If my wizard has protection from evil cast and is facing an evil summoner, can he attack the summoner without ending the spell effects against the summons?
Greetings, fellow traveller.
Following the spell description, there is nothing to prevent you from doing that and ending your protective ward against his summoned creatures.
The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature.
Since it's the summoned creatures your protection works against and not the one who summoned them, you're golden.
Ruyan.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
What if there are 10 summoned creatures and I attack one of them? Are all of the summons then permitted to attack me?
What if there are 10 summoned creatures and I attack one of them? Are all of the summons then permitted to attack me?
Yes.
Be careful with your diplomatic immunity.
Thanks to both of you
The protection from evil spell does not end if you attack what are you all talking about?
|
The protection from evil spell does not end if you attack what are you all talking about?
It does, but from my interpretation, the effect only ends for that creature you attack:. See the bolded part below:
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by evil summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Summoned creatures that are not evil are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.
From the bolded section, it appears that the pretection effect goes on a creature-by-creature basis.
Also, only the protection against contact vanishes, the bonuses for AC and saves remain.
|
The protection from evil spell does not end if you attack what are you all talking about?It does, but from my interpretation, the effect only ends for that creature you attack:. See the bolded part below:
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by evil summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Summoned creatures that are not evil are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.From the bolded section, it appears that the pretection effect goes on a creature-by-creature basis.
I can bold things and take things out of context too. Congrats.
|
I completely agree with Nebelwerfer41.
Why would it end against ALL summoned creatures if you only attacked ONE of them?
The barrier breaks because you force the barrier against that ONE creature. Just because i force it against one doesn't mean it is forced against all of them. That doesn't seem to follow with the rules at all. It doesn't say that you break the effect ALL TOGETHER. To me that is an extension of an interpretation.
That's my take on it.
|
|
Picture it like a bubble. As long as you don't attack the group of enemies you are getting protection from then that bubble prevents them from getting to you. Now once you attack from the inside that barrier is popped open and you lose the benefits of the protection against summoned creatures.
Think of it like this. In Santuary once you attack the effect ends for all incoming attacks, not just against that one thing you attacked. Try and picture what that spell looks like and how your explanation would even work.
|
|
And that logic is sound for spells that specifically state that the effect breaks -all together-. Protection from Evil says nothing about a blanket effect of breaking. It exists as a barrier against each summoned, evil creature.
The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature.
Emphasis mine.
Some people might think this is an "overpowered" interpretation but you have to realize that there are few spells that grant you immunity to certain types of creatures or attacks. Protection from Evil is one of them, but it is not so powerful that creatures with SR can't just bypass it. Again, that is specifically stated in the spell description.
There is no need to infer that the protection breaks against all summoned creatures if you attack one. It is a perfectly fine interpretation but don't confuse an interpretation for the RAW.
|
|
I missed the back and forth about bolding and quoting text and I was not trying to be inflammatory. The fact is that is states a single creature. There is no reason to think that it goes beyond the one creature being mentioned.
Rules of grammar indicate that if the words "creatures" is used at the beginning of a sentence you would continue to use it (or a word that implies the same use, such as "all") unless you are changing the meaning.
I would think that if they intended to have the effect break against all creatures it would say something like "warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against ANY blocked creature." It would have been that simple. Yet they didn't make that change which leads me to believe that it doesn't break against all creatures.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by evil summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Summoned creatures that are not evil are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.
In this description the warded creature is the PC. The PC is protected from being touched by evil summoned creatures. If the PC attacks or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature (evil summons) the protection ends.
Sometimes I wonder how you guys come up with your interpretations. "The protection againts contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature." Its right there in black and white "The protection against contact by summoned creatureS ends" period dot end of subject "if the warded creature (the PC) makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature (evil summoned monsters)." I can only type that so many more times. Its pretty straight forward. The protection against evil summoned monsters ends if you attack an evil summoned monster. As was stated above, if you attack the evil summoned monsters controller/caster/master it doesn't end that protection against the summons, but the second you attack the evil summoned monsters that ward is gone.
