Elemental Adept and collateral damage

[BootStrapTommy]

Elemental Adept gives the caster the ability to bypass resistance. If the caster casts an area effect damage spell of their element, and are themselves resistant to that damage type, does their attack bypass their own resistance if they are in the blast radius?

[Ruslan]

"Spells you cast ignore resistance to damage of the chosen type."

Seems pretty straightforward to me. Bypassing resistance is not optional, you can't switch it off. That's the RAW, for what it's worth. In a practical game? Ask your DM.

[BootStrapTommy]

I am the DM, I'm the one having to make the ruling.

[Naanomi]

In general I try and make it that unless something is *supposed* to be a drawback it shouldn't be; so I would rule it doesn't negate your own resistance; however if RAW is your thing it probably would do so

[R.Shackleford]

I am the DM, I'm the one having to make the ruling.

5e is very, DM judgement fiat edition. Do you want it to work one way or the other in your game? That's your answer.

[BootStrapTommy]

I wanna know what you guys think. Hence why I asked.

[Demonic Spoon]

I'd say caster's choice, but for the casting of the spell. You can decide to turn off elemental adept when you cast a spell, but you cannot turn it off for the damage dealt to you while leaving it on for the damage dealt to enemies.

[Hawkstar]

I say 'Nope! Full damage if you can't exclude yourself!"

[Starsinger]

I would say, "Well, your fireballs are so potent that a red dragon feels them fully, why is your fire resistance somehow better?" and be done with it.

But if you wanted to look at it deeper, has a significant amount of their tactics prior to this been, "I aoe myself in the face because I have resistance, and everything around me does not."? Because if so, then you have to ask yourself if it's worth it to remove this tactic from their arsenal now that their spells pierce their own resistance.

For the record, I would still have them take full damage because, "I blow myself up" isn't the best tactic in the first place.

[BootStrapTommy]

The question came from the player himself at the end of the last session, when he was awarded Boots of the Winterland.

So far they have never even once AoE themselves. He just was curious if the option was now open even though he has Elemental Adept.

I honestly had to mull it over.

[brainface]

I would say an elemental adept has spent time/effort/character options on gaining more control over their element of choice, and therefore should be able to chose not to bypass resistances--potentially on party members as well, though that's a bit further afield. In addition--I don't think it's the best of feats, and I don't foresee this happening often, nor to great advantage, unless it's a party of tieflings constantly fighting fire genasai for some reason, so meh.

Also mages fireballing their feet is the best tactic. Not... most optimal, nor particularly wise, just best. :)

[BootStrapTommy]

I once incapacitated myself and all but the party cleric by smashing an entire Necklace of Fireball against a vampire I was grappling. Because Rule of Cool.

[DemonSlayer6]

The text states specifically that spells that inflict the chosen damage type bypass resistance. So I would say that the spell does bypass the caster's resistance if the caster is in the AoE.

However, Evocation Wizards get a special class ability called "Sculpt Spells" that specifically allows the caster to select targets that aren't affected by the spell. This is not a resistance, and so would be useful to take if your spellcaster plans to use himself as the center of his AoE attacks.

(Ninja'd) Also, however, the feat seems to indicate or intend for you to be able to control the magic better. Thus...Screw RAW; I would permit a character to choose if they want resistance to be bypassed or not.

[KorvinStarmast]

If I were voting here, DemonSlayer6's post has the best take on this question.

I also love the self immolation Rule of Cool from BootStrapTommy. Ages ago when we were fighting the Frost Giant Jarl, yes, in that ancient module, my monk had one of those "all of the necklace of fireball missiles went off" nova moments in the middle of a fight. Rule of cool, RIP Brother Ashes.

[HoarsHalberd]

I'd rule that anyone with the feat can choose whether a spell they cast of the requisite element bypasses resistances or not at the point of casting. So you can choose to cast a resistance bypassing fireball at the distant foe. Or you can choose to cast a normal one at your own feet.

[R.Shackleford]

I'd rule that anyone with the feat can choose whether a spell they cast of the requisite element bypasses resistances or not at the point of casting. So you can choose to cast a resistance bypassing fireball at the distant foe. Or you can choose to cast a normal one at your own feet.

This is probably the best way to do it, gives options and options are always a good thing.

It worked pretty well this way in 3e4e too.

[Kryx]

"Well, your fireballs are so potent that a red dragon feels them fully, why is your fire resistance somehow better?"
Agreed. If it pierces enemies it pierces your own as well.

[R.Shackleford]

Agreed. If it pierces enemies it pierces your own as well.

Isn't the typical response to this "because it's magic"?

[Kryx]

Isn't the typical response to this "because it's magic"?
You could choose to take that approach. I would not.

[R.Shackleford]

You could choose to take that approach. I would not.

Oh, me neither, however I would take the stance of "because this is fantasy and it's how I think it should work".

DM/player compromise should be encouraged.

[BootStrapTommy]

Ages ago when we were fighting the Frost Giant Jarl, yes, in that ancient module, my monk had one of those "all of the necklace of fireball missiles went off" nova moments in the middle of a fight. Rule of cool, RIP Brother Ashes. I too was a monk. The DM (interestingly also the player who asked me the OP question) loved the choice. He rewarded me with vampirism. Which is a nice unarmed damage boost for the level. Nastier considering I was an aarakocra...


In general I try and make it that unless something is *supposed* to be a drawback it shouldn't be; so I would rule it doesn't negate your own resistance; however if RAW is your thing it probably would do so RAW says yes, but I agree RAI probably meant no. Feats are a huge investment, and they are intended to be beneficial. Feels kinda wrong to me to punish for what's suppose to be a reward.

[VoxRationis]

If your wizard had neither fire resistance nor a resistance-bypassing ability, and fireballed himself, he would take damage, correct? So clearly, barring an ability that says otherwise (i.e., Sculpt Spell), he can't alter part of a fireball spell (or any AoE spells, except those that say otherwise) in order to protect himself. Hence, I would say he could not avoid bypassing his own resistance.

[BootStrapTommy]

He's a Favored Soul. So Careful Spell was an option, just not one he planned on...

[PoeticDwarf]

I would say, "Well, your fireballs are so potent that a red dragon feels them fully, why is your fire resistance somehow better?" and be done with it.

But if you wanted to look at it deeper, has a significant amount of their tactics prior to this been, "I aoe myself in the face because I have resistance, and everything around me does not."? Because if so, then you have to ask yourself if it's worth it to remove this tactic from their arsenal now that their spells pierce their own resistance.

For the record, I would still have them take full damage because, "I blow myself up" isn't the best tactic in the first place.

Agreed, except that a red dragon has immunity to fire damage so still doesn't get damage.