5e Quick Ruling request

[BerzerkerUnit]

Paralyzed Creature vs Controlled Sphere of Annihilation.

Can you just have the sphere eat their head(s) or would you limit it to the 4d10 for a failed save?

[Abracadangit]

Paralyzed Creature vs Controlled Sphere of Annihilation.

Can you just have the sphere eat their head(s) or would you limit it to the 4d10 for a failed save?

In my opinion, this falls into the same category of debates as "called shots" or "stealth encounters where if the rogue hits with their sneak attack, the enemy is auto-KO'ed."

RAW, it's 4d10 damage. However, if the DM is cool with head spaghettification in this particular scenario, that's fine, but it's their call to make.

[OldTrees1]

I can see either ruling being reasonable. It depends on how well the movement of the sphere is controlled.

I would have it be 4d10 damage (failed Dex save) for a paralyzed PC or notable NPC.
I would have it be instant death if the PCs used it on a non notable NPC.

Although personally I prefer the sphere of annihilation to have a Con OR Dex save instead of just a Dex save. Let a paralyzed Barbarian fight it in the same way they fight off Disintegration.

[BerzerkerUnit]

I can see either ruling being reasonable. It depends on how well the movement of the sphere is controlled.

I would have it be 4d10 damage (failed Dex save) for a paralyzed PC or notable NPC.
I would have it be instant death if the PCs used it on a non notable NPC.

Although personally I prefer the sphere of annihilation to have a Con OR Dex save instead of just a Dex save. Let a paralyzed Barbarian fight it in the same way they fight off Disintegration.

The Wizard in question has a +10 int mod and Talisman of the sphere, so I’d think he has pretty fine control of it (it does move 110 feet per round at his direction).

The target may have legendary resistance (depends whether it burns them all to avoid Hold Monster).

Thank you so much for the feedback.

[Sillybird99]

+10 Int mod? how does that happen?

[Segev]

This comes down a bit to "what do hp represent?" I like to take the "combination of meat and luck/skill/energy" approach. This allows cinematic executions to work when, for whatever reason, it makes no sense that you could exercise anything but "meat" hp to protect you, and the "meat" is not sufficient.

If you want to be gameplay-fair with this, the RAW definitely do call for it to be merely 4d10 damage, and you should figure out what it is that prevents the wizard from landing that lethal head-removing blow. Whatever luck, or interference by others, or anything else that saves the guy's life is 4d10 units of life-saving more depleted than it was before, and for whatever reason the wizard hasn't managed to put the sphere up against the top of the guy's neck yet.

[Azara5]

+10 Int mod? how does that happen?

The DMG has rules for campaigns that go past level 20, where PCs get an ASI or feat every time they level up, but nothing else. Under these rules, PCs can raise their scores up to a maximum of 30.

[Keravath]

+10 Int mod? how does that happen?

They may have meant a +10 control mod. Controlling the sphere requires an intelligence (arcana) check. Having the Talisman of the sphere allows the character to double their proficiency bonus on the check. So a tier 2 wizard with +4 int mod and +3 from proficiency in arcana would have a +10 total modifier to control the sphere.

On the other hand, since they can move the sphere 110' in a round, and that is based on 10' + 10 x int mod - they may have really meant that the int mod in this case was +10 which would be a 30 int. In which case, I am not sure why they are resorting to using a sphere of annihilation since at the level required for 30 int they probably have access to much more deadly options - especially as a wizard.

As far as RAW goes, "Anything else that touches the sphere but isn't wholly engulfed and obliterated by it takes 4d10 force damage."

So if engulfing the head isn't the entire creature then they take 4d10 damage :). It doesn't make sense but then having an item that obliterates the matter it passes through would usually be considered fatal in most cases.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Mechanically they would take 4d10 at my table.

Flavor wise look at Avengers Infinity War. Almost everyone just dusts over the course of a few seconds, except for Peter who stumbles around and slowly collapses. His healing factor was fighting the effect.

Similar idea here, your soul's inate magic (Because it's a fantasy world, why not) is struggling against this force of destruction. It's held off for the last 6 seconds, giving allies a chance to yank you out of the way. But if you stay there you won't be able to hold on. (IE eventually the damage will drop you)

[loki_ragnarock]

Paralyzed Creature vs Controlled Sphere of Annihilation.

Can you just have the sphere eat their head(s) or would you limit it to the 4d10 for a failed save?

How paralyzed?

Paralyzed for, like, a minute with no additional saves? Boom. Headshot.
Speed the inevitable.

Paralyzed for, like, a couple rounds with additional saves to break free? 4d10.
If the chance to live is there, defer to life.

