Radiant is really VISIBLE light damage, perhaps because x tending a bit into the UV and IR.radiation as a damage is x rays and gamma rays. So a radiation damage would be mostly necrotic with a bit of radiant.
Actually, it's invisible light damage: harmful ionizing radiation is UV at its longest frequency up through gamma rays at its shortest frequency. Once you reach the visible wavelength, any damage it causes is a result of heat.
The other thing to remember about actual radiation is that it doesn't kill you instantly: at Chernobyl, for example, the workers who were exposed to the worst radiation died over a period of about three months. The kind of radiation burst that kills you instantly comes with a free mushroom cloud.
Right, this might normally be a disease, but in 2024, diseases have been rolled into Poison/Poisoned. I would definitely use Poison and inflict the Poisoned Condition. In addition, maybe prevent healing until the poisoned condition is removed.
Real world physics don't really apply to DnD in the sense that you can't look at the rules of DnD and extrapolate the laws of physics from them or visa versa. In the real world light, electricity and magnetism are all kind of the same thing where as in DnD electricity and radiant are metaphysically different things with no real connection. There is also no real world analogy of necrotic energy, necrosis is a biological process not an energy . Radiation can cause necrosis but so can pretty much anything else that damages living tissue, similarly all physical process could be described as a force and hence do force damage. So following real world physics all damage could be force and or necrotic.
My point is that the damage types kind of break down if you look into the physics so I wouldn't bother. Instead think about the kind of game play effects you want. Do you want strait damage or something else? which enemies do you want to resist it and which do you want to be weak to it ? ect...
Real world physics don't really apply to DnD in the sense that you can't look at the rules of DnD and extrapolate the laws of physics from them or visa versa. In the real world light, electricity and magnetism are all kind of the same thing where as in DnD electricity and radiant are metaphysically different things with no real connection. There is also no real world analogy of necrotic energy, necrosis is a biological process not an energy . Radiation can cause necrosis but so can pretty much anything else that damages living tissue, similarly all physical process could be described as a force and hence do force damage. So following real world physics all damage could be force and or necrotic.
My point is that the damage types kind of break down if you look into the physics so I wouldn't bother. Instead think about the kind of game play effects you want. Do you want strait damage or something else? which enemies do you want to resist it and which do you want to be weak to it ? ect...
I disagree with the assertion that real world physics don't apply in D&D, but agree as to asking what kind of game play effects do you want.
D&D abstracts real world physics, deliberately breaking it in some places, but it's not a reason to throw it out as a reference. D&D caps out falling damaged at 20D6 damage because of terminal velocity.
Agreed. Yes the game is fantasy but - for it and us to function in it it has to approximate the world we know in how it works. Only when the vast majority of things work the way we are used to can magic and its exceptions work with our willing suspension of disbelief. Does it work exactly the same, no there are extractions and simplifications for game. Play ease but using real world physics as a basis is generally a safe start. For “radiation” damage we are dealing with a number of real world possibilities: 1) radio - too low an energy to generally do damage 2) microwaves - vibrates water and metallic molecules causing meat to cook from the inside out and metals to heat and burn (heat metal spell?) 3) infrared - radiant heat - depending on intensity it can keep stuff warm or burn - heat lamps, incandescent bulbs, room heaters etc. 4) visible light - generally not harmful except at extreme dosages - more on this later. 5) ultraviolet - sunburn and disinfectant uses. Long wave (near visible) not generally harmful, used for “glow in the dark” stuff. Short wave is harmful. This is the stuff that gives you a sunburn at low intensities and is used as a commercial anti microbial at higher intensities. This probably the stuff in “daylight” that kills vampires. 6) X rays - high energy ionizing stuff. Damages/destroys cellular membranes, DNA etc. penetrating enough that at low dosages it passes thru soft tissue without much damage but is stopped by metals, bone, etc - hence it real world use in medicine. 7) Gamma rays - the highest energy stuff- actually very deadly even at low dosages (forget the hulk, Banner should have been dead) 8) Alpha rays/particles - high energy ( relativistic) helium nuclei. Very damaging but not generally very penetrating. They mostly do surface damage but do do a lot on that surface. 9) Beta Rays/ particles - relativistic electrons - penetrating and damaging, ripping cellular structures and molecules apart.
