Can you use Thaumaturgy to hit someone with a door?












14












$begingroup$


My group was in this cottage gathering clues when someone kicked open the door while wielding a battle axe. I as a cleric reacted to this by using my action in order to make the now open door slam shut on his face pushing him outside using thaumaturgy:




You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




So what happens to the guy who had kicked the door?



The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
    $endgroup$
    – AntiDrondert
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
    $endgroup$
    – Maiko Chikyu
    2 days ago
















14












$begingroup$


My group was in this cottage gathering clues when someone kicked open the door while wielding a battle axe. I as a cleric reacted to this by using my action in order to make the now open door slam shut on his face pushing him outside using thaumaturgy:




You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




So what happens to the guy who had kicked the door?



The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
    $endgroup$
    – AntiDrondert
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
    $endgroup$
    – Maiko Chikyu
    2 days ago














14












14








14


1



$begingroup$


My group was in this cottage gathering clues when someone kicked open the door while wielding a battle axe. I as a cleric reacted to this by using my action in order to make the now open door slam shut on his face pushing him outside using thaumaturgy:




You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




So what happens to the guy who had kicked the door?



The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




My group was in this cottage gathering clues when someone kicked open the door while wielding a battle axe. I as a cleric reacted to this by using my action in order to make the now open door slam shut on his face pushing him outside using thaumaturgy:




You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




So what happens to the guy who had kicked the door?



The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.







dnd-5e spells cantrips






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









V2Blast

20.6k359131




20.6k359131










asked 2 days ago









Maiko ChikyuMaiko Chikyu

6,03441761




6,03441761








  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
    $endgroup$
    – AntiDrondert
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
    $endgroup$
    – Maiko Chikyu
    2 days ago














  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
    $endgroup$
    – AntiDrondert
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
    $endgroup$
    – NautArch
    2 days ago










  • $begingroup$
    No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
    $endgroup$
    – Maiko Chikyu
    2 days ago








4




4




$begingroup$
Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
$endgroup$
– AntiDrondert
2 days ago




$begingroup$
Was that a readied action to someone opening a door? Were you in combat?
$endgroup$
– AntiDrondert
2 days ago












$begingroup$
I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
$endgroup$
– NautArch
2 days ago




$begingroup$
I'm still unclear as to the initiative order sequence of events. You say you won initiative, but that they open the door first which allowed you to cast thaumaturgy to close it. So did you ready action expecting them to open it?
$endgroup$
– NautArch
2 days ago












$begingroup$
No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
$endgroup$
– Maiko Chikyu
2 days ago




$begingroup$
No. The dungeon master told us the guy kicked the door open and he was brandishing an axe and we should roll initiative. I won the initiative and i cast Thaumaturgy.
$endgroup$
– Maiko Chikyu
2 days ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















16












$begingroup$

The rules don't say, thus it is up to the DM



Thaumaturgy only has this to say about the door closing effect:




You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




Now, 5e spells are designed to do only the things that they say in the spell description. However, in this case, that doesn't really help settle the dilemma. Does the door shut, regardless of obstacles because the spell says that the door shuts? Or will obstacles prevent the door from shutting because there is nothing to indicate that the door slamming shut is in any way immune to the effects of normal physics with respect to things blocking it?



The thing is, the rules don't say. And either ruling, when applied uniformly, can lead to nonsensical results. For example, the door flinging enormous boulders out of the way to close.



And that is another thing 5e spells are designed for. Many spells are written in language that purposefully doesn't try to cover every detail or circumstance instead choosing to leave it up to the DM to adjudicate the results in those cases.



This is one of those cases. Ask your DM.



Reasonable ruling: it acts like a normal door slammed by a normal person



The way I would rule it at my table is that the door is not imbued with any kind of supernatural strength, but instead is simply closed as if I had slammed it myself.



