Timeline for Can the spell Spirit Shroud heal a zombie?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 21, 2022 at 10:18 | comment | added | Matthieu | Another thing I forgot to point out, although minor, is that the spell does not directly inflict necrotic damage, and the question was about the spell healing an undead with no mention of attacking them for the "extra damage" feature. This is the main reason I did not focus on necrotic damage as a main thing in my answer, but rather in the spell description itself. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 10:12 | history | edited | Matthieu | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Jun 21, 2022 at 10:09 | comment | added | Matthieu | @doppelgreener this case of spells not doing what they say they do would be right for other editions. However, the only edition mentionned here is 5e, in which undeads do not have any particular interaction with necrotic damage (which lead me to homebrew). My intention with this header was not to be condescending, but to affirm what is likely known as the "golden rule" of 5e spell interpretation. Then again, english is not my native language, so if there is any way to rephrase my answer so it sounds less condescending, while keeping the emphasis on that rule, I'll gladly use it instead. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:44 | history | edited | Nobody the Hobgoblin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
spelling, pluralization, minor readability
|
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:41 | comment | added | doppelgreener | That's not what I mean—the DM has not set up homebrew rules at all. The question claims no such thing. But in prior editions, undeath-type spells would deal a particular damage type, and that damage type would heal undead, which is a straightforward case of spells not doing merely what they say they do. This makes that header somewhat tonedeaf to the situation. They don't need to be told that the spell only does what it says, which is somewhat condescending here—they need to be told there's no side-effects of the damage type. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:33 | vote | accept | Vrastyr | ||
| Jun 22, 2022 at 10:05 | |||||
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:31 | history | edited | Matthieu | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 319 characters in body
|
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:26 | comment | added | Matthieu | @doppelgreener in such a situation, we're entering homebrew territory, which cannot really be solved outside of "the DM decides what happens". That is why I'm answering the question assuming we're talking about RAW. I will nevertheless edit my question to reflect your comment. | |
| Jun 21, 2022 at 9:22 | comment | added | doppelgreener | I'm not sure the "spells only do what they say they do" header is appropriate here given we're operating on a background where energy types can in fact do things the spell didn't say. | |
| S Jun 21, 2022 at 9:06 | review | First answers | |||
| Jun 21, 2022 at 12:00 | |||||
| S Jun 21, 2022 at 9:06 | history | answered | Matthieu | CC BY-SA 4.0 |