The Elements: What is better?

[CyberThread]

Have we any information, besides thunder, and force, on what will proably be the best damage type this edition?

[Yorrin]

A quick browse of the existing monsters shows fire and poison as the most commonly resisted. I'm going to guess radiant and force as the elements to go for, in terms of offense.

[Fwiffo86]

If poison is not resisted automatically I think its the best. A poisoned creature has disadvantage on every check they make, every attack roll, every save throw, etc.

[Mikeavelli]

Keep in mind there's a feat that lets you ignore resistance for a single element, and other quite good bonuses. If you're going to specialize in an element, you should really take that, and you can ignore monsters with resistance, and just focus on how many creatures are outright immune.

[DrLemniscate]

Fire might be the most frequent damage type that Wizards / Sorcerers have access to. So if you are trying to stay in a single element, they might give you the most flexibility.

Radiant is mostly used by Clerics / Paladins, while Force is going to mostly come in the form of Eldritch Blast. Some Lightning spells are only for clerics, and some Poison spells are only for Rangers / Druids.

However, you will also run in to resistance to fire the most. So make sure you pick up the feat to ignore resistance (but not immunity!).

You'll still have a lot of spells left to know / transcribe after grabbing everything fire, so you might want to focus these left over spells on a second damage type, after you pick up utility or out of combat spells. Ideally, this would be the damage type that you use when a creature is immune to your primary damage type. Maybe even try to go somewhat opposite in case they have other immunities / resistances.

[Edge of Dreams]

Radiant is probably going to be really really good, due to being rarely resisted and often a vulnerability of undead and other such evil things. However, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks don't get much access to Radiant damage. The next best element for them (especially if taking that one elemental specialist feat or being a Dragon Sorcerer) is probably Lightning, given that it has a decent number of good spells - Fire has more, but Cold and Acid hardly have any.

[DrLemniscate]

For Sorcerer Dragons, Lightning will probably be best.

Fire has more spells/options, and therefore more utility, but then you risk friendly fire or having to worry about positioning. Lightning is a bit easier to work around friendlies.

For this reason, School of Evocation Wizards are better off going with Fire, since they can negate the risk of friendly fire. Of course then, you risk lighting the environment on fire.

[Steel Mirror]

If poison is not resisted automatically I think its the best. A poisoned creature has disadvantage on every check they make, every attack roll, every save throw, etc.
Poison as a damage type and poisoned, the condition are separate, aren't they? You can take poison damage, but it doesn't inflict the poisoned condition unless the effect specifically states that it is so, as far as I can tell. Likewise there might be effects that could impose the poisoned condition that don't actually deal any damage at all (I would have food poisoning work something like that). Or did I miss a rule somewhere?

[Surrealistik]

Radiant, Psychic, Force and Thunder will probably be the best in roughly that order based on the Alpha closed playtest monster manual.

Poison, Fire, Cold and Lightning will probably be the worst in roughly that order based on the Alpha closed playtest monster manual.

[DrLemniscate]

Radiant, Psychic, Force and Thunder will probably be the best in roughly that order based on the Alpha closed playtest monster manual.

Poison, Fire, Cold and Lightning will probably be the worst in roughly that order based on the Alpha closed playtest monster manual.

This requires some context from the OP.

Why focus on a damage type? If you are a Dragon Sorcerer, or a caster taking the Elemental Adept feat, the quantity of spells of an element need to be taken in to consideration.

For example, Radiant damage is a great damage type, but is usually only available to Clerics and Paladins, and can be difficult to benefit from focusing on that damage type. iirc, even Light Clerics don't get any extra effects from casting Radiant damage spells (except adding their spell modifier to the cantrip).

Lightning might get resisted a lot, but is more available to Sorcerers or Wizards. Any resistances can be overcome with the feat, and can be good for sculpting AoE spells around friendlies if you don't have the School of Evocation feature. Tempest clerics can also capitalize on this damage type.

[cobaltstarfire]

Lightning might get resisted a lot, but is more available to Sorcerers or Wizards. Any resistances can be overcome with the feat, and can be good for sculpting AoE spells around friendlies if you don't have the School of Evocation feature. Tempest clerics can also capitalize on this damage type.


I'm not sure on the tempest Cleric, even though most of the domain abilities deal with lightning, most of their domain spells do thunder damage.

Then again once you hit level 8 you get to add lightning damage to all your melee attacks...

I suppose having their abilities doing lightning, and taking elemental adept (lightning) leaves it where the cleric can fall back onto their thunder spells if they run into a monster with immunity...unless monsters with lightning immunity also often have thunder immunity...

Edit: actually does Elemental Adept actually apply to the various abilities Tempest clerics have? The description says that it works for damage rolled on spells of the chosen type. Wouldn't that make thunder a better choice for a tempest cleric?

[Fralex]

Boomerang. Boomerang is the best element.

[rlc]

Poison as a damage type and poisoned, the condition are separate, aren't they? You can take poison damage, but it doesn't inflict the poisoned condition unless the effect specifically states that it is so, as far as I can tell. Likewise there might be effects that could impose the poisoned condition that don't actually deal any damage at all (I would have food poisoning work something like that). Or did I miss a rule somewhere?

you can be poisoned without taking poison damage (like if you're drunk or something), but i don't know if you can take poison damage without becoming poisoned. i guess it makes sense.

[DrLemniscate]

you can be poisoned without taking poison damage (like if you're drunk or something), but i don't know if you can take poison damage without becoming poisoned. i guess it makes sense.

I think some effects deal poison damage, then provoke a saving throw against being poisoned.

[Yorrin]

I think some effects deal poison damage, then provoke a saving throw against being poisoned.

Take a look at the imp from the PHB. Tail attack does some piercing damage, and then there's a save vs poison damage. No talk of being poisoned as a status effect there, so it's definitely possible to have the damage without the condition.

[mabriss lethe]

p.196 in the PG states:

Different attacks, damaging spells, and other harmful
effects deal different types o f damage. Damage types
have no rules of their own, but other rules, such as
damage resistance, rely on the types.
emphasis mine.

It's a pretty clear "No." The poison damage type does not automatically inflict the Poisoned condition. Damage types are just tags that other rules key off of.

[DeAnno]

Ray of Sickness vs. Poison Spray is a clear example of one thing doing Poison damage with a save for Poisoned condition, and the other thing just doing Poison damage.