In my opinion the spell does make noise, and some EXTREMELY loud noise, thunder damage is based off of sound after all. However, sound can be directional.
A lot of spells that deal thunder damage specify directly in the spell description that the spell can be heard from X feet away, but this one doesn't. My thought about this spell is it creates a small wall of force around the target made up of concentrated sound waves at extremely high decibels. After 5th level this wall of force is just initially pushed through the target then expands around them.
There is a military device called an LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device). An LRAD is a “loudspeaker-like device that emits a focused beam of sound. What makes these systems unique is that rather than transmitting sound like a loudspeaker in many directions (similar to the way a lightbulb emits light), LRAD systems transmit sound in a narrow beam (much like a flashlight).” The sound from these devices can only be heard from a few steps away from its focused beam.
To me, the “booming energy” that sheathes a target of this spell is like the focused beam of sound that an LRAD makes. Only, due to magic, is surrounding the target instead of being in a straight line or cone. The way I would rule it is that creatures within 5ft of the target (including the target) would hear a low, high bass, hum but anyone further than that would be unaware.
I know overall this is entirely up to your DM, but I am curious what peoples thoughts on this ruling would be.
When I've DMed, any effect that deals thunder damage makes a nice loud sound.
The spells which DO mention being heard from 300 ft away help inform the DM as to how other thunder damage effects should also not be advisable if stealth is required.
Ah, two of your three definitions don't mention sound, and obviously using this "lets define the words in the name" technique doesn't work for all spells, includingchill touch which is neither chilly or requires physical contact between caster and target.
Since the spell doesn't say either way, this has to be up to the DM, as Farling said. Since we have examples of how loud spells work, this one should necessarily be quieter than those, but we can't say much more.
know overall this is entirely up to your DM, but I am curious what peoples thoughts on this ruling would be.
l'd rule that Booming Blade make significant noise, both from the attack, the booming energy and the thunder damage, so everyone in the encounter can hear it. I'd have to dettermine if other nearby creatures not in the encounter are within hearing range based on distance, layout, background noise, awareness, distraction etc.
I can see no reason to add a nerf to the spell tbh. The designers knows how to write spells that make noise, most of the spells that deal thunder damage has language that specifies them doing so but booming blade does not.
I agree that it does make sound, a booming effect. Only it’s concentrated sound contained within the space. Using magic to achieve an effect that can be created in real life isn’t a stretch at all.
LRADs create insanely loud noise, only it’s contained to a cone-like shape extending from the device. Standing inside that cone does physically cause permanent damage to the body and is an excruciating thing to hear. Outside that cone however is just as quiet as the environment.
It’s never stated anywhere that thunder damage is audible in the surrounding space, only assumed that thunder damage is caused by loud concussive sounds. The way I see it, the spells that list a range for the sound are noises specifically heard by anyone nearby, but the spells that don’t still operate off of these concussive sounds, they are just contained to the target (again, an effect achievable in real life while still be VERY loud)
I feel like you might be missing the point too: which is that if the rules don't say it, then that is all there is to say about that as far as rules go.
It doesn't matter what there is in real life, or what you and your group decide or whatnot. The rules make no mention of it, so you or your DM might decide to change something, but no one else can say more than what they think.
It also doesn't make a lot of sense (other than "it's magic") to have a very loud sound cause damage to a creature without affecting their hearing. Nearly none of the thunder damage spells (save storm of vengeance) actually produce the deafened condition, and beyond that spell being bad, it makes it pretty clear that the thunder is audible.
I'd say it makes about as much noise as any other standard combat action, like smacking someone in metal armor with a metal sword. It's not stealthy, but it's no more audible than general combat.
You hit them with your spell infused weapon to cause tremors and vibrations wrack their body. If they attempt to walk away, the extra stress on their body causes them to take Xd8 thunder damage.
Thunder damage in the Combat chapter is defined as:
"Thunder. A concussive burst of sound, such as the effect of the thunderwave spell, deals thunder damage."
This suggests that every spell, and any other effect, which deals thunder damage are audible.
You should also shift Shatter to your first group, based on the words in the first sentence of that spell's description.
Ah, two of your three definitions don't mention sound, and obviously using this "lets define the words in the name" technique doesn't work for all spells, includingchill touch which is neither chilly or requires physical contact between caster and target.
The word booming isn't just used in the name of booming blade, but also in its description, and while I do feel like chill touch is poorly named it's not entirely inaccurate (you're still being touch by a horrible ghostly/skeletal hand, and while it doesn't deal cold damage, it's not impossible for necrotic damage to be chilling, though "chilling touch" probably would have been a slightly better form of the name).
