you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 5 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I think nonliving creatures may be more specific versions of objects then, since I couldn’t find any reference of creatures not being considered objects (because who would even say that, it should be obvious if you use your brain), but it also means that if a spell or ability only allows you to target or create objects and has no specification in regards to creatures, undead and constructs are valid targets by RAW.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    undead and constructs are valid targets by RAW.

    I mean, if you follow the logic, undead are "animated corpses" and constructs are "animated objects", sooo.... Sure, the "Rule of Cool" wins my vote on this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    Yes. That's the point. But you don't need rule of cool for this. You just need to use at least a single braincell to apply RAI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Gonna disagree, rule of cool is the deciding factor between the RAI vs RAW interpretations.

    I wouldn't say it's RAI, spells or abilities meant for inanimate objects typically don't include undead under colloquial interpretations but it is definitely RAW using very technical interpretations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment