10
\$\begingroup\$

Spider Climb allows a PC to walk, using just their feet (no hands) up vertical surfaces and on ceilings. It is heavily implied that the user's feet have some magical attraction to the surface they are walking on. Does this grant any type of resistance to the effect of spells, like Gust of Wind, that move the PC against their will? What about a PC that is climbing on the back of a large creature?

RAW text of the spell states that it enables the PC to walk up walls and on ceilings - are the logical implications of this strong enough to infer the above other uses of the spell under RAW alone?

\$\endgroup\$
17
\$\begingroup\$

RAW, spells do only what they say. Per Jeremy Crawford:

A spell's text details the spell's effects—the only thing the spell does. Any additional effects are up to the DM.

Twitter

Since this comes from Jeremy Crawford, it counts as an official ruling. You can also find more quotes and discussion about this concept at this question.

Spider Climb does not explicitly grant any sort of resistance to effects trying to move the person, so RAW it does not.

However, both Jeremy Crawford and the core rulebooks leaves room for the DM to determine "additional effects", and this would absolutely be a reasonable thing to allow as a DM. It's important to note that making such a ruling is entirely within the rules - the spell does not explicitly grant this resistance, but the rules do explicitly allow the DM to allow additional affect like this one. This is because it would be impossible to include all reasonable special cases in a spell description. Instead, DnD explicitly gives the DM the ability to arbitrate edge cases like this in a reasonable manner in order to keep the rules as concise as possible.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree raw it does not. I personally would rule that it gives you advantage on the save (not immunity), because superman can be scraped of of a building, it's just harder to remove him. \$\endgroup\$ – Garret Gang May 14 '18 at 13:32
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The question was about an RAW interpretation, which is what I answered. I also addressed the possibility of a DM allowing additional effects like the one you propose, but discussion of specific mechanics for that effect is probably outside the scope of the question. \$\endgroup\$ – Dacromir May 15 '18 at 6:56

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.