Can the damage from a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil) be non-lethal?What is “Force” Damage?What are the mechanics of attacking with a Talisman of (Pure Good / Ultimate Evil)?Can massive damage knock out rather than causing instant death?Can you knock out Animated Armor and/or Zombies?What happens when you bring a creature down to 0 HP entirely by a “Sword of Wounding”, but choose to deal nonlethal damage?Can the Death Cleric's Channel Divinity stack with the Paladin's Smite?Can I disarm and immediately grapple with Tavern Brawler?How can I make trying to knock out an opponent dangerous?How can a disarmed foe be prevented from recovering the item?Can one still deal Non-Lethal Damage if they trigger the Automatic Kill feature?What are the mechanics of attacking with a Talisman of (Pure Good / Ultimate Evil)?Can the bonus action attack from Polearm Master be used to Disarm?
An Accountant Seeks the Help of a Mathematician
Schematic conventions for different supply rails
Define different actions for the same operator depending on the nature of its arguments
Why doesn't the EU now just force the UK to choose between referendum and no-deal?
Is a lawful good "antagonist" effective?
Simulating rnorm() using runif()
About parabolic Kazhdan Lusztig polynomials
Can unconscious characters be unwilling?
What is a good source for large tables on the properties of water?
Provisioning profile doesn't include the application-identifier and keychain-access-groups entitlements
Why must traveling waves have the same amplitude to form a standing wave?
Prove that this set in the metric space is open
Ban on all campaign finance?
What options are left, if Britain cannot decide?
Can the damage from a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil) be non-lethal?
Implicit nil checks in algorithms
Plot a function of two variables equal 0
Replacing Windows 7 security updates with anti-virus?
MSTP and Rapid-PVST+
Why do Australian milk farmers need to protest supermarkets' milk price?
How is the Swiss post e-voting system supposed to work, and how was it wrong?
My story is written in English, but is set in my home country. What language should I use for the dialogue?
Life insurance that covers only simultaneous/dual deaths
Bastion server: use TCP forwarding VS placing private key on server
Can the damage from a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil) be non-lethal?
What is “Force” Damage?What are the mechanics of attacking with a Talisman of (Pure Good / Ultimate Evil)?Can massive damage knock out rather than causing instant death?Can you knock out Animated Armor and/or Zombies?What happens when you bring a creature down to 0 HP entirely by a “Sword of Wounding”, but choose to deal nonlethal damage?Can the Death Cleric's Channel Divinity stack with the Paladin's Smite?Can I disarm and immediately grapple with Tavern Brawler?How can I make trying to knock out an opponent dangerous?How can a disarmed foe be prevented from recovering the item?Can one still deal Non-Lethal Damage if they trigger the Automatic Kill feature?What are the mechanics of attacking with a Talisman of (Pure Good / Ultimate Evil)?Can the bonus action attack from Polearm Master be used to Disarm?
$begingroup$
This is a direct follow-up to this other question of mine and assumes that, indeed, one may wield a Talisman of Pure Good (or a Talisman of Ultimate Evil) as an improvised weapon and apply both the regular melee damage from an improvised weapon plus the Talisman's radiant/necrotic damage if the creature is not of the right alignment.
The Player's Handbook states the following about Knocking a Creature Out:
Sometimes an attacker wants to incapacitate a foe, rather than deal a killing blow. When an attacker reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack, the attacker can knock the creature out. The attacker can make this choice the instant the damage is dealt. The creature falls unconscious and is stable.
Can one decide to strike a maligned foe non-lethally (and therefore knock them out instead of killing them) with a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil)?
My hesitation relies on the fact that the radiant/necrotic damage from the Talisman does not directly come from the melee attack, but rather from the item. I think it might still work, but I am unsure.
dnd-5e magic-items combat improvised-weaponry
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a direct follow-up to this other question of mine and assumes that, indeed, one may wield a Talisman of Pure Good (or a Talisman of Ultimate Evil) as an improvised weapon and apply both the regular melee damage from an improvised weapon plus the Talisman's radiant/necrotic damage if the creature is not of the right alignment.
The Player's Handbook states the following about Knocking a Creature Out:
Sometimes an attacker wants to incapacitate a foe, rather than deal a killing blow. When an attacker reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack, the attacker can knock the creature out. The attacker can make this choice the instant the damage is dealt. The creature falls unconscious and is stable.
Can one decide to strike a maligned foe non-lethally (and therefore knock them out instead of killing them) with a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil)?
My hesitation relies on the fact that the radiant/necrotic damage from the Talisman does not directly come from the melee attack, but rather from the item. I think it might still work, but I am unsure.
dnd-5e magic-items combat improvised-weaponry
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a direct follow-up to this other question of mine and assumes that, indeed, one may wield a Talisman of Pure Good (or a Talisman of Ultimate Evil) as an improvised weapon and apply both the regular melee damage from an improvised weapon plus the Talisman's radiant/necrotic damage if the creature is not of the right alignment.
