D&D 5E (2014) Defeating intangible creatures w/non-magical weapons

[abirdcall]

How do you handle this narratively?

I'm talking about creatures like ghosts and fire elementals.

In my games I describe it as the creatures having a sort of energy core that can be disrupted.

Visually I think of the creatures that are fought at the end of season 3 of Legion.

 

[Northern Phoenix]

The in-fiction logic behind melee weapons (both magic and non-magic) harming intangible creatures is, to me, the idea that repeated strain from disrupting their true/ideal/platonic form eventually causes the animating magic to fail. Magic weapons make this happen faster. I generally don't imagine them as having "cores" except in special cases where it's especially interesting.

 

[Guest 7030100]

For me, I suppose it varies creature to creature, and campaign to campaign.

Elementals have a sort of "heart" (like your "energy core", I imagine?) that's disruptable. The heart is effectively their spiritual connection to their plane, and harming it threatens the integrity of the creature's body.

Fire beings specifically could also be "worn" down as weapons absorb a bit of the creatures' essential heat. (Of course, this means the weapons heat up a bit, too.) Cold, windy creatures might suffer the opposite effect, warming up little by little with watch hit.

Ethereal beings I ususally envision as being harmed by the ethereal "shadows" of weapons. Slashes manifest as rips that "leak" a bit of essence that evaporates, while bludgeons could manifest as wavery or ripply impacts.

Shadow creatures are harmed less by the weapons themselves, and more by any light admitted when a weapon hits. The impact temporarily opens a hole allowing ambient light to burn the creature's innards.

 

[Quickleaf]

How do you handle this narratively?

I'm talking about creatures like ghosts and fire elementals.

In my games I describe it as the creatures having a sort of energy core that can be disrupted.

Visually I think of the creatures that are fought at the end of season 3 of Legion.

I break the rules.

When it comes to ghosts, I've found that a more narrative focused presentation (what it wants, what its fetter is, what its unique weakness is) is much more satisfying for my group. Dael Kingsmill did a really great video on ghosts, if you're interested in veering off the beaten path.

Basically, if it gets to the point where you can damage a ghost with a sword (even half-damage it), that ghost is starting to manifest a physical body. It might not "bleed", but wisps of it will be torn away, maybe some article of clothing like an earring or scabbard might clatter across the floor, and the ghost will flicker momentarily along with all the candles/torches in the room.

I haven't worked with elementals quite as much recently, but the one I did use and alter (water weird), I recall giving it immunity to non-magical bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage, halving its hit points, and inventing a couple unique vulnerabilities suiting the story.

 

[ko6ux]

I don't see where this is narratively a problem in my games. Non-corporeal beings in DND are usually able to interact with the physical world through some sort of manifestation. If a ghost can pick up an object and make it float through the air, or an elemental can open a door, then why wouldn't a physical object be able to strike them?

 

[Charlaquin]

Ethereal creatures take force damage when they end their turn inside a material object. I imagine passing weapons through their form being similar. It’s half damage because it’s a more brief disruption of their form than standing inside an object for six seconds. But it’s still enough to discorporate a portion of the ether that they’re comprised of.

 

[MarkB]

Undead have a connection to the material plane, even incorporeal undead - whether it's a ghost's unfinished business, or a spectre's simple hunger for mortal life. If they didn't have that connection, they wouldn't be undead - and so long as they do, they will still be at least somewhat susceptible to mortal weapons.

Fire elementals don't have an organic structure, but they do still have some cohesive form, and if that form is disrupted involuntarily, it can cause them to lose a small piece of themselves, becoming diminished as a result. Magical weapons cause a greater disruption.

 

[iserith]

I just say they're allergic to weapons from the corporeal realm.

 

[Shiroiken]

Fire elementals don't have an organic structure, but they do still have some cohesive form, and if that form is disrupted involuntarily, it can cause them to lose a small piece of themselves, becoming diminished as a result. Magical weapons cause a greater disruption.

This is how my group looks at it to. Things that lack a solid form still have to keep themselves intact. Most physical things don't affect them much, but magic tends to draw out more of the essence (assuming they have resistance).

 

[GMMichael]

If a ghost can pick up an object and make it float through the air, or an elemental can open a door, then why wouldn't a physical object be able to strike them?

In D&Dese, making an object float through the air is a spell-like ability. In this case: mage hand.

Physical objects don't hurt ghosts, magic does. Ghosts are no longer scary when you can just whack them with the candelabra that you were nervously skulking through your dark house with.

Fire elementals could have some sort of body beneath the flame. See Skyrim: fire atronachs. Kill one of these, and they leave a sort of rusted iron-looking husk behind. If you're fighting something that's pure flame, poking it with a stick doesn't make much sense.