The warding bond spell description states:

While the target is within 60 feet of you, it gains a +1 bonus to AC and saving throws, and it has resistance to all damage. Also, each time it takes damage, you take the same amount of damage.

If you cast the spell on another creature and then that creature is damaged, what type is the damage you take? If the target receives 12 slashing damage, do you get 6 slashing damage, or just 6 (untyped) damage?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Related question and answer is here, I am not sure if this is a dupe or not. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 13 '16 at 15:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast, I read that one before creating this question, it does not really mention damage type \$\endgroup\$ – András Dec 13 '16 at 16:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Miniman's answer discusses damage type, and the lack of specificity, but I concur with your "it's not a dupe" point. VtC removed. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 13 '16 at 16:42

Damage is never "untyped":

Different attacks, damaging spells, and other harmful effects deal different types of damage. (p. 75 Basic Rules)

Jeremy Crawford confirmed this:

All damage has a type. #DnD

Since it cannot be "untyped" and there is no basis for assuming the type would change, it is the type(s) of the original damage.

The damage types are Acid, Bludgeoning, Cold, Fire, Force, Lightning, Necrotic, Piercing, Poison, Psychic, Radiant, Slashing, and Thunder. (p. 75 Basic Rules)

| improve this answer | |
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is an important distinction from previous editions, notably 3.5 and PFRPG, which did have untyped damage. \$\endgroup\$ – LegendaryDude Dec 13 '16 at 20:13
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ DaleM - I added page references and the types. Hope that's OK with you. Taking your approach makes sense of J. Crawford's text that is cited in the other answer. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 13 '16 at 21:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ This answers it way better than mine. \$\endgroup\$ – Jeff Dec 23 '16 at 19:38

This answer from Jeremy Crawford implies that the type carries over for purposes of resistance, if the resistance would still take effect. Though, even it isn't entirely clear on the matter.

If the cleric has resistance, nothing in the rules says it doesn't work.


| improve this answer | |

RAW? I can't seem to find anything definitive. Looking at the spell, and the nature of it, I assume you take the same type of damage. Again, I don't see anything in the rules.

This, like every ambiguity, comes down to the DM.

Thematically, you have this magical bond and as your target/ally takes a sword across the face, you feel the slash across your face as well.

The only case I could make for it being just straight damage (other than the DM just wants that) is that in the spell, it says:

While the target is within 60 feet of you, it gains a +1 bonus to AC and saving throws, and it has resistance to all damage.

As for resistance, The target resists the damage type because of the spell. You are hit with half of that damage. Resistances don't stack (see other answers and PHB 197), but since this is brand new damage to you, you have not resisted it yet. If you are resistant to that type, you take 1/4 of the original total. If you are immune to it, you take zero.


  1. Ogre hits your ally with Warding Bond for 32 bludgeoning damage.
  2. Your ally is resistant to that damage, so he takes 16 bludgeoning damage.
  3. You take the same amount of damage, 16 bludgeoning damage. Since you are a barbarian wizard, you are resistant to that damage while raging. You cast the spell then raged, thus are resistant. You take 8 bludgeoning damage.
| improve this answer | |

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.