D&D 5E Capricious Home Rules and DM Pet Peeves

[Colder]

Target of teleport is you, not your destination. Same with misty step, you are the target and you can teleport anywhere you can see within 30 ft ... even if it's behind a window or wall of force.

I'm not here to argue, just to point out a rule I do not like because I am capricious and peeved. Listen to the podcast I linked in my first post. The logic I am presenting comes from none other than Jeremy Crawford himself. Take it up with him.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Sure. Basically, the Clear Path to Target rule says that you need an unobstructed line from you to the target. It can't be behind total cover. This is to stop spells like Conjure Animals from conjuring a bear from the otherside of a window, or to stop Hold Person from working on a person on the other side of a wall of force.

Only spells that explicitly say they work on targets with total cover get around this rule. But the only spell that actually does this is Sacred Flame.

In the podcast, The Craw said that "target" isn't really a key word in 5e, and that anything a spell affects is its target: creatures, objects, locations, anything.

That means that teleportation spells target a location as the destination, and since none of those spells say they can teleport you through cover, they are still subject to the Clear Path to Target rule, meaning that they can't do what they need to do if you hold all spells to the same goal post. It's dumb.

Thanks for sharing, and I will listen to that podcast when I have some time, but it seems like a misunderstanding - like you are trying to say that a teleport spell "affects" a location, thus making it impossible for the location to be on the other side of total cover.

What a teleport spell affects, and thus its target, is clearly the creature or object that is teleporting - not the location it is going to arrive at.

 

[Oofta]

I'm not here to argue, just to point out a rule I do not like because I am capricious and peeved. Listen to the podcast I linked in my first post. The logic I am presenting comes from none other than Jeremy Crawford himself. Take it up with him.

I did listen to the podcast. Doesn't change the fact that the target of teleport is "you". Teleport would be effectively unusable if you had to have line of effect to the destination which makes no sense.

The rules are quite clear: you have to have line of effect to the target(s) unless there is an explicit exception to the rule such as flame strike ignoring cover (which I had not noticed before the podcast).

 

[machineelf]

I don't allow dragonborn primarily because the pictures are just stupid*. Mammaries on a reptile? Why?

Don't take this the wrong way, but it's a bit funny to me that you'll accept elves, gnomes, dragons, bugbears, flying eyes covered in more eyes, and magic, but you draw the line at mammaries on a reptile. (Which is crossed with human anyway, so ...)

 

[The Human Target]

I ban players who don't understand what a pet peeve is from my game.

 

[Oofta]

Don't take this the wrong way, but it's a bit funny to me that you'll accept elves, gnomes, dragons, bugbears, flying eyes covered in more eyes, and magic, but you draw the line at mammaries on a reptile. [emoji14] (Which is crossed with human anyway, so ...)

Hey now, as the thread states these are pet peeves and we're allowed capriciousness. [emoji3]

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using EN World mobile app

 

[flametitan]

I remember hearing somewhere that a dev said 5E Dragon born do not have breasts. Maybe I was wrong, but if it is true then any of the pictures inside can be make it female.

I found the source. It's a twitter post from Chris Perkins: https://twitter.com/ChrisPerkinsDnD/status/723651126185308162?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

[Colder]

Thanks for sharing, and I will listen to that podcast when I have some time, but it seems like a misunderstanding - like you are trying to say that a teleport spell "affects" a location, thus making it impossible for the location to be on the other side of total cover.

What a teleport spell affects, and thus its target, is clearly the creature or object that is teleporting - not the location it is going to arrive at.

I did listen to the podcast. Doesn't change the fact that the target of teleport is "you". Teleport would be effectively unusable if you had to have line of effect to the destination which makes no sense.


The rules are quite clear: you have to have line of effect to the target(s) unless there is an explicit exception to the rule such as flame strike ignoring cover (which I had not noticed before the podcast).

In the podcast at 12:35, Crawford says that if a spell says to choose something (a creature, object, a point in space), whatever you choose is that spell's target. That's why I say that teleportation spells target the location, because it's the only thing in the spell you choose. Bring it up with him! Cheers!

Edit: also, it's Sacred Flame that ignores cover, not Flame Strike.

 

[MostlyDm]

I believe sacred flame only ignores the bonus to dex saves granted by partial cover. I think Full cover still prevents sacred flame.

 

[Colder]

I believe sacred flame only ignores the bonus to dex saves granted by partial cover. I think Full cover still prevents sacred flame.

Crawford says otherwise in that podcast I keep mentioning, but that is neither here nor there.