D&D (2024) December 1st UA Spell changes

[tetrasodium]

In my game it does. I have proactive players who come up with things to spend their money on. They build temples, buy homes in various cities they go to frequently, sometimes they will open a shop and set NPCs up to run it so they can sell the used stuff they find, and so on. Spending money is never an issue.

That's you fixing a hole created by the encumbrance being designed to obliviate itself system with three homebrew solutions not the encumbrance system mattering enough for me to have credibility when I browbeat players into being on the ball with tracking the weight of what they are carrying. Here's a story of three other subsystems filling a similar role...

 

[Maxperson]

That's you fixing a hole created by the encumbrance being designed to obliviate itself system with three homebrew solutions not the encumbrance system mattering enough for me to have credibility when I browbeat players into being on the ball with tracking the weight of what they are carrying. Here's a story of three other subsystems filling a similar role...

No. That's not me at all. THEY choose things to spend money on.

 

[Maxperson]

Funny how you can have things that "go without saying" but I need to demonstrate the hidden math of 5e to be allowed to talk about healing spells and have hyper precise language. And this STILL doesn't prove that Blood Frenzy getting a +4 on average because of advantage is wrong.

False Equivalences are false. One is math(yours) and one is not(mine). I shouldn't have to explain to you what "everything but the PCs means."

Care to support that with evidence? Or are we still playing the "Max just states things as facts" game?

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

Okay, why not give them a single 12,000 gold piece ornamental necklace then? Then it is a pound. I have the option to do that, so why don't I?

Because I don't do nonsense. They'll get the jewelry and gems, but coins are and always have been part of the game. I'm not going to alter that just so that you can dump strength.

Cool, I have 50 lbs of extra space. What else am I required to carry as "necessary equipment". Because, I did specify it was only the necessary equipment, since we are playing with encumbrance.

What's not necessary? The equipment list has a lot of commonly used items.

I remember a DM ran us through a 2e adventure once. He was a newer DM and confused, because there was this massively heavy statue locked to the floor of this mansion with Sovereign Glue, but it had this big gold value. And he asked us what we wanted to do with it. And after confirming we had no way of interacting with it, we ignored it. It was... entirely pointless for the adventure to include. Just a way to tempt us into wasting time.


So, sure, don't have your tapestry lose weight. But also don't expect your players to care that it exists, because you by telling them it weighs more than they can carry, have declared it is useless to them.

Have I? They left it there until they could come back with a cart and get it. I don't tell them anything is useful or useless. I just make the world and the players can decide.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

nah, okay, no, i need to respond to this because this is a downright insulting misinterpretation of this page.

this table is referring to NATURAL DICE ROLLS. it is NOT accounting for modifiers. advantage drops below +4 if you need to roll over a natural 15. monsters are (almost always) not rolling flat d20s as their attacks. they are (almost) never going to need roll a natural 15 or higher to hit a PC with 15 AC - actually, you know what? let's look at the sahuagin, since 5e.tools lists that as an example of blood frenzy.

the sahuagin is a CR1/2 creature with a +3 to hit. that means it needs a 12 (15-3=12) to hit a creature with 15 AC. advantage to hit a natural 12 increases the odds of success by 24.8%, which we round down to 20% since as you said the game rounds down (i mean...i don't know if that applies here but we'll roll with it), which comes out to...a +4 to hit. quite interesting. verily so, i would say.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Can one mark a thread so that it does not update to unread everytime someone makes a 100lines, multiquote, competely irrelevant nitpicky post?

Edit: as a reminder: the topic of this thread was: "UA spell changes"

 

[Chaosmancer]

Can one mark a thread so that it does not update to unread everytime someone makes a 100lines, multiquote, competely irrelevant nitpicky post?

Edit: as a reminder: the topic of this thread was: "UA spell changes"

I've tried a few times to get back to talking about healing spells, which were the major changes to spells to date, but no such luck. I'd hoped to get a chance to talk about heroism vs barkskin vs aid as well

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I've tried a few times to get back to talking about healing spells, which were the major changes to spells to date, but no such luck. I'd hoped to get a chance to talk about heroism vs barkskin vs aid as well

So just stop. And talk about this. I think it is reasonably clear that the two of you won't convince the other one.

