Wrathful Smite, and the term 'Creature'Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?What...
Can a magnet rip protons from a nucleus?
Is there a star over my head?
"Not enough RAM " error in PIC16F877a
I changed a word from a source, how do I cite it correctly?
How can I fix a framing mistake so I can drywall?
How do I preserve the line ordering for two "equal" strings while sorting and ignoring the case?
Which ping implementation is cygwin using?
CBP interview, how serious should I take it?
Why would "an mule" be used instead of "a mule"?
Guitar beginner - What does this card show?
Can the Warforged Integrated Weapon Trait be Disarmed?
Two different colors in an Illustrator stroke / line
Dividing Divisive Divisors
What causes this bloom with an old telephoto lens?
How was Carlo's plan supposed to work?
Character theory and Quantum Chemistry
Stack class in Java 8
Improbable Inequalities
Awesomism and its awesome gods
How do I politely hint customers to leave my store, without pretending to need leave store myself?
How accurate is the new appraisal system?
Are the definite and indefinite integrals actually two different things? Where is the flaw in my understanding?
What was the first LISP compiler?
Expected value until a success?
Wrathful Smite, and the term 'Creature'
Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?What is the definition of “creature” and is it used consistently?Can I use Booming Blade and Wrathful Smite in the same turn?Can I combine Haste, Green Flame Blade, Divine Smite, and Thunderous Smite like this?Do I have to concentrate on Wrathful Smite for the fear effect to continue?Are you allowed to stack Divine Smite and Eldritch Smite on the same attack?Is Wrathful Smite's wisdom check optional?Will the illusion of a creature, of a given type, trigger a spell contingent upon the creature type?Is it possible to smite with ranged weapons using either Branding Smite or Banishing smite?Do you need a weapon for Thunderous Smite, and the other 'Smite' spells?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
$begingroup$
I've been playing D&D 5e for about a year, and as I've understood, every living being falls under the "creature" category: humanoids, beasts, monstrosities, monsters, constructs, undead, celestials, fiends, etc.
However, the Paladin spell Wrathful Smite reads as follows:
Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw
or be frightened of you until the spell ends
This made me question the meaning of "creature".
Does it imply that there are other living beings, aside from "creatures"?
dnd-5e spells
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've been playing D&D 5e for about a year, and as I've understood, every living being falls under the "creature" category: humanoids, beasts, monstrosities, monsters, constructs, undead, celestials, fiends, etc.
However, the Paladin spell Wrathful Smite reads as follows:
Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw
or be frightened of you until the spell ends
This made me question the meaning of "creature".
Does it imply that there are other living beings, aside from "creatures"?
dnd-5e spells
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've been playing D&D 5e for about a year, and as I've understood, every living being falls under the "creature" category: humanoids, beasts, monstrosities, monsters, constructs, undead, celestials, fiends, etc.
However, the Paladin spell Wrathful Smite reads as follows:
Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw
or be frightened of you until the spell ends
This made me question the meaning of "creature".
Does it imply that there are other living beings, aside from "creatures"?
dnd-5e spells
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
I've been playing D&D 5e for about a year, and as I've understood, every living being falls under the "creature" category: humanoids, beasts, monstrosities, monsters, constructs, undead, celestials, fiends, etc.
However, the Paladin spell Wrathful Smite reads as follows:
Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw
or be frightened of you until the spell ends
This made me question the meaning of "creature".
Does it imply that there are other living beings, aside from "creatures"?
dnd-5e spells
dnd-5e spells
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 9 hours ago
NautArch
77.9k16 gold badges301 silver badges517 bronze badges
77.9k16 gold badges301 silver badges517 bronze badges
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 11 hours ago
Mikkel ToftMikkel Toft
313 bronze badges
313 bronze badges
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The term "creature" does not include objects.
In other words, if you use Wrathful Smite to break down a door, the door does not need to make a wisdom saving throw.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The effects of the wrathful smite spell can apply to anything, including objects; the phrase in question makes it so that only creatures make the Wisdom saving throw
Most of the smite spells (all but thunderous smite and wrathful smite) begin with the following:
The next time you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack...
The wrathful smite spell, however, states:
The next time you hit with a melee weapon attack during this spell's duration, your attack deals an extra 1d6 psychic damage. Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw or be frightened of you until the spell ends...
Most smite spells only have effects against creatures, however, the effects of wrathful smite are not restricted in this way so they can apply to anything you hit, including objects.
The additional 1d6 psychic damage applies no matter what you hit; however, the wording in question is there so that the Wisdom saving throw is only made if the target is a creature.
Of note, there are things which are neither creatures nor objects and they are explicitly called out as such. The only one I know of is the Shepherd Druid's Spirit Totem which states:
The spirit creates an aura in a 30-foot radius around that point. It counts as neither a creature nor an object, though it has the spectral appearance of the creature it represents.
