I'm not sure what you mean by 'as direct' but from what I understand the Goodberry spell creates up to ten berries. After that anyone can eat these berries, each berry healing 1 hp and providing enough nourishment to sustain a creature for 1 day. So if the caster is killed, robbed, or incapacitated in any way or if the creature it's given to gives it to another the berry still heals and nourishes. Seems like the berries are doing the healing and nourishing, the caster just created them. Also the berries magical properties only last for 24 hours, but the berries remain.
Although you're asking me something about the Goodberry spell you also mentioned the Heat Metal spell. I would just like to add that the intention of the Heat Metal spell is to make a (manufactured) metal item too hot to hold onto. A side effect of this is that it deals fire damage, this damage is dealt on the first turn and is optional on following turns, and the wording of the spell suggests that even this optional damage is to force anyone in contact with the object to drop it (giving them a Con save, failure means they drop it if able, and success means they suffer a disadvantage penalty for continuing to hold onto it).
Comparing other spells to either Heat Metal or Sanctuary would probably only serve to 'muddy the waters' so to speak. I would like to get the most recent designers/creators of the game opinions on this matter. It would be interesting to see how they rule on this particular situation.
This debate is on whether or not heat metal damages directly enough to trigger sanctuary.
I remembered a similar debate on whether or not goodberry heals directly enough to trigger the Life cleric's Disciple of Life, the result of which was a Sage Advice ruling that it does.
The wording on the two pairs of features/spells seemed very similar--to me, at least.
OK I guess I see why you mentioned the Goodberry spell. But I would like to once again mention the debate isn't over the point of the damage being direct enough to trigger the Sanctaury spell. The Sanctuary spell is not triggered by damage. It is triggered by an attack or harmful spell that targets the creature. So regardless of whether the damage is direct or not is irrelevant for this debate. It is about whether one spell will trigger the other.
And as much as I think I know about this I still learn something when I go back over everything. This time I noticed the first sentence of the Sanctuary spell... "You ward a creature within range against attack." You not only don't ward an object against attack, you don't even ward an object... at all... against anything.
Actually, I would just walk up to the Sanctuary person and start to take all their stuff, if they try to stop you that would/could be considered an attack and sanctuary would end.
I am glad I'm not at some of these tables. The amount of rules lawyering is quite staggering. I enjoy the spirit of the game, the adventure and roleplaying. It's not a MMO. I don't want to play D&D Court of Appeals.
Actually, I would just walk up to the Sanctuary person and start to take all their stuff, if they try to stop you that would/could be considered an attack and sanctuary would end.
I am glad I'm not at some of these tables. The amount of rules lawyering is quite staggering. I enjoy the spirit of the game, the adventure and roleplaying. It's not a MMO. I don't want to play D&D Court of Appeals.
Actually I'd say you are rules lawyering here. Because Sanctuary prevents an "attack" you are arguing that you can come and simply lift the items off the person since that is not an "attack". The spirit of Sanctuary is that it is a potential defense against unwanted harmful or negative effects "targeting the person". I think someone mugging you fits that description. That's Assault.
I'd say a person under the effects of Sanctuary would benefit from it vs any attack, harmful spell or unwanted negative effect/action that targets them. Somone attacking you, someone trying to snipe you from a distance or someone walking up to you and trying to take your stuff. That thief trying to pick your pockets while you walk through the bazaar is targeting you and maybe loses focus for some unknown reason...
Actually I'd say you are rules lawyering here. Because Sanctuary prevents an "attack" you are arguing that you can come and simply lift the items off the person since that is not an "attack". The spirit of Sanctuary is that it is a potential defense against unwanted harmful or negative effects "targeting the person". I think someone mugging you fits that description. That's Assault.
I'd say a person under the effects of Sanctuary would benefit from it vs any attack, harmful spell or unwanted negative effect/action that targets them. Somone attacking you, someone trying to snipe you from a distance or someone walking up to you and trying to take your stuff. That thief trying to pick your pockets while you walk through the bazaar is targeting you and maybe loses focus for some unknown reason...
The word "attack", like the word "spell", has a very specific meaning in the rules. Something is an attack if and only if it involves an attack roll or the rules say it is (as is the case with grappling and shoving). When the rules refer to an attack, they mean an attack, not anything that causes damage or harm.
Sanctuary isn't meant to be an absolute defense anyways since it doesn't protect from area spells.
