Would the additional damage from Absorb Elements be considered spell damage for the purposes of triggering the effects of the Elemental Adept Feat?
i.e: Aurelia the Sorceror/Paladin multiclass with Elemental Adept(Fire) gets hit with a Fireball and uses Absorb Elements to half the damage, would the extra damage on her next melee hit also ignore resistance and promote her 1s?
The relevant text from the feat is:
Spells you cast ignore resistance to damage of the chosen type. In addition, when you roll damage for a spell you cast that deals damage of that type, you can treat any 1 on a damage die as a 2.
While the spell is:
* the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
1. The damage is an inherently magical consequence of a spell. (Ergo, Spell damage.) 2. The damage is the result of a spell cast by you. (Ergo, Spell you cast.)
Therefore, I would say yes.
In effect, Absorb Elements is two effects: A) Gain Resistance as Reaction and B) Augment next Melee attack with Spell Damage. The descriptive text provides flavor, but shouldn't otherwise distract from the underlying mechanics.
As someone with that feat and who casts that spell, I will say "Yes, but it is rarely helpful." Elemental Adept is only one of many elements. Absorb Elements only adds damage to melee attacks. Most of the time people that cast Absorb Elements do not do melee attacks. The people that use Absorb Elements to attack tend to be either a) multi-classers, or b) people that are heavily focused on being some kind of melee mage (Bladesinger, etc.) But those people do NOT use a lot of elemental damage spells, so why would they also take Elemental Adept? Most of the elemental spells are ranged attacks (No class has more than 3 elemental based spells that are designed for melee combat, and all are low level.). Worse, Elemental Adept requires you to pick one element, so each class has maybe one spell that is an elemental melee attack spell. Why would you also take Elemental Adept?
The classes that get Absorb Elements are: Artificer, Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer, Wizard. Multi-classers also works, but they are even less likely to want Elemental Adept. Druid is the only one with Absorb Elements that is also highly likely to get into melee combat and ALSO likely to cast elemental spells often enough to want Elemental Adept.
So the most common example of someone that a) likes melee, b) has Absorb Element Spell, c) likes elemental damage enough to make Elemental Adept worthwhile is:
An 18th level druid that loves to blast with elemental spells. But they now have the capacity to cast spells while in wild shape. So if they are attacked by an elemental spell while in Beast Form, they could cast Absorb Element and then proceed to make a melee attack, ignoring resistance and boosting 1 to 2 on damage, with that element. Assuming of course that they are Elementally Adept with that particular element.
As someone with that feat and who casts that spell, I will say "Yes, but it is rarely helpful." Elemental Adept is only one of many elements. Absorb Elements only adds damage to melee attacks. Most of the time people that cast Absorb Elements do not do melee attacks. The people that use Absorb Elements to attack tend to be either a) multi-classers, or b) people that are heavily focused on being some kind of melee mage (Bladesinger, etc.) But those people do NOT use a lot of elemental damage spells, so why would they also take Elemental Adept? Most of the elemental spells are ranged attacks (No class has more than 3 elemental based spells that are designed for melee combat, and all are low level.). Worse, Elemental Adept requires you to pick one element, so each class has maybe one spell that is an elemental melee attack spell. Why would you also take Elemental Adept?
The classes that get Absorb Elements are: Artificer, Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer, Wizard. Multi-classers also works, but they are even less likely to want Elemental Adept. Druid is the only one with Absorb Elements that is also highly likely to get into melee combat and ALSO likely to cast elemental spells often enough to want Elemental Adept.
So the most common example of someone that a) likes melee, b) has Absorb Element Spell, c) likes elemental damage enough to make Elemental Adept worthwhile is:
An 18th level druid that loves to blast with elemental spells. But they now have the capacity to cast spells while in wild shape. So if they are attacked by an elemental spell while in Beast Form, they could cast Absorb Element and then proceed to make a melee attack, ignoring resistance and boosting 1 to 2 on damage, with that element. Assuming of course that they are Elementally Adept with that particular element.