Whether this being counts as "living" would be up to a GM (though I don't know any game-effect where it would matter). However, you can't actually hit the spirit totem, it has no stats. If you could then it would take the additional 1d6 psychic damage but it would not make the Wisdom saving throw as it is not a creature.
The fact that there are extremely few things which are neither creature nor object is supported by the rules constant use of the phrase "creatures and objects" such as in the see invisibility spell which states:
For the duration, you see invisible creatures and objects as if they were visible
This (and many other instances of this phrase throughout the rules) help show that unless stated otherwise something must be either a creature or an object (or both, potentially, see this question for that discussion: "Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?")
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154966%2fwrathful-smite-and-the-term-creature%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The term "creature" does not include objects.
In other words, if you use Wrathful Smite to break down a door, the door does not need to make a wisdom saving throw.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The term "creature" does not include objects.
In other words, if you use Wrathful Smite to break down a door, the door does not need to make a wisdom saving throw.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The term "creature" does not include objects.
In other words, if you use Wrathful Smite to break down a door, the door does not need to make a wisdom saving throw.
$endgroup$
The term "creature" does not include objects.
In other words, if you use Wrathful Smite to break down a door, the door does not need to make a wisdom saving throw.
answered 11 hours ago
AceCalhoonAceCalhoon
39.4k10 gold badges129 silver badges190 bronze badges
39.4k10 gold badges129 silver badges190 bronze badges
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch OP's edit suggests otherwise, that it was in fact confusion around the wrathful smite description. The question should perhaps be cleaned up to better reflect the OP's "true" query...
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NathanS After the clarification, this answer doesn't really address the OP's concerns.
$endgroup$
– StackLloyd
10 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The effects of the wrathful smite spell can apply to anything, including objects; the phrase in question makes it so that only creatures make the Wisdom saving throw
Most of the smite spells (all but thunderous smite and wrathful smite) begin with the following:
The next time you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack...
The wrathful smite spell, however, states:
The next time you hit with a melee weapon attack during this spell's duration, your attack deals an extra 1d6 psychic damage. Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw or be frightened of you until the spell ends...
Most smite spells only have effects against creatures, however, the effects of wrathful smite are not restricted in this way so they can apply to anything you hit, including objects.
The additional 1d6 psychic damage applies no matter what you hit; however, the wording in question is there so that the Wisdom saving throw is only made if the target is a creature.
Of note, there are things which are neither creatures nor objects and they are explicitly called out as such. The only one I know of is the Shepherd Druid's Spirit Totem which states:
The spirit creates an aura in a 30-foot radius around that point. It counts as neither a creature nor an object, though it has the spectral appearance of the creature it represents.
Whether this being counts as "living" would be up to a GM (though I don't know any game-effect where it would matter). However, you can't actually hit the spirit totem, it has no stats. If you could then it would take the additional 1d6 psychic damage but it would not make the Wisdom saving throw as it is not a creature.
The fact that there are extremely few things which are neither creature nor object is supported by the rules constant use of the phrase "creatures and objects" such as in the see invisibility spell which states:
For the duration, you see invisible creatures and objects as if they were visible
This (and many other instances of this phrase throughout the rules) help show that unless stated otherwise something must be either a creature or an object (or both, potentially, see this question for that discussion: "Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?")
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The effects of the wrathful smite spell can apply to anything, including objects; the phrase in question makes it so that only creatures make the Wisdom saving throw
Most of the smite spells (all but thunderous smite and wrathful smite) begin with the following:
The next time you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack...
The wrathful smite spell, however, states:
The next time you hit with a melee weapon attack during this spell's duration, your attack deals an extra 1d6 psychic damage. Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw or be frightened of you until the spell ends...
Most smite spells only have effects against creatures, however, the effects of wrathful smite are not restricted in this way so they can apply to anything you hit, including objects.
The additional 1d6 psychic damage applies no matter what you hit; however, the wording in question is there so that the Wisdom saving throw is only made if the target is a creature.
Of note, there are things which are neither creatures nor objects and they are explicitly called out as such. The only one I know of is the Shepherd Druid's Spirit Totem which states:
The spirit creates an aura in a 30-foot radius around that point. It counts as neither a creature nor an object, though it has the spectral appearance of the creature it represents.
Whether this being counts as "living" would be up to a GM (though I don't know any game-effect where it would matter). However, you can't actually hit the spirit totem, it has no stats. If you could then it would take the additional 1d6 psychic damage but it would not make the Wisdom saving throw as it is not a creature.
The fact that there are extremely few things which are neither creature nor object is supported by the rules constant use of the phrase "creatures and objects" such as in the see invisibility spell which states:
For the duration, you see invisible creatures and objects as if they were visible
This (and many other instances of this phrase throughout the rules) help show that unless stated otherwise something must be either a creature or an object (or both, potentially, see this question for that discussion: "Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?")