Here's ways to damage someone without making an attack or casting a spell:
A dragonborn's breath weapon
A Way of the Four Elements Monk's Fist of Unbroken Air or Water Whip
Pouring oil in their space and lighting it on fire.
Hiding caltrops or hunting traps so that they stop on it.
Creating or summoning a creature to hurt them for you.
Pick-pocketing someone usually isn't an attack; that's a clear case for the Sleight of Hand skill.
Forcefully taking someone's things may or may not be an attack, depending on how the DM decides to resolve that. I can see many valid ways of resolving this:
Use a strength contest
Use the grappling rules
Use the disarm rule in the Dungeon Master's Guide, which involves an attack roll.
Some combination of the above (e.g. grapple + strength contest).
I agree completely. My emphasis was on Letter of the Law (targeted "attack) vs Spirit of the Law (targeted unwanted effect). Ultimately it comes down to the DM and the group playing to determine how it plays out.
I don't think Sanctuary is intended to be an absolute defense and even if it is broadly applied there are ways around it and it can be bypassed (via Wis Save). You give some excellent examples above of how to bypass it though I would point out the following:
A dragonborn's breath weapon (Excellent example!)
A Way of the Four Elements Monk's Fist of Unbroken Air or Water Whip (Excellent example)
Pouring oil in their space and lighting it on fire. (Tricky one there. Pouring oil on the ground is not listed as an attack, but splashing a creature is. Pouring oil in a creatures space?)
Hiding caltrops or hunting traps so that they stop on it. (Excellent again!)
Creating or summoning a creature to hurt them for you. (the creature would still have to bypass Sanctuary)
Grappling is a special attack
Thank you for the dialogue and for guiding me to some specific situations I had considered.
As specified in the Heat Metal Spell, the metal becomes red hot. Can the spell be used to lite a fire? Usually, red hot metal may be enough to do so depending on the nature of the object that touches it..
if the metal becomes red hot, is it easier to bend or to break?
Public Mod Note(MellieDM): Please do not revive threads from 2018 as per our Thread Necromancy rules. You are welcome to open a new discussion for our current community!
So when the spell is cast, you have to see the object, but it you can no longer see the object, can you still use a bonus action to cause the damage?
Public Mod Note
(MellieDM):
Please do not revive threads from 2018 as per our Thread Necromancy rules. You are welcome to open a new discussion for our current community!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
OK I guess I see why you mentioned the Goodberry spell. But I would like to once again mention the debate isn't over the point of the damage being direct enough to trigger the Sanctaury spell. The Sanctuary spell is not triggered by damage. It is triggered by an attack or harmful spell that targets the creature. So regardless of whether the damage is direct or not is irrelevant for this debate. It is about whether one spell will trigger the other.
And as much as I think I know about this I still learn something when I go back over everything. This time I noticed the first sentence of the Sanctuary spell... "You ward a creature within range against attack." You not only don't ward an object against attack, you don't even ward an object... at all... against anything.
Actually, I would just walk up to the Sanctuary person and start to take all their stuff, if they try to stop you that would/could be considered an attack and sanctuary would end.
I am glad I'm not at some of these tables. The amount of rules lawyering is quite staggering. I enjoy the spirit of the game, the adventure and roleplaying. It's not a MMO. I don't want to play D&D Court of Appeals.
Here's ways to damage someone without making an attack or casting a spell:
Pick-pocketing someone usually isn't an attack; that's a clear case for the Sleight of Hand skill.
Forcefully taking someone's things may or may not be an attack, depending on how the DM decides to resolve that. I can see many valid ways of resolving this:
I agree completely. My emphasis was on Letter of the Law (targeted "attack) vs Spirit of the Law (targeted unwanted effect). Ultimately it comes down to the DM and the group playing to determine how it plays out.
I don't think Sanctuary is intended to be an absolute defense and even if it is broadly applied there are ways around it and it can be bypassed (via Wis Save). You give some excellent examples above of how to bypass it though I would point out the following:
Thank you for the dialogue and for guiding me to some specific situations I had considered.
As specified in the Heat Metal Spell, the metal becomes red hot. Can the spell be used to lite a fire? Usually, red hot metal may be enough to do so depending on the nature of the object that touches it..
if the metal becomes red hot, is it easier to bend or to break?
So when the spell is cast, you have to see the object, but it you can no longer see the object, can you still use a bonus action to cause the damage?