Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 2859980" data-attributes="member: 2011">That is one difference.This is a difference between EBT and other spells, not between EBT and grappling.A second difference.In this case, the spell explicitly states that the creatures are grappling. Hence, the grapple rules are used unless otherwise specified.Again, using the quote above, it indicates only one check (the word check is singular). This is a third change from the normal grapple check rules.Just because there are differences does not mean that you throw out all of the grappling rules. You just throw out ones which the spell indicates are different.Now, an argument could be made that Bludgeoning damage is not Nonlethal Bludgeoning damage. However, unlike the other three differences that you have indicated, bludgeoning damage is not a change from the normal grappling rules since the normal grappling rules do bludgeoning damage. So, this is not an explicit difference, unlike the other three you quoted.Basically, it comes down to "spells are lethal damage unless indicated otherwise" versus "grapples are nonlethal damage unless indicated otherwise". The reason the grapple rules trumps is because the spell is indicated otherwise, it is indicated as a grapple.The spell is extremely potent and deadly for a fourth level spell with the damage being lethal damage. Given this, it seems logical to interpret based on the normal grapple rules as opposed to some new rule (EBT does lethal damage, even though grappling does not and even though the spell does not actually state that) that is not explicitly indicated.If grapples did stun damage as well, so would the spell. For the spell to change something in the normal grapple rules, it does have to explicitly state it.</blockquote>

Verification