3
\$\begingroup\$

The enemies abound spell (XGtE, p. 155) states:

[...] On a failed save, the target loses the ability to distinguish friend from foe, regarding all creatures it can see as enemies until the spell ends. Each time the target takes damage, it can repeat the saving throw, ending the effect on itself on a success.

Whenever the affected creature chooses another creature as a target, it must choose the target at random from among the creatures it can see within range of the attack, spell, or other ability it’s using.

Are you allowed to choose yourself as a target without needing to randomly select one?

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
1

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
\$\begingroup\$

You don't need Enemies Abound to attack yourself

Characters are always allowed to attack themselves (nevermind if they are affected by Enemies Abound).

Enemies Abound does not require the affected creature to make attacks or cast spells at other creatures. It may, for instance, target itself with a healing spell instead.

The section of the rules relating to "other creatures" simply says that, if the affected creature does target a creature other than itself, it must do so at random.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ That's true but I feel like a player would be metagaming too much if they refuse to actually treat creatures as their enemy. \$\endgroup\$
    – Gerson Lopez
    Sep 3, 2019 at 21:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ger I agree completely (though this is what the question is seems to be getting at). As a GM, I'd have a player affected by this roll an intelligence check to resist the urge to attack a nearby creature. Theme/narrative should drive action, not interpretations of rules. \$\endgroup\$
    – Rykara
    Sep 3, 2019 at 21:27
3
\$\begingroup\$

Yes. By RAW "another creature" implies a creature other than yourself. The wording for this should be clearer in my opinion but as it's written that works.

The downside is that if you choose another creature there's a chance you could actually be attacking a real enemy.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Out of curiosity, would you then say that you could also just attack the ground (no creature at all) while under the effects of enemies abound? \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Aug 31, 2019 at 15:59
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Medix2 only if it fits the character you are playing. You have to ask your self that if you character thinks everybody around him is an enemy would he ever not attack his enemies? As a DM I'd disallow you from attack the ground unless you've been consistently playing your character as a fool (which would make you a liability to the party), because attacking the ground with enemies around you doesnt make sense. If your playing a competent character you have to attack, flee from, or otherwise try to harm your enemies. On a side note I wouldn't allow character like that. \$\endgroup\$
    – Gerson Lopez
    Aug 31, 2019 at 23:02
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Medix2: You can attack yourself (as Rykara's answer notes) or the ground - but you don't need to do so, because those are simply scenarios not governed by the spell. The spell only affects your ability to choose other creatures as targets, and forces you to do so randomly when you have to do so. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast ♦
    Sep 3, 2019 at 8:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Entirely agreed, it just seemed like a loophole sort of thing to me and this answer didn't quite specify that \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Sep 3, 2019 at 11:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .