I've got a question. I'm a DM, and one of my players, playing a Storm Domain cleric, has recently had huge problems accepting my interpretation of the rules for his Channel Divinity: Destructive Wrath. He used it to strengthen a spell that was giving the opponent a saving throw opportunity to reduce the damage by half (not sure what spell it was, though, it was some time ago). Saving throw was succesful, so I applied the standard damage reduction - the maximum possible damage from the roll with half the dice number (because the save cut the maximum potential damage by half). If the number of dice were odd, I would take half of the maximum spell value and round it up, also according to the rules.
However, my player argues that Destructive Wrath should take away an opponent's save throw possibility, and the spell should always do maximum damage - which makes no sense to me. Sequence of actions for me is always
1.Spell hit roll (if necessary)
2. Saving throw (if possible)
3. Damage roll (depending on saving throw result)
If it is possible to make a saving throw, it should always have an effect, unless something clearly says that it is preventing it - and I am not interpreting Destructive Wrath description like that.
Who's right, me or my player? I don't want to make his game more difficult on purpose, but I think the rules are clear here, and I'm right. What do you think?
Starting at 2nd level, you can use your Channel Divinity to wield the power of the storm with unchecked ferocity.
When you roll lightning or thunder damage, you can use your Channel Divinity to deal maximum damage, instead of rolling.
Does it say anything about saving throws being nullified and being able to deal max damage regardless if the save succeeds or fails? No that is actually whether you would allow it to but RAW you are correct. If a creature saves, that particular creature halves the damage, the rest still receive full damage if they don't.
When you roll lightning or thunder damage, you can use your Channel Divinity to deal maximum damage, instead of rollig
"Dealing maximum damage, instead of rolling" is the key here. This just means that the damage output is maximized. So, e.g. Thunderwave would deal 16 damage (2d8) and then a successful saving throw halves the damage, as well as thunder resistance halves the damage.
Same goes for Lightning Bolt. The Lightning Bolt would do 48 damage (8d6), save halves that damage.
If it helps, point out to the player other abilities where it says things like 'this damage cannot be reduced in any way.' This doesn't say anything about targets being unable to reduce the damage dealt. Damage dealt doesn't always equal damage taken, or barbs and casters with absorb elements would be a lot less happy.
Explain it like the others mentioned above: the cleric's Thunderwave is 'dealing' max damage, but the recipient is mitigating that max damage with their saving throw. EZ
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
If they save for half damage, roll all the dice as normal (or use the maximum possible on all the dice with this Wrath ability), then half the result - don't roll/use half the number of dice.
If they save for half damage, roll all the dice as normal (or use the maximum possible on all the dice with this Wrath ability), then half the result - don't roll/use half the number of dice.
I noticed that too and was going to mention.
Also, if there are multiple targets in an AOE, they all use the same damage roll. If 4 people are in the area of fireball and 2 succeed the save. Lets say you roll 30 damage with that spell's damage roll, 2 take 30 damage, 2 take 15 damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey!
I've got a question. I'm a DM, and one of my players, playing a Storm Domain cleric, has recently had huge problems accepting my interpretation of the rules for his Channel Divinity: Destructive Wrath. He used it to strengthen a spell that was giving the opponent a saving throw opportunity to reduce the damage by half (not sure what spell it was, though, it was some time ago). Saving throw was succesful, so I applied the standard damage reduction - the maximum possible damage from the roll with half the dice number (because the save cut the maximum potential damage by half). If the number of dice were odd, I would take half of the maximum spell value and round it up, also according to the rules.
However, my player argues that Destructive Wrath should take away an opponent's save throw possibility, and the spell should always do maximum damage - which makes no sense to me. Sequence of actions for me is always
1.Spell hit roll (if necessary)
2. Saving throw (if possible)
3. Damage roll (depending on saving throw result)
If it is possible to make a saving throw, it should always have an effect, unless something clearly says that it is preventing it - and I am not interpreting Destructive Wrath description like that.
Who's right, me or my player? I don't want to make his game more difficult on purpose, but I think the rules are clear here, and I'm right. What do you think?
Starting at 2nd level, you can use your Channel Divinity to wield the power of the storm with unchecked ferocity.
When you roll lightning or thunder damage, you can use your Channel Divinity to deal maximum damage, instead of rolling.
Does it say anything about saving throws being nullified and being able to deal max damage regardless if the save succeeds or fails? No that is actually whether you would allow it to but RAW you are correct. If a creature saves, that particular creature halves the damage, the rest still receive full damage if they don't.
When you roll lightning or thunder damage, you can use your Channel Divinity to deal maximum damage, instead of rollig
"Dealing maximum damage, instead of rolling" is the key here. This just means that the damage output is maximized. So, e.g. Thunderwave would deal 16 damage (2d8) and then a successful saving throw halves the damage, as well as thunder resistance halves the damage.
Same goes for Lightning Bolt. The Lightning Bolt would do 48 damage (8d6), save halves that damage.
Yup what they said above.
If it were the way the player described it would be way over powered.
If it helps, point out to the player other abilities where it says things like 'this damage cannot be reduced in any way.' This doesn't say anything about targets being unable to reduce the damage dealt. Damage dealt doesn't always equal damage taken, or barbs and casters with absorb elements would be a lot less happy.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Explain it like the others mentioned above: the cleric's Thunderwave is 'dealing' max damage, but the recipient is mitigating that max damage with their saving throw. EZ
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
If they save for half damage, roll all the dice as normal (or use the maximum possible on all the dice with this Wrath ability), then half the result - don't roll/use half the number of dice.
I noticed that too and was going to mention.
Also, if there are multiple targets in an AOE, they all use the same damage roll. If 4 people are in the area of fireball and 2 succeed the save. Lets say you roll 30 damage with that spell's damage roll, 2 take 30 damage, 2 take 15 damage.