The ability shocking grasp allows the stop of a reaction till the victim's next turn. I was in a dangerous situation with some OP swarms of rats. I used my shocking grasp expecting to be able to escape because I am at low health and I can run past them without an attack of opportunity. My DM considered this a Restrained move and therefore did not allow me to do this because swarm of rats is immune to restrained effect, therefore killing me off.
However, I don't think that shocking grasp is a restrained effect. I wanted to ask the forum what they thought of Shocking grasp or have had a similar situation. Shocking grasp says nothing about restraining. Just that it removes reaction moves. The shocking grasp says: " On a hit, the target takes 1d8 lightning damage, and it can't take reactions until the start of its next turn." - DND Beyond
However, I do not approve of how D&D 5e handles swarms, to the extent that I either don't use them or house-rule that they're almost immune to single-target spells and abilities but are wiped out entirely by save-for-half area damage.
Yeah, the DM made a bad ruling by taking away the tools at the character's disposal without reason. Hopefully it was just a misunderstanding that they won't repeat once it's pointed out (as covered by Matthias above), and not an indication of the DM going "killer DM" on purpose.
However, I do not approve of how D&D 5e handles swarms, to the extent that I either don't use them or house-rule that they're almost immune to single-target spells and abilities but are wiped out entirely by save-for-half area damage.
A swarm is a collection of creatures so a lot of single-target spells are already pointless on them.
DMs who cheat to kill players are very strange to me. I too hope that this is not a common occurrence.
I know that DMs can not cheat, since they have the last word on everything. But taking away player agenda and taking away an ability at the exact moment it is needed feels very much like it.
However, I do not approve of how D&D 5e handles swarms, to the extent that I either don't use them or house-rule that they're almost immune to single-target spells and abilities but are wiped out entirely by save-for-half area damage.
A swarm is a collection of creatures so a lot of single-target spells are already pointless on them.
But the rules don't actually say that anywhere. The answer to the question in that tweet is really that the swarm of fish is immune to the trident's effect because the effect uses the charmed condition, and the swarm is immune to the charmed condition (along with a great many other conditions which do make many spells ineffective against swarms). There is nothing more general about how to treat swarms written anywhere, and nothing written which makes them immune to shocking grasp.
DMs who cheat to kill players are very strange to me. I too hope that this is not a common occurrence.
Sadly, its more common than you think. I know one GM that, after the game, flipped out because they didn't realize that the character had some THP, and were upset they didn't get to kill the PC. Furthermore, the GM didn't know the rules well (or ignored them) and deliberately ignoring of player abilities. It was kinda crap. Granted, this was online, and the GM in question didn't exactly have a built up rapport with the group playing over time, but still. That kind of GM sadly happens when seeking out newer GMs.
Yup. A fair number of people just don't get the idea of the DM's goal not being to defeat the players - most of them figure it out eventually, though, so the die-hard hold-outs that will never not be trying to beat their players (as if there is some way they could actually fail to do so when trying, given the game enabling them to do literally anything they want) are a rarity.
But the rules don't actually say that anywhere. The answer to the question in that tweet is really that the swarm of fish is immune to the trident's effect because the effect uses the charmed condition, and the swarm is immune to the charmed condition (along with a great many other conditions which do make many spells ineffective against swarms). There is nothing more general about how to treat swarms written anywhere, and nothing written which makes them immune to shocking grasp.
The part of the stat block that has the creature type says "Medium swarm of Tiny beasts, unaligned". "Swarm" isn't a creature type, and "beasts" is plural. Note that Jeremy has also ruled you can't Wild Shape into a swarm for the exact same reason. The charm immunity is another reason why the trident wouldn't work, but not the only reason.
Swarms are weird because they're treated as one creature for the purposes of streamlining combat but they're not actually a creature; because of that they're always going to require a bit more DM adjudication than normal monsters. I wouldn't treat a spell attack like Shocking Grasp any differently from a weapon attack which cleaves through the swarm, but a spell like Hunter's Mark that directly targets a specific creature without fail should arguably only stick to only one fish.
But the rules don't actually say that anywhere. The answer to the question in that tweet is really that the swarm of fish is immune to the trident's effect because the effect uses the charmed condition, and the swarm is immune to the charmed condition (along with a great many other conditions which do make many spells ineffective against swarms). There is nothing more general about how to treat swarms written anywhere, and nothing written which makes them immune to shocking grasp.
The part of the stat block that has the creature type says "Medium swarm of Tiny beasts, unaligned". "Swarm" isn't a creature type, and "beasts" is plural. Note that Jeremy has also ruled...
You must be reading from a different version than I am here, because for me the stat blocks I have on this site just say Medium Beast. And Jeremy's rulings are all well and good (I wouldn't allow changing into a swarm either - except maybe a Tiefling Druid can change into a swarm of bats because that'd be awesome), but 95% of people playing have not read that tweet. Bottom line is, whatever decision the DM makes about how swarms are treated, the final moments of a life and death battle is not the time to be revealing these things to a desperate player.