Possibly could come up for an Eldritch Knight with Elemental Adept (Thunder) build (and I'd say to put in Warcaster as well for opp attacks using Booming Blade)
Booming Blade will get used levels 3-4 and then 7-10 as the regular attack, although it's ditched at level 11 when the third attack comes in. Because of that, undercutting resistances could be helpful, but not many creatures have thunder resistance.
If you were planning to somehow go up to level 7 in Eldritch Knight and then multiclass into Storm Sorcerer or Tempest Cleric it might be worthwhile.
While an eldritch Knight is very likely to get Booming Blade and likely to want Absorb Elements, I find it hard to believe they would take Elemental Adept. Especially at low levels. If they are human variant, they should take Warcaster, as you mentioned, so first ASI is spoken for. At level 4, they are just about to get a 2nd attack. and contrary to your belief, you have to be a fool to use Booming Blade at level 7 (unless you have some method to make them move).
Assume a strength of 18, +1 magic, Dueling fighting style.
The choice is 2 weapon attacks, at say 1d8 + 4+1+2 or 1 attack at 1d8 + 4+1+ 2 + 1d8 + 2d8 if they move.
Assuming a 50% chance of hitting:
Damage for 2 weapon attacks averages out to 11.5 per round.
Not moving, damage for Booming Blade averages out to 8 per round.
Moving, damage for Booming Blade averages out to 13.5 per round
Elemental Adept would just boom damage by less than 1 pt. But taking a feat like Mobility will make them MUCH more likely to move after you attack, as they would have to follow you.
So at human you take Warcaster, at 4th you take mobility, and you might consider taking Elemental Adept at 8, which works till you hit 11th level.... Nope.
While an eldritch Knight is very likely to get Booming Blade and likely to want Absorb Elements, I find it hard to believe they would take Elemental Adept. Especially at low levels. If they are human variant, they should take Warcaster, as you mentioned, so first ASI is spoken for. At level 4, they are just about to get a 2nd attack. and contrary to your belief, you have to be a fool to use Booming Blade at level 7 (unless you have some method to make them move).
Assume a strength of 18, +1 magic, Dueling fighting style.
The choice is 2 weapon attacks, at say 1d8 + 4+1+2 or 1 attack at 1d8 + 4+1+ 2 + 1d8 + 2d8 if they move.
Assuming a 50% chance of hitting:
Damage for 2 weapon attacks averages out to 11.5 per round.
Not moving, damage for Booming Blade averages out to 8 per round.
Moving, damage for Booming Blade averages out to 13.5 per round
Elemental Adept would just boom damage by less than 1 pt. But taking a feat like Mobility will make them MUCH more likely to move after you attack, as they would have to follow you.
So at human you take Warcaster, at 4th you take mobility, and you might consider taking Elemental Adept at 8, which works till you hit 11th level.... Nope.
If as an EK you take mobility and run from your enemy every round you're sorta sabotaging your role in combat. You're supposed to be tanky and hard to kill, so your 'job' so to speak is keeping enemies off your teammates. You're certainly not doing the most damage nor have the most utility. Your whole shtick is being nearly impossible to hit and being able to stand toe to toe with crazy monsters.
But if you run away from them, now they don't have to provoke from you when they peel off to a soft target. That was your one job, to keep them glued to you and you intentionally sabotaged it. No triggering the boom, then triggering your op attack subbed to another booming blade plus another boom! Just gave it up for mobility? play a bladesinger if you want hit and run mobility style spellsword they do it infinitely better than an EK.
But, as to your point about not using Booming Blade at certain levels? You should be able to use it at all levels. Your Opportunity Attacks can be subbed to spells with Warcaster and you should be making great use of this as often as possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Ravnodaus, have you paid any attention to the post? I do not disagree about a tank running. I am not promoting a Boooming Blade build. Instead I am telling everyone that the build they are talking about is CRAP. This is not me saying how great Booming blade is. This is me saying that:
There are very very few builds that make good use both Elemental Adept and Absorb Elements, and Eldritch Knight is NOT one of them.
