36
\$\begingroup\$

When swallowed by a Giant Toad, you are Blinded and Restrained, both of which give you disadvantage on attacks.

However you also have "total cover against attacks and other effects outside the toad".

The Toad's eyes are outside the Toad, and I certainly don't see anything inside my own stomach. Doesn't this mean you are considered Unseen when swallowed?

The rules on Unseen Attackers and Targets (PHB, p. 194-195) state:

When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it.

Am I unseen while swallowed?

If this is true, then your disadvantage from being blinded and restrained and your advantage from being unseen cancel out, and an attack against the Toad from within has no advantage or disadvantage. Is this correct?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ And with that out of the way, Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already and see the help center or ask us here in the comments (use @ to ping someone) if you need more guidance. Good Luck and Happy Gaming! \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil Apr 8 at 9:39
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ And that's why a wise Evil Lord will populate his dungeons with invisible Giant Toads. \$\endgroup\$ – Emilio M Bumachar Apr 8 at 18:50
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ In case you don't know, a toad was born with the eyes inside the mouth; if you dare, google "toad with eyes in mouth" \$\endgroup\$ – coredump Apr 9 at 9:32
47
\$\begingroup\$

Neither advantage nor disadvantage

As you say, you have several sources of disadvantage and one source of advantage - being unseen. These cancel, leaving you with neither.

Even if you don’t particularly like this source of advantage, there is a strong argument for advantage from a non-conventional source: every way is toad. If you can just wiggle your sword a little or manage to get your Fire Bolt off, you are bound to hit toad.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ You can eat with the lights off - you know where your mouth is, and where your hand is, just not precisely where the end of the spoon is; but it's not like you're going to get yourself in the eye. \$\endgroup\$ – Ben Apr 9 at 3:53
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Also the toad probably has weaker skin on the inside than on the outside. \$\endgroup\$ – findusl Apr 9 at 8:17
  • 33
    \$\begingroup\$ every way is toad.. You're toadally surrounded, in fact. \$\endgroup\$ – Graham Apr 9 at 13:31
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @findusl: giant creatures that routinely eat whole animals without at least stunning them first (like a real world boa constrictor would) do need pretty tough innards, hence same AC makes sense. The claws of a jungle cat might not be as long as a sword, but still. I feel like it would be mechanically appropriate if there was a difference between piercing vs. bludgeoning weapons, with slashing somewhere in the middle, for this case, but DnD5e RAW keeps it simple. A DM might reasonably decide that blunt weapons don't get any advantage from this situation. \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Cordes Apr 9 at 16:23
25
\$\begingroup\$

Technically...

And it kinda hurts to say it. But the logic you've set up is correct: restrained gives disadvantage, but the Toad can't see you which is supposed to give you advantage. There isn't any kind of clause to say creatures don't need to see you if you are in their stomach. (Having this kind of detail to your rules very quickly make them long, complicated and incomprehensible.)

Instead, 5e has a clause for DMs to go "That makes no sense, you have disadvantage on that attack" and its called "Rule 0" - it is supposed to handle cases when the rules (as written) give ambiguous or ridiculous results, or when they don't align with the game you want to play.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ if it helps make it easier to swallow (lol cringe) I am asking this as a first time DM still planning the campaign and NOT as a player trying to rules lawyer. I read the Giant Toad stat block and thought it was silly to get disadvantage from blind or restrained because: 1.) even though you cant see, you cant really miss when you are surrounded by the target. and 2.) yes you are restrained by the cramped space but the Toad cant see the attack coming nor can it make any effort at all to avoid the attack. \$\endgroup\$ – Gamina Apr 8 at 9:59
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Gamina There you see how it comes down to DM and game you want to play. It may not see the attack but can definitely feel it, and whether its limitation to avoid the attack is greater that the attackers inability to do so I leave up to you. I have no problem with you (or anyone) going with the rules as written here. You do you, I might have done otherwise (I'm not sure). \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil Apr 8 at 10:05
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Gamina Once, as a part of the game I was loosely wrapped in layers of plastic and fishing net, and I had a pocket knife. It was quite hard to cut my way out in 3 minutes, even if I could slash through same wrapping in one stroke, when I was outside. Imagine having even longer and less handy sword while wrapped in thick muscle? \$\endgroup\$ – Revolver_Ocelot Apr 8 at 10:18
  • 9
    \$\begingroup\$ On the same token, you could also rule that "this is stupid, you have advantage on the attack because the frog has no real way to avoid getting stabbed by you". \$\endgroup\$ – Cubic Apr 8 at 11:18
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ @Cubic The old 3.5 Rule was: "The Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity." Wich is the 3.5 equivalent of "can not see the attacker". Wich in 5E is mapped to "Advantage for attacker". So there would at least be precdent for it in the rules. \$\endgroup\$ – Christopher Apr 8 at 12:13
3
\$\begingroup\$

You're correct. You're unseen, so you'd have advantage as a result, cancelling out with the disadvantage from being restrained.

If your DM suggests that this is ridiculous, remind them that the Giant Toad has zero way of avoiding the blow and that insides are typically more delicate than outsides.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Apr 9 at 8:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ill copy my other comment here. AC isn't just about being able to hit, its also about being able to do damage. Sure you can hit the guy in full plate but his armor deflects the blow. Same here sure you could hit the insides but can you get enough leverage to do anything? \$\endgroup\$ – Chris Apr 10 at 14:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'd argue you've got far more chance to do damage from inside than out. Yes you're in a cramped space causing you to be restrained, but that doesn't mean you can't start carving up the toad's innards. If it did, the stat block would state you were incapacitated or have some custom condition preventing you from attacking. Of course, if you're DMing and in your world giant toads have stomachs of steel that aren't easy to carve up, you may want to represent that with a different armour class. \$\endgroup\$ – Richard Campbell Apr 11 at 15:24
2
\$\begingroup\$

That's one of the situations where you as a DM are there to make a ruling. It's fuzzy by design, if you will. One can argue as you did and say "if you're swallowed, you're bound to it the thing that swallowed you, so adv&disadv should cancel each other out". Or one might say "The toad might not see the swalloed creature but it knows exactly where it is, so there's no advantage from being unseen, and since the toad is built to swallow creatures of your size it's innards are actually designed to withstand attacks from within, so you've got disadvantage on your attacks not because you might miss the toad, but because you might be unable to do damage to it". And you might even want to distinguish between the attack forms a swallowed creature might take. If there ever is a time where a dagger would be more advantageous than a longsword, it's when you're swallowed whole by some creature and you need to be able to deliver the most damage without being able to take big swings. The same can be said about firebolt and shocking grasp if you want. You're not able to have enough distance between you and the firebolt to not get burned yourself, but you can easily shock the the toad without being shocked yourself, because the nervous system will work as a lightning rod for you.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Please break this up into paragraphs for readability. \$\endgroup\$ – Purple Monkey Apr 9 at 21:55
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree, in a sense any animals has blindsight for things inside their mouths. you can't see it but you have direct sensory prescription of its location. its the reason you don't constantly bite your tongue. \$\endgroup\$ – John Apr 10 at 0:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Apr 11 at 7:32

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.