For booming blade specifically we have two things to refer to; 1) the description of "booming energy" and 2) that energy being thunder damage which is explicitly sound. So we have "loud deep sound", "forceful sound" or "rapidly growing sound", all of which makes it clear that there is definitely an audible effect, it's just not one with an explicit range or impact (beyond what the spell does), but I think it's fair to assume that enemies certainly could hear it.
Also, I think definition 2 of those three isn't strictly relevant, it's more in the sense of "business is booming" (i.e- "boom and bust"), and I'm actually not sure what the third one's context is (I can't really imagine using "booming" in place of "forceful", though it still kind of works in an audible sense).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Ah, I think definition 2 is nearly identical to the effect of, say thunderwave, or actually any of the sort of thunder based push spells. One could argue that definition 3 is the ideal wording for what booming blade does to your attack: makes it so powerfully executed that additional effects are added to the attack.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I think this sums it up well for me. If a spell doesn't tell you how much sound it makes, the DM decides. If a spell doesn't tell you how much light it makes, the DM decides. I'm not a big fan of the idea that if a feature doesn't tell you EXACTLY how much of a descriptive thing it does, then it does none at all.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I think this sums it up well for me. If a spell doesn't tell you how much sound it makes, the DM decides. If a spell doesn't tell you how much light it makes, the DM decides. I'm not a big fan of the idea that if a feature doesn't tell you EXACTLY how much of a descriptive thing it does, then it does none at all.
Well, sure as long as you consider that "none at all" is still a valid ruling as long as the spell doesn't tell you how much. I wouldn't be happy saying that booming blade is any louder than firebolt.
I'd say it makes about as much noise as any other standard combat action, like smacking someone in metal armor with a metal sword. It's not stealthy, but it's no more audible than general combat.
Yeah i would most likely not have it more noisy than combat itselfl, which is considerable already.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I think this sums it up well for me. If a spell doesn't tell you how much sound it makes, the DM decides. If a spell doesn't tell you how much light it makes, the DM decides. I'm not a big fan of the idea that if a feature doesn't tell you EXACTLY how much of a descriptive thing it does, then it does none at all.
Well, sure as long as you consider that "none at all" is still a valid ruling as long as the spell doesn't tell you how much. I wouldn't be happy saying that booming blade is any louder than firebolt.
Except that the very definition of Thunder damage is that it is "a concussive burst of sound", which I would suggest does NOT allow for the spell effect to be silent.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I think this sums it up well for me. If a spell doesn't tell you how much sound it makes, the DM decides. If a spell doesn't tell you how much light it makes, the DM decides. I'm not a big fan of the idea that if a feature doesn't tell you EXACTLY how much of a descriptive thing it does, then it does none at all.
Well, sure as long as you consider that "none at all" is still a valid ruling as long as the spell doesn't tell you how much. I wouldn't be happy saying that booming blade is any louder than firebolt.
Except that the very definition of Thunder damage is that it is "a concussive burst of sound", which I would suggest does NOT allow for the spell effect to be silent.
Nor does it require it to be any louder than any other spell. So there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In my opinion the spell does make noise, and some EXTREMELY loud noise, thunder damage is based off of sound after all. However, sound can be directional.
A lot of spells that deal thunder damage specify directly in the spell description that the spell can be heard from X feet away, but this one doesn't. My thought about this spell is it creates a small wall of force around the target made up of concentrated sound waves at extremely high decibels. After 5th level this wall of force is just initially pushed through the target then expands around them.
There is a military device called an LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device). An LRAD is a “loudspeaker-like device that emits a focused beam of sound. What makes these systems unique is that rather than transmitting sound like a loudspeaker in many directions (similar to the way a lightbulb emits light), LRAD systems transmit sound in a narrow beam (much like a flashlight).” The sound from these devices can only be heard from a few steps away from its focused beam.
To me, the “booming energy” that sheathes a target of this spell is like the focused beam of sound that an LRAD makes. Only, due to magic, is surrounding the target instead of being in a straight line or cone. The way I would rule it is that creatures within 5ft of the target (including the target) would hear a low, high bass, hum but anyone further than that would be unaware.
I know overall this is entirely up to your DM, but I am curious what peoples thoughts on this ruling would be.
Yes it does make sound but which ammount exactly and up to which distance is untold so up to DM.
The Spell sheath the target in a booming energy and can cause thunder damage, which is a concussive burst of sound.
Depending on which définition of the word booming the DM rely on, it may also make noise before thunder damage is dealt: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/booming
When I've DMed, any effect that deals thunder damage makes a nice loud sound.
The spells which DO mention being heard from 300 ft away help inform the DM as to how other thunder damage effects should also not be advisable if stealth is required.