But the rules don't actually say that anywhere. The answer to the question in that tweet is really that the swarm of fish is immune to the trident's effect because the effect uses the charmed condition, and the swarm is immune to the charmed condition (along with a great many other conditions which do make many spells ineffective against swarms). There is nothing more general about how to treat swarms written anywhere, and nothing written which makes them immune to shocking grasp.
The part of the stat block that has the creature type says "Medium swarm of Tiny beasts, unaligned". "Swarm" isn't a creature type, and "beasts" is plural. Note that Jeremy has also ruled...
You must be reading from a different version than I am here, because for me the stat blocks I have on this site just say Medium Beast. And Jeremy's rulings are all well and good (I wouldn't allow changing into a swarm either - except maybe a Tiefling Druid can change into a swarm of bats because that'd be awesome), but 95% of people playing have not read that tweet. Bottom line is, whatever decision the DM makes about how swarms are treated, the final moments of a life and death battle is not the time to be revealing these things to a desperate player.
He's reading from the physical books. The compendium version of the MM on here also gets it right.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
The part of the stat block that has the creature type says "Medium swarm of Tiny beasts, unaligned". "Swarm" isn't a creature type, and "beasts" is plural. Note that Jeremy has also ruled...
You must be reading from a different version than I am here, because for me the stat blocks I have on this site just say Medium Beast...
He's reading from the physical books. The compendium version of the MM on here also gets it right.
How interesting! Still not sure exactly what in-game meaning the words there have. Definitely remains an area for DM rulings. I feel that these animals have decided to form a swam to gain certain advantages, unfortunately for them there are trade-offs for that choice and that is that they can be targeted and damaged as if they were one creature - unless the rules state they are immune/resistant to it. Sucks to be them.
I'd probably rule that the Shocking Grasp spell works, and that the swarm of small creatures is so tightly packed that the electric shock travels through a majority of them, causing the damage to the swarm (and illustrate that some of the rats die and fall of you) and leaving the swarm in a state where they are slow to react to your movements (allowing the no Reactions effect).
The entire point of 5e is to streamline a lot of rules, even if they don't make "real world" sense. Nothing says that a swarm is somehow immune to the effects of Shocking Grasp, therefore it is not immune.
I'm not aware of anywhere advising to treat swarms as multiple creatures, in a game mechanical sense. Treating them as if they were a singular creature is the whole point of the swarm stat block no?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The ability shocking grasp allows the stop of a reaction till the victim's next turn. I was in a dangerous situation with some OP swarms of rats. I used my shocking grasp expecting to be able to escape because I am at low health and I can run past them without an attack of opportunity. My DM considered this a Restrained move and therefore did not allow me to do this because swarm of rats is immune to restrained effect, therefore killing me off.
However, I don't think that shocking grasp is a restrained effect. I wanted to ask the forum what they thought of Shocking grasp or have had a similar situation. Shocking grasp says nothing about restraining. Just that it removes reaction moves. The shocking grasp says: " On a hit, the target takes 1d8 lightning damage, and it can't take reactions until the start of its next turn." - DND Beyond
Shocking grasp says nothing about the restrained condition, therefore shocking grasp has nothing to do with the restrained condition.
However, I do not approve of how D&D 5e handles swarms, to the extent that I either don't use them or house-rule that they're almost immune to single-target spells and abilities but are wiped out entirely by save-for-half area damage.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Allowing you to escape without taking an opportunity attack seems like a very good and intentional use of shocking grasp to me.
Yeah, the DM made a bad ruling by taking away the tools at the character's disposal without reason. Hopefully it was just a misunderstanding that they won't repeat once it's pointed out (as covered by Matthias above), and not an indication of the DM going "killer DM" on purpose.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
DMs who cheat to kill players are very strange to me. I too hope that this is not a common occurrence.
I know that DMs can not cheat, since they have the last word on everything. But taking away player agenda and taking away an ability at the exact moment it is needed feels very much like it.
Yup. A fair number of people just don't get the idea of the DM's goal not being to defeat the players - most of them figure it out eventually, though, so the die-hard hold-outs that will never not be trying to beat their players (as if there is some way they could actually fail to do so when trying, given the game enabling them to do literally anything they want) are a rarity.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I treat swarms as environmental dangers, instead of creatures.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
I'd probably rule that the Shocking Grasp spell works, and that the swarm of small creatures is so tightly packed that the electric shock travels through a majority of them, causing the damage to the swarm (and illustrate that some of the rats die and fall of you) and leaving the swarm in a state where they are slow to react to your movements (allowing the no Reactions effect).
The entire point of 5e is to streamline a lot of rules, even if they don't make "real world" sense. Nothing says that a swarm is somehow immune to the effects of Shocking Grasp, therefore it is not immune.
I'm not aware of anywhere advising to treat swarms as multiple creatures, in a game mechanical sense. Treating them as if they were a singular creature is the whole point of the swarm stat block no?