Protection against all the creatures you are being warded against (evil, good, lawful, chaotic what have you depending on the spell) ends when you attack one of the type (evil, good, alwful, chaotic).
The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature.
What ends? The protection against contact by summoned creatures.
When does it end? When the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature.
There is a discrepancy in the language.
The first has plural creatures, implying the bubble effect.
The second specifies a specific singular creature. This implies the first part is on a creature-by-creature basis.
I would probably just pop the bubble (leaving the existing AC bonus and mental protection) because tracking individual critters is annoying. It seems to be pretty much equally valid either way, as either interpretation needs a change to the rule to be grammatically valid.
|
|
Grick, thanks for pointing out the breaking of the plural.
ossian666, my apologies. It does seem that there is a breaking of the subject(s) in that sentence so either interpretation works.
To me I see it as Grick outline, a creature-by-creature basis. I can see how it would be annoying to track multiples but how many times is that going to happen? As the DM you at least partially control how many summoned, evil creatures are in play. Know your limits. ;)
|
|
Its a level 1 spell...the alternative interpretation that everyone keeps trying to push makes this spell much stronger than a level 1 spell.
Really what needs adjusted is instead of "force the barrier against the blocked creature" it should say "force the barrier against a blocked creature".
Congrats you managed to find 1 of roughly 1,000 poorly worded descriptions in these books.
Specificity. Its not just a word, but a way of life.
Edit: Sometimes the limits aren't yours to set...there are LOTS of APs out there and this question comes directly from a scenario in one.
I would say yes. You are not attacking the warded creature.
Can a warded creature SUNDER armor worn or items held by the protected player? Or even disarm them?
(Assuming protection from evil) If the creature is an evil summoned creature, and it's using it's natural weapons to sunder or disarm, then no. If it's using a manufactured weapon, then yes. If it's just an evil dude, who isn't summoned, then yes with either natural or manufactured.
The +2 deflection bonus to AC will apply to the players CMD in any case.
I would say that if the action you took would break invisibility, it would also break the "diplomatic immunity" of Protection from Evil. You may not be causing hit point damage to the creature, but the creature still defends against the attack with its CMD.
Grick, why can't an evil summoned creature attack an OBJECT on the person's body or being held. I am looking for a proper RAW ruling if possible. The wording for PfE says it prevents BODILY CONTACT.
The spell creates a magical barrier around the subject at a distance of 1 foot.
There is an assumption that this either includes attended items, or that in order to target an attended item you must be able to target the creature holding it (the same reason you can't attack the end of a reach weapon being wielded by a creature outside your threatened area).
Meaning, even if the barrier doesn't completely envelop my lance, you still need to hit it near my hand in order to disarm me of it.
The item uses the save of the person holding it. Which would imply its kinda part of that person. Although i would still allow it since protection from evil is kinda over powered. See. I can be reasonable Ossian
I apologise, I had the question backwards in my head. I thought we were asking if the PROTECTED player could sunder/disarm against the summoned creature that's being warded against without that summoned creature being able to use its natural attacks back.
If the summoned creature has a manufactured weapon, he's golden to do anything he wants with it, as it's not a natural attack.
However, in the case of the summoned creature attempting a disarm on the protected player, nothing is specified in the disarm description if bodily contact is made (although there is a -4 for attempting a disarm while unarmed). If you haven't a weapon yourself, you're obviously not knocking the weapon from your target's hand with your own, so you must be doing something else like striking the target's wrist or elbow if the weapon is one that can't be grasped (like, say, a brilliant energy or flaming sword).
There's no bonus to a disarm maneuver for having DR of any kind, so ... the maneuver just isn't detailed enough for these distinctions. PFRPG is not at heart a hard simulationist game.
The only natural attack I'd let an evil summoned creature use against a warded person is some sort of non-returning ranged attack (evil dire porcupine quills maybe ?)