I want to open a portal to the Quasi-elemental Plane of Radiance that'll unleash a big ol' laser that'll probably ruin some monster's day. (Currently I'm considering using dimension door to do it.) Is this possible?

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ What spell are you using to open this portal? Also, welcome to the site! Be sure to take the tour! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 20, 2016 at 22:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ Dimension door, but i'm still in creation and open to sudjestions \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 20, 2016 at 22:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ im a 10th lvl wizard. what dimensional portal spells would i be able to use. 3.5e \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 20, 2016 at 23:18

1 Answer 1


While a feature of earlier editions, the quasi-elemental planes go unmentioned in Dungeons and Dragons 3.5. However, the Dragon #321 article "The Limitless Light" (64-8) describes the Plane of Radiance, a coterminous plane equally the opposite of the Plane of Shadow, but that Plane of Radiance is actually very nice and not at all filled with lasers. (Manual of the Planes mentions quasi-planes (21)—they're the soft borders of multiple planes—, but the text doesn't mention any by name.)

Bringing stuff (instead of creatures) from one plane to another (e.g. flooding the Material Plane via an opening to the Elemental Plane of Water) probably requires the 9th-level Sor/Wiz spell gate [conj] (PH 234), which causes "anyone or anything that moves through [it to be] shunted instantly to the other side" (emphasis mine). Although that or anything is likely a rhetorical flourish intended to deter using the spell lest it accidentally bring forth, for example, Cthulhu, a generous DM may rule this means the possibility of, for example, conjuring a deluge of material from the Inner Planes while the opening exists and if the opening's properly oriented.

It's possible for a generous DM to rule that a magic item like the cubic gate (DMG 251) (164,000 gp; 0 lbs.) accomplishes the same effect, but since the opening is to a random destination on the plane, the opening is just as likely to be facing the wrong way to cause the desired apocalypse.

  • \$\begingroup\$ My interpretation of the gate spell text is that "anything" refers to creatures of any kind rather than air, water, light, energy, etc. Otherwise, I can see use of the gate spell having unintended consequences if energy from the Plane of Radiance or the Plane of Positive Energy is tapped. Players could create perpetual motion engines, "rocket ships" propelled by a gate spell to the Plane of Positive Energy, or immensely powerful beam weapons as suggested by the OP. Although it would be really cool to use the gate spell in this way. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – RobertF
    Commented Sep 22, 2016 at 15:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RobertF I also think that anything is the spell's author being descriptive, which is why I said it's likely a rhetorical flourish (this definition SFW; others on the site aren't). The Plane of Radiance as described is a puppies-and-rainbows opposite to the Plane of Shadow, not intended to be weaponized (except, I guess, versus puppy-and-rainbow haters). I'm not sure it can be assumed Inner Planes material is pressurized enough for propulsion, though, and were it, 2 min. still isn't a very long burn. (Cool idea, though!) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 22, 2016 at 15:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ah, sounds like the Plane of Positive Energy contains positive "psychic" energy, the opposite of negative psychic energy, if that makes any sense. But see this : reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1omf03/… \$\endgroup\$
    – RobertF
    Commented Sep 22, 2016 at 17:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RobertF The article's description pretty much has the Plane of Radiance being a coterminous bright-and-happy plane to oppose the dark-and-grim Plane of Shadow, like the Negative and Positive Energy Planes. (And that Reddit conversation is interesting; were I participating I'd add that the xag-ya and xeg-yi (originally from AD&D but brought into to 3e by Manual of the Planes) are creatures native to the Positive Energy and Negative Energy Planes, respectively, and, in fact do explode on contact with one another, so there's precedent for an equally destructive sphere of creation.) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 22, 2016 at 18:08

You must log in to answer this question.

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