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The effects of the wrathful smite spell can apply to anything, including objects; the phrase in question makes it so that only creatures make the Wisdom saving throw
Most of the smite spells (all but thunderous smite and wrathful smite) begin with the following:
The next time you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack...
The wrathful smite spell, however, states:
The next time you hit with a melee weapon attack during this spell's duration, your attack deals an extra 1d6 psychic damage. Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw or be frightened of you until the spell ends...
Most smite spells only have effects against creatures, however, the effects of wrathful smite are not restricted in this way so they can apply to anything you hit, including objects.
The additional 1d6 psychic damage applies no matter what you hit; however, the wording in question is there so that the Wisdom saving throw is only made if the target is a creature.
Of note, there are things which are neither creatures nor objects and they are explicitly called out as such. The only one I know of is the Shepherd Druid's Spirit Totem which states:
The spirit creates an aura in a 30-foot radius around that point. It counts as neither a creature nor an object, though it has the spectral appearance of the creature it represents.
Whether this being counts as "living" would be up to a GM (though I don't know any game-effect where it would matter). However, you can't actually hit the spirit totem, it has no stats. If you could then it would take the additional 1d6 psychic damage but it would not make the Wisdom saving throw as it is not a creature.
The fact that there are extremely few things which are neither creature nor object is supported by the rules constant use of the phrase "creatures and objects" such as in the see invisibility spell which states:
For the duration, you see invisible creatures and objects as if they were visible
This (and many other instances of this phrase throughout the rules) help show that unless stated otherwise something must be either a creature or an object (or both, potentially, see this question for that discussion: "Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?")
$endgroup$
The effects of the wrathful smite spell can apply to anything, including objects; the phrase in question makes it so that only creatures make the Wisdom saving throw
Most of the smite spells (all but thunderous smite and wrathful smite) begin with the following:
The next time you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack...
The wrathful smite spell, however, states:
The next time you hit with a melee weapon attack during this spell's duration, your attack deals an extra 1d6 psychic damage. Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must make a Wisdom saving throw or be frightened of you until the spell ends...
Most smite spells only have effects against creatures, however, the effects of wrathful smite are not restricted in this way so they can apply to anything you hit, including objects.
The additional 1d6 psychic damage applies no matter what you hit; however, the wording in question is there so that the Wisdom saving throw is only made if the target is a creature.
Of note, there are things which are neither creatures nor objects and they are explicitly called out as such. The only one I know of is the Shepherd Druid's Spirit Totem which states:
The spirit creates an aura in a 30-foot radius around that point. It counts as neither a creature nor an object, though it has the spectral appearance of the creature it represents.
Whether this being counts as "living" would be up to a GM (though I don't know any game-effect where it would matter). However, you can't actually hit the spirit totem, it has no stats. If you could then it would take the additional 1d6 psychic damage but it would not make the Wisdom saving throw as it is not a creature.
The fact that there are extremely few things which are neither creature nor object is supported by the rules constant use of the phrase "creatures and objects" such as in the see invisibility spell which states:
For the duration, you see invisible creatures and objects as if they were visible
This (and many other instances of this phrase throughout the rules) help show that unless stated otherwise something must be either a creature or an object (or both, potentially, see this question for that discussion: "Is there anything that is simultaneously a creature and an object?")
edited 8 hours ago
answered 9 hours ago
Medix2Medix2
10.5k2 gold badges36 silver badges104 bronze badges
10.5k2 gold badges36 silver badges104 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think you fell into the same trap as AceCalhoon. WIth the most recent edit, OP seems to understand Objects are separate. They're asking if there are other non-objects that would be removed from this effect as "not creatures". I think.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch I'm not sure what you mean, the phrase is there to explain that only a creature makes the saving throw. I honestly don't understand how this implies the existence of non-creature living beings
$endgroup$
– Medix2
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
And with OP's final question, they're asking if it is simply object v. creature dichotomy, or if there is something else that qualifies as not-object, but not-creature.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@NautArch Added that in now
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago
add a comment |
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mikkel Toft is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154966%2fwrathful-smite-and-the-term-creature%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
$begingroup$
@StackLloyd I'm not sure this is a duplicate, since this question seems to be about confusion around the wrathful smite description specifically, rather than the "creature" thing that the other question explores.
$endgroup$
– NathanS
11 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Welcome to the stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate and glad to have you around! FYI, you don't need to signal edits (the edit history takes care of that.) It's better to just fully edit your question to include newly relevant information but keep the question as a narrative whole.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm not sure we can answer the first part of your last question (that's designer intent, which we hold as off-topic), but we could potentially answer the second. I've deleted the first part, but you can always roll back that edit.
$endgroup$
– NautArch
9 hours ago
$begingroup$
If your real question is "are there things which are neither creatures nor objects?" I would change the title of your question to reflect this
$endgroup$
– Medix2
8 hours ago