So, what would happen to the guy in the door? It would depend on the exact circumstances of where they where, but if they were in enough to block the door, likely the only thing it would do to them is stub their toe or bruise their nose (not enough to do HP damage) just as a normal slammed door would do and the door would remain ajar.



This is my ruling that I would probably make a my table. It makes sense to me because we all know how doors normally work and thus it makes it easy to keep my rulings consistent and reasonable.



Your DM should consider what option is best fit for their table that will make sense to them and maximise fun.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    6












    $begingroup$

    Not much happens to the guy in the door



    As spells only do what they say they do, what happens when you try to slam the door shut with someone standing in them? The door does not shut. Will it be painful for them? Maybe. Will it do any damage? No, the spell would say so. Will it smack into their face? Depends on where they stand – I would presume that after kicking the door open, they are well on the way through that door. Would it have any mechanical effect if it did? No, see above. (I assume the door opens into the room; in any case the it may also be destroyed by the aforementioned kicking in which case there is not much to use the spell on.)



    Obviously, this is a rather strict, RAW reading. Your DM may rule otherwise, allowing for fun consequences.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$









    • 9




      $begingroup$
      If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
      $endgroup$
      – David Coffron
      2 days ago






    • 8




      $begingroup$
      "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
      $endgroup$
      – goodguy5
      2 days ago






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
      $endgroup$
      – J.E
      2 days ago






    • 3




      $begingroup$
      "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
      $endgroup$
      – GrandOpener
      2 days ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
      $endgroup$
      – Nox
      yesterday



















    6












    $begingroup$

    You can try anything, the DM will narrate the result



    Based on the core model of play being: 1. The DM describes the environment; 2. The players describe what they want to do; 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions(Basic Rules, p. 4), a recommended ruling is to apply opposed ability checks for a mini-shove.




    The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.




    This case looks like a way to use the cantrip's ability to slam the door shut in a tactical way without trying to turn that spell into a weapon/damage causing spell - none of its features indicate that it damages opponents. The opponent should get a chance to resist the effects since he's already in the doorway.



    In order to see if the door slams in the opponent's face and closes (which would push him back to 'just outside the door', use the contest rules. A full "shove" action (knock the opponent back 5') does not seem appropriate for what is being attempted.




    Contests

    Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly
    opposed to another’s. This can occur when both of them are trying to
    do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to
    snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation
    also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from
    accomplishing a goal—for example, when a monster tries to force open a
    door that an adventurer is holding closed.




    The situation you describe is very similar to this. A contest is an opposed ability check. This does not seem to be a case where an automatic win should be granted to slam the door. There needs to be a chance that the door bounces off of the guy with the ax, and does not knock him back.



    How to adjudicate the contest: oppose the cleric's spell casting DC with the opponent's Athletics(Strength) ability check. The outcome is that either the cleric succeeds, or if the opponent is strong enough, or quick enough, to resist the door slamming in his face. Tie goes to the guy in the doorway




    If the contest results in a tie, the situation remains the same as it was before the contest




    Discuss this with your DM



    This is a case where rulings over rules, a 5e design paradigm, can work to make the game fun. Rewarding innovative use of game features - any DM ought to be on the lookout for that chance. In this case, the DM might offer advantage to the guy with the ax, or to the cleric, depending on how the rest of the situation is set up.



    Rules As Fun-embrace it.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$





















      0












      $begingroup$

      After the initiative is rolled, let us talk in terms of combat abstractions.



      If the traditional combat grid is assumed, then the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is occupying either the 5' square outside the door, or the 5' square inside the building.



      Shutting the door by any means (Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, an action) on your turn does only that - closes the door. It will close in front of him if he is considered occupying an outside square, or will shut behind him otherwise. With no effect on the barbarian himself.