I think going to temp hp in aid is a good idea, because the increase of max hp is neat, but deviates too much from the standard and is an additional layer of bookkeeping. How do two aid spells stack anyway?

Heroism and barkskin are now redundand, bit I still think, that we need some other restriction than just concentration for personal buff spells.
Or: as long as you concentrate on barkskin, your constitution saves are always at least 10. (Treat a result of 9 or lower as 10).
And maybe explicitely state, that damage you completely absorb with thp does not force a con save.
Or maybe remove the DC at least 10 bar and just make the save DC = damage taken/2.

 

[Chaosmancer]

False Equivalences are false. One is math(yours) and one is not(mine). I shouldn't have to explain to you what "everything but the PCs means."

Well, at least I finally get you to admit that I have math. But no, I wasn't referring to my math versus you stating the value of advantage via math changing because AC is higher than normal.

D&D 5e: Probabilities for Advantage and Disadvantage | Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

For everything over 15 it drops below +4 since the game rounds down, and PCs often have ACs higher than 15.

I believe W'rkncacnter provided an excellent response to why this claim is flatly misrepresenting the situation.

Because I don't do nonsense. They'll get the jewelry and gems, but coins are and always have been part of the game. I'm not going to alter that just so that you can dump strength.

How is it nonsense? Who cares if coins have "always been part of the game"? And who said anything about dumping strength? You noted that the coins and armor were over 300 lbs. You of course realize that for any single character to carry that much without penalty, they needed to have a strength over 20. I don't see maxed strength as dumping strength, do you?

The obvious truth is that while you make the claim of not altering anything, you obviously are setting players up to not be able to get their proper rewards after a fight, that is the ONLY time encumbrance matters. Because people can carry their essential gear trivially. It is only when you start offering them rewards for winning that they then begin to have to deal with this system.

What's not necessary? The equipment list has a lot of commonly used items.

My wizard doesn't need fishing tackle, they aren't going to be fishing.
They have an 8 strength, they don't need a crowbar, they not only can't benefit from it, but they don't need it for advantage in 5e.
Don't have a crossbow or longbow, so don't need a quiver or bolt case
No need for an abacus. Not only does it not do anything, my wizard is a genius, math is easy
I can summon fire, no need for alchemist fire
No need to carry a barrel, nothing to put in it
No point in carrying a 10-ft ladder, I have adventuring companions
I'm not mining, so I don't need a miner's pick
No need for a tent. Really no need for a bedroll either. Neither improves the quality of sleep, if my character even needs sleep.
Not a strength character, so a sledgehammer is fairly useless
Don't need a grappling hook, same as not needing the ladder.
Not hunting, so I don't need the hunting trap

So... a lot of the stuff isn't necessary.

Have I? They left it there until they could come back with a cart and get it. I don't tell them anything is useful or useless. I just make the world and the players can decide.

So what practical difference was there between them getting a cart and taking it compared to them just moving 5ft every six seconds and taking it? Sounds like it literally made zero difference, so why did it matter enough to track?

And yes, you'll note 200 lbs tapestry is not in the equipment list. So you are the one who decided that is what it weighed.

Now, can we be done talking about encumbrance which has even less to do with the thread than the OTHER red herrings you keep throwing out?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think going to temp hp in aid is a good idea, because the increase of max hp is neat, but deviates too much from the standard and is an additional layer of bookkeeping. How do two aid spells stack anyway?

I never considered two aid spells. But isn't there a general rule that two effects of the same name don't stack anyways? I think that would cover double Aid.

Going to temp hp is a debuff, because it prevents it from working with all of the VAST number of other temp hp spells. But it does get to be a full party, which is really nice. The bookkeeping is a great point, and one reason I avoided the spell, needing to track changes to max hp is rough.

Heroism and barkskin are now redundand, bit I still think, that we need some other restriction than just concentration for personal buff spells.

Well... yes and no?

Barkskin is a bonus action and grants Mod+Prof. So, starts at +2 over heroism and slowly levels with you (great mechanic, wish more spells had that)

Heroism is an action, grants only mod, but also makes you immune to frightened.

Where I struggle here is that Barkskin is 2nd level and Heroism 1st. I think the bonus action for Barkskin keeps it viable, but it gets to the point where now I am looking at Heroism and wondering if it would be worth it. It was often a hard spell for us to justify anyways.

