, spells are separate from you, meaning you can still cast spells from the ethereal plane into the plane you came from, and conversely creatures can cast spells at you (as long as A) the spells don't have a range, or the range extends across planes, and B)for creatures to cast spells at you, they can see into the ethereal plane, or the spell doesn't require Line of Sight).


I don't know which is the correct interpretation, which is why I posed this question. However, this question is not directly related to concentration or its general rules, only relying on concentration to determine whether the spell is an extension of yourself or not.

Blink specific rule: "You can only affect and be affected by other creatures on the Ethereal Plane."

To borrow and alter a line, from a infamous president: It depends on what your definition of "affect" is.




Interesting side note is that I remember reading, I believe in 3.5, that the ethereal plane had a direct association with the material plane such that some distance traveled in the ethereal equaled an exact amount of distance traveled in the material plane. If this is still true in 5e, it could lead to interesting interactions as far as "range" is concerned.

[Plaguescarred]

What is your reasoning for ongoing affects to continue even though the spell explicitly states you cannot affect creatures on another plane?I'd say lasting effects keep going on wether the caster is still around or away unless the effect specifically require him to be on the same plane of existence because any effect run it's duration on itself in general and doesn't require the caster anymore once cast to do so.

[JakOfAllTirades]

The Etherealness spell has a little more information.



You can see and hear the plane you originated from, but
everything there looks gray, and you can’t see anything
more than 60 feet away.



This implies that it's possible to maintain Line of Sight out to 60', but the Etherealness spell takes the caster to the border region of the Ethereal Plane, while the Blink spell makes no mention of the border region. In my campaign, I'd rule that both spells function in a similar way; the Blink spell seems hard enough to use without the risk of ending the caster's other spells on a "coin toss" basis.

Edited for clarification: I'd allow LOS for maintaining ongoing effects while the caster is Ethereal, not for making attacks between different planes! The language of both spells clearly rules that out, so no.