      It is reasonable to expect a barbarian ready for combat, within the game's abstracted 6-second round, to be able to take a small step inside a 5' square he controls to not get hit by a closing door.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "122"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139122%2fcan-you-use-thaumaturgy-to-hit-someone-with-a-door%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        16












        $begingroup$

        The rules don't say, thus it is up to the DM



        Thaumaturgy only has this to say about the door closing effect:




        You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




        Now, 5e spells are designed to do only the things that they say in the spell description. However, in this case, that doesn't really help settle the dilemma. Does the door shut, regardless of obstacles because the spell says that the door shuts? Or will obstacles prevent the door from shutting because there is nothing to indicate that the door slamming shut is in any way immune to the effects of normal physics with respect to things blocking it?



        The thing is, the rules don't say. And either ruling, when applied uniformly, can lead to nonsensical results. For example, the door flinging enormous boulders out of the way to close.



        And that is another thing 5e spells are designed for. Many spells are written in language that purposefully doesn't try to cover every detail or circumstance instead choosing to leave it up to the DM to adjudicate the results in those cases.



        This is one of those cases. Ask your DM.



        Reasonable ruling: it acts like a normal door slammed by a normal person



        The way I would rule it at my table is that the door is not imbued with any kind of supernatural strength, but instead is simply closed as if I had slammed it myself.



        So, what would happen to the guy in the door? It would depend on the exact circumstances of where they where, but if they were in enough to block the door, likely the only thing it would do to them is stub their toe or bruise their nose (not enough to do HP damage) just as a normal slammed door would do and the door would remain ajar.



        This is my ruling that I would probably make a my table. It makes sense to me because we all know how doors normally work and thus it makes it easy to keep my rulings consistent and reasonable.



        Your DM should consider what option is best fit for their table that will make sense to them and maximise fun.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$


















          16












          $begingroup$

          The rules don't say, thus it is up to the DM



          Thaumaturgy only has this to say about the door closing effect:




          You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




          Now, 5e spells are designed to do only the things that they say in the spell description. However, in this case, that doesn't really help settle the dilemma. Does the door shut, regardless of obstacles because the spell says that the door shuts? Or will obstacles prevent the door from shutting because there is nothing to indicate that the door slamming shut is in any way immune to the effects of normal physics with respect to things blocking it?



          The thing is, the rules don't say. And either ruling, when applied uniformly, can lead to nonsensical results. For example, the door flinging enormous boulders out of the way to close.



          And that is another thing 5e spells are designed for. Many spells are written in language that purposefully doesn't try to cover every detail or circumstance instead choosing to leave it up to the DM to adjudicate the results in those cases.



          This is one of those cases. Ask your DM.



          Reasonable ruling: it acts like a normal door slammed by a normal person



          The way I would rule it at my table is that the door is not imbued with any kind of supernatural strength, but instead is simply closed as if I had slammed it myself.



          So, what would happen to the guy in the door? It would depend on the exact circumstances of where they where, but if they were in enough to block the door, likely the only thing it would do to them is stub their toe or bruise their nose (not enough to do HP damage) just as a normal slammed door would do and the door would remain ajar.



          This is my ruling that I would probably make a my table. It makes sense to me because we all know how doors normally work and thus it makes it easy to keep my rulings consistent and reasonable.



          Your DM should consider what option is best fit for their table that will make sense to them and maximise fun.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$
















            16












            16








            16





            $begingroup$

            The rules don't say, thus it is up to the DM



            Thaumaturgy only has this to say about the door closing effect:




            You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




            Now, 5e spells are designed to do only the things that they say in the spell description. However, in this case, that doesn't really help settle the dilemma. Does the door shut, regardless of obstacles because the spell says that the door shuts? Or will obstacles prevent the door from shutting because there is nothing to indicate that the door slamming shut is in any way immune to the effects of normal physics with respect to things blocking it?



            The thing is, the rules don't say. And either ruling, when applied uniformly, can lead to nonsensical results. For example, the door flinging enormous boulders out of the way to close.



            And that is another thing 5e spells are designed for. Many spells are written in language that purposefully doesn't try to cover every detail or circumstance instead choosing to leave it up to the DM to adjudicate the results in those cases.



