Does the Evard's Black Tentacles spell inflict lethal damage

[Caliban]

Default damage for grappling is nonlethal. If a grappling spell doesn't specify lethal, then it's nonlethal.

But feel free to nit-pick.

*shrug* Whatever.

 

[IcyCool]

Yes. For exactly the same reason as Caliban mentioned.

 

[Piratecat]

Wow, this may be the first time I've agreed with KD on a RAW ruling.

That being said, I'm just as happy to house rule it to lethal in my game. Less to keep track of in an already unweildy spell.

 

[Abraxas]

Default damage for spells is lethal.

Is this actually stated somewhere?
I was looking for just such a statement but have not found it yet.

 

[KarinsDad]

Is this actually stated somewhere?

Not TMK.

 

[Caliban]

Is this actually stated somewhere?
I was looking for just such a statement but have not found it yet.

By default, any damage is lethal unless stated otherwise. That's why there isn't a specific statement to that effect in the spell section.

That is why the Sap is specified as doing non-lethal damage, and why there is a rule for taking a -4 penalty to do non-lethal damage with melee weapons, and why there is a specific feat in the Complete Arcane to do non-lethal damage with certain spells.

Note that the spell in question goes to the trouble of lising a specific damage and type (1d6+4 bludgeoning damage). If was intended that the spell do non-lethal damage, it would say so.

 

[KarinsDad]

By default, any damage is lethal unless stated otherwise. That's why there isn't a specific statement to that effect in the spell section.

This is a fine claim, but where is this default rule in ANY section?

 

[Caliban]

This is a fine claim.

I'm glad you agree with me.

but where is this default rule in ANY section?

Try the combat section, under "damage".

 

[KarinsDad]

Try the combat section, under "damage".

I still do not see such a default damage rule.

However, I do see other rules that work together to indicate that grapples are, by default, nonlethal:

Certain attacks deal nonlethal damage.

...

Make an opposed grapple check as a free action. If you succeed, you and your target are now grappling, and you deal damage to the target as if with an unarmed strike.

...

All damage from unarmed strikes is nonlethal damage.

...

Once the tentacles grapple an opponent

I understand that most damaging spells default to lethal damage, but I do not see a rule that states that. And even if there were such a rule, there still is not an explicit rule within EBT that states that the normal state of nonlethal damage for a grapple is actually disregarded for EBT.

For that matter, there really are no explicit rules that Constrict is lethal damage that trumps the normal state of nonlethal damage for a grapple.

Both interpretations have valid RAW behind them. The issue becomes one of which RAW (and which interpretation of RAW) a given person wants to use.

 

[Infiniti2000]

By default, any damage is lethal unless stated otherwise. That's why there isn't a specific statement to that effect in the spell section.

I'll grant this because even though I see no explicit statement to that effect, I agree with it.

Note that the spell in question goes to the trouble of lising a specific damage and type (1d6+4 bludgeoning damage). If was intended that the spell do non-lethal damage, it would say so.

The spell also goes to the trouble of specifying that it grapples the opponent. I think that's a pretty good indicator that it deals nonlethal damage.