7
\$\begingroup\$

End to Strife is a spell on the Apostle of Peace PrC spell list that deals damage to creatures who make attacks in its area, yet an Apostle of Peace is forbidden by their vows from dealing damage.

Does the fact that the target has to consciously make the decision to attack shift the responsibility for their damage from the Apostle of Peace to themselves?

\$\endgroup\$
7
\$\begingroup\$

Apostle of Peace (or anyone else with the same Vow feats) is forbidden from dealing real damage to living creatures, and there is no exception for conditional spells.

However this isn't a dysfunction, because End to Strife has a nonlethal mode, and both Vow of Peace and Vow of Nonviolence allow nonlethal damage.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Don't know how I missed that! \$\endgroup\$ – Cellheim Feb 24 '18 at 20:18
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ By 'isn't a dysfunction' you mean 'is no more dysfunctional than taking Vow of Peace/Nonviolence in the first place', right? \$\endgroup\$ – the dark wanderer Feb 24 '18 at 21:53
  • \$\begingroup\$ Shun the non-believer! \$\endgroup\$ – Cellheim Feb 24 '18 at 22:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ I would add that as the OP asked, the burden of responsibility lies with the creature making the attack, not the apostle. The apostle is no more responsible for somebody taking damage by willfully engaging in attacks within the protected area than they are responsible for a person throwing themselves under the hooves of their horse. \$\endgroup\$ – Lino Frank Ciaralli Feb 25 '18 at 3:55
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @LinoFrankCiaralli That sounds it could be the start of a fine standalone answer. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Feb 25 '18 at 15:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.