            This is one of those cases. Ask your DM.



            Reasonable ruling: it acts like a normal door slammed by a normal person



            The way I would rule it at my table is that the door is not imbued with any kind of supernatural strength, but instead is simply closed as if I had slammed it myself.



            So, what would happen to the guy in the door? It would depend on the exact circumstances of where they where, but if they were in enough to block the door, likely the only thing it would do to them is stub their toe or bruise their nose (not enough to do HP damage) just as a normal slammed door would do and the door would remain ajar.



            This is my ruling that I would probably make a my table. It makes sense to me because we all know how doors normally work and thus it makes it easy to keep my rulings consistent and reasonable.



            Your DM should consider what option is best fit for their table that will make sense to them and maximise fun.






            share|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            The rules don't say, thus it is up to the DM



            Thaumaturgy only has this to say about the door closing effect:




            You instantaneously cause an unlocked door or window to fly open or slam shut.




            Now, 5e spells are designed to do only the things that they say in the spell description. However, in this case, that doesn't really help settle the dilemma. Does the door shut, regardless of obstacles because the spell says that the door shuts? Or will obstacles prevent the door from shutting because there is nothing to indicate that the door slamming shut is in any way immune to the effects of normal physics with respect to things blocking it?



            The thing is, the rules don't say. And either ruling, when applied uniformly, can lead to nonsensical results. For example, the door flinging enormous boulders out of the way to close.



            And that is another thing 5e spells are designed for. Many spells are written in language that purposefully doesn't try to cover every detail or circumstance instead choosing to leave it up to the DM to adjudicate the results in those cases.



            This is one of those cases. Ask your DM.



            Reasonable ruling: it acts like a normal door slammed by a normal person



            The way I would rule it at my table is that the door is not imbued with any kind of supernatural strength, but instead is simply closed as if I had slammed it myself.



            So, what would happen to the guy in the door? It would depend on the exact circumstances of where they where, but if they were in enough to block the door, likely the only thing it would do to them is stub their toe or bruise their nose (not enough to do HP damage) just as a normal slammed door would do and the door would remain ajar.



            This is my ruling that I would probably make a my table. It makes sense to me because we all know how doors normally work and thus it makes it easy to keep my rulings consistent and reasonable.



            Your DM should consider what option is best fit for their table that will make sense to them and maximise fun.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 2 days ago

























            answered 2 days ago









            RubiksmooseRubiksmoose

            50.7k7249383




            50.7k7249383

























                6












                $begingroup$

                Not much happens to the guy in the door



                As spells only do what they say they do, what happens when you try to slam the door shut with someone standing in them? The door does not shut. Will it be painful for them? Maybe. Will it do any damage? No, the spell would say so. Will it smack into their face? Depends on where they stand – I would presume that after kicking the door open, they are well on the way through that door. Would it have any mechanical effect if it did? No, see above. (I assume the door opens into the room; in any case the it may also be destroyed by the aforementioned kicking in which case there is not much to use the spell on.)



                Obviously, this is a rather strict, RAW reading. Your DM may rule otherwise, allowing for fun consequences.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$









                • 9




                  $begingroup$
                  If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                  $endgroup$
                  – David Coffron
                  2 days ago






                • 8




                  $begingroup$
                  "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                  $endgroup$
                  – goodguy5
                  2 days ago






                • 4




                  $begingroup$
                  @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                  $endgroup$
                  – J.E
                  2 days ago






                • 3




                  $begingroup$
                  "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                  $endgroup$
                  – GrandOpener
                  2 days ago






                • 1




                  $begingroup$
                  Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Nox
                  yesterday
















                6












                $begingroup$

                Not much happens to the guy in the door



                As spells only do what they say they do, what happens when you try to slam the door shut with someone standing in them? The door does not shut. Will it be painful for them? Maybe. Will it do any damage? No, the spell would say so. Will it smack into their face? Depends on where they stand – I would presume that after kicking the door open, they are well on the way through that door. Would it have any mechanical effect if it did? No, see above. (I assume the door opens into the room; in any case the it may also be destroyed by the aforementioned kicking in which case there is not much to use the spell on.)



