While you're generally right that immunity to or avoidance of damage doesn't imply immunity to secondary effects, Heat Metalspecifically ties the disadvantage/dropping to damage, not being affected by the spell in general. "If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it..."
I read the second sentence as separate from the first conditional.
Part 1: If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it, the creature must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or drop the object if it can.
Part 2: If it doesn't drop the object, it has disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks until the start of your next turn.
So, i assumed if you were still holding or wearing a heated object you always had disadvantage but now I'm second guessing myself. part of my reasoning is when grouping both parts is things like returning weapons allowing you to drop it but then re-summon it to avoid the disadvantage.
If you divorce all logical inference from your interpretation of RAW then you are correct in your assumption: The condition for not getting disadvantage is to drop your weapon. Once this has been done the condition is fulfilled and you can pick up your weapon the next second. However, if you apply a little logic to your rules interpretation, the weapon is likely burning hot until the start of your next turn as that is how long the disadvantage would have lasted for. So the answer depends on how divorced you are from logic in your rules interpretation.
Surprisingly I think we agree. I was saying if they are both one set, the drop loop hole works. If they are separate then picking it back up or having it returned means It would still apply disadvantage because part 2 is an always on thing. but.... if its an always on thing and separate that means even fire immune creatures would still have the disadvantage. for some people this wouldn't make sense. I can see disadvantage even when immune as working because even if you are immune it doesn't mean you can't feel it, or the heated state makes it harder to wield.
to sum it up I think if you are in *contact* with an object the disadvantage applies. probably even if you are Immune.
* Contact in above sentence is defined as forced to touch where you have no option of getting away or choosing to stay touching said object. This is the definition I uses for determining damage. so I would say No to hit damage.
Physical contact was not a requirement of casting the spell. Its also not a requirement of using a bonus action in the future. What are you talking about?
Not every class is meant to have access to every effect. I don't see your point. I guess you can use Absorb Elements to get a fiery sword in certain situations, if it's that important.
And Elemental Weapon is an optional addition to the spell list in Tasha's.
Not every class is meant to have access to every effect. I don't see your point. I guess you can use Absorb Elements to get a fiery sword in certain situations, if it's that important.
And Elemental Weapon is an optional addition to the spell list in Tasha's.
Flame Blade was the better comeback, however you might not have it prepared for whatever reason.
That would be because it's a garbage spell, and because someone already said it. We're getting pretty off topic though.
1. You cast the concentration spell heat metal on your sword, you immediately take damage, you make a saving throw not to drop the sword and a second one not to lose concentration.
2. You attack with the sword next round, if you hit you do normal damage. THEN you use the bonus action to cause the spell to inflict damage. A bonus action does not happen at the exact same time as a regular action, it occurs either before or after. Either way the sword has either not yet hit or is no longer in contact with the enemy. You take damage, and need to make the 2 saving throws again. Realistically you will fail at least 1 of the saving throws.
Although I accept that Heat Metal can't be used the way I was suggesting in a weapon attack IF IT COULD it would be way better than these cantrips or Searing Smite because
1) It would not require the Cast a Spell action to be taken on subsequent turns, so you still get your full Attack action on those turns rather than casting a cantrip every time
2) It would last for up to a minute, meaning for one spell slot you could apply Xd8 extra damage every turn rather than being one and done like Searing Smite
Again, I accept that it cannot be used as part of an attack like I was thinking (but grapple maybe???) BUT I still think if it could be and you had ways to mitigate the damage to yourself it would be much better and not comparable to a SCAGtrip or Searing Smite due to its duration
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Although I accept that Heat Metal can't be used the way I was suggesting in a weapon attack IF IT COULD it would be way better than these cantrips or Searing Smite because
1) It would not require the Cast a Spell action to be taken on subsequent turns, so you still get your full Attack action on those turns rather than casting a cantrip every time
2) It would last for up to a minute, meaning for one spell slot you could apply Xd8 extra damage every turn rather than being one and done like Searing Smite
Although I accept that Heat Metal can't be used the way I was suggesting in a weapon attack IF IT COULD it would be way better than these cantrips or Searing Smite because
1) It would not require the Cast a Spell action to be taken on subsequent turns, so you still get your full Attack action on those turns rather than casting a cantrip every time
2) It would last for up to a minute, meaning for one spell slot you could apply Xd8 extra damage every turn rather than being one and done like Searing Smite
You want a level 2 spell to do more than twice as much damage as a level 3 spell.
I missed that one of the ones you posted was Elemental Weapon. I thought they were the SCAG trips. None of the spells you linked will show for me because I do not have a copy of SCAG or the PHB purchased on D&D beyond. I want a level 2 spell to do more than twice as much damage as a level 3 spell IF it is used by a character who can pick up fire immunity. If your character cannot pick up fire immunity (which wont happen usually until Tier 4 of play) then this usage of the spell is a terrible idea because then you are also taking damage.
