Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
In most cases the breath weapon, by RAW, would not damage the cover. They generally read “each creature in” whatever shape the weapon is. Cover is provided by objects, so unless there’s language about unattended objects, the weapon wouldn’t damage it.
It would certainly be reasonable to house rule something like a fire breath might burn through a wooden wall - and of course destructible environments are way more cinematic and make fights much more interesting. But, then we’re into house rules, and it’s going to be up to you on how to run it. If it were me, I’d probably say the wall takes the damage, and anything left over would affect the character. So in your example, 1 hp, subject to a save, resistance, evasion, etc.
What if there were other types of area-of-effect attacks involving anything? Like a bomb, etc.?
This question is not answered by the rules. DM's call.
I would probably have reduced or modified damage, depending on the circumstances.
It’s all going to depend on how the specific AoE is written. But even then, there’s no rule on how to deal with it.
Shatter is a good example, as it also damages objects. At that point, we’re in to what jl8e says. It’s a DM’s call. But there’s nothing definitively saying what happens if it blows through a wall being used as cover.
The question that is posed in the OP comes down to whether or not the DM has declared that the "object" in question provides Total Cover or not. Some of this should be based on the definition of Cover, which is that the thing in question must be an obstacle that can provide protection. The DM decides whether or not the thing is an obstacle.
Once the DM establishes that the thing in question is indeed an obstacle that provides Total Cover, then the logic that you presented in the OP is sound. By rule:
Therefore, the creatures in question do not experience the effects of the AoE since they are positioned in a location that isn't included in the area of effect.
Of course, the game never actually defines 'obstacle', and doesn't say they do provide cover, merely that they can provide cover. If a DM doesn't think a thin wooden wall is an obstacle, then it isn't.
A DM could well decide that if an AOE attack destroys an object (or wouldn't otherwise hinder the attack), that object does not constitute an obstacle, and thus does not provide cover.
Yeah, I agree with what Xalthu said. Not only do most, if not all, dragon breaths affect only creatures, but the area of effect would also be blocked in that scenario, unless its effect can go around corners (like the 5e Fireball).
There is a thread about this topic in Dungeon Masters Only, Breath weapons / AoEs against creatures, objects and vehicles, in case it's interesting for LordYcarus or anyone else.
I think this is where the 'the rules are not a physics simulator' is properly deployed. (As per the example of the peasants readying an action to pass a spear, when following the literal rules creates an absurdity, don't follow the literal rules -- that's what that rule means, not 'don't try to reach realistic outcomes', which is the exact opposite of what is meant). It's patently obvious a red dragon's breath should set objects on fire, so the DM should just declare it does, in whatever manner is suitable for the moment.
Well, I'd say all depends on how much you mix RAW, RAI, and RAF in your games.