D&D 5E Levitate is a save-or-die spell

[jaelis]

Floating as if weightless? "One creature or object of your choice that you can see within range rises vertically, up to 20 feet, and remains suspended there for the duration." Check.

Can only move slowly as if weightless? "The target can move only by pushing or pulling against a fixed object or surface within reach (such as a wall or a ceiling), which allows it to move as if it were climbing." Check.

The mechanics of the spell absolutely support my conclusion. Feel free to interpret it differently, but don't tell me that the spell doesn't support what I'm saying I'd rule at my table.

The spell is certainly consistent with your interpretation, I'm saying that isn't the only interpretation it is consistent with. Another picture would be that it provides a 5 ft square invisible platform of force for you to stand on, and you can shove the platform around by pushing or pulling on a wall or the like. That's consistent too. Like I said, you can play it how you like, I just think that if there's a way to read it the makes the spell work better for the game, I'm inclined to read it that way.

 

[Maxperson]

It just seems strange to me, given the sheer number of ways that RPGs fudge reality, to get hung up on this one.

We had a wizard use this just last week, and he was jumping in and out of cover on his turns specifically for this reason. So the target held his action to wait for him to appear. If the DM has decided that THIS is where he is finally going to draw the line on realism, the wizard probably wouldn’t have bothered trying to hide, and the game would have been less fun for everyone.

You shouldn't assume that your brand of fun is everyone's brand of fun. It's also fun to eliminate an opponent or render someone helpless by floating them in the air. There are very few wrong ways to have fun playing D&D, and those ways are generally at the expense of another.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Floating as if weightless? "One creature or object of your choice that you can see within range rises vertically, up to 20 feet, and remains suspended there for the duration." Check.

Can only move slowly as if weightless? "The target can move only by pushing or pulling against a fixed object or surface within reach (such as a wall or a ceiling), which allows it to move as if it were climbing." Check.

The mechanics of the spell absolutely support my conclusion. Feel free to interpret it differently, but don't tell me that the spell doesn't support what I'm saying I'd rule at my table.

That's how it worked in previous editions, but given the language used I don't think that was the intent for the 5e version. It makes no mention of penalties to attack, whether melee or ranged. IMO, had that been the intent for this version it would have said so.

You're free to rule as you wish, but by RAW there is no penalty.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The spell is certainly consistent with your interpretation, I'm saying that isn't the only interpretation it is consistent with.

Yeah, that gets to the heart of this. Certainly it's not wrong to rule that it's harder to throw accurately/forcefully while levitated, but given all the physics-defying shenanigans in 5e, why get hung up on this one?

The question shouldn't be "what is the most realistic?" but "what is the most fun?"

EDIT: Just saw your last post. Sure, if you think it's more fun for there to be fewer ways to counter this spell, go for it. /scratchhead

 

[Maxperson]

You may have missed my previous edit, Max, so I’ll ask again: ever see an athlete jump, catch, and throw again before landing?

Yep. Far weaker throws with far less distance and accuracy. Which is probably why they are rarely performed. Athletes overwhelmingly wait until they hit the ground before throwing.

 

[Maxperson]

The spell is certainly consistent with your interpretation, I'm saying that isn't the only interpretation it is consistent with. Another picture would be that it provides a 5 ft square invisible platform of force for you to stand on, and you can shove the platform around by pushing or pulling on a wall or the like. That's consistent too. Like I said, you can play it how you like, I just think that if there's a way to read it the makes the spell work better for the game, I'm inclined to read it that way.

If it provided a platform of force, the spell would say so. That platform would have mechanical impact upon the game. For instance, it would block attacks from beneath the suspended victim. You would also be standing in the air, not suspended in the air. The spell uses suspended for a reason.

You can interpret that the person can throw unimpeded if you want, but the spell doesn't provide a mechanical platform of force as a reason for doing so.

 

[Maxperson]

That's how it worked in previous editions, but given the language used I don't think that was the intent for the 5e version. It makes no mention of penalties to attack, whether melee or ranged. IMO, had that been the intent for this version it would have said so.

5e is a rulings over rules edition. Of course it leaves it vague and up to the DM.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Yep. Far weaker throws with far less distance and accuracy. Which is probably why they are rarely performed. Athletes overwhelmingly wait until they hit the ground before throwing.

I would hate to play a ninja at your table. "Sorry, if you throw two shuriken at once they're both with disadvantage. You can't throw using your core muscles from both sides at once. Not possible."

Which, I would have to admit, is true.

But I think "rule of cool" outweighs "rule of selective application of quasi-realism"

 

[Guest 6801328]

GAH. I just realized I got sucked into one of these surreal debates with Max YET AGAIN.

The greater fool am I.

Happy gaming.

 

[jaelis]

You can interpret that the person can throw unimpeded if you want, but the spell doesn't provide a mechanical platform of force as a reason for doing so.

Neither does it say that the suspended creature has disadvantage on attacks. Spells do what they say, anything either you or I add because of how we picture it is coming from us. But you seem to like your way of reading it, and I wasn't really trying to talk you out of it. Just thought you might not have considered there were other ways, but I can see now that you have.