                Obviously, this is a rather strict, RAW reading. Your DM may rule otherwise, allowing for fun consequences.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$









                • 9




                  $begingroup$
                  If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                  $endgroup$
                  – David Coffron
                  2 days ago






                • 8




                  $begingroup$
                  "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                  $endgroup$
                  – goodguy5
                  2 days ago






                • 4




                  $begingroup$
                  @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                  $endgroup$
                  – J.E
                  2 days ago






                • 3




                  $begingroup$
                  "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                  $endgroup$
                  – GrandOpener
                  2 days ago






                • 1




                  $begingroup$
                  Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Nox
                  yesterday














                6












                6








                6





                $begingroup$

                Not much happens to the guy in the door



                As spells only do what they say they do, what happens when you try to slam the door shut with someone standing in them? The door does not shut. Will it be painful for them? Maybe. Will it do any damage? No, the spell would say so. Will it smack into their face? Depends on where they stand – I would presume that after kicking the door open, they are well on the way through that door. Would it have any mechanical effect if it did? No, see above. (I assume the door opens into the room; in any case the it may also be destroyed by the aforementioned kicking in which case there is not much to use the spell on.)



                Obviously, this is a rather strict, RAW reading. Your DM may rule otherwise, allowing for fun consequences.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                Not much happens to the guy in the door



                As spells only do what they say they do, what happens when you try to slam the door shut with someone standing in them? The door does not shut. Will it be painful for them? Maybe. Will it do any damage? No, the spell would say so. Will it smack into their face? Depends on where they stand – I would presume that after kicking the door open, they are well on the way through that door. Would it have any mechanical effect if it did? No, see above. (I assume the door opens into the room; in any case the it may also be destroyed by the aforementioned kicking in which case there is not much to use the spell on.)



                Obviously, this is a rather strict, RAW reading. Your DM may rule otherwise, allowing for fun consequences.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 2 days ago









                Rubiksmoose

                50.7k7249383




                50.7k7249383










                answered 2 days ago









                J.EJ.E

                3,690935




                3,690935








                • 9




                  $begingroup$
                  If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                  $endgroup$
                  – David Coffron
                  2 days ago






                • 8




                  $begingroup$
                  "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                  $endgroup$
                  – goodguy5
                  2 days ago






                • 4




                  $begingroup$
                  @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                  $endgroup$
                  – J.E
                  2 days ago






                • 3




                  $begingroup$
                  "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                  $endgroup$
                  – GrandOpener
                  2 days ago






                • 1




                  $begingroup$
                  Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Nox
                  yesterday














                • 9




                  $begingroup$
                  If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                  $endgroup$
                  – David Coffron
                  2 days ago






                • 8




                  $begingroup$
                  "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                  $endgroup$
                  – goodguy5
                  2 days ago






                • 4




                  $begingroup$
                  @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                  $endgroup$
                  – J.E
                  2 days ago






                • 3




                  $begingroup$
                  "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                  $endgroup$
                  – GrandOpener
                  2 days ago






                • 1




                  $begingroup$
                  Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Nox
                  yesterday








                9




                9




                $begingroup$
                If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                $endgroup$
                – David Coffron
                2 days ago




                $begingroup$
                If spells only do what they say they do, would not the door slam shot regardless of obstacle (as there is no qualifier on the description)
                $endgroup$
                – David Coffron
                2 days ago




                8




                8




                $begingroup$
                "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                $endgroup$
                – goodguy5
                2 days ago




                $begingroup$
                "The door slams shut, period. The barbarian charging through is bisected, vertically, as he is caught in the destructive path that is thaumaturgy" </s>
                $endgroup$
                – goodguy5
                2 days ago




