Doubts about Sanctuary

[Captain Cap]

Special attacks like sunder, disarm, overrun or bull-rush are considered "direct attacks"? And spells like Shatter, if the target is an attended item?

[Venger]

Special attacks like sunder, disarm, overrun or bull-rush are considered "direct attacks"? And spells like Shatter, if the target is an attended item?

I don't understand the question you're asking. "direct attack" is not a game term. could you rephrase?

[Hamste]

I don't understand the question you're asking. "direct attack" is not a game term. could you rephrase?

They are wondering if Sanctuary work on these things as it is unclear. I would rule things that target items don't as they aren't direct attacks but things like trip and bull rush would.

[Venger]

They are wondering if Sanctuary work on these things as it is unclear. I would rule things that target items don't as they aren't direct attacks but things like trip and bull rush would.

it is not a melee or ranged attack or a targeted effect, so sanctuary does not do anything

[KillianHawkeye]

I would rule things that target items don't as they aren't direct attacks but things like trip and bull rush would.

I definitely agree that sanctuary should protect against non-damaging attacks like trip and bull rush. As for things like sunder or disarm, which target an attended object, I could maybe go either way but I'm leaning towards sanctuary not being effective in that situation without some specific text that extends the effect to held items and equipment. For comparison, the invisibility spell clearly details how it affects the recipient's gear.

[Hamste]

it is not a melee or ranged attack or a targeted effect, so sanctuary does not do anything

Trips and bull rushes are attacks, as the player's handbook does call them attacks with sanctuary just saying it stops direct attacks. Trips are even melee touch attacks.

[tiercel]

If the save fails, the opponent can’t follow through with the attack, that part of its action is lost, and it can’t directly attack the warded creature for the duration of the spell. Those not attempting to attack the subject remain unaffected. This spell does not prevent the warded creature from being attacked or affected by area or effect spells.

(Emphasis added.)

Given the text of the spell, it would be highly reasonable to interpret “direct attack” as being defined in opposition to “area or effect spells,” i.e. an attack or special attack which is directed or targeted at the warded creature.

This interpretation still doesn’t firmly address targeting attended objects, of course, but given the spell talks about directly targeting a creature... it seems reasonable that a sunder or disarm targets an object, not a creature per se. I could also see the interpretation that attended objects count as part of their attending creature, however. I suppose I’m uncertain as to the practical application because, frankly, sunder and disarm haven’t come up that much in my experience.

Other folks can probably make a more cogent RAW argument than I, but “direct attack” doesn’t seem to be a well-defined term...

[Fizban]

I think I might allow the sundering or disarming of a held weapon, only, since it's an attack clearly directed at the weapon and not the wielder. Sundering a shield "risks" breaking it and hurting the person beneath, tripping, grappling, or disarming a worn object is a direct assault on their person. Disarming or tripping with an unarmed strike seems like it should be safe, but that's only a hair removed from grappling which should absolutely be prevented.

Basically it depends on if you think Sanctuary should leave the pacifist stripped but technically unharmed by hit point damage, or if it should be a magical compulsion that prevents people from so much as getting close with impure intent. As a will save that specifically prevents magical area bombing, the latter is more correct.

[Captain Cap]

I think I might allow the sundering or disarming of a held weapon, only, since it's an attack clearly directed at the weapon and not the wielder.

But to defend yourself from the attempt you need to perform an attack roll. If this is considered an attack (the text specify that every attack, whatever the target is, puts an end to the spell), getting rid of Sanctuary becomes too easy.

Basically it depends on if you think Sanctuary should leave the pacifist stripped but technically unharmed by hit point damage, or if it should be a magical compulsion that prevents people from so much as getting close with impure intent. As a will save that specifically prevents magical area bombing, the latter is more correct.

I will probably opt for this reasoning: it would be quite strange if the holy symbol of a cleric protected by his Sanctuary could be easily snatched.

[casb1965]

Seeing as Sunder provokes an attack of opportunity I would say you are attacking the player not the item, items have no attacks.

Trip is definitely against the person.

So IMHO Sanctuary protects against both and any other special attack listed in the rulebook table 8-7.

[Captain Cap]

So IMHO Sanctuary protects against both and any other special attack listed in the rulebook table 8-7.

Even Feint?

[casb1965]

Even Feint?

Does it require you or your opponent to use an attack bonus in calculating the result, yes, therefore it is an "attack", which neither party can do whilst Sanctuary is in play.

[KillianHawkeye]

Even Feint?

Feinting should be allowed because it's not a real attack, it's a bluff. Capitalizing on the bonus you get from a successful feint definitely would be an attack, though, so this distinction isn't very important IMO.

[denthor]

Think of this way a wizard cast color spray, fireball lighting bolt. Targets square x. Wizard failed will save for sanctuary spell.

Cleric is in the spell effects area or in the case of lighting bolt line of effect.

Cleric still has to take reflex saves for the spell the Wizard does not know he was affected since they are unaware of the presence of saI'd cleric.

[Psyren]

Think of this way a wizard cast color spray, fireball lighting bolt. Targets square x. Wizard failed will save for sanctuary spell.

Cleric is in the spell effects area or in the case of lighting bolt line of effect.

Cleric still has to take reflex saves for the spell the Wizard does not know he was affected since they are unaware of the presence of saI'd cleric.

FYI, Lightning Bolt is an area spell too, so Sanctuary not working on it is explicit.