D&D 5E Is it houseruling to let a torch set fire to things?

[pemerton]

sunburst is an instantaneous spell. The dispelling of magical darkness is called out because that's a lasting effect of the spell. After the instant flash from sunburst whatever natural light conditions prevailed would resume - including natural darkness if the area was otherwise unlit.

That is all interpretation, though.

Similarly, some of us think that the logic of fireball calling out the ignition of non-worn, non-carried items is to make it clear that the affect on those objects is not governed by the general rules for damaging objects.

 

[pemerton]

Natural darkness isn't dispelled. It's only interrupted for a very brief instant and then it comes right back.

How do you know this about natural darkness? The spell says nothing about it, and by your "preclusion" principle only darkness caused by spells is affected.

 

[pemerton]

[MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], [MENTION=61529]seebs[/MENTION]:

You seem to be assuming that "dispel" in the Sunburst spell description means "dispel magical effect". I think [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION]'s point is that "dispel" is more naturally read as having its ordinary meaning (to drive off or bring to an end). In this sense, Sunburst will dispel natural darkness, if only for a moment. Which appears to contradict the "exclusionary"/"preclusionary" principle

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Hriston]

Since the spell does not create a specific rule about damaging objects, the general rule would apply. Congrats. You just found the one spell that can damage worn items without a house rule.

Not the only one:

FIRE BOLT

EVOCATION CANTRIP

Casting Time:
1 action

Range:
120 feet

Components:
V, S

Duration:
Instantaneous

You hurl a mote of fire at a creature or object within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, the target takes 1d10 fire damage. A flammable object hit by this spell ignites if it isn’t being worn or carried.

Firebolt targets creatures and objects. The target takes fire damage on a hit. If the target is an object that isn't being worn or carried, it bursts into flames. If it is being worn or carried it still takes fire damage. The so-called exclusionary language does not prevent the excluded objects from taking damage.

 

[Hriston]

Do you think that most people would view a fireball enabling the caster to read the minds of the targets to be a house rule?

It depends on how they define what a house-rule is.

 

[Hriston]

I don't shout. When I use all caps I'm just placing stress on those words.

Well, it looks like you're shouting.

LOL Are you seriously saying that having fireball do the laundry doesn't add anything to the spell? You sir are not arguing in good faith.

I'm just pointing out that the spell doesn't say it doesn't do your laundry.

 

[Hriston]

Restrictive. It restricts to unattended objects. This is backed up by Jeremy Crawford saying flat out that fireball does not affect worn objects.

He didn't say it can't, just that it doesn't. If you were trying to settle things on this thread, you asked the wrong question.

 

[Hriston]

The rules are not irrelevant. Despite the initial target being a point of origin, all creatures subject to fireball are also targets. The specific rule of fireball says so.

I think you should distinguish between the way the rules use the verb targets (as in fireball targets a point of origin), and the noun target (as in a target makes a saving throw).

In any case, it specifies how it targets objects, and it specifies unattended.

It doesn't say anything about targeting objects, only that they burst into flames.

 

[Hriston]

That was before I realized that the specific targeting rules, which supersede the general object damaging rules, solved everything. Those specific targeting rules state unequivocally that the spell will tell you whether it can target objects. If a spell doesn't tell you it can target worn objects, it can't. Fireball can only target unattended objects as those are the only ones specifically mentioned by it.

The targeting rules and the spell fireball tell us the spell targets a point of origin. It doesn't tell us it targets unattended objects, only that they ignite.

Um, no. I've only been saying the exact opposite for 16 pages now. I'm saying that since the rules don't explicitly target worn objects, you are not departing from the rules by not targeting worn objects. You are simply going by RAW and adding nothing else.

You also said if you add healing to the spell's effects there is no departure.

That spell which lasts only an instant is not going to dispel any sort of non-magical darkness. Ever. The "instant" it's over, the darkness will return. Only magical darkness will fail to return once dispelled.

If I dispel your fears, they can still come back to haunt you.