                4




                4




                $begingroup$
                @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                $endgroup$
                – J.E
                2 days ago




                $begingroup$
                @DavidCoffron I see what you mean, but the way I interpret this is if I ask you to slam the door, you can do that and if there is any obstacle, you will hit it. Does not mean that the door will end up closed. I can see that this is not a perfect interpretation since the wording is actualy "slam shut", but since there is no perfect non-game-breaking solution I would stick with the narrative spirit of the spell.
                $endgroup$
                – J.E
                2 days ago




                3




                3




                $begingroup$
                "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                $endgroup$
                – GrandOpener
                2 days ago




                $begingroup$
                "shut" is a qualifier for where the path terminates. Resting a door against a heavily breathing barbarian is not "shut." Either the door moves the barbarian (which it doesn't say it should) or the door does not shut (which it does say it should). In no case is it possible for the spell to do exactly what it says and nothing more.
                $endgroup$
                – GrandOpener
                2 days ago




                1




                1




                $begingroup$
                Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                $endgroup$
                – Nox
                yesterday




                $begingroup$
                Well, if the traditional combat grid is assumed, than the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is either occupying the 5' square outside the door, or in the square inside the building. Shutting the door either closes the door in front of him, or shuts the door behind him. With no effect on the barbarian himself.
                $endgroup$
                – Nox
                yesterday











                6












                $begingroup$

                You can try anything, the DM will narrate the result



                Based on the core model of play being: 1. The DM describes the environment; 2. The players describe what they want to do; 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions(Basic Rules, p. 4), a recommended ruling is to apply opposed ability checks for a mini-shove.




                The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.




                This case looks like a way to use the cantrip's ability to slam the door shut in a tactical way without trying to turn that spell into a weapon/damage causing spell - none of its features indicate that it damages opponents. The opponent should get a chance to resist the effects since he's already in the doorway.



                In order to see if the door slams in the opponent's face and closes (which would push him back to 'just outside the door', use the contest rules. A full "shove" action (knock the opponent back 5') does not seem appropriate for what is being attempted.




                Contests

                Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly
                opposed to another’s. This can occur when both of them are trying to
                do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to
                snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation
                also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from
                accomplishing a goal—for example, when a monster tries to force open a
                door that an adventurer is holding closed.




                The situation you describe is very similar to this. A contest is an opposed ability check. This does not seem to be a case where an automatic win should be granted to slam the door. There needs to be a chance that the door bounces off of the guy with the ax, and does not knock him back.



                How to adjudicate the contest: oppose the cleric's spell casting DC with the opponent's Athletics(Strength) ability check. The outcome is that either the cleric succeeds, or if the opponent is strong enough, or quick enough, to resist the door slamming in his face. Tie goes to the guy in the doorway




                If the contest results in a tie, the situation remains the same as it was before the contest




                Discuss this with your DM



                This is a case where rulings over rules, a 5e design paradigm, can work to make the game fun. Rewarding innovative use of game features - any DM ought to be on the lookout for that chance. In this case, the DM might offer advantage to the guy with the ax, or to the cleric, depending on how the rest of the situation is set up.



                Rules As Fun-embrace it.






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$


















                  6












                  $begingroup$

                  You can try anything, the DM will narrate the result



                  Based on the core model of play being: 1. The DM describes the environment; 2. The players describe what they want to do; 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions(Basic Rules, p. 4), a recommended ruling is to apply opposed ability checks for a mini-shove.




                  The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.




                  This case looks like a way to use the cantrip's ability to slam the door shut in a tactical way without trying to turn that spell into a weapon/damage causing spell - none of its features indicate that it damages opponents. The opponent should get a chance to resist the effects since he's already in the doorway.



                  In order to see if the door slams in the opponent's face and closes (which would push him back to 'just outside the door', use the contest rules. A full "shove" action (knock the opponent back 5') does not seem appropriate for what is being attempted.




