Howdy everyone, my players are going to encounter an enemy next session that, when threatened, is going to drop a darkness spell.
Darkness states that, “If any of this spell’s area overlaps with an area of light created by a spell of 2nd level or lower, the spell that created the light is dispelled.”
I KNOW their most likely source of damage is from moonbeam, would you rule that the beam is canceled in darkness?
Posted Dec 7, 2019, 1:53 AM UTC
The light, at least, would be dispelled unless Moonbeam was up-cast. But it's an interesting question because a case could be made that per a strict reading of RAW, the light and the damage from the spell are two separate effects and a creature could take damage even if the light were dispelled:
A silvery beam of pale light shines down in a 5-foot radius, 40-foot-high Cylinder centered on a point within range. Until the spell ends, dim light fills the Cylinder.
And then, separately:
When a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, it is engulfed in ghostly flames that cause searing pain, and it must make a Constitution saving throw. It takes 2d10 radiant damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
It says nothing about entering the light. But I think its obvious that the intent is that the light is doing the damage; that's supported by this tweet from JC which says "Moonbeam is meant to get you when you enter the light (not when it passes over you) or start your turn in it." But it'll be up to the DM.
I appreciate the insight, I've been debating the topic all week and am glad there is information regarding moonbeam from Crawford. I think I'm going to rule that moonbeam is dispelled in this situation as it doesn't make much sense for a completely invisible cylinder to be behaving as a moonbeam might. Invisible moonbeam could easily be abused in the future if done correctly so I believe this approach to be the most logical.
I agree that's how I'd run it also, I think the intent is kinda obvious and overrules explicit RAW in cases like this.
Intriguing find from JC again, I apologize for reviving this thread but stumbled upon this when finalizing spells and figured you might be interested.
I like this question. In this case, the issue is sidestepped. Short answer: Yes, moonbeam is dispelled by darkness.
Moonbeam creates a cylinder of pale light. Creatures that enter the spell's area or start their turn there take damage. So is the damage directly tied to the light?
It doesn't matter. Darkness creates a sphere of magical darkness, which nonmagical light can't illuminate. More importantly, if its area overlaps with an area of light created by a 2nd level spell or lower, the spell that created that light is dispelled.
You're not justing blocking moonbeam's light, you're dispelling the entire spell when the area of effects overlap. So absolutely by RAW and RAI, moonbeam would not just be stopped from working, but actually end.
HOWEVER
Let's look at an alternative case- Hunger of Hadar. This spell also creates a sphere of blackness which no light, magical or otherwise, can illuminate. But unlike Darkness it does not dispel any spells that overlap, it simply blocks them.
You could argue the damage and the light of moonbeam are separate effects of the same spell, and that damage is still applied. After all, does darkness that bodes no light prevent fireball from working? What about Sunbeam? I don't have a RAW answer for that.
it really does seem like Hunger of Hadar is a special spell https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/04/09/can-a-warlock-with-devils-sight-see-within-hunger-of-hadar/
I was thinking that same but coolcrowe provided a very well-put answer that made me doubt myself on the RAW. You provide a very nice point though, "... the spell that created the light is dispelled" which does in fact agree with both RAW and RAI. Moonbeam is canceled by darkness unless cast as a 3rd level spell or higher. I am glad to know my players will not hate me for my interpretation of the interaction, thanks for the response.
Edit: I've written my response before your own edit.
The second case is quite interesting, I would certainly have to think about that scenario more in order to provide the best answer. I certainly see a case for moonbeam working but I can also imagine the opposite end of that argument with both sides being "technically" correct. I hope I won't have to make that ruling too soon, the party's moonbeam hype has just started so I have no clue as to how long they might be utilizing it. I would likely rule that the beam is visible until it hits the area effected by Hunger and then has no effect within the area but not be dispelled. I imagine it how water can't penetrate an overturned bowl but the stream is still visible hitting the bowl (disregard the fact that the water would flow over the sides)
I kept finding new things and adding them. The more mundane option is things like heavy obscurement (from Stinking Cloud or a heavy blizzard) and whether they would qualify to block light, and potentially spells associated with it. No answers, only conjecture.
All my time scrolling this subreddit and I've never even thought about this interaction, good question!
Even though its not necessarily the light from moonbeam causing the damage, the description of darkness is explicit in saying that it dispels any light creating spell, rather than just cancelling the light component. So I would say yes it does dispel moonbeam.
Unless moonbeam is cast at a higher level, it meets the criteria for being dispelled.
Thank you for this actually, if they cast it as a 3rd level spell (Level 5 Player) I need to remember it would still work.