This is not about me trying to make a 2nd level spell better than a 3rd level spell and it is not that I think there ARENT other spells in the game that fill the role of "weapon attack that deals fire damage", its more what I thought was a creative way that the spell can be used by characters with fire immunity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I have an artificer who is immune to fire and this question came up, if she can cast Heat Metal on her own hammer before she hits things.
I don't think this interaction is too broken when you compare it to other spells that do roughly the same thing. Flame Blade does the same thing essentially (3d6 vs 2d8) doesn't damage you, and can last ten minutes instead of the one of Heat Metal.
I mean, if the player is willing to take the damage and disadvantage from the casting, and use their bonus action to inflict the damage when they hit something, I feel like that's a pretty fair tradeoff.
Surprisingly I think we agree. I was saying if they are both one set, the drop loop hole works. If they are separate then picking it back up or having it returned means It would still apply disadvantage because part 2 is an always on thing. but.... if its an always on thing and separate that means even fire immune creatures would still have the disadvantage. for some people this wouldn't make sense. I can see disadvantage even when immune as working because even if you are immune it doesn't mean you can't feel it, or the heated state makes it harder to wield.
to sum it up I think if you are in *contact* with an object the disadvantage applies. probably even if you are Immune.
* Contact in above sentence is defined as forced to touch where you have no option of getting away or choosing to stay touching said object. This is the definition I uses for determining damage. so I would say No to hit damage.
And to circle back around, no, the disadvantage/urge to drop is explicitly tied to taking damage
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
If only...
If only....
If only.....
Wait? there's no way for druids to get non druid cantrips? Ah well, I guess all is lost.
I don't know how to be any clearer than I was.
That has never been part of the discussion up to now. I was just listing all the spells off the top of my head that added fire to a weapon.
Druids can just make weapons out of fire that so even more damage:
Not every class is meant to have access to every effect. I don't see your point. I guess you can use Absorb Elements to get a fiery sword in certain situations, if it's that important.
And Elemental Weapon is an optional addition to the spell list in Tasha's.
That would be because it's a garbage spell, and because someone already said it. We're getting pretty off topic though.
1. You cast the concentration spell heat metal on your sword, you immediately take damage, you make a saving throw not to drop the sword and a second one not to lose concentration.
2. You attack with the sword next round, if you hit you do normal damage. THEN you use the bonus action to cause the spell to inflict damage. A bonus action does not happen at the exact same time as a regular action, it occurs either before or after. Either way the sword has either not yet hit or is no longer in contact with the enemy. You take damage, and need to make the 2 saving throws again. Realistically you will fail at least 1 of the saving throws.
Although I accept that Heat Metal can't be used the way I was suggesting in a weapon attack IF IT COULD it would be way better than these cantrips or Searing Smite because
1) It would not require the Cast a Spell action to be taken on subsequent turns, so you still get your full Attack action on those turns rather than casting a cantrip every time
2) It would last for up to a minute, meaning for one spell slot you could apply Xd8 extra damage every turn rather than being one and done like Searing Smite
Again, I accept that it cannot be used as part of an attack like I was thinking (but grapple maybe???) BUT I still think if it could be and you had ways to mitigate the damage to yourself it would be much better and not comparable to a SCAGtrip or Searing Smite due to its duration
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Read Elemental weapon again.
You want a level 2 spell to do more than twice as much damage as a level 3 spell.
I missed that one of the ones you posted was Elemental Weapon. I thought they were the SCAG trips. None of the spells you linked will show for me because I do not have a copy of SCAG or the PHB purchased on D&D beyond. I want a level 2 spell to do more than twice as much damage as a level 3 spell IF it is used by a character who can pick up fire immunity. If your character cannot pick up fire immunity (which wont happen usually until Tier 4 of play) then this usage of the spell is a terrible idea because then you are also taking damage.
This is not about me trying to make a 2nd level spell better than a 3rd level spell and it is not that I think there ARENT other spells in the game that fill the role of "weapon attack that deals fire damage", its more what I thought was a creative way that the spell can be used by characters with fire immunity.
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I have an artificer who is immune to fire and this question came up, if she can cast Heat Metal on her own hammer before she hits things.
I don't think this interaction is too broken when you compare it to other spells that do roughly the same thing. Flame Blade does the same thing essentially (3d6 vs 2d8) doesn't damage you, and can last ten minutes instead of the one of Heat Metal.
I mean, if the player is willing to take the damage and disadvantage from the casting, and use their bonus action to inflict the damage when they hit something, I feel like that's a pretty fair tradeoff.
Whether something is legal is pretty much unrelated to whether it's broken.