[RPG] Can Resilient Sphere contain multiple creatures

creature-sizednd-5espells

As a DM, I want to know if there are any loopholes to allow more than one creature to fit inside Otiluke’s Resilient Sphere, Rules as Written.

Here is the scenario:

A party of four Medium creatures are walking through the old sewers of a city. Suddenly, the sound of gallons of rushing water echos down the tunnel, the party has only moments to react before the chamber floods with water. Thinking quickly, the party groups together and the wizard casts Resilient Sphere on them to protect them from the water.

Rules as Written, this wouldn’t work. The spell states that:

“The sphere is weightless and just large enough to contain the creature or object inside”.

This quote, and the continued use of singular rather than plural language, heavily implies that it is only intended to affect one creature at a time.

However, I want to know if there are any ways within the rules that would allow for more than one creature to be protected by Resilient Sphere.

Best Answer

Not according to RAW

“A sphere of shimmering force [that] encloses a creature or object of Large size or smaller within range”.

The emphasis above is mine, and it means one, singular 'thing' can be affected. I would say that any attempts to target something that is clustered in such a way that one item isn't a clear target then the spell would actually fail.

For example the spell makes no mention of emptying containers, and since spells only do what they say they do, then the container can't be emptied, isn't a singular object and will not be a valid target.

However, there are inconsistencies

Is a door a single object when hinge is also an object? This is not clear in the rules so there are loopholes in any reading of this spell.

How would I rule it?

I would let it affect both the vial and its contents, or the container and its contents, but I would treat creatures differently and not allow it to affect a box full of people. There is no specific rules support, but I think it makes more sense because there is no precedent (that I know of) for people becoming objects (unlike the precedent that a hinge can become part of a larger object - the door).