Sanvael tried to convince me that it was a worthwhile to take those two feats if you are playing Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade. He was wrong, as I demonstrated.
Most importantly, if you are using Absorb Elements then you cannot take an Opportunity Attack. That is the context of the discussion. So trying to convince me that Warcaster means you can still make good use of Booming blade makes no sense, because they already used their reaction.
P.S. As to your final point about an Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade for an Opportunity Attack, that is a pretty rare circumstance. It only triggers on a Move AoO, and an EK only gets 3 cantrips. Chill Touch and Create Bonfire have far more utility - stopping regeneration and discouraging movement are really helpful. The "M" cantrips - Mage Hand, Message, Mending, and Minor Illusion are all really good utility spells and you really should take at least one of them. I do not see wasting your remaining cantrip just to do more damage when someone runs away. Better to stop them from running away.
Ravnodaus, have you paid any attention to the post? I do not disagree about a tank running. I am not promoting a Boooming Blade build. Instead I am telling everyone that the build they are talking about is CRAP. This is not me saying how great Booming blade is. This is me saying that:
Hmm.
There are very very few builds that make good use both Elemental Adept and Absorb Elements, and Eldritch Knight is NOT one of them.
"Good use"? You can use them just fine.
Sanvael tried to convince me that it was a worthwhile to take those two feats if you are playing Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade. He was wrong, as I demonstrated.
That's like, just your opinion, man.
But no serious that is 100% in the realm of 'opinion". You cannot demonstrate if something is good or bad. Those are opinions. Try to aim for an objective metric if you're going to "demonstrate" your position or something. Sanvael isn't wrong to have his opinion. It is perfectly valid to think it is a good feat to take on a build.
Most importantly, if you are using Absorb Elements then you cannot take an Opportunity Attack. That is the context of the discussion. So trying to convince me that Warcaster means you can still make good use of Booming blade makes no sense, because they already used their reaction.
Fun Fact: You get a new reaction at the start of each and every one of your turns. They come in handy! Having the ability to sometimes when needed cast Absorb Elements in no way, shape, or form precludes you from making opportunity attacks during your long career as a spellsword.
And, since Warcaster lets you convert those into spells it behooves you to have one of the blade cantrips.
P.S. As to your final point about an Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade for an Opportunity Attack, that is a pretty rare circumstance.
I bet it sure is rare when your tactic as EK is to always run from your enemy, sure.
It only triggers on a Move AoO, and an EK only gets 3 cantrips. Chill Touch and Create Bonfire have far more utility - stopping regeneration and discouraging movement are really helpful.
Booming Blade discourages movement...
rephrasing what you just said results in: Create Bonfire has far more utility than Booming Blade - discouraging movement is really more helpful than discouraging movement.
The "M" cantrips - Mage Hand, Message, Mending, and Minor Illusion are all really good utility spells and you really should take at least one of them.
They're good options, totally. Good thing you get 3.
I do not see wasting your remaining cantrip just to do more damage when someone runs away. Better to stop them from running away.
Wait, I thought "discouraging movement is really helpful"?
Anyway. Mobility on an EK is self sabotaging. So, in my opinion that's a "bad" feat to take for that type of character. I don't really think Elemental Adept is a strong choice for this type of character, either, for the record. But it doesn't sabotage your own role, so it is "decent". The stat boost would be better but whatever. So, is a "bad" feat better than a "decent" one? Naw. Elemental Adept>Mobility for an EK.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Spells you cast ignore resistance to damage of the chosen type. In addition, when you roll damage for a spell you cast that deals damage of that type, you can treat any 1 on a damage die as a 2.
By literal reading, I would have to say 'no' as you did not cast the spell that is causing the damage, only the spell that is redirecting the damage.
Spells you cast ignore resistance to damage of the chosen type. In addition, when you roll damage for a spell you cast that deals damage of that type, you can treat any 1 on a damage die as a 2.
By literal reading, I would have to say 'no' as you did not cast the spell that is causing the damage, only the spell that is redirecting the damage.
Absorb elements doesn't "redirect" damage, it reduces it then deals its own damage.
