D&D 5E Should physical damage caused by spells bypas DR/magic?

[Zandos]

Hello, sorry if posting in wrong place.
We're playing Out of Abyss campaing, and I'm playing a druid.
At last session, we fought some Hezrou and troglodyte-like demons, and I casted one of spells from Book of lost spells supplement, that was dealing AoE bludgeoning damage, earthburst, if I remember right, and DM said, that it gets reduced by /magic DR.

Is this how it should work by the rules?
Sure, I know, DM can change anything at will, but that's not the point, I'm just asking if that's how it works (and if it does, wow, I don't even know which spells are worth memorizing anymore).

 

[Shiroiken]

First of all, any attack that is generated by a spell is considered magical (per Sage Advice), thus Earthburst does deal magical damage. However, if this is Bludgeoning damage and the target has Bludgeoning Resistance, the damage will be halved regardless of the source, unless the creature's Resistance mechanic specially says so.

Second, by normal rules there is no DR, only Resistance. Assuming that's what you mean, instead of a DM houserule, Magic Resistance does not actually Half Damage, but grants Advantage on Saving Throws instead (it was a poor wording decision by WotC). There is nothing in the normal rules that halves all magical damage, but your DM could easily add something in.

 

[Leatherhead]

According to the Monster Manual Errata:

Vulnerabilities, Resistances, and Immunities (p. 8). The second and third sentences now read as follows: “Particular creatures are even resistant or immune to damage from nonmagical attacks (a magical attack is an attack delivered by a spell, a magic item, or another magical source). In addition, some creatures are immune to certain conditions.”

That said, I haven't actually looked at the resistances of the Hesrou, so it's stat block could be weird.

 

[Blue]

In Sage Advice they talk about a related case.

Here’s a simple fix to use until the Monster Manual errata is released: whenever a stat block refers to resistance or immunity to bludgeoning damage from nonmagical weapons, read that last part as “nonmagical weapon attacks.”

This suggests that Resistance to Slashing/Piercing/Bludgeoning is only to damage of that type from nonmagical weapon attacks.

Since a spell isn't a nonmagic weapon attack, Resistance wouldn't apply.

 

[Zandos]

Thanks for replies, I'm gonna clarify now.

I'm not very experienced in 5e, I'm more experienced in 3rd, so, I still use 3rd naming.

Anyway, I attaced group of demonical troglodytes (champions of something, DM says, they're made for campaing (out of abyss)), and he rolled their save (with 1 dice for all for convinience). They rolled high enough, and halved damage, then resistance to nonmagical damage halved it again.
When witchhunter and rogue were hitting them with magical axe and magic scimitars, and my summoned fire elemental was attacking them in melee, they were taking normal damage (I swapped to spamming sunbeam, despite drow rogue whining that he must make saves vs blindess, not my fault he don't have con save prof ;p)

 

[Shiroiken]

Thanks for replies, I'm gonna clarify now.

I'm not very experienced in 5e, I'm more experienced in 3rd, so, I still use 3rd naming.

It happens

BTW, welcome to 5E!

Anyway, I attaced group of demonical troglodytes (champions of something, DM says, they're made for campaing (out of abyss)), and he rolled their save (with 1 dice for all for convinience). They rolled high enough, and halved damage, then resistance to nonmagical damage halved it again.
When witchhunter and rogue were hitting them with magical axe and magic scimitars, and my summoned fire elemental was attacking them in melee, they were taking normal damage (I swapped to spamming sunbeam, despite drow rogue whining that he must make saves vs blindess, not my fault he don't have con save prof ;p)

Since the bludgeoning damage came from a spell, it was a magical effect and should have avoided the "Resistance to non-magical Bludgeoning Damage." However, as you noted in your OP, the DM has final say (even if it goes against the rules in the book). I'd talk to him about it away from the table so you can avoid confusion in later sessions.

 

[Valetudo]

It happens

BTW, welcome to 5E!


Since the bludgeoning damage came from a spell, it was a magical effect and should have avoided the "Resistance to non-magical Bludgeoning Damage." However, as you noted in your OP, the DM has final say (even if it goes against the rules in the book). I'd talk to him about it away from the table so you can avoid confusion in later sessions.

No, rules clarifications like this should be solved or atleast discussed in front of the group. I say this as a dm. If I make a judgement call during a session, I will look up the rules afterwards and explain it next session.

 

[Shiroiken]

No, rules clarifications like this should be solved or atleast discussed in front of the group. I say this as a dm. If I make a judgement call during a session, I will look up the rules afterwards and explain it next session.

As a DM, I disagree. If a player has an issue with a ruling, airing it with everyone often just starts arguments and makes it take longer to resolve. Once I work out the issue with a player (or group of players), I can then bring it to the rest of the group, and unless there is significant opposition (which I've only experienced once in several decades), the game goes on without problem. In the one case, it did cause a problem and ruin that session, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

I've been trapped in such an open airing when I could tell that no one other than the player and the DM actually cared, and it sucked for all involved (especially when the player kept trying to get us to join with him). I've also been the DM when a simple issue was blown out of proportion when a player disagreed with a ruling of mine, and after I eventually agreed with him, a another player jumped in because he was angry at the first player and wanted to irritate him (I was unaware of this at the time). It's far easier to have a conversation if you eliminate extra elements.

 

[Zandos]

I dont like arguing about rulesmid game, as it wastes time, especially mid combat when people are waiting for their turns.
As I dont know 5e much I prefered to find forum of people who do and ask their opinion, and show it to GM (hi Darklord).
Thanks for replies!