The Player's Handbook states the following about Knocking a Creature Out:
Sometimes an attacker wants to incapacitate a foe, rather than deal a killing blow. When an attacker reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack, the attacker can knock the creature out. The attacker can make this choice the instant the damage is dealt. The creature falls unconscious and is stable.
Can one decide to strike a maligned foe non-lethally (and therefore knock them out instead of killing them) with a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil)?
My hesitation relies on the fact that the radiant/necrotic damage from the Talisman does not directly come from the melee attack, but rather from the item. I think it might still work, but I am unsure.
dnd-5e magic-items combat improvised-weaponry
$endgroup$
This is a direct follow-up to this other question of mine and assumes that, indeed, one may wield a Talisman of Pure Good (or a Talisman of Ultimate Evil) as an improvised weapon and apply both the regular melee damage from an improvised weapon plus the Talisman's radiant/necrotic damage if the creature is not of the right alignment.
The Player's Handbook states the following about Knocking a Creature Out:
Sometimes an attacker wants to incapacitate a foe, rather than deal a killing blow. When an attacker reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack, the attacker can knock the creature out. The attacker can make this choice the instant the damage is dealt. The creature falls unconscious and is stable.
Can one decide to strike a maligned foe non-lethally (and therefore knock them out instead of killing them) with a Talisman of Pure Good (or Ultimate Evil)?
My hesitation relies on the fact that the radiant/necrotic damage from the Talisman does not directly come from the melee attack, but rather from the item. I think it might still work, but I am unsure.
dnd-5e magic-items combat improvised-weaponry
dnd-5e magic-items combat improvised-weaponry
edited 18 mins ago
V2Blast
24.6k383155
24.6k383155
asked 5 hours ago
Gael LGael L
9,027341169
9,027341169
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Any melee attack can be a knock-out blow.
You've quoted the complete rules on the matter. The type of damage is not relevant, only the source of the attack - melee or ranged. Both a melee weapon attack and a melee spell attack are melee attacks.
Another user asked What is "Force" Damage? In that case, they were asking how to describe wounds, but I made a key point in my answer:
Until a source of damage interacts with something with resistance, immunity, vulnerability, or some other ability that cites an interaction with a type of damage, the damage type is functionally meaningless.
In D&D5E, you can just as easily fire-damage somebody into unconsciousness (via Flame Blade, a melee spell attack) or shock them into submission (via Shocking Grasp), as you can beat them within an inch of their life. You cannot Lightning Bolt or Fire Bolt somebody without the risk of killing them, because neither of those two spells involves a melee attack (one is a save, the other is a ranged spell attack).
The Talisman may not be an attack at all.
While it isn't written that way, I suspect the intention of that passage is when an unworthy character touches the talisman willingly. If you're allowing that feature to be used offensively, by pressing it against the unworthy, you're dipping into homebrew territory anyway.
If you're allowing a character to make a melee attack with a Talisman, then yes, it would work as you describe. A melee attack is a melee attack, and by the rules can be used as a knock-out blow.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No
Your quote specifically states a "melee attack," but the damage from the Talisman occurs after (when they touch it), so it isn't an attack.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
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/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 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
);
);
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%2f143133%2fcan-the-damage-from-a-talisman-of-pure-good-or-ultimate-evil-be-non-lethal%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
$begingroup$
Any melee attack can be a knock-out blow.
You've quoted the complete rules on the matter. The type of damage is not relevant, only the source of the attack - melee or ranged. Both a melee weapon attack and a melee spell attack are melee attacks.
Another user asked What is "Force" Damage? In that case, they were asking how to describe wounds, but I made a key point in my answer:
Until a source of damage interacts with something with resistance, immunity, vulnerability, or some other ability that cites an interaction with a type of damage, the damage type is functionally meaningless.
In D&D5E, you can just as easily fire-damage somebody into unconsciousness (via Flame Blade, a melee spell attack) or shock them into submission (via Shocking Grasp), as you can beat them within an inch of their life. You cannot Lightning Bolt or Fire Bolt somebody without the risk of killing them, because neither of those two spells involves a melee attack (one is a save, the other is a ranged spell attack).
The Talisman may not be an attack at all.
While it isn't written that way, I suspect the intention of that passage is when an unworthy character touches the talisman willingly. If you're allowing that feature to be used offensively, by pressing it against the unworthy, you're dipping into homebrew territory anyway.
If you're allowing a character to make a melee attack with a Talisman, then yes, it would work as you describe. A melee attack is a melee attack, and by the rules can be used as a knock-out blow.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Any melee attack can be a knock-out blow.
You've quoted the complete rules on the matter. The type of damage is not relevant, only the source of the attack - melee or ranged. Both a melee weapon attack and a melee spell attack are melee attacks.