                  Contests

                  Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly
                  opposed to another’s. This can occur when both of them are trying to
                  do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to
                  snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation
                  also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from
                  accomplishing a goal—for example, when a monster tries to force open a
                  door that an adventurer is holding closed.




                  The situation you describe is very similar to this. A contest is an opposed ability check. This does not seem to be a case where an automatic win should be granted to slam the door. There needs to be a chance that the door bounces off of the guy with the ax, and does not knock him back.



                  How to adjudicate the contest: oppose the cleric's spell casting DC with the opponent's Athletics(Strength) ability check. The outcome is that either the cleric succeeds, or if the opponent is strong enough, or quick enough, to resist the door slamming in his face. Tie goes to the guy in the doorway




                  If the contest results in a tie, the situation remains the same as it was before the contest




                  Discuss this with your DM



                  This is a case where rulings over rules, a 5e design paradigm, can work to make the game fun. Rewarding innovative use of game features - any DM ought to be on the lookout for that chance. In this case, the DM might offer advantage to the guy with the ax, or to the cleric, depending on how the rest of the situation is set up.



                  Rules As Fun-embrace it.






                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$
















                    6












                    6








                    6





                    $begingroup$

                    You can try anything, the DM will narrate the result



                    Based on the core model of play being: 1. The DM describes the environment; 2. The players describe what they want to do; 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions(Basic Rules, p. 4), a recommended ruling is to apply opposed ability checks for a mini-shove.




                    The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.




                    This case looks like a way to use the cantrip's ability to slam the door shut in a tactical way without trying to turn that spell into a weapon/damage causing spell - none of its features indicate that it damages opponents. The opponent should get a chance to resist the effects since he's already in the doorway.



                    In order to see if the door slams in the opponent's face and closes (which would push him back to 'just outside the door', use the contest rules. A full "shove" action (knock the opponent back 5') does not seem appropriate for what is being attempted.




                    Contests

                    Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly
                    opposed to another’s. This can occur when both of them are trying to
                    do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to
                    snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation
                    also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from
                    accomplishing a goal—for example, when a monster tries to force open a
                    door that an adventurer is holding closed.




                    The situation you describe is very similar to this. A contest is an opposed ability check. This does not seem to be a case where an automatic win should be granted to slam the door. There needs to be a chance that the door bounces off of the guy with the ax, and does not knock him back.



                    How to adjudicate the contest: oppose the cleric's spell casting DC with the opponent's Athletics(Strength) ability check. The outcome is that either the cleric succeeds, or if the opponent is strong enough, or quick enough, to resist the door slamming in his face. Tie goes to the guy in the doorway




                    If the contest results in a tie, the situation remains the same as it was before the contest




                    Discuss this with your DM



                    This is a case where rulings over rules, a 5e design paradigm, can work to make the game fun. Rewarding innovative use of game features - any DM ought to be on the lookout for that chance. In this case, the DM might offer advantage to the guy with the ax, or to the cleric, depending on how the rest of the situation is set up.



                    Rules As Fun-embrace it.






                    share|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$



                    You can try anything, the DM will narrate the result



                    Based on the core model of play being: 1. The DM describes the environment; 2. The players describe what they want to do; 3. The DM narrates the results of the adventurers’ actions(Basic Rules, p. 4), a recommended ruling is to apply opposed ability checks for a mini-shove.




                    The guy was standing right at the entrance breathing heavily and I won initiative.




                    This case looks like a way to use the cantrip's ability to slam the door shut in a tactical way without trying to turn that spell into a weapon/damage causing spell - none of its features indicate that it damages opponents. The opponent should get a chance to resist the effects since he's already in the doorway.



                    In order to see if the door slams in the opponent's face and closes (which would push him back to 'just outside the door', use the contest rules. A full "shove" action (knock the opponent back 5') does not seem appropriate for what is being attempted.




