D&D 5E Leomund's Tiny Hut in Tight Places

[Mort]

Oh, good point. At least it doesn't have that problem. So no more than one portable bunker per caster at a time...

I can still spam them, but at least I can't have multiples without henchmen.

Well 5th level+ henchmen that have to remain stationary.

Fun way to drive home the absurdity - In a magic heavy campaign (Eberron fits the bill usually) - Have secure rooms be manned by a 5th+ level wizard at all times who has the spell up and is not allowed to leave. Only people that can access the room are those that were there when the spell was cast. Heck it even unerringly prevents creatures/characters that try to disguise themselves - magically or otherwise.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Oh, good point. At least it doesn't have that problem. So no more than one portable bunker per caster at a time...

I can still spam them, but at least I can't have multiples without henchmen.

New spell title: "Leomund's Secure Fighting Position"

Also, check the casting time: 1 minute

If enemies are afoot, good luck finishing the spell

doesn’t seem to be all that spammable IMO

 

[tetrasodium]

As soon as the wizard leaves the hut, the spell ends. So no spamming multiples of the thing, or leaving it behind you to clog an area.

At least that issue is a rules lawyerly ambigious wording issue that could be fixed with errata that made it clear it blocked line of effect. Even if you rule that you can't cast a spell that targets something outside of the sphere, it's clear from the new wording that you can stab spears through the sides of the sphere at the kobolds or goblins investigating it, or fire arrows at the orcs setting up an ambush. So you still have a huge problem quite apart from any rulings you could make.

No, you are inadvertantly houseruling sanity into the spell without realizing.

Spoiler: phb205

A C l e a r Pa t h t o t h e T a r g e t
To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover. If you place an area of effect at a point that you can’t see and an obstruction, such as a wall, is between you and that point, the point o f origin comes into being on the near side of that obstruction.

Spoiler: phb196

A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly
by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach
such a target by including it in an area of effect. A
target has total cover if it is completely concealed by
an obstacle.

@Celebrim We could argue day & night without agreeing on if total cover or "point you can't see" is the important part of that ambiguous point but there is still the fact that it allows two very problematic styles of play that I think both of you are overlooking by simply never having considered such insanity.

• Kick in the door > nova/alpha strike > tiny hut > take a long rest > kick in the door & repeat.. the wizard only leaves the hut just before it's time to kick in the door & unload with every spell/ability he can while the rest of the party is doing the same.
• OK Rogue, go scout up there & see what to expect, absolute worst case train to the zone & we figure out what to do after you take a short rest before going back to nova or just evac to town with teleport or something.... the wizard doesn't need to leave the hut.

Regardless of scouting, it still allows PCs to completely abandon concepts like "this fight doesn't look like it needs my best everything, I should save some gas in the tank for whatever we encounter later". Once the party begins with those styles of play, the GM is left with the incredibly lame options of constant doom clock, changing dungeon design to neuter tiny hut, & building encounters to neuter tiny hut. It ppresents "omg this is horribly broken" with "GM vrs Player"as the solution. There's only so many times you can surprise them with a bullette or some other burrowing creature. I've lost track of how many times I've had to hear "how does X work with tiny hut?"

Also, check the casting time: 1 minute

If enemies are afoot, good luck finishing the spell

doesn’t seem to be all that spammable IMO

one minute? Are all your ancient tombs, abandoned castles, unexplored jungles, & so on grand central station?...go back to that room back there & cast tiny hut so we don't need to care if they kick in the door... it's not like we need to beat respawn timers. It's a spell built against mmo tropes not d&d.

 

[StormbringerAUS]

I'd allow it once, but the spell is also a ritual. I wouldn't let the PCs spend 11 minutes outside every door for the remainder of the campaign to get an impervious shield 10 feet into every new room.

Yes if being used at a ritual there would be other consequences

 

[MarkB]

I think "spells can't extend or be cast through it" is pretty clear.

I agree. However, arguments could be made for briefly sticking a hand out of it to cast a spell.

The last time a party in my campaign tried this the enemy built a shield wall, converged on their location and started throwing in bundles of wood soaked in tar. The plan was to wait for the hut to collapse, trapping the PCs inside and then light it on fire.

Oh, and the enemy had called for reinforcements first.

Reasonable. I did rather like the use of it by the players in Critical Role recently, when they set it up as a fallback position while sneaking into the inner sanctum of a white dragon's lair. The encounter ended with them racing back into the hut and spending a tense minute casting Teleportation Circle while the dragon raged, clawed and breath-weaponed at the dome's surface, finally promising them that it had their scent, and would know where to find them. It was a powerful tactic, but it did prevent their primary arcane spellcaster from participating in the heist itself.

 

[Oofta]

I agree. However, arguments could be made for briefly sticking a hand out of it to cast a spell.

Yeah, I'd call shenanigans on that. In order to cast a spell you have to be inside or outside the hut. Doing it part way would be like being "kind of" pregnant.