generally microwaves and infrared ignite things while ultraviolet, x rays and gamma + do cellular damage without ignition. Whether it’s a lightbulb or a nuclear bomb the actual energy released is a combination of all types called blackbody radiation with a peak at some point and a possible cutoff of the higher energy types. A lightbulb’s peak is actually in the infrared ( that’s why they are so hot to touch) but it includes enough visible light to be useful. Nuclear explosions have their peak in the gamma ray region and produce huge amounts of everything else as well. The only real exception to this are lasers (including masers) that produce essentially all their energy in a very narrow band of a specific type. A radiation monster (like Godzilla) produces a blackbody blast as we see the visible, the blast ignites flammable and it does cellular damage. The key piece is the intensity or dosage received. For any monster (or magic) damage the intensity is going to be high. We can use that split between ignition and cellular damage to identify what type of energy we are talking about. If things are ignited then at least some is heat, if we can see the blast then some is visible, if it damages undead then some is UV and if it does cellular damage then some is “necrotic” . If you can’t see the blast, it doesn’t ignite things and doesn’t do internal cellular damage but does physical damage then it’s a force blast. The OP was asking specifically about a “radiation” monster, to me that means a Godzilla like creature so mostly necrotic with some of each other type so if it did 10 D8 damage I would make it 1 D8 heat, 1 D8 Radiant, 8 D8 necrotic.
Real world physics don't really apply to DnD in the sense that you can't look at the rules of DnD and extrapolate the laws of physics from them or visa versa. In the real world light, electricity and magnetism are all kind of the same thing where as in DnD electricity and radiant are metaphysically different things with no real connection. There is also no real world analogy of necrotic energy, necrosis is a biological process not an energy . Radiation can cause necrosis but so can pretty much anything else that damages living tissue, similarly all physical process could be described as a force and hence do force damage. So following real world physics all damage could be force and or necrotic.
My point is that the damage types kind of break down if you look into the physics so I wouldn't bother. Instead think about the kind of game play effects you want. Do you want strait damage or something else? which enemies do you want to resist it and which do you want to be weak to it ? ect...
I disagree with the assertion that real world physics don't apply in D&D, but agree as to asking what kind of game play effects do you want.
D&D abstracts real world physics, deliberately breaking it in some places, but it's not a reason to throw it out as a reference. D&D caps out falling damaged at 20D6 damage because of terminal velocity.
Regarding physics, we now have this text in the 2024 DMG. Not sure if it has been included due to previous discussions about this topic across the Material Plane :-?
Rules Aren’t Physics. The rules of the game are meant to provide a fun game experience, not to describe the laws of physics in the worlds of D&D, let alone the real world. [...]
No the physics are not the rules and the rules don’t always follow the physics, especially follow exactly. My point as that our brains and expectations that we use to decide what to do are based on real world function as we experience it. That is based on real world physics. If the rules stray too far from those expectations things get confusing and difficult to work with. So if you start with real world science on radiation then it’s easy t get a handle on how the extractions should probably work. As DMs we are all free to depart from that base as much ( or little) as we want. But starting with a real word base then adjusting to fit the rules generally gives better/more workable results.
Agreed. Yes the game is fantasy but - for it and us to function in it it has to approximate the world we know in how it works.
Not necessarily, it would only need our laws of physic if it were to function how our world functions and it doesn't. There have been other historical models of physics that arguably fit the DnD world better than our modern scientific one because allot of the fantastical elements of the setting are based on them. Something like platonic metaphysics and alchemy would fit the world better and while it's not true for our world is actually allot more predictive of the DnD world than our laws of physics are.
For example the platonic realm of forms could explain how when an object is polymorphed it still retains some connection to it's original form and returns to it when damaged. There would be a blueprint of the object in a spirit dimension that they are created inherently with knowledge of. Similarly the platonic four elements theory also better explains the structure of the planes then astrophysics.
No the physics are not the rules and the rules don’t always follow the physics, especially follow exactly. My point as that our brains and expectations that we use to decide what to do are based on real world function as we experience it. That is based on real world physics. If the rules stray too far from those expectations things get confusing and difficult to work with. So if you start with real world science on radiation then it’s easy t get a handle on how the extractions should probably work. As DMs we are all free to depart from that base as much ( or little) as we want. But starting with a real word base then adjusting to fit the rules generally gives better/more workable results.
This I also don't think is true. The laws of physics are no intuitive and most people don't know them well enough to apply them correctly . It often requires a long explanation that some people just won't understand and it commits you to a set of physical laws that leads to unintended consequences. Peasant rail guns, attempts to build nuclear bombs ect....
