I think nonliving creatures may be more specific versions of objects then, since I couldn’t find any reference of creatures not being considered objects (because who would even say that, it should be obvious if you use your brain), but it also means that if a spell or ability only allows you to target or create objects and has no specification in regards to creatures, undead and constructs are valid targets by RAW.
I mean, if you follow the logic, undead are “animated corpses” and constructs are “animated objects”, sooo… Sure, the “Rule of Cool” wins my vote on this.
Gonna disagree, rule of cool is the deciding factor between the RAI vs RAW interpretations.
I wouldn’t say it’s RAI, spells or abilities meant for inanimate objects typically don’t include undead under colloquial interpretations but it is definitely RAW using very technical interpretations.
I think nonliving creatures may be more specific versions of objects then, since I couldn’t find any reference of creatures not being considered objects (because who would even say that, it should be obvious if you use your brain), but it also means that if a spell or ability only allows you to target or create objects and has no specification in regards to creatures, undead and constructs are valid targets by RAW.
I mean, if you follow the logic, undead are “animated corpses” and constructs are “animated objects”, sooo… Sure, the “Rule of Cool” wins my vote on this.
Yes. That’s the point. But you don’t need rule of cool for this. You just need to use at least a single braincell to apply RAI.
Gonna disagree, rule of cool is the deciding factor between the RAI vs RAW interpretations.
I wouldn’t say it’s RAI, spells or abilities meant for inanimate objects typically don’t include undead under colloquial interpretations but it is definitely RAW using very technical interpretations.
Yes. And RAI means „rules as intended“. The technical interpretation of those words seems very much unintended.