Let's say that the tree is a large, resilient, wooden object.
[AC15, 27hp, vulnerable to fire]
RAW, objects will always fail all STR and DEX saves and are immune to effects that require other saves.
It's a bit weird that Searing Smite would require a CON save, but it makes perfect sense to me that a spell that can do fire damage and set fire to someone can also do fire damage and set fire to a flammable object.
Handwavium inbound: This tree is not immune to — and will auto fail — the CON save required to avoid Searing Smite fire damage.
Sure, let's say the treehouse / lookout post / hunting blind is mostly constructed of ropes and vines. The primary purpose is to grant cover (avoid being seen), not necessarily to take direct damage.
Umm spiders are rather flammable too. Can I retcon my actions a bit, because I wouldn't climb a burning treehouse. If no then yolo i guess
There are risks to hopping ahead in the turn order. :) Feels like you could retcon since I'd set the tree alight before your turn, but that's up to the DM.
I'll do my best to not burn you down. My guess is the tree isn't going to insta-pyre, so if I can catch it on fire, you may have a round or two to get out. I'd be more worried about racing up there and being the nearest target for the entire goblin trio, though.
Let's say that the tree is a large, resilient, wooden object.
[AC15, 27hp, vulnerable to fire]
RAW, objects will always fail all STR and DEX saves and are immune to effects that require other saves.
It's a bit weird that Searing Smite would require a CON save, but it makes perfect sense to me that a spell that can do fire damage and set fire to someone can also do fire damage and set fire to a flammable object.
Handwavium inbound: This tree is not immune to — and will auto fail — the CON save required to avoid Searing Smite fire damage.
Thanks, DM. Would I have advantage in my attack, since it's an immovable object, which might be considered "restrained"?
Umm spiders are rather flammable too. Can I retcon my actions a bit, because I wouldn't climb a burning treehouse. If no then yolo i guess
There are risks to hopping ahead in the turn order. :) Feels like you could retcon since I'd set the tree alight before your turn, but that's up to the DM.
I'll do my best to not burn you down. My guess is the tree isn't going to insta-pyre, so if I can catch it on fire, you may have a round or two to get out. I'd be more worried about racing up there and being the nearest target for the entire goblin trio, though.
I mean i have 2 wildshapes. I am a damage sponge right now. A support/control tank
Umm spiders are rather flammable too. Can I retcon my actions a bit, because I wouldn't climb a burning treehouse. If no then yolo i guess
I'd rather we didn't go down that path. 'Tis a rabbit hole of indecision, that is.
But yeah, very similar to the 'can I attack a swarm if it occupies the same square as an ally' question ... the tree is a very large object ... and a relatively small, melee-attack-sized portion of it at the 5' elevation will be on fire (if that is what the paladin decides to do). What is happening to that portion of the object will have very little bearing on other, more distant squares. It will take some number of rounds of fire damage before being 15' aloft in the tree becomes a bad idea.
Thanks, DM. Would I have advantage in my attack, since it's an immovable object, which might be considered "restrained"?
Sorry, no. Generally speaking, I am a RAW guy. Changing the way that all objects may be damaged all of the time would be a very broad, this-affects-every-object-in-the-world-and-how-heroes-interact-with-them sort of situation. I'm pretty sure the rules would say something to the effect of 'all attacks targeting objects may do so with advantage' if the game designers intended that to be the case.
In my view, the 'flammable objects can be affected by the paladin spell, Searing Smite' ruling was not as much of a this-changes-everything sort of ruling ... that is why I was comfortable adjusting the RAW when ruling in your favor in that instance.
Umm spiders are rather flammable too. Can I retcon my actions a bit, because I wouldn't climb a burning treehouse. If no then yolo i guess
I'd rather we didn't go down that path. 'Tis a rabbit hole of indecision, that is.
