I would agree that the roll is final when the reaction is used, so it's nice to get around disadvantages or to redirect advantages. Heck, it could be good for baiting out an enemy's AoO for redirection to their ally. As for the unconscious condition's crit transferring, I don't think it transfers the crit since it's not an effect of the attack but an effect of being unconscious that causes it. Maybe someone has a good argument why it does, but I don't think we'll get attack our downed friend for a free crit transfer.
This could be a way to transfer's a rogue's sneak attack. Couldn't it?
The cloud rune explicitly states it transfers all effects, and damage is an effect.
Is it? An 'effect' would seem to be something apart from the damage. Per the PHB:
3. Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise. Some attacks cause special effects in addition to or instead of damage.
WOTC doesn't write rules as well as you're theorizing they do. The text you bolded here doesn't mean, even if WOTC was being very careful about implications, that damage isn't an effect - it only implies damage isn't a special effect. And that inference can't be drawn - WOTC never, under any circumstance in 5E, writes rules that "tightly". The way they consistently write rules is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and furthermore, rules text may include redundancies - for example, a teleport effect may specify you teleport with your clothing, even though all teleport effects teleport you with your clothing unless they say they don't. So for both reasons, the text you quote here does not establish that damage is not an effect. On the contrary, spells like globe of invulnerability only work as clearly intended if damage is an effect, and 5E is always written using "plain English", which means damage is an effect unless we're told it's not, since that's what the word effect means, and we're never told it's not.
You're conflating two different uses of the word 'effect' there. 'Effect', as in whether damage is an effect of an attack, is a noun. 'Have an/no effect (on)', as in "Such a spell can target creatures and objects within the barrier, but the spell has no effect on them" from the Globe of Invulnerability description, is a verb. The latter usage in no way reflects on or is informed by the former. Saying a spell has no effect on anyone within the globe would still include damage even if the game doesn't consider damage an effect per the use of the cloud rune.
With regards to Sneak Attack specifically, the wording would suggest it could still apply if the conditions for it applied to the new target -- "Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon. You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll." -- but it wouldn't be automatic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
When you roll a 15 to hit a paralyzed creature, your attack does not include the effect of critical hit damage. The critical hit is an effect of the target's condition. If you move the attack to something that does not have that condition, it is still a hit but not a crit because only the effects of the attack transfer, not all the pre-existing conditions on the target.
Similarly, if the initial target has vulnerability to fire and you hit it with fire and then transfer the attack to a creature without fire vulnerability, you don't get double damage. The vulnerability was not an effect of the attack, it is simply a condition that effects how that particular creature takes damage.
Or to put it another way, a debuff is an effect on a creature, not a buff to all attacks against the creature. Reducing a target's AC by two and giving someone a +2 bonus to hit that creature may have the same outcome, but they are not the same effect.
(Paralyzed condition: “Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.” )
You now activate the cloud rune and choose a different target for the SAME ATTACK (that is a critical Hit).
(Cloud Rune: “The chosen creature becomes the target of the attack, using the same roll.”)
If the attack roll of your attack then is high enough to hit the chosen creature, you then roll damage for this attack (still the SAME ATTACK).
Now you roll damage as normal, for your attack, that still is a critical hit and get to deal your extra dice as damage against the now changed target.
(Critical Hits: “When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target.“)
There is still the problem of the timing of the cloud rune and the paralyzed condition since they are simultaneously applied “on hit”. But since the dungeon masters guide tells that the effect of a reaction generally is resolved before the reaction takes it effect, I would say that, first, the attack gets to be a krit (since at this points all requirements of the paralyzed condition are met) and then the attack is transferred.
When the newly chosen creature becomes the target of the attack, using the same roll, unless that roll is sufficiently high to become a critical hit or the new target has a condition making it so, the hit will not be a critical hit, because such result is not part of the attack’s effects but the condition.
Likewise, if said Rune Knight had the ability to crit on 19+ roll, such a roll would not be a critical hit against a target wearing an Adamantine Armor but would on a newly chosen target not having the ability to cancel crit because such effect was not part of the attack's effect, but a feature from the target.
My point was that the attack becomes a critical hit and stays a critical hit if it is transferred. This has nothing to do with the attacks effekts or conditions, but is a property of this specific attack. Therefore the attack stays a critical hit if you just switch the target.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You're conflating two different uses of the word 'effect' there. 'Effect', as in whether damage is an effect of an attack, is a noun. 'Have an/no effect (on)', as in "Such a spell can target creatures and objects within the barrier, but the spell has no effect on them" from the Globe of Invulnerability description, is a verb. The latter usage in no way reflects on or is informed by the former. Saying a spell has no effect on anyone within the globe would still include damage even if the game doesn't consider damage an effect per the use of the cloud rune.
With regards to Sneak Attack specifically, the wording would suggest it could still apply if the conditions for it applied to the new target -- "Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon. You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll." -- but it wouldn't be automatic.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
When you roll a 15 to hit a paralyzed creature, your attack does not include the effect of critical hit damage. The critical hit is an effect of the target's condition. If you move the attack to something that does not have that condition, it is still a hit but not a crit because only the effects of the attack transfer, not all the pre-existing conditions on the target.
Similarly, if the initial target has vulnerability to fire and you hit it with fire and then transfer the attack to a creature without fire vulnerability, you don't get double damage. The vulnerability was not an effect of the attack, it is simply a condition that effects how that particular creature takes damage.
Or to put it another way, a debuff is an effect on a creature, not a buff to all attacks against the creature. Reducing a target's AC by two and giving someone a +2 bonus to hit that creature may have the same outcome, but they are not the same effect.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I disagree. I think RAW this is what would happen:
You attack the paralyzed creature.
You hit and now the paralyzed condition turns your ATTACK in a critical hit.
(Paralyzed condition: “Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.” )
You now activate the cloud rune and choose a different target for the SAME ATTACK (that is a critical Hit).
(Cloud Rune: “The chosen creature becomes the target of the attack, using the same roll.”)
If the attack roll of your attack then is high enough to hit the chosen creature, you then roll damage for this attack (still the SAME ATTACK).
Now you roll damage as normal, for your attack, that still is a critical hit and get to deal your extra dice as damage against the now changed target.
(Critical Hits: “When you score a critical hit, you get to roll extra dice for the attack’s damage against the target.“)
There is still the problem of the timing of the cloud rune and the paralyzed condition since they are simultaneously applied “on hit”. But since the dungeon masters guide tells that the effect of a reaction generally is resolved before the reaction takes it effect, I would say that, first, the attack gets to be a krit (since at this points all requirements of the paralyzed condition are met) and then the attack is transferred.
When the newly chosen creature becomes the target of the attack, using the same roll, unless that roll is sufficiently high to become a critical hit or the new target has a condition making it so, the hit will not be a critical hit, because such result is not part of the attack’s effects but the condition.
Likewise, if said Rune Knight had the ability to crit on 19+ roll, such a roll would not be a critical hit against a target wearing an Adamantine Armor but would on a newly chosen target not having the ability to cancel crit because such effect was not part of the attack's effect, but a feature from the target.
My point was that the attack becomes a critical hit and stays a critical hit if it is transferred. This has nothing to do with the attacks effekts or conditions, but is a property of this specific attack. Therefore the attack stays a critical hit if you just switch the target.