I won't reprint the spell's text here, but the long and the short of it is that I don't see anything in the text of the spell that would prevent casting it on extremely big objects.

  • The planet sits below the caster and is partially in range
  • If dragon can be hit when partially in range, shouldn't the planet?
  • The planet is an object. It may be covered in other objects and features but by the definition of object we commonly use in 5e, the planet is one

The background: I have a player who wants to solve the problem of an evil city by teleporting to the moon and enlarging it at just the right moment to cause it to be brought, by gravity, to crash into said city.

The question: Can you Enlarge/Reduce the planet you stand on?

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ The down votes probably came from the "not enough research" reason for a down vote, which you can see due to what @SPavel pointed out in the rules text. I up voted because I find value in ferreting out cheese factory start-ups where possible. "How do I deal with attempt at being cheesy" (in this case green cheese, as a moon is involved) questions provide answers that can help future DMs address dairy production at their tables. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast May 3 '16 at 12:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ There was a comment here previously explaining that someone simply objected to this type of question. It was unfortunately worded rather inflammatorily, so it's gone now. (Basically: there's no change that would satisfy the downvoter, so don't even worry about it.) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie May 3 '16 at 14:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ While I'm here though, there were also a number of comments discussing the physics involved; those were civil but deleted because comments aren't for discussion. So Reminder: Comments aren't for discussion. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie May 3 '16 at 14:14

A planet is a location, not an object

The rules (DMG, p.246) have this to say about what an object is:

For the purpose of these rules, an object is a discrete, inanimate item like a window, door, sword, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or a vehicle that is composed of many other objects.

The Earth is composed of all sorts of components. Rocks, trees, buildings, people, tectonic plates, oceans, mantle, core, etc. Same goes for the moon. If your average hut or wagon is not an object, what chance does a planet have?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Some mountains are monolithic. Since they are made up of one single gigantic rock (and thus one object) would your interpretation of the rules permit enlarging / reducing a monolithic mountain? \$\endgroup\$ – Tophandour May 3 '16 at 14:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Tophandour Where the line is drawn is probably going to move from table to table. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast May 3 '16 at 15:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ But what about a door that's made up of windows, lock, 2 handles, 2 hingest, flap for mail? \$\endgroup\$ – Zymus May 3 '16 at 17:26
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ It's 5e, the answer is "DM decides." \$\endgroup\$ – SPavel May 3 '16 at 18:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ Seems clear enough to me. If you need an in-game reason, explain that it is magic, and depends on the caster's perceptions. You can mentally conceive of a door as a single object, even if it has hinges and a tiny glass window. But mentally their is no way to think of the planet you are on as one single, coherent and discrete object. You can also claim that the power requirements scale with size, and are prohibitively large for things like buildings or planets. \$\endgroup\$ – D.Spetz May 3 '16 at 18:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.