[BerzerkerUnit]

The DMG has rules for campaigns that go past level 20, where PCs get an ASI or feat every time they level up, but nothing else. Under these rules, PCs can raise their scores up to a maximum of 30.

This was adjacent to a Level 20 game, the players leveled existing level 10s to 20th and were given very favorable treasure rules. In this case they traded very rare items for very rare consumable and took stat books. It was a one shot (intended to be anyway, we're having the 4th and final session this week), and all the encounters were absurd. Flying space tarrasque, Tiamat, Orcus backed up by a lich and army of lesser undead (They cut a deal with the lich, which turned out to be a depowered Vecna, and Gated in Zariel to fight Orcus).


They may have meant a +10 control mod. Controlling the sphere requires an intelligence (arcana) check. Having the Talisman of the sphere allows the character to double their proficiency bonus on the check. So a tier 2 wizard with +4 int mod and +3 from proficiency in arcana would have a +10 total modifier to control the sphere.

On the other hand, since they can move the sphere 110' in a round, and that is based on 10' + 10 x int mod - they may have really meant that the int mod in this case was +10 which would be a 30 int. In which case, I am not sure why they are resorting to using a sphere of annihilation since at the level required for 30 int they probably have access to much more deadly options - especially as a wizard.

As far as RAW goes, "Anything else that touches the sphere but isn't wholly engulfed and obliterated by it takes 4d10 force damage."

So if engulfing the head isn't the entire creature then they take 4d10 damage :). It doesn't make sense but then having an item that obliterates the matter it passes through would usually be considered fatal in most cases.

The character is a conjurer, as a "hole in the multiverse" the sphere is something he was tasked with being caretaker of. The character doesn't use direct damaging spells, just focuses on control, summons, and moving allies around so the sphere is his only real direct damage option. Yes, having a summoned shadow go 8d12+44 cold damage vs the paralyzed target is solid, but there's no reason not to do that too?

I've played for a lot of years with rules kind of at the forefront, but given the games poor balance at 17+ and the rocket tag gameplay, I think I prefer rewarding clever solutions (even if they're one step, like using the Sphere to annihilate heads. Have you read how the sphere works? Do you know what hoops you have to jump through to actually use it? Especially in a game where the players teleport and planeshift every session? The sapphires, man, so many sapphires!) Like the Dhampir EK player that gaseous formed into the tarrasque's lungs and gave it a case of dancing blade induced pneumonia to death. The other character used the sphere to hollow out the shell which was used to make magic reflective hulls for their spelljammer.

[Segev]

I've played for a lot of years with rules kind of at the forefront, but given the games poor balance at 17+ and the rocket tag gameplay, I think I prefer rewarding clever solutions (even if they're one step, like using the Sphere to annihilate heads. Have you read how the sphere works? Do you know what hoops you have to jump through to actually use it? Especially in a game where the players teleport and planeshift every session? The sapphires, man, so many sapphires!) Like the Dhampir EK player that gaseous formed into the tarrasque's lungs and gave it a case of dancing blade induced pneumonia to death. The other character used the sphere to hollow out the shell which was used to make magic reflective hulls for their spelljammer.

"Rulings, not rules." If you think you're not being unfair and thus unfun, have it work however makes sense to you.

[dafrca]

"Rulings, not rules."
As a GM I have always tried to understand the rules but once play starts I try to use rulings. For the most part combining the two this way has led to some very successful and fun game sessions over time. :smallsmile:

[Segev]

As a GM I have always tried to understand the rules but once play starts I try to use rulings. For the most part combining the two this way has led to some very successful and fun game sessions over time. :smallsmile:

A good approach. The RAW would be that it's just the 4d10 damage. Whether that's sensible depends entirely on you and your table and the situation.

[dafrca]

A good approach. The RAW would be that it's just the 4d10 damage. Whether that's sensible depends entirely on you and your table and the situation.

Agree 100%. :biggrin:

[Foolwise]

If you think you're not being unfair and thus unfun

Double negatives are tough to read, try to avoid them. And I also dislike the insinuation that being fair = not fun.

[PhantomSoul]

Double negatives are tough to read, try to avoid them. And I also dislike the insinuation that being fair = not fun.

I interpreted that as being unfair tends to be unfun, not that being fair means fun.

[Sigreid]

4D10 is the way I'd rule it. Largely for that case where the shoe is on the other foot and the player is paralyzed and something horrible is coming for them.

[Foolwise]

I interpreted that as being unfair tends to be unfun, not that being fair means fun.

Exactly why one should avoid using double negatives.