At the same time it also often maps on poorly on to what exists in the world. For example I mentioned earlier that necrotic could be used to describe basically any damage because necrosis just means death and all damage to a living thing in a sense kills it. That makes a real world analogy pointless for Necrotic damage because if you use it everything is necrotic unless it's directly synonymous with another damage type.
If your goal is merely to match expectations then you should simply go with what you intuitive understanding is because that is what most people with a similar background are going to find intuitive. There are also goal other than being intuitive that are interesting as well such as being as conveying meaning or being mechanically interesting. You may make something radiant to convey the meaning that it's holy even if radiant damage doesn't make physical sense or you may choose fire damage to trigger a weakness or resistance.
No the physics are not the rules and the rules don’t always follow the physics, especially follow exactly. My point as that our brains and expectations that we use to decide what to do are based on real world function as we experience it. That is based on real world physics. If the rules stray too far from those expectations things get confusing and difficult to work with. So if you start with real world science on radiation then it’s easy t get a handle on how the extractions should probably work. As DMs we are all free to depart from that base as much ( or little) as we want. But starting with a real word base then adjusting to fit the rules generally gives better/more workable results.
This I also don't think is true. The laws of physics are no intuitive and most people don't know them well enough to apply them correctly . It often requires a long explanation that some people just won't understand and it commits you to a set of physical laws that leads to unintended consequences. Peasant rail guns, attempts to build nuclear bombs ect....
The physics of the game are founded in a layman's understanding of physics and proceeding from there will generally provide the best results, even if this understanding is partially warped by unrealistic Hollywood depictions. i don't think anyone is actually suggesting that proper physics with MATH (gasp!) and whatnot. No one is proposing characters affected by radiation make saving throws affected by the half life of the source of the radiation. But just like an arrow fired from a bow does not travel infinitely in a straight line and does not pierce infinite creatures, there is a founding in the principles of physics, as well as chemistry, biology, and other sciences. Use it as a base. Break it deliberately when it makes sense for the effect you want.
No I wasn’t suggesting that the PCs or the players would be doing actual physics problems. In our world everything follows the math of physics from arrows, to cell phones to cars to falls.we experience it all our lives and our judgements are based on those experiences. An outfielder doesn’t actually do calculations as he chases a fly ball - he intuits where it will land ( in his glove hopefully) based on years of experience of fly balls. However, everyone of those fly balls he experienced followed the laws of physics. So we have an intuitive knowledge that we use to predict how the world works. To play dnd the DnD world has to be similar enough I it’s normal (nonmagical) operations that our intuitions work at least most of the time. When trying to create something new - like the OP’s radiation monster - starting with the actual physics can help to I’d just what you might want. Yes necrosis has to do with death but more to do with cellular death than with direct damage to the body. When looking at radiation types that difference helps to separate out what different kinds damage different radiation types would produce. So microwave and IR should produce heat/fire damage, visible light and long wave UV radiant damage, while short wave UV, X rays and gamma rays as well as alpha and beta particle streams would produce necrotic damage with a touch of electrical damage as they are both charged particle streams somewhat similar to a lightning bolt. We don’t have magic in our world so it and its explanations lie outside of the realms of physics and we can use earlier attempts like Plato’s to describe it if we want.
By the way, walls of text are a bit hard to read, particularly on a site with poor mobile options. I trimmed down to just the part I wanted to address.
We don’t have magic in our world so it and its explanations lie outside of the realms of physics and we can use earlier attempts like Plato’s to describe it if we want.
Magic follows physics as much as you want for the story you are telling. There may be odd abstractions, like a line of lightning, magic forcing a path, or altering the resistance in the desired path, or an alternative explanation can be in line with physics.
Many of the simple effects follow basic physics. Feather Fall, for example, doesn't just negate fall damage, it limits the falling speed, much like a parachute would. Call Lightning summons bolts of lightning from a storm cloud. Burst effects have shorter ranges than equivalent focused effects (roughly area - burst - cone - line - ray).
Real world physics is an excellent starting point for any effect. Then, decide how you are going change things up.
Right, this might normally be a disease, but in 2024, diseases have been rolled into Poison/Poisoned. I would definitely use Poison and inflict the Poisoned Condition. In addition, maybe prevent healing until the poisoned condition is removed.
