D&D (2024) What is With Poison?, and Other PHB Conundrums.

You can run into this with lots of spells. I had a Bard player lose his mind when he tried to use Command on a Gnoll and I asked him "hey, can you speak Gnoll?".
Okay? I don't see the comparison. Like, yes, it can fail. Gnolls are pretty notoriously monsters in 5e* though, so you should be prepared for the possibility that they don't speak common.

Meanwhile, we can now have beings that look like humans, move like humans, speak like humans, dress like humans, and do pretty much everything else humans do...and which have been classified as humans...but which are now classified as fey or aberrations or whatever. That's where the issue lies. I don't see any meaningful chance of a rug-pull experience with trying to cast command on a gnoll, whereas I can see that happening frequently with these new "updates."

*Which mildly annoys me. I've never played one and have no intent to start, but it's just...why jettison the cool gnoll lore and gnoll PC possibilities? Particularly in the edition that's been striving to present more nuanced views on frequently vilified races, like orcs and drow!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are lots of kinds of poison (with prices) in the DMG, resulting in a bit of mixed signals.
Yeah, as much as I will take 5.x to task for various things, this isn't one of them. While the 5.5e PHB only has one poison, the 5.5e DMG has a further fourteen, ranging in price from 150 gp (Poisoned for 24 hours + d12 poison damage; DC10 Con save for half and no condition) all the way up to 2000 gp (10d6 poison damage, DC 21 Con save for half).

One might argue that there should've been more options for poison in the PHB, but that's not quite the same argument.
 

Okay? I don't see the comparison. Like, yes, it can fail. Gnolls are pretty notoriously monsters in 5e* though, so you should be prepared for the possibility that they don't speak common.

Meanwhile, we can now have beings that look like humans, move like humans, speak like humans, dress like humans, and do pretty much everything else humans do...and which have been classified as humans...but which are now classified as fey or aberrations or whatever. That's where the issue lies. I don't see any meaningful chance of a rug-pull experience with trying to cast command on a gnoll, whereas I can see that happening frequently with these new "updates."

*Which mildly annoys me. I've never played one and have no intent to start, but it's just...why jettison the cool gnoll lore and gnoll PC possibilities? Particularly in the edition that's been striving to present more nuanced views on frequently vilified races, like orcs and drow!
Don't we already have a thread for this argument?
 


There are lots of kinds of poison (with prices) in the DMG, resulting in a bit of mixed signals.
Yeah, as much as I will take 5.x to task for various things, this isn't one of them. While the 5.5e PHB only has one poison, the 5.5e DMG has a further fourteen, ranging in price from 150 gp (Poisoned for 24 hours + d12 poison damage; DC10 Con save for half and no condition) all the way up to 2000 gp (10d6 poison damage, DC 21 Con save for half).

One might argue that there should've been more options for poison in the PHB, but that's not quite the same argument.
okay yeah that's an...odd organization decision.
 


I mean poison was also overpriced in 3e as well. The problem with things like poison is, yes its only +1d4, but in a world of bounded accuracy its +1d4!!!

Aka there aren't a lot of ways to boost your damage (especially non-concentration methods), so having something that can do it on tap is actually quite useful, and so they make it ridiculously expensive to ensure every player isn't just poison poison poison all the time....because many players would if it was cheap.

Poison is one of those things that's very hard to balance in dnd, as pcs don't suffer the same story restrictions as npcs in many campaigns. PCs get all the best stuff, and so if they have a poison guy by gum they are going to milk that person for every bit of poison they are worth if the stuff is cheap
 

Alchemist's Fire is much worse than Poison so it does make sense that it is cheaper. I would say they're both WAY too expensive, but then I reduce the pricing on everything. I make Alchemist's Fire 12g and Basic Poison 20g, but then for reference I also make a +1 weapon be 100g.

Alchemist's Fire is basically never worth using, it takes your action to do 1d4 damage + Burning; if you don't have much better uses of your action in combat then... well I don't know how that could be possible. Could be worth using out of combat if you need to light an object on fire but somehow don't have anyone with Firebolt or Create Bonfire cantrips, but that's about it

Basic Poison on the other hand uses your Bonus Action to do free damage on your next attack. There are definitely cases where someone may not have a use of their Bonus Action, and in theory the poison can be applied for free before combat starts if you time it well. So it's not amazing but definitely much better than Alchemist's Fire
What if you threw two flasks or a barrel of Alchemist's Fire?
 

1d4 damage? It's pretty hard to put a price on the ability to snap someone with a rubber band and be miles away from the scene of the crime.

Unless that price is $49.99 on Amazon. Then it's a bit much.
Commoner's have 4 hp. Poison/Alchemist's Fire could one shot them.
 

we can now have beings that look like humans, move like humans, speak like humans, dress like humans, and do pretty much everything else humans do...and which have been classified as humans...but which are now classified as fey or aberrations or whatever.
Discovering that something that looks and acts human is not in fact human is way more interesting than whatever benefit I was planning to get from charming or holding them.
 

Remove ads

Top