Absorb elements cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "reflect". Therefore, it is NOT the spell CAUSING the damage. But it sounds like we have a difference of opinion. Your game, your interpretation.
Absorb elements cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "reflect". Therefore, it is NOT the spell CAUSING the damage.
That's absurd. There's still no damage without someone casting absorb elements. The incoming effect is just the trigger
Lots of spells require triggers before they do damage. You might as well argue hellish rebuke is not CAUSING the damage, because it cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "activate it"
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)
Hellish Rebuke actually generates the damage. There is no incoming source of damage being reflected back.
Absorb Elements: The spell captures some of the incoming energy, lessening its effect on you and storing it for your next melee attack. You have resistance to the triggering damage type until the start of your next turn. Also, the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
Absorb Elements is not generating the damage, it is simply passing it along from the original spell. Let's say there was a special version of the Shield spell that did everything the existing one does except this new version also reflects the magic missiles that allowed the caster to cast this Augmented Shield. The shield spell is NOT generating nor causing the damage back to the caster of the magic missile but is simply reflecting the original spell's damage. In my opinion, Absorb Elements is doing the same thing.
Would you also claim then that someone wearing a Ring of Spell Turning that reflects a spell back on the caster is casting that spell and is therefore able to add their elemental adept bonus damage?
Absorb elements cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "reflect". Therefore, it is NOT the spell CAUSING the damage. But it sounds like we have a difference of opinion. Your game, your interpretation.
So you wouldn't let absorb elements deal more damage than it prevents then?
Absorb elements cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "reflect". Therefore, it is NOT the spell CAUSING the damage. But it sounds like we have a difference of opinion. Your game, your interpretation.
So you wouldn't let absorb elements deal more damage than it prevents then?
Hellish Rebuke actually generates the damage. There is no incoming source of damage being reflected back.
Absorb Elements: The spell captures some of the incoming energy, lessening its effect on you and storing it for your next melee attack. You have resistance to the triggering damage type until the start of your next turn. Also, the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
Absorb Elements is not generating the damage, it is simply passing it along from the original spell.
That's not what the spell says, though. It says you gain resistance to the triggering damage type, and then can also do damage of the triggering type
You are not "passing it along" -- if you were, the damage you deal would be determined by how much the damage you took was reduced by, not by an entirely separate die roll that scales at higher levels
Would you also claim then that someone wearing a Ring of Spell Turning that reflects a spell back on the caster is casting that spell and is therefore able to add their elemental adept bonus damage?
You mean the magic item that explicitly says the original caster is still casting the original spell and using their own spell slots, etc.?
While wearing this ring, you have advantage on saving throws against any spell that targets only you (not in an area of effect). In addition, if you roll a 20 for the save and the spell is 7th level or lower, the spell has no effect on you and instead targets the caster, using the slot level, spell save DC, attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the caster.
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)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Would the additional damage from Absorb Elements be considered spell damage for the purposes of triggering the effects of the Elemental Adept Feat?
i.e: Aurelia the Sorceror/Paladin multiclass with Elemental Adept(Fire) gets hit with a Fireball and uses Absorb Elements to half the damage, would the extra damage on her next melee hit also ignore resistance and promote her 1s?
The relevant text from the feat is:
While the spell is:
* the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
Yes. The feat applies.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
1. The damage is an inherently magical consequence of a spell. (Ergo, Spell damage.)
2. The damage is the result of a spell cast by you. (Ergo, Spell you cast.)
Therefore, I would say yes.
In effect, Absorb Elements is two effects: A) Gain Resistance as Reaction and B) Augment next Melee attack with Spell Damage. The descriptive text provides flavor, but shouldn't otherwise distract from the underlying mechanics.
What they said, yes.
What tells you that damage is being done? The spell. Therefore it is damage from a spell effect.