How to add Tooltips.
Real world physics don't really apply to DnD in the sense that you can't look at the rules of DnD and extrapolate the laws of physics from them or visa versa. In the real world light, electricity and magnetism are all kind of the same thing where as in DnD electricity and radiant are metaphysically different things with no real connection. There is also no real world analogy of necrotic energy, necrosis is a biological process not an energy . Radiation can cause necrosis but so can pretty much anything else that damages living tissue, similarly all physical process could be described as a force and hence do force damage. So following real world physics all damage could be force and or necrotic.
My point is that the damage types kind of break down if you look into the physics so I wouldn't bother. Instead think about the kind of game play effects you want. Do you want strait damage or something else? which enemies do you want to resist it and which do you want to be weak to it ? ect...
I disagree with the assertion that real world physics don't apply in D&D, but agree as to asking what kind of game play effects do you want.
D&D abstracts real world physics, deliberately breaking it in some places, but it's not a reason to throw it out as a reference. D&D caps out falling damaged at 20D6 damage because of terminal velocity.
How to add Tooltips.
Agreed. Yes the game is fantasy but - for it and us to function in it it has to approximate the world we know in how it works. Only when the vast majority of things work the way we are used to can magic and its exceptions work with our willing suspension of disbelief. Does it work exactly the same, no there are extractions and simplifications for game. Play ease but using real world physics as a basis is generally a safe start. For “radiation” damage we are dealing with a number of real world possibilities:
1) radio - too low an energy to generally do damage
2) microwaves - vibrates water and metallic molecules causing meat to cook from the inside out and metals to heat and burn (heat metal spell?)
3) infrared - radiant heat - depending on intensity it can keep stuff warm or burn - heat lamps, incandescent bulbs, room heaters etc.
4) visible light - generally not harmful except at extreme dosages - more on this later.
5) ultraviolet - sunburn and disinfectant uses. Long wave (near visible) not generally harmful, used for “glow in the dark” stuff. Short wave is harmful. This is the stuff that gives you a sunburn at low intensities and is used as a commercial anti microbial at higher intensities. This probably the stuff in “daylight” that kills vampires.
6) X rays - high energy ionizing stuff. Damages/destroys cellular membranes, DNA etc. penetrating enough that at low dosages it passes thru soft tissue without much damage but is stopped by metals, bone, etc - hence it real world use in medicine.
7) Gamma rays - the highest energy stuff- actually very deadly even at low dosages (forget the hulk, Banner should have been dead)
8) Alpha rays/particles - high energy ( relativistic) helium nuclei. Very damaging but not generally very penetrating. They mostly do surface damage but do do a lot on that surface.
9) Beta Rays/ particles - relativistic electrons - penetrating and damaging, ripping cellular structures and molecules apart.
generally microwaves and infrared ignite things while ultraviolet, x rays and gamma + do cellular damage without ignition. Whether it’s a lightbulb or a nuclear bomb the actual energy released is a combination of all types called blackbody radiation with a peak at some point and a possible cutoff of the higher energy types. A lightbulb’s peak is actually in the infrared ( that’s why they are so hot to touch) but it includes enough visible light to be useful. Nuclear explosions have their peak in the gamma ray region and produce huge amounts of everything else as well. The only real exception to this are lasers (including masers) that produce essentially all their energy in a very narrow band of a specific type. A radiation monster (like Godzilla) produces a blackbody blast as we see the visible, the blast ignites flammable and it does cellular damage. The key piece is the intensity or dosage received. For any monster (or magic) damage the intensity is going to be high. We can use that split between ignition and cellular damage to identify what type of energy we are talking about. If things are ignited then at least some is heat, if we can see the blast then some is visible, if it damages undead then some is UV and if it does cellular damage then some is “necrotic” . If you can’t see the blast, it doesn’t ignite things and doesn’t do internal cellular damage but does physical damage then it’s a force blast. The OP was asking specifically about a “radiation” monster, to me that means a Godzilla like creature so mostly necrotic with some of each other type so if it did 10 D8 damage I would make it 1 D8 heat, 1 D8 Radiant, 8 D8 necrotic.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Regarding physics, we now have this text in the 2024 DMG. Not sure if it has been included due to previous discussions about this topic across the Material Plane :-?