Ah, two of your three definitions don't mention sound, and obviously using this "lets define the words in the name" technique doesn't work for all spells, includingchill touch which is neither chilly or requires physical contact between caster and target.
Since the spell doesn't say either way, this has to be up to the DM, as Farling said. Since we have examples of how loud spells work, this one should necessarily be quieter than those, but we can't say much more.
l'd rule that Booming Blade make significant noise, both from the attack, the booming energy and the thunder damage, so everyone in the encounter can hear it. I'd have to dettermine if other nearby creatures not in the encounter are within hearing range based on distance, layout, background noise, awareness, distraction etc.
RAW No. Or rather, RAW is not specified to make noise.
However, RAI should make a rumbling noise, like thunder falling.
I can see no reason to add a nerf to the spell tbh.
The designers knows how to write spells that make noise, most of the spells that deal thunder damage has language that specifies them doing so but booming blade does not.
I feel like some of you are missing my point.
I agree that it does make sound, a booming effect. Only it’s concentrated sound contained within the space. Using magic to achieve an effect that can be created in real life isn’t a stretch at all.
LRADs create insanely loud noise, only it’s contained to a cone-like shape extending from the device. Standing inside that cone does physically cause permanent damage to the body and is an excruciating thing to hear. Outside that cone however is just as quiet as the environment.
It’s never stated anywhere that thunder damage is audible in the surrounding space, only assumed that thunder damage is caused by loud concussive sounds. The way I see it, the spells that list a range for the sound are noises specifically heard by anyone nearby, but the spells that don’t still operate off of these concussive sounds, they are just contained to the target (again, an effect achievable in real life while still be VERY loud)
I feel like you might be missing the point too: which is that if the rules don't say it, then that is all there is to say about that as far as rules go.
It doesn't matter what there is in real life, or what you and your group decide or whatnot. The rules make no mention of it, so you or your DM might decide to change something, but no one else can say more than what they think.
It also doesn't make a lot of sense (other than "it's magic") to have a very loud sound cause damage to a creature without affecting their hearing. Nearly none of the thunder damage spells (save storm of vengeance) actually produce the deafened condition, and beyond that spell being bad, it makes it pretty clear that the thunder is audible.
I'd say it makes about as much noise as any other standard combat action, like smacking someone in metal armor with a metal sword. It's not stealthy, but it's no more audible than general combat.
Thunder damage replaced earlier editions Sonic damage. The shatter spell is an excellent example of detailing that Thunder damage makes noise.
Thunder damage in the Combat chapter is defined as:
This suggests that every spell, and any other effect, which deals thunder damage are audible.
You should also shift Shatter to your first group, based on the words in the first sentence of that spell's description.
It definitely makes noise. How much noise? Ask your DM.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The word booming isn't just used in the name of booming blade, but also in its description, and while I do feel like chill touch is poorly named it's not entirely inaccurate (you're still being touch by a horrible ghostly/skeletal hand, and while it doesn't deal cold damage, it's not impossible for necrotic damage to be chilling, though "chilling touch" probably would have been a slightly better form of the name).
For booming blade specifically we have two things to refer to; 1) the description of "booming energy" and 2) that energy being thunder damage which is explicitly sound. So we have "loud deep sound", "forceful sound" or "rapidly growing sound", all of which makes it clear that there is definitely an audible effect, it's just not one with an explicit range or impact (beyond what the spell does), but I think it's fair to assume that enemies certainly could hear it.
Also, I think definition 2 of those three isn't strictly relevant, it's more in the sense of "business is booming" (i.e- "boom and bust"), and I'm actually not sure what the third one's context is (I can't really imagine using "booming" in place of "forceful", though it still kind of works in an audible sense).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Ah, I think definition 2 is nearly identical to the effect of, say thunderwave, or actually any of the sort of thunder based push spells. One could argue that definition 3 is the ideal wording for what booming blade does to your attack: makes it so powerfully executed that additional effects are added to the attack.
I do agree that, while thunder damage mentions sound, I still contend if a spell doesn't say how much, then it would be a ruling.
I think this sums it up well for me. If a spell doesn't tell you how much sound it makes, the DM decides. If a spell doesn't tell you how much light it makes, the DM decides. I'm not a big fan of the idea that if a feature doesn't tell you EXACTLY how much of a descriptive thing it does, then it does none at all.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Well, sure as long as you consider that "none at all" is still a valid ruling as long as the spell doesn't tell you how much. I wouldn't be happy saying that booming blade is any louder than firebolt.
Yeah i would most likely not have it more noisy than combat itselfl, which is considerable already.
Except that the very definition of Thunder damage is that it is "a concussive burst of sound", which I would suggest does NOT allow for the spell effect to be silent.
Nor does it require it to be any louder than any other spell. So there.