                    Contests

                    Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly
                    opposed to another’s. This can occur when both of them are trying to
                    do the same thing and only one can succeed, such as attempting to
                    snatch up a magic ring that has fallen on the floor. This situation
                    also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from
                    accomplishing a goal—for example, when a monster tries to force open a
                    door that an adventurer is holding closed.




                    The situation you describe is very similar to this. A contest is an opposed ability check. This does not seem to be a case where an automatic win should be granted to slam the door. There needs to be a chance that the door bounces off of the guy with the ax, and does not knock him back.



                    How to adjudicate the contest: oppose the cleric's spell casting DC with the opponent's Athletics(Strength) ability check. The outcome is that either the cleric succeeds, or if the opponent is strong enough, or quick enough, to resist the door slamming in his face. Tie goes to the guy in the doorway




                    If the contest results in a tie, the situation remains the same as it was before the contest




                    Discuss this with your DM



                    This is a case where rulings over rules, a 5e design paradigm, can work to make the game fun. Rewarding innovative use of game features - any DM ought to be on the lookout for that chance. In this case, the DM might offer advantage to the guy with the ax, or to the cleric, depending on how the rest of the situation is set up.



                    Rules As Fun-embrace it.







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited 2 days ago

























                    answered 2 days ago









                    KorvinStarmastKorvinStarmast

                    75.9k17238415




                    75.9k17238415























                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        After the initiative is rolled, let us talk in terms of combat abstractions.



                        If the traditional combat grid is assumed, then the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is occupying either the 5' square outside the door, or the 5' square inside the building.



                        Shutting the door by any means (Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, an action) on your turn does only that - closes the door. It will close in front of him if he is considered occupying an outside square, or will shut behind him otherwise. With no effect on the barbarian himself.



                        It is reasonable to expect a barbarian ready for combat, within the game's abstracted 6-second round, to be able to take a small step inside a 5' square he controls to not get hit by a closing door.






                        share|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$


















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          After the initiative is rolled, let us talk in terms of combat abstractions.



                          If the traditional combat grid is assumed, then the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is occupying either the 5' square outside the door, or the 5' square inside the building.



                          Shutting the door by any means (Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, an action) on your turn does only that - closes the door. It will close in front of him if he is considered occupying an outside square, or will shut behind him otherwise. With no effect on the barbarian himself.



                          It is reasonable to expect a barbarian ready for combat, within the game's abstracted 6-second round, to be able to take a small step inside a 5' square he controls to not get hit by a closing door.






                          share|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$
















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            After the initiative is rolled, let us talk in terms of combat abstractions.



                            If the traditional combat grid is assumed, then the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is occupying either the 5' square outside the door, or the 5' square inside the building.



                            Shutting the door by any means (Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, an action) on your turn does only that - closes the door. It will close in front of him if he is considered occupying an outside square, or will shut behind him otherwise. With no effect on the barbarian himself.



                            It is reasonable to expect a barbarian ready for combat, within the game's abstracted 6-second round, to be able to take a small step inside a 5' square he controls to not get hit by a closing door.






                            share|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            After the initiative is rolled, let us talk in terms of combat abstractions.



                            If the traditional combat grid is assumed, then the door is probably the border between two squares - which means the barbarian can't end his turn in the doorway - he is occupying either the 5' square outside the door, or the 5' square inside the building.



                            Shutting the door by any means (Thaumaturgy, Mage Hand, an action) on your turn does only that - closes the door. It will close in front of him if he is considered occupying an outside square, or will shut behind him otherwise. With no effect on the barbarian himself.



                            It is reasonable to expect a barbarian ready for combat, within the game's abstracted 6-second round, to be able to take a small step inside a 5' square he controls to not get hit by a closing door.







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered yesterday









                            NoxNox

                            1,2331823




                            1,2331823






























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded




















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139122%2fcan-you-use-thaumaturgy-to-hit-someone-with-a-door%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

                                Alcedinidae

                                Origin of the phrase “under your belt”?