D&D General How often do your adventurers have lengthy - months+ - preparations?

[Son of the Serpent]

IDK where you learned math, but spending hundreds of thousands of gold to make two rings for each player is a smarter use of resources than casting 1 3rd level spell slot a day. They even have a druid for back up. It would cost them less to horde components to cast Raise Dead on the Wizard everyday. Not only that, but the spell can be ritually cast, so it doesn't even have to take a spell slot. The only time when you would need a magic item or potion is, when the GROUP has NO ONE who can cast that spell at all. They have 2 people who can cast it as a ritual and only need it cast once a day for the whole party.

Even if the party wanted to waste resources, it would be cheaper just to make scrolls.

Its the superior option because its far less likely to fail and lasts longer. Needs to be replaced less often. You lose it less easily (very easy to lose items in an aquatic environment realistically). Takes up less space. btw, you have to pass a check to use a potion while you are already submerged without just ruining the potion because you are under water. Furthermore it takes time in a round to activate a potion. Time you might not have. Furthermore if you are under really deep water you will be using magical means to protect yourself from that aspect of the environment most likely. Sometimes items arent on your person within this protective zone. Manybreasons you might need to leave items behind. Guess what? The potion bottle isnt gonna hold up. Even if it did the cork or cap would pop off long before the bottle shatters in most cases. Ruined. The spare ring not on your person will be just fine though. Even if you have to temporarily leave it behind for any of the multitude of potential reasons. Furthermore if already drowning a potion can be a problem. Dc check is not exactly a great one to take a potion while already drowning. Furthermore, good luck trying to get a person underwater whos already unconscious to take a potion of water breathing properly with water already filling their esophagus, airway, and oral cavity. Its difficult not to spill any underwater while conscious and drowning. Its way more difficult to pass the whole thing down someone's esophagus while already underwater with them already unconscious. Its going to just seep right out their mouth or nose if you arent really careful. Could be extra difficult in combat. I could continue the list of reasons the ring is the superior option in a heavily aquatic campaign for a whole page of this thread. Ive proven the point though. Ring>potion in this scenario.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

IDK where you learned math, but spending hundreds of thousands of gold to make two rings for each player is a smarter use of resources than casting 1 3rd level spell slot a day. They even have a druid for back up. It would cost them less to horde components to cast Raise Dead on the Wizard everyday. Not only that, but the spell can be ritually cast, so it doesn't even have to take a spell slot. The only time when you would need a magic item or potion is, when the GROUP has NO ONE who can cast that spell at all. They have 2 people who can cast it as a ritual and only need it cast once a day for the whole party.

Even if the party wanted to waste resources, it would be cheaper just to make scrolls.

Many more things apply to scrolls in an aqueous environ.

Many other different things apply to casting a spell. Like, dc for casting under water with verbal and somatic components. And whether the party will have to split.

Every option other than rings has a long list of why its horrible by comparison. Every other option has just an extensive of a list. I chose potions as the example list of awful because its also an item so the comparisons are more directly easy to see and compare directly to the option not plagued with failure and also because they are a better option than scrolls (which underwater are the worst of the three inferior options by far). Its obviously not just about money but there are actually monetary arguments that can be made for this too. They are more convoluted though and not as universally and consistantly applicable.

 

[neogod22]

Its the superior option because its far less likely to fail and lasts longer. Needs to be replaced less often. You lose it less easily (very easy to lose items in an aquatic environment realistically). Takes up less space. btw, you have to pass a check to use a potion while you are already submerged without just ruining the potion because you are under water. Furthermore it takes time in a round to activate a potion. Time you might not have. Furthermore if you are under really deep water you will be using magical means to protect yourself from that aspect of the environment most likely. Sometimes items arent on your person within this protective zone. Manybreasons you might need to leave items behind. Guess what? The potion bottle isnt gonna hold up. Even if it did the cork or cap would pop off long before the bottle shatters in most cases. Ruined. The spare ring not on your person will be just fine though. Even if you have to temporarily leave it behind for any of the multitude of potential reasons. Furthermore if already drowning a potion can be a problem. Dc check is not exactly a great one to take a potion while already drowning. Furthermore, good luck trying to get a person underwater whos already unconscious to take a potion of water breathing properly with water already filling their esophagus, airway, and oral cavity. Its difficult not to spill any underwater while conscious and drowning. Its way more difficult to pass the whole thing down someone's esophagus while already underwater with them already unconscious. Its going to just seep right out their mouth or nose if you arent really careful. Could be extra difficult in combat. I could continue the list of reasons the ring is the superior option in a heavily aquatic campaign for a whole page of this thread. Ive proven the point though. Ring>potion in this scenario.

Are you agreeing with me? That's what it sounds like.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

months would rarely be necessary but can be for certain things certain classes might want to do. It does happen but depends usually on the character having certain things it wants to do that require a lot of work. There are certain golems this applies to for instance.

Also uncommon but far more common than needing a month is certain classes needing a day, couple days, or a week for something. Some things certain classes can do just simply take time.

 

[neogod22]

Many more things apply to scrolls in an aqueous environ.

Many other different things apply to casting a spell. Like, dc for casting under water with verbal and somatic components. And whether the party will have to split.

Every option other than rings has a long list of why its horrible by comparison. Every other option has just an extensive of a list. I chose potions as the example list of awful because its also an item so the comparisons are more directly easy to see and compare directly to the option not plagued with failure and also because they are a better option than scrolls (which underwater are the worst of the three inferior options by far). Its obviously not just about money but there are actually monetary arguments that can be made for this too. They are more convoluted though and not as universally and consistantly applicable.

This depends wholly on which edition you're playing. 5e has no such checks. You can either cast the spell or you can't. There is no chance of failure.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

You might want to put an edition tag on the thread (or clarify relevant editions in the OP) if you are assuming an edition where doing things like drinking a potion underwater requires a check. We discuss all editions here, but people generally assume 5e rules unless otherwise specified.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Are you agreeing with me? That's what it sounds like.

Nope. The back ups should be rings. My posts were about why you dont wabt your back ups to not be rings. Not amulets or crowns or anything else either. When you are under water you dont want to wear your "i can breath water" device where it can easily be snatched off of you.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

You might want to put an edition tag on the thread (or clarify relevant editions in the OP) if you are assuming an edition where doing things like drinking a potion underwater requires a check. We discuss all editions here, but people generally assume 5e rules unless otherwise specified.

I must have missed something. Im still learning 5e rules of course, but if everyone assumes there is no problem using a potion under water then quite frankly thats a blind spot or its not but people are missing where its covered. That should just be completely a normal task. At all. Why on earth would you not need to do a check for such a thing in any edition? Doesnt it count as adverse conditions? Either way there are just a ton of reasons the ring is the way to go.

 

[aco175]

My players would tend to try researching where they could find a ring or McGruffin that would allow them to continue on the main quest. My job would be to say yes and have a side quest to find something to aid them.

 

[neogod22]

Nipe. The back ups should be rings. My posts were about why you dont wabt your back ups to not be rings.

The back up is the druid. There's no reason to make rings. Again 0 resources used vs 5000+gp per ring. I'm not at home so I can't look up the magic item tables, but there are a lot more things you can spend your gold on than creating magic items, especially redundant ones. Water breathing does not protect against environmental hazards such as cold, darkness, pressure, the deterioration of your items. So the idea of wasting money on multiple rings that cast the same spell 2 of your casters already can cast is STUPID. If you found a ring, I would agree it would be a superior option, but creating or buying one or multiple rings isn't.