But yeah, very similar to the 'can I attack a swarm if it occupies the same square as an ally' question ... the tree is a very large object ... and a relatively small, melee-attack-sized portion of it at the 5' elevation will be on fire (if that is what the paladin decides to do). What is happening to that portion of the object will have very little bearing on other, more distant squares. It will take some number of rounds of fire damage before being 15' aloft in the tree becomes a bad idea.
And my "hop" was just a theatrical "Brad Pitt in Troy" flourish, not an attempt to leap halfway up the tree, or anything like that. My stroke landed at my normal stab height.
Let's say that the tree is a large, resilient, wooden object.
[AC15, 27hp, vulnerable to fire]
RAW, objects will always fail all STR and DEX saves and are immune to effects that require other saves.
It's a bit weird that Searing Smite would require a CON save, but it makes perfect sense to me that a spell that can do fire damage and set fire to someone can also do fire damage and set fire to a flammable object.
Handwavium inbound: This tree is not immune to — and will auto fail — the CON save required to avoid Searing Smite fire damage.
DM, Can the tree stand itself be targeted? For example, could it be damaged/destroyed to remove or reduce the goblin’s cover?
Sure, let's say the treehouse / lookout post / hunting blind is mostly constructed of ropes and vines. The primary purpose is to grant cover (avoid being seen), not necessarily to take direct damage.
A medium sized, fragile, cloth/rope object.
[AC11, 4hp, vulnerable to fire]
Umm spiders are rather flammable too. Can I retcon my actions a bit, because I wouldn't climb a burning treehouse. If no then yolo i guess
There are risks to hopping ahead in the turn order. :) Feels like you could retcon since I'd set the tree alight before your turn, but that's up to the DM.
I'll do my best to not burn you down. My guess is the tree isn't going to insta-pyre, so if I can catch it on fire, you may have a round or two to get out. I'd be more worried about racing up there and being the nearest target for the entire goblin trio, though.
Thanks, DM. Would I have advantage in my attack, since it's an immovable object, which might be considered "restrained"?
I mean i have 2 wildshapes. I am a damage sponge right now. A support/control tank
I'd rather we didn't go down that path. 'Tis a rabbit hole of indecision, that is.
But yeah, very similar to the 'can I attack a swarm if it occupies the same square as an ally' question ... the tree is a very large object ... and a relatively small, melee-attack-sized portion of it at the 5' elevation will be on fire (if that is what the paladin decides to do). What is happening to that portion of the object will have very little bearing on other, more distant squares. It will take some number of rounds of fire damage before being 15' aloft in the tree becomes a bad idea.
Sorry, no. Generally speaking, I am a RAW guy. Changing the way that all objects may be damaged all of the time would be a very broad, this-affects-every-object-in-the-world-and-how-heroes-interact-with-them sort of situation. I'm pretty sure the rules would say something to the effect of 'all attacks targeting objects may do so with advantage' if the game designers intended that to be the case.
In my view, the 'flammable objects can be affected by the paladin spell, Searing Smite' ruling was not as much of a this-changes-everything sort of ruling ... that is why I was comfortable adjusting the RAW when ruling in your favor in that instance.
Sounds good. Here goes nothing...
@Bird, I noticed that Yaudara had both of his 1st level spell slots marked as used. I adjusted the sheet to reflect only 1 of 2 spell slots used.
Carpe Diem it is then :D
Thanks. Not sure how that happened. Early morning double clicks or something.
One thing to think about as that tree burns: when it's consumed, it may fall into the ravine. Don't hang out up there too long.
With my luck, it'll fall on the rope bridge and burn it up.
I have spiderclimb, so i can get us over regardless.
And my "hop" was just a theatrical "Brad Pitt in Troy" flourish, not an attempt to leap halfway up the tree, or anything like that. My stroke landed at my normal stab height.
^^ Yeah, totally. I'm good with hyperbole existing in the IC descriptions of game actions.
Cover is completely toast for the goblins.
Fiyahhh!
*elmo fire meme*