No the physics are not the rules and the rules don’t always follow the physics, especially follow exactly. My point as that our brains and expectations that we use to decide what to do are based on real world function as we experience it. That is based on real world physics. If the rules stray too far from those expectations things get confusing and difficult to work with. So if you start with real world science on radiation then it’s easy t get a handle on how the extractions should probably work. As DMs we are all free to depart from that base as much ( or little) as we want. But starting with a real word base then adjusting to fit the rules generally gives better/more workable results.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Not necessarily, it would only need our laws of physic if it were to function how our world functions and it doesn't. There have been other historical models of physics that arguably fit the DnD world better than our modern scientific one because allot of the fantastical elements of the setting are based on them. Something like platonic metaphysics and alchemy would fit the world better and while it's not true for our world is actually allot more predictive of the DnD world than our laws of physics are.
For example the platonic realm of forms could explain how when an object is polymorphed it still retains some connection to it's original form and returns to it when damaged. There would be a blueprint of the object in a spirit dimension that they are created inherently with knowledge of. Similarly the platonic four elements theory also better explains the structure of the planes then astrophysics.
Read my latest post
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
This I also don't think is true. The laws of physics are no intuitive and most people don't know them well enough to apply them correctly . It often requires a long explanation that some people just won't understand and it commits you to a set of physical laws that leads to unintended consequences. Peasant rail guns, attempts to build nuclear bombs ect....
At the same time it also often maps on poorly on to what exists in the world. For example I mentioned earlier that necrotic could be used to describe basically any damage because necrosis just means death and all damage to a living thing in a sense kills it. That makes a real world analogy pointless for Necrotic damage because if you use it everything is necrotic unless it's directly synonymous with another damage type.
If your goal is merely to match expectations then you should simply go with what you intuitive understanding is because that is what most people with a similar background are going to find intuitive. There are also goal other than being intuitive that are interesting as well such as being as conveying meaning or being mechanically interesting. You may make something radiant to convey the meaning that it's holy even if radiant damage doesn't make physical sense or you may choose fire damage to trigger a weakness or resistance.
The physics of the game are founded in a layman's understanding of physics and proceeding from there will generally provide the best results, even if this understanding is partially warped by unrealistic Hollywood depictions. i don't think anyone is actually suggesting that proper physics with MATH (gasp!) and whatnot. No one is proposing characters affected by radiation make saving throws affected by the half life of the source of the radiation. But just like an arrow fired from a bow does not travel infinitely in a straight line and does not pierce infinite creatures, there is a founding in the principles of physics, as well as chemistry, biology, and other sciences. Use it as a base. Break it deliberately when it makes sense for the effect you want.
How to add Tooltips.
No I wasn’t suggesting that the PCs or the players would be doing actual physics problems. In our world everything follows the math of physics from arrows, to cell phones to cars to falls.we experience it all our lives and our judgements are based on those experiences. An outfielder doesn’t actually do calculations as he chases a fly ball - he intuits where it will land ( in his glove hopefully) based on years of experience of fly balls. However, everyone of those fly balls he experienced followed the laws of physics. So we have an intuitive knowledge that we use to predict how the world works. To play dnd the DnD world has to be similar enough I it’s normal (nonmagical) operations that our intuitions work at least most of the time. When trying to create something new - like the OP’s radiation monster - starting with the actual physics can help to I’d just what you might want. Yes necrosis has to do with death but more to do with cellular death than with direct damage to the body. When looking at radiation types that difference helps to separate out what different kinds damage different radiation types would produce. So microwave and IR should produce heat/fire damage, visible light and long wave UV radiant damage, while short wave UV, X rays and gamma rays as well as alpha and beta particle streams would produce necrotic damage with a touch of electrical damage as they are both charged particle streams somewhat similar to a lightning bolt. We don’t have magic in our world so it and its explanations lie outside of the realms of physics and we can use earlier attempts like Plato’s to describe it if we want.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Magic follows physics as much as you want for the story you are telling. There may be odd abstractions, like a line of lightning, magic forcing a path, or altering the resistance in the desired path, or an alternative explanation can be in line with physics.
Many of the simple effects follow basic physics. Feather Fall, for example, doesn't just negate fall damage, it limits the falling speed, much like a parachute would. Call Lightning summons bolts of lightning from a storm cloud. Burst effects have shorter ranges than equivalent focused effects (roughly area - burst - cone - line - ray).
Real world physics is an excellent starting point for any effect. Then, decide how you are going change things up.
How to add Tooltips.