8
\$\begingroup\$

The fourth spell level wizard's spell Otiluke's Resilient Sphere describes the sphere as

A sphere of shimmering force

I always envisioned this to kind of look like "ball of force", a maybe shimmering, but basically transparent sphere made of force, similar to the fifth spell level spell Wall of Force (which explicitly states it is invisible), and we always played it like that. Most images picture it like that, too. We also used to play it so that you could still talk to the creature inside.

However, this question has answers that suggest the sphere might be opaque, much like Leomund's Tiny Hut from the outside. This would not only make a difference for gaze attacks, but more importantly, also for being able to purposefully move around in it and to observe the battlefield while protected within it. In addition, if nothing could pass, not even sound, then you also could not communicate with your team or anyone else.

So, is it opaque? Is it soundproof?

\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

7
\$\begingroup\$

Up to the DM

The spell says:

A sphere of shimmering force

That's it. The rules don't say whether opaque or transparent. So the DM decides.

You can try to tie it in to other rules and build a logical structure that determines what the answer is, but the rules really just aren't that consistent.

So the DM decides.

Arguments for opacity

The spell says:

Nothing--not physical objects, energy, or other spell effects--can pass through

It's reasonable to assume that that means light and sound, they're energy, right? Basic physics. There you are in the sphere, and the only light or sound is from inside.

Counter-argument: "Physics"? Really? We broke physics back at the light cantrip. Earlier. Probably on page one of the Basic Rules.

Arguments for transparency

The spell says:

An enclosed creature can use its action to push against the sphere's walls and thus roll the sphere at up to half the creature's speed.

What's the point of being able to move it if you can't see where you're going?

Also, and it's a thin thread, I admit, part of the spell component says "clear crystal". Why say "clear" if the resulting sphere is opaque?

Counter-argument: Physics. It says energy can't go through. Light and sound are energy.

How to decide

Pick whichever feels most reasonable and go with it. You're not going to break the game either way. If you decide you don't like how it works, you can change your mind later.

Personally, I prefer transparent, because I think it seems more fun, and that's the way we've used it in games in the past.

In a game I currently play in, I have a wizard who has resilient sphere in their book, although I've never cast it. I've always assumed it would be transparent, because that's the way I've played it in the past, but I asked the DM. I got that DM look, and they said, "What? It doesn't say? Hmm. It's transparent, it's a hamster ball." So there you have it.

But it's your game, you decide.

As a player

If there's any doubt how it's going to work at your table, I recommend you ask your DM ahead of time, so that you can figure it out before you need to use it in session.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Hi @Jack, I accepted this one. I think there is enough room for DM interpretation so that the "Opaque" choice is not clear cut. The about equal up and downvotes on opaque support this (and I still think there also is someting about what "energy" means if used by the game, I'm pretty confident it is not a modern physics interpretation of the term, that is a trap most answers on this fall into). \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 28, 2022 at 21:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ Another argument against "light and sound are energy" point: the spell doesn't apply the blinded or deafened conditions to creatures within in, though I suppose that's still compatible with light and sound within the sphere anyway. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ty Hayes
    Commented May 29, 2022 at 2:06
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I think the "physics" argument would be hard to defend when we're talking about a "magic" spell, something that by definition does not respect the rules of physics. \$\endgroup\$
    – Matthieu
    Commented May 30, 2022 at 8:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ No, the "energy" and "Physics" lines don't work. D&D uses metaphysics, not physics, otherwise dragons can't fly due to the cube/square law, and the conservation of mass is violated left, right, and center. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 23 at 21:14
3
\$\begingroup\$

It is probably opaque

My first instinct was to use the description of the field, which is described as "shimmering". However there are several usages of this word in spell and item descriptions which do not appear to indicate an influence on opacity.

Take for example Shield of Faith and Dispel Evil and Good which both use an almost identical visual description but are obviously transparent.

On the flip side, Serpent Scale Armor is also described as shimmering however there's no indication that it is transparent. This is consistent with a dictionary definition of "shimmer" which only indicates the emission or distortion of light.

Hence, without a consistent pattern we have to fall back to a plain reading of the following text (emphasis mine) :

Nothing--not physical objects, energy, or other spell effects--can pass through the barrier

Sound and light are both energy, hence we can confidently say that neither of them can pass through the barrier.

Of course, the lack of specific mention to sound and light call into question whether this is intended, so your DM will need to provide a ruling.

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Energy in the game as a term used to be used for non-physical damage types, I believe: fire, lightning, acid, radiant, thunder. I’m not sure that is still true in 5e. If it is, maybe not all sound and light would count as “energy” in the sense of the use here. I’ll + this anyways, I think the comparison of shimmering ist good, but I think it could benefit from digging a bit more \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 27, 2022 at 20:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ For example, the 5e spell Protection from Energy gives “resistance to one damage type of your choice: acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder” \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 27, 2022 at 20:34
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Or Dragon’s Breath allows the target to “spew magical energy from its mouth, provided it has one. Choose acid, cold, fire, lightning, or poison.” \$\endgroup\$ Commented May 27, 2022 at 20:38
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @GroodytheHobgoblin While energy is sometimes used as a broad category of damage types, it is not a game term: the game did not write out a definition for Energy in the same way it has for say Concentration (PHB 203). Plus in the context of "physical objects, energy, or other spell effects" damage types are out of place, so the spell is clearly referring to the normal meaning of energy. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ruse
    Commented May 27, 2022 at 21:07
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ @GroodytheHobgoblin You can see just how loose and undefined the notion of energy damage is from your very own examples. Protection from Energy includes thunder, whereas Dragon's Breath includes poison, and neither include radiant which you do. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ruse
    Commented May 27, 2022 at 21:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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