 

[Tony Vargas]

... it's not like we need to beat respawn timers. It's a spell built against mmo tropes not d&d.

Where did you think MMOs got those tropes?

 

[Celebrim]

The last time a party in my campaign tried this the enemy built a shield wall...

So you went full on "Tucker's Kobold"?

Built as in built a mantlet, or formed, as in formed a shield wall?

0) The very fact that you have a story means that you recognize that this has already become a thing.
1) Does 5e have rules for shield walls and are they equally accessible to the PCs? In my experience shield walls even if you invent some rules to handle them only provide a major benefit when facing near peer opposition. If the rules you use give vastly inferior opposition a major benefit, they'll be absolutely game wrecking in the hands of the players turned against that opposition.
2) If built a mantlet or pavise that gave full cover, how long did that take or where they already on hand in the scenario? Did said tar, wood, and so forth already exist in the scenario or where they "plausibly" invented as a result of the problem the PC's posed? Is this such a common occurrence in the game world that armies have actually drilled in the deployment of tar covered bundles of wood?
3) In any event, how did the PC's respond? I don't see how anything you suggest remotely threatens a PC party. Using the one way viewing function of the spell they can easily see how at any enemy preparations while the enemy can't see what is being planned by the PC's. Flammables tend to be much more dangerous to low level NPC's than PC's, who have the option here of setting them off at the time and in the manner of their choosing The PC's have almost complete capacity to counter and disrupt the slow motion plan you describe.
4) Or, so long as they aren't surrounded, they could just ignore it. Huts don't collapse in 5e. You are thinking of earlier editions. Nothing in the spell provides for the collapse of the hut and any ruling providing such a collapse would go against the wording of the spell.

Tucker's Kobolds -- really that tough a challenge?

Shark, we usually agree on many things, but here I must disagree. First off, the players do not know, and generally will never know *exactly* how the Kobold tribe gains the wealth to store/stockpile/utilize all the oil, traps, poisons, and so on. Most don't, and are unlikely to find out the...

www.enworld.org

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well 5th level+ henchmen that have to remain stationary.

Fun way to drive home the absurdity - In a magic heavy campaign (Eberron fits the bill usually) - Have secure rooms be manned by a 5th+ level wizard at all times who has the spell up and is not allowed to leave. Only people that can access the room are those that were there when the spell was cast. Heck it even unerringly prevents creatures/characters that try to disguise themselves - magically or otherwise.

"It's a boring job, but in two more years I'll have my student loans paid off..."

 

[Oofta]

So you went full on "Tucker's Kobold"?

Built as in built a mantlet, or formed, as in formed a shield wall?

0) The very fact that you have a story means that you recognize that this has already become a thing.
1) Does 5e have rules for shield walls and are they equally accessible to the PCs? In my experience shield walls even if you invent some rules to handle them only provide a major benefit when facing near peer opposition. If the rules you use give vastly inferior opposition a major benefit, they'll be absolutely game wrecking in the hands of the players turned against that opposition.
2) If built a mantlet or pavise that gave full cover, how long did that take or where they already on hand in the scenario? Did said tar, wood, and so forth already exist in the scenario or where they "plausibly" invented as a result of the problem the PC's posed? Is this such a common occurrence in the game world that armies have actually drilled in the deployment of tar covered bundles of wood?
3) In any event, how did the PC's respond? I don't see how anything you suggest remotely threatens a PC party. Using the one way viewing function of the spell they can easily see how at any enemy preparations while the enemy can't see what is being planned by the PC's. Flammables tend to be much more dangerous to low level NPC's than PC's, who have the option here of setting them off at the time and in the manner of their choosing The PC's have almost complete capacity to counter and disrupt the slow motion plan you describe.
4) Or, so long as they aren't surrounded, they could just ignore it. Huts don't collapse in 5e. You are thinking of earlier editions. Nothing in the spell provides for the collapse of the hut and any ruling providing such a collapse would go against the wording of the spell.

Tucker's Kobolds -- really that tough a challenge?

Shark, we usually agree on many things, but here I must disagree. First off, the players do not know, and generally will never know *exactly* how the Kobold tribe gains the wealth to store/stockpile/utilize all the oil, traps, poisons, and so on. Most don't, and are unlikely to find out the...

www.enworld.org

The wall was essentially an improvised siege tower. Well if the tower only needed to be a little over 5 ft tall. It wouldn't have been much use in other circumstances. But as it was it would either draw the PCs out of the hut so they could be attacked or provide 100% cover to get close. Oh, and yes, under similar circumstances the PCs could build something similar.

The fighters ended up going out of the hut, only to get attacked. If they had not the hut would have been buried. Had the hut not been on solid rock, they would have started digging underneath.

As far as the hut collapsing, it's not permanent. At the end of 8 hours it goes away. It takes a minute to recast. In the meantime a small army would have been getting ready to attack.

None of the actions of the enemy took particularly genius tactics, just hobgoblins with reasonable military tactics.