As someone with that feat and who casts that spell, I will say "Yes, but it is rarely helpful." Elemental Adept is only one of many elements. Absorb Elements only adds damage to melee attacks. Most of the time people that cast Absorb Elements do not do melee attacks. The people that use Absorb Elements to attack tend to be either a) multi-classers, or b) people that are heavily focused on being some kind of melee mage (Bladesinger, etc.) But those people do NOT use a lot of elemental damage spells, so why would they also take Elemental Adept? Most of the elemental spells are ranged attacks (No class has more than 3 elemental based spells that are designed for melee combat, and all are low level.). Worse, Elemental Adept requires you to pick one element, so each class has maybe one spell that is an elemental melee attack spell. Why would you also take Elemental Adept?
The classes that get Absorb Elements are: Artificer, Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer, Wizard. Multi-classers also works, but they are even less likely to want Elemental Adept. Druid is the only one with Absorb Elements that is also highly likely to get into melee combat and ALSO likely to cast elemental spells often enough to want Elemental Adept.
So the most common example of someone that a) likes melee, b) has Absorb Element Spell, c) likes elemental damage enough to make Elemental Adept worthwhile is:
An 18th level druid that loves to blast with elemental spells. But they now have the capacity to cast spells while in wild shape. So if they are attacked by an elemental spell while in Beast Form, they could cast Absorb Element and then proceed to make a melee attack, ignoring resistance and boosting 1 to 2 on damage, with that element. Assuming of course that they are Elementally Adept with that particular element.
Possibly could come up for an Eldritch Knight with Elemental Adept (Thunder) build (and I'd say to put in Warcaster as well for opp attacks using Booming Blade)
Booming Blade will get used levels 3-4 and then 7-10 as the regular attack, although it's ditched at level 11 when the third attack comes in. Because of that, undercutting resistances could be helpful, but not many creatures have thunder resistance.
If you were planning to somehow go up to level 7 in Eldritch Knight and then multiclass into Storm Sorcerer or Tempest Cleric it might be worthwhile.
While an eldritch Knight is very likely to get Booming Blade and likely to want Absorb Elements, I find it hard to believe they would take Elemental Adept. Especially at low levels. If they are human variant, they should take Warcaster, as you mentioned, so first ASI is spoken for. At level 4, they are just about to get a 2nd attack. and contrary to your belief, you have to be a fool to use Booming Blade at level 7 (unless you have some method to make them move).
Assume a strength of 18, +1 magic, Dueling fighting style.
The choice is 2 weapon attacks, at say 1d8 + 4+1+2 or 1 attack at 1d8 + 4+1+ 2 + 1d8 + 2d8 if they move.
Assuming a 50% chance of hitting:
Elemental Adept would just boom damage by less than 1 pt. But taking a feat like Mobility will make them MUCH more likely to move after you attack, as they would have to follow you.
So at human you take Warcaster, at 4th you take mobility, and you might consider taking Elemental Adept at 8, which works till you hit 11th level.... Nope.
If as an EK you take mobility and run from your enemy every round you're sorta sabotaging your role in combat. You're supposed to be tanky and hard to kill, so your 'job' so to speak is keeping enemies off your teammates. You're certainly not doing the most damage nor have the most utility. Your whole shtick is being nearly impossible to hit and being able to stand toe to toe with crazy monsters.
But if you run away from them, now they don't have to provoke from you when they peel off to a soft target. That was your one job, to keep them glued to you and you intentionally sabotaged it. No triggering the boom, then triggering your op attack subbed to another booming blade plus another boom! Just gave it up for mobility? play a bladesinger if you want hit and run mobility style spellsword they do it infinitely better than an EK.
But, as to your point about not using Booming Blade at certain levels? You should be able to use it at all levels. Your Opportunity Attacks can be subbed to spells with Warcaster and you should be making great use of this as often as possible.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Ravnodaus, have you paid any attention to the post? I do not disagree about a tank running. I am not promoting a Boooming Blade build. Instead I am telling everyone that the build they are talking about is CRAP. This is not me saying how great Booming blade is. This is me saying that:
There are very very few builds that make good use both Elemental Adept and Absorb Elements, and Eldritch Knight is NOT one of them.
Sanvael tried to convince me that it was a worthwhile to take those two feats if you are playing Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade. He was wrong, as I demonstrated.