Another user asked What is "Force" Damage? In that case, they were asking how to describe wounds, but I made a key point in my answer:
Until a source of damage interacts with something with resistance, immunity, vulnerability, or some other ability that cites an interaction with a type of damage, the damage type is functionally meaningless.
In D&D5E, you can just as easily fire-damage somebody into unconsciousness (via Flame Blade, a melee spell attack) or shock them into submission (via Shocking Grasp), as you can beat them within an inch of their life. You cannot Lightning Bolt or Fire Bolt somebody without the risk of killing them, because neither of those two spells involves a melee attack (one is a save, the other is a ranged spell attack).
The Talisman may not be an attack at all.
While it isn't written that way, I suspect the intention of that passage is when an unworthy character touches the talisman willingly. If you're allowing that feature to be used offensively, by pressing it against the unworthy, you're dipping into homebrew territory anyway.
If you're allowing a character to make a melee attack with a Talisman, then yes, it would work as you describe. A melee attack is a melee attack, and by the rules can be used as a knock-out blow.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Any melee attack can be a knock-out blow.
You've quoted the complete rules on the matter. The type of damage is not relevant, only the source of the attack - melee or ranged. Both a melee weapon attack and a melee spell attack are melee attacks.
Another user asked What is "Force" Damage? In that case, they were asking how to describe wounds, but I made a key point in my answer:
Until a source of damage interacts with something with resistance, immunity, vulnerability, or some other ability that cites an interaction with a type of damage, the damage type is functionally meaningless.
In D&D5E, you can just as easily fire-damage somebody into unconsciousness (via Flame Blade, a melee spell attack) or shock them into submission (via Shocking Grasp), as you can beat them within an inch of their life. You cannot Lightning Bolt or Fire Bolt somebody without the risk of killing them, because neither of those two spells involves a melee attack (one is a save, the other is a ranged spell attack).
The Talisman may not be an attack at all.
While it isn't written that way, I suspect the intention of that passage is when an unworthy character touches the talisman willingly. If you're allowing that feature to be used offensively, by pressing it against the unworthy, you're dipping into homebrew territory anyway.
If you're allowing a character to make a melee attack with a Talisman, then yes, it would work as you describe. A melee attack is a melee attack, and by the rules can be used as a knock-out blow.
$endgroup$
Any melee attack can be a knock-out blow.
You've quoted the complete rules on the matter. The type of damage is not relevant, only the source of the attack - melee or ranged. Both a melee weapon attack and a melee spell attack are melee attacks.
Another user asked What is "Force" Damage? In that case, they were asking how to describe wounds, but I made a key point in my answer:
Until a source of damage interacts with something with resistance, immunity, vulnerability, or some other ability that cites an interaction with a type of damage, the damage type is functionally meaningless.
In D&D5E, you can just as easily fire-damage somebody into unconsciousness (via Flame Blade, a melee spell attack) or shock them into submission (via Shocking Grasp), as you can beat them within an inch of their life. You cannot Lightning Bolt or Fire Bolt somebody without the risk of killing them, because neither of those two spells involves a melee attack (one is a save, the other is a ranged spell attack).
The Talisman may not be an attack at all.
While it isn't written that way, I suspect the intention of that passage is when an unworthy character touches the talisman willingly. If you're allowing that feature to be used offensively, by pressing it against the unworthy, you're dipping into homebrew territory anyway.
If you're allowing a character to make a melee attack with a Talisman, then yes, it would work as you describe. A melee attack is a melee attack, and by the rules can be used as a knock-out blow.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
T.J.L.T.J.L.
33.1k5115173
33.1k5115173
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No
Your quote specifically states a "melee attack," but the damage from the Talisman occurs after (when they touch it), so it isn't an attack.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No
Your quote specifically states a "melee attack," but the damage from the Talisman occurs after (when they touch it), so it isn't an attack.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No
Your quote specifically states a "melee attack," but the damage from the Talisman occurs after (when they touch it), so it isn't an attack.
$endgroup$
No
Your quote specifically states a "melee attack," but the damage from the Talisman occurs after (when they touch it), so it isn't an attack.
answered 5 hours ago
NoOneIsHereNoOneIsHere
572416
572416
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
You're ignoring the parameters supplied before the quote. In the context of this question, the Talisman itself is being used as a weapon and the damage does apply to the attack.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
7 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
@T.J.L. what I'm trying into the I say here is that the damage comes after the attack.
$endgroup$
– NoOneIsHere
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
$begingroup$
And the querent is saying they have already decided that is not the case. They have decided it is part of the attack. This answer might be viable for the linked question, but here it is ignoring the explicitly provided context.
$endgroup$
– T.J.L.
4 mins ago
add a comment |
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%2f143133%2fcan-the-damage-from-a-talisman-of-pure-good-or-ultimate-evil-be-non-lethal%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