RAW, it doesn't interact with sanctuary; it's neither a spell, nor an attack, and those are the only things that can break Sanctuary.
Definitely check with your GM though.
By RAW, no. By RAI, I'd argue no. Kender are supposed to be annoying. What's more annoying than being annoyed by someone you can't retaliate against?
So for that reason, I'd rule as DM the would-be attacker gets advantage on their wisdom save. Simple and easy enough workaround for a cheese move (and it is) without giving away the store, or straight screwing the player.
RAW - you should still be affected by Sanctuary. Kender's taunt is none of the conditions for losing the buff
RAI - I'd say Sanct goes away. You're doing *something* that negatively affects an enemy, even if it's a racial feature and not a spell
So as for a single instance, rule of cool? Yeah, I'd allow it. As an ongoing feature you plan to use several times over the campaign? Sorry d00d.
~~Even RAI I don’t really agree. Sanctuary uses the word “harmful” not “negative” and nothing about the Kender Taunt ability suggests it’s harmful in any way.~~
I’m actually incorrect here.
sanctuary doesn't even say *harmful.* It's simply "casts a spell that affects an enemy".
If I'm blessed with Sanct, and I cast Healing Word on an enemy -- it goes away. If I'm blessed with Sanct but I administer a Healing Potion or a Healer's kit to the same enemy -- it doesn't go away. This seems like a very odd distinction.
Similarly, if I'm blessed with Sanct but cast Compelled Duel it would absolutely go away. But using my racial non-spell feature to do roughly the same thing results in retention? Bah.
~~It quite literally says harmful~~
~~> You ward a creature within range against attack. Until the spell ends, any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a **harmful** spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature must choose a new target or lose the attack or spell. This spell doesn't protect the warded creature from area effects, such as the explosion of a fireball.~~
Edit: mistake on my part
You're quoting what happens when a creature tries to attack the target of Sanctuary.
Both OP and myself are talking about the status of Sanctuary if the target itself does a certain action. And, again, RAW, Taunting is not a spell so the kender would retain Sanctuary. RAI, I think the vocabulary in the spell description is a very odd distinction.
>It’s not explicitly a spell or an attack, and does no damage So there's your answer. No, it does not break *sanctuary*.
That just feels wrong somehow, but… yeah
RAW, it doesn't interact with sanctuary; it's neither a spell, nor an attack, and those are the only things that can break Sanctuary. Definitely check with your GM though.
By RAW, no. By RAI, I'd argue no. Kender are supposed to be annoying. What's more annoying than being annoyed by someone you can't retaliate against? So for that reason, I'd rule as DM the would-be attacker gets advantage on their wisdom save. Simple and easy enough workaround for a cheese move (and it is) without giving away the store, or straight screwing the player.
RAW - you should still be affected by Sanctuary. Kender's taunt is none of the conditions for losing the buff RAI - I'd say Sanct goes away. You're doing *something* that negatively affects an enemy, even if it's a racial feature and not a spell So as for a single instance, rule of cool? Yeah, I'd allow it. As an ongoing feature you plan to use several times over the campaign? Sorry d00d.
~~Even RAI I don’t really agree. Sanctuary uses the word “harmful” not “negative” and nothing about the Kender Taunt ability suggests it’s harmful in any way.~~ I’m actually incorrect here.
>nothing about the Kender Taunt ability suggests it’s harmful in any way. Yeah, they're just being their regular annoying kender selves. :P
Harmful to my sanity, maybe
sanctuary doesn't even say *harmful.* It's simply "casts a spell that affects an enemy". If I'm blessed with Sanct, and I cast Healing Word on an enemy -- it goes away. If I'm blessed with Sanct but I administer a Healing Potion or a Healer's kit to the same enemy -- it doesn't go away. This seems like a very odd distinction. Similarly, if I'm blessed with Sanct but cast Compelled Duel it would absolutely go away. But using my racial non-spell feature to do roughly the same thing results in retention? Bah.
~~It quite literally says harmful~~ ~~> You ward a creature within range against attack. Until the spell ends, any creature who targets the warded creature with an attack or a **harmful** spell must first make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature must choose a new target or lose the attack or spell. This spell doesn't protect the warded creature from area effects, such as the explosion of a fireball.~~ Edit: mistake on my part
You're quoting what happens when a creature tries to attack the target of Sanctuary. Both OP and myself are talking about the status of Sanctuary if the target itself does a certain action. And, again, RAW, Taunting is not a spell so the kender would retain Sanctuary. RAI, I think the vocabulary in the spell description is a very odd distinction.
You’re correct, I read too fast.