Most importantly, if you are using Absorb Elements then you cannot take an Opportunity Attack. That is the context of the discussion. So trying to convince me that Warcaster means you can still make good use of Booming blade makes no sense, because they already used their reaction.
P.S. As to your final point about an Eldritch Knight using Booming Blade for an Opportunity Attack, that is a pretty rare circumstance. It only triggers on a Move AoO, and an EK only gets 3 cantrips. Chill Touch and Create Bonfire have far more utility - stopping regeneration and discouraging movement are really helpful. The "M" cantrips - Mage Hand, Message, Mending, and Minor Illusion are all really good utility spells and you really should take at least one of them. I do not see wasting your remaining cantrip just to do more damage when someone runs away. Better to stop them from running away.
Hmm.
"Good use"? You can use them just fine.
That's like, just your opinion, man.
But no serious that is 100% in the realm of 'opinion". You cannot demonstrate if something is good or bad. Those are opinions. Try to aim for an objective metric if you're going to "demonstrate" your position or something. Sanvael isn't wrong to have his opinion. It is perfectly valid to think it is a good feat to take on a build.
Fun Fact: You get a new reaction at the start of each and every one of your turns. They come in handy! Having the ability to sometimes when needed cast Absorb Elements in no way, shape, or form precludes you from making opportunity attacks during your long career as a spellsword.
And, since Warcaster lets you convert those into spells it behooves you to have one of the blade cantrips.
I bet it sure is rare when your tactic as EK is to always run from your enemy, sure.
Booming Blade discourages movement...
rephrasing what you just said results in: Create Bonfire has far more utility than Booming Blade - discouraging movement is really more helpful than discouraging movement.
They're good options, totally. Good thing you get 3.
Wait, I thought "discouraging movement is really helpful"?
Anyway. Mobility on an EK is self sabotaging. So, in my opinion that's a "bad" feat to take for that type of character. I don't really think Elemental Adept is a strong choice for this type of character, either, for the record. But it doesn't sabotage your own role, so it is "decent". The stat boost would be better but whatever. So, is a "bad" feat better than a "decent" one? Naw. Elemental Adept>Mobility for an EK.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
By literal reading, I would have to say 'no' as you did not cast the spell that is causing the damage, only the spell that is redirecting the damage.
Absorb elements doesn't "redirect" damage, it reduces it then deals its own damage.
Absorb elements cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "reflect". Therefore, it is NOT the spell CAUSING the damage. But it sounds like we have a difference of opinion. Your game, your interpretation.
That's absurd. There's still no damage without someone casting absorb elements. The incoming effect is just the trigger
Lots of spells require triggers before they do damage. You might as well argue hellish rebuke is not CAUSING the damage, because it cannot cause damage without something else giving it damage to "activate it"
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)
Hellish Rebuke actually generates the damage. There is no incoming source of damage being reflected back.
Absorb Elements: The spell captures some of the incoming energy, lessening its effect on you and storing it for your next melee attack. You have resistance to the triggering damage type until the start of your next turn. Also, the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
Absorb Elements is not generating the damage, it is simply passing it along from the original spell. Let's say there was a special version of the Shield spell that did everything the existing one does except this new version also reflects the magic missiles that allowed the caster to cast this Augmented Shield. The shield spell is NOT generating nor causing the damage back to the caster of the magic missile but is simply reflecting the original spell's damage. In my opinion, Absorb Elements is doing the same thing.
Would you also claim then that someone wearing a Ring of Spell Turning that reflects a spell back on the caster is casting that spell and is therefore able to add their elemental adept bonus damage?
So you wouldn't let absorb elements deal more damage than it prevents then?
Hmmm, I probably wouldn’t.
That's not what the spell says, though. It says you gain resistance to the triggering damage type, and then can also do damage of the triggering type
You are not "passing it along" -- if you were, the damage you deal would be determined by how much the damage you took was reduced by, not by an entirely separate die roll that scales at higher levels
You mean the magic item that explicitly says the original caster is still casting the original spell and using their own spell slots, etc.?
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)