-1
\$\begingroup\$

This question already has an answer here:

Heavily related to my previous question (possibly a duplicate in a way) heat metal states:

If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it, the creature must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or drop the object if it can. If it doesn't drop the object, it has disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks until the start of your next turn...

If you are suffering disadvantage from holding a weapon affected by heat metal, does dropping the weapon remove the disadvantage or does the phrase "If it doesn't drop the object" only refer to the possibility of dropping it at the time of the casting?

\$\endgroup\$

marked as duplicate by V2Blast dnd-5e Jul 25 at 21:53

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

1
\$\begingroup\$

It refers to dropping it anytime the damage occurs and the Constitution saving throw is failed (emphasis added):

Choose a manufactured metal object, such as a metal weapon or a suit of heavy or medium metal armor, that you can see within range. You cause the object to glow red-hot. Any creature in physical contact with the object takes 2d8 fire damage when you cast the spell. Until the spell ends, you can use a bonus action on each of your subsequent turns to cause this damage again.

If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it, the creature must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or drop the object if it can. If it doesn't drop the object, it has disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks until the start of your next turn.

As I understand it, if the Constitution save is failed, the creature must drop the object if possible. If the object cannot be dropped, then disadvantage comes into play. If the save is passed, the creature does not have to drop the object and does not suffer disadvantage.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ For clarification, you believe that if a target succeeds on the saving throw they do not suffer disadvantage? Even though it says that if you don't drop it you have disadvantage? \$\endgroup\$ – Medix2 Jul 25 at 19:58
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I believe so. I think the Constitution save determines whether the creature is required to drop it and the disadvantage is a consequence of not being able to fulfill that requirement, rather than a consequence of not dropping it period. Granted this is all RAI, not RAW, but I see the saving throw as a creature steeling itself against the heated metal. Essentially, if it's strong enough to not drop the object to begin with, it should be able to use it without issue... \$\endgroup\$ – Soulis Jul 25 at 20:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Medix2 I hadn't considered it before, but it actually is a valid reading to interpret the last sentence as a continuation of the consequences for failing the saving throw. Of course it's also equally valid to read it as an independent sentence that applies regardless of the result of the saving throw. It's unfortunately ambiguous. \$\endgroup\$ – Ryan Thompson Jul 25 at 20:04
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That situation is ambiguous as written also and would be up to interpretation too. Thinking narratively again, I can see it argued that since the creature is relieved of the item, it no longer causes them an issue so no disadvantage. But it could also be viewed that the pain caused still lingers for the turn, so there would be disadvantage. \$\endgroup\$ – Soulis Jul 25 at 20:35
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, I think that'd be fine. The big issue with the spell comes from how ambiguous it is, so I think it'll boil down to the DM. \$\endgroup\$ – Soulis Jul 25 at 20:36

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