Or: as long as you concentrate on barkskin, your constitution saves are always at least 10. (Treat a result of 9 or lower as 10).

And maybe explicitely state, that damage you completely absorb with thp does not force a con save.
Or maybe remove the DC at least 10 bar and just make the save DC = damage taken/2.

Clarification on if Temp HP can cause concentration saves would be nice, but I think at this point we know it does. I like the idea of Barkskin giving a con save bonus, but I think that is a bit too much. Maybe something like "as long as this spell is active, you have proficiency in con saves"

I also think that with Barkskin now being temp hp, it is no longer as much a self-buff. This is VERY good for any frontliner, druid or no. And actually, with the scaling prof mod, I can see this being very worth it even at high levels. Bonus action for a 6th level spell to give the entire party regenerating 11 temp hp, for an hour? If it wasn't touch that would be really hard to beat even mid combat.

Edit: Oh. Just noticed, the spell grants the Temp hp, but losing concentration on the spell doesn't remove them like Heroism does. That's HUGE for making this more worthwhile.

 

[Maxperson]

Well, at least I finally get you to admit that I have math. But no, I wasn't referring to my math versus you stating the value of advantage via math changing because AC is higher than normal.

God your twisting of words is frustrating. You know damn well that I'm talking about the hidden math. I said so in the quote.

I believe Tetrasodium provided an excellent response to why this claim is flatly misrepresenting the situation.

Except he didn't. He provided a link to someone talking about the DM creating new subsystems for spending money, something that I do not do. Players coming to me with what they want to spend their money on is not me creating a subsystem.

How is it nonsense? Who cares if coins have "always been part of the game"? And who said anything about dumping strength? You noted that the coins and armor were over 300 lbs. You of course realize that for any single character to carry that much without penalty, they needed to have a strength over 20. I don't see maxed strength as dumping strength, do you?

What?! How does 60 pounds of coins + 65 pounds of armor = 300+ pounds? Or are you trying to twist things again and include the tapestry? Because if you are, simply sharing the coins around the rest of the party and going with 65 pounds of armor + 200 for the tapestry = 265.

Some things will be too large to carry. That's reasonable. If you raid a castle, there will be big and valuable things in it.

The obvious truth is that while you make the claim of not altering anything, you obviously are setting players up to not be able to get their proper rewards after a fight, that is the ONLY time encumbrance matters.

Blah blah blah all I want to do is deliberately not understand Maxperson instead of having a conversation blah.

Nothing that I said could possibly be construed(only deliberately misconstrued) as setting players up not to get proper rewards. I spoke of coins, gems, jewelry, etc. which are all easily carriable rewards. Extras like the tapestry might take some work.

Coins and items(normal and magic) are enough to cause encumbrance issues.

Because people can carry their essential gear trivially. It is only when you start offering them rewards for winning that they then begin to have to deal with this system.

Yeah, wouldn't want to include things like coins and magic items like adamantine plate mail for winning fights. Wouldn't want them to have any rewards for winning.

So what practical difference was there between them getting a cart and taking it compared to them just moving 5ft every six seconds and taking it? Sounds like it literally made zero difference, so why did it matter enough to track?

You really want to have a move 5 feet in a dangerous world? Do you really want to consume 6x as much food getting back to town? You didn't bring enough to cover that much extra time. You brought 1 month of rations. If your journey took even one week, taking six weeks to get back would cause food issues. Oh, yeah. You house ruled tracking food away. Convenient for your players.

And yes, you'll note 200 lbs tapestry is not in the equipment list. So you are the one who decided that is what it weighed.

A giant tapestry that takes up a wall isn't going to be light.

Now, can we be done talking about encumbrance which has even less to do with the thread than the OTHER red herrings you keep throwing out?

As soon as you stop twisting what I say, sure. In this post alone you've.

1) Falsely accused me of setting players up not to get their rewards. Rewards you say they shouldn't get for winning.
2) Deliberately twisted my saying your examples involve hidden math as "admitting that yours has math."
3) Deliberately twisted two different paragraphs(one explicitly only coin and items) dealing with weight issues into "Must have them carry all the gear, coins AND tapestry."

Just respond to what I say and you'll be fine. We can actually have a conversation. If I break something up and it's two different paragraphs, they aren't together and twisting them together the way you do is going to be wrong. You already know that, though, since I've told it to you at least two dozen times over the years.