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

[AaronOfBarbaria]

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.

Having now listened to that portion of the podcast, I can say with certainty that you are focusing on only a single part of what was said and are missing the intention of the statement by doing so.

Specifically, just prior to the time you mention, Crawford says that targeting is when "you choose someone or something to be subjected to some kind of effect."

You are latching on to the following comments which, given context, are attempting (however poorly) to build upon, not contradict, that statement.

So you don't need to house-rule anything, because not literally every choice made within a spell is choosing a target - just the choice as to who or what is being subjected to the effect of the spell, which in the case of teleportation types of spells is not the location to which the teleportation will lead.

 

[JEB]

I turned Use Magic Device into a feat, because it didn't make sense to me that the Thief could spontaneously get that ability. (I replaced it with a more thematically appropriate Improvise feature.)

 

[Colder]

Having now listened to that portion of the podcast, I can say with certainty that you are focusing on only a single part of what was said and are missing the intention of the statement by doing so.

Specifically, just prior to the time you mention, Crawford says that targeting is when "you choose someone or something to be subjected to some kind of effect."

You are latching on to the following comments which, given context, are attempting (however poorly) to build upon, not contradict, that statement.

So you don't need to house-rule anything, because not literally every choice made within a spell is choosing a target - just the choice as to who or what is being subjected to the effect of the spell, which in the case of teleportation types of spells is not the location to which the teleportation will lead.

The two would seem to be contradictory in this instance, and would seem to allow the Conjure X spells to work through cover as it would not then be the location that would be targeted, but whatever you're summoning to that location. This seems to be counter to the philosophy presented in the podcast.

And if the effect is really the only important bit, and choice doesn't have any part in determining what a spell's target is, why did he say that bit about choice at all? He should have just stopped there instead of mentioning choice at all.

Know what would make this a nonissue? Getting rid of the damn rule in the first place. The house rule isn't to make spells work like they should, it's to reduce the mental gymnastics and the arguing it takes to reach that conclusion. /thread

 

[Lanliss]

The two would seem to be contradictory in this instance, and would seem to allow the Conjure X spells to work through cover as it would not then be the location that would be targeted, but whatever you're summoning to that location. This seems to be counter to the philosophy presented in the podcast.

And if the effect is really the only important bit, and choice doesn't have any part in determining what a spell's target is, why did he say that bit about choice at all? He should have just stopped there instead of mentioning choice at all.

Know what would make this a nonissue? Getting rid of the damn rule in the first place. The house rule isn't to make spells work like they should, it's to reduce the mental gymnastics and the arguing it takes to reach that conclusion. /thread

/argument, maybe. I am sure there are other house rules to talk about.

 

[Colder]

/argument, maybe. I am sure there are other house rules to talk about.

Whoops! You're right, my apologies.

 

[Lanliss]

Whoops! You're right, my apologies.

No worries. I realized after I put that up that it sounded a bit douche-ey anyway, so apologies if it looked that way. Slightly tired...

 

[Colder]

No worries. I realized after I put that up that it sounded a bit douche-ey anyway, so apologies if it looked that way. Slightly tired...

Oh I just assumed you were being funny. No harm no foul.

 

[Oofta]

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.

Yeah, my bad. I heard Sacred Flame and then thought "I wonder if Flame Strike works the same?".

If anything is inconsistent, it's Sacred Flame, not all of the other spells. Just because the radiance descends on the creature doesn't mean that creature couldn't be hiding under a table. I guess it's different because Flame Strike is a cylinder of flame? Dunno. For whatever reason Sacred Flame ignores all cover.

But that's still irrelevant. The target of teleport is you and eight willing creatures or an object. You're conflating destination with target and they are two different things. It may be unfortunate that "target" is used in the description, but it's just an example of the difficulty of using natural language when words have multiple meanings as was mentioned in the podcast.

It's not worth arguing over any more. I think the rule "To target something, you must have a clear path to it" is clear, simple and succinct. You don't so as with all things, adjust the rules so that they make sense to you.

 

[Colder]

You don't so as with all things, adjust the rules so that they make sense to you.

You should have just lead with this instead of wasting both our time trying to convince me that an inconsistent ruling is the most correct one.

 

[Oofta]

You should have just lead with this instead of wasting both our time trying to convince me that an inconsistent ruling is the most correct one.

I thought everyone understood Rule 0 of D&D: if you don't like a rule, change it.