the Jester
Legend
Don't make me get on my "they changed all the Humanoids to other types!" horse again.
D&D (2024) What is With Poison?, and Other PHB Conundrums.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
Not to mention the fact that a lot of DMs probably won't care or even remember goblins are now fey and will let the spell work anyway because why not? What's the harm? And also... even if the DM does not allow it to work, it only takes one time for a player to try and charm a goblin for the DM to shout "Ha ha! Doesn't work! FOOLED YOU!!! LOSE YOUR SPELL!!!" for the player to just roll their eyes and then remember for next time. Assuming of course the DM felt the NEED to be a jerk about it-- because in truth what would most likely happen would be either the player and DM would have already talked together about which creatures are now no longer classified as Humanoid (so they'd know going in whether these spells would work)... or the DM would alert the player at the time of casting, and let them choose a different target or choose a different spell.
We're in 'mountains out of molehills' territory right now it seems.
Shadowdweller00
Hero
Hey, whatever's fun for you. In my personal experience though-It's very much a playstyle thing. I like being surprised to learn what the PCs are capable of- over time ofc I'll learn what they can do and adapt, but I definitely don't know all the player options until I have to help a player understand something ... Or if a PC is doing something and I think "now that doesn't seem right, how does that work?" and ask them to read it, or I'll check it out after the session. But I also know which players that'll tend to come up with :')
Ofc not knowing every player option has bitten me in the past when something like Tasha's comes up and a 2nd level spell trivializes 2 purple worms"oh that's very cool" is one thing, "oh what the hell that's so busted" is another.
1) When you're not familiar with the PCs' abilities beforehand, you get to disrupt the story and make everyone else at the table wait while you figure them out upon use during play. On top of all the other things a DM needs to be concentrating on...
2) Balance problems are far more than the PCs merely being able to unexpectedly trivialize a few encounters. They're also the interminable slog against an enemy that isn't seriously dangerous but takes FOREVER to defeat; or the foe that one-shots a PC unexpectedly. Or if you mess up badly enough causes a disruptive TPK. 5e is exceptionally forgiving so one might not experience balance problems that often regardless. But they WILL happen more frequently if you don't know PC abilities. And the difference between a "threatening" encounter, a trivial encounter, and a lethal encounter still all too often come down to a fairly narrow range of power differences.
3) Players will still find plenty of ways to surprise you regardless of whether you know their character abilities.
Last edited:
Bounded accuracy is not something that hit points and damage are really a part of.
Shadowdweller00
Hero
I suspect that part of the designers' rationale for the price of "basic poison" is that the damage isn't JUST +1d4. It's another 1d4 over and above what the players can normally inflict with weapons.
Even so, 100 gp seems unrealistic and prohibitive for use in actual play. I'm not sure I'd want vast quantities of basic poison available for essentially free in a given game world. But I might consider balancing things with legal prohibitions, production issues, and other complications so that it's tricky to obtain and only a few doses are ever available at once rather than with a market price of that magnitude.
Even so, 100 gp seems unrealistic and prohibitive for use in actual play. I'm not sure I'd want vast quantities of basic poison available for essentially free in a given game world. But I might consider balancing things with legal prohibitions, production issues, and other complications so that it's tricky to obtain and only a few doses are ever available at once rather than with a market price of that magnitude.
I'm not sure I understand the distinction you are making. An extra 1d4 is an extra 1d4.
But all those in-fiction limitations would exist for all poisons. Why is this one weak overpriced poison in the PHB?
CreamCloud0
Hero
to inhibit a flood of everyone just adding poison to their weapons maybe it ought to require proficiency in poisoner's kit to properly poison a weapon, thus letting players access the whole list of poisons but stemming the ability to exploit it.
Shadowdweller00
Hero
It's a matter of opportunity cost- an alchemical item that deals 2d6 damage but replaces an attack likely doesn't affect DPR much. Nor does a one-use spell item that, say, deals 3d8 instead of ALL your attacks in a particular round (depending on character level). Even though 2d6 or 3d8 are both notably greater than 1d4. But that 1d4 from basic poison is over and above what you would normally deal anyway. It IS a net DPR increase.
Compare to a sharp stick that also deals 1d4 damage...just with a few extra action economy limitations.
I think other poisons SHOULD suffer from the same in-fiction limitations. It is worth pointing out that the base listings for the majority of other poisons are ALSO similarly overpriced.
Last edited:
Yup. Definite differences of person experiences. Though I think we have different definitions of "not know PC features."
I'm going off of the original convo, that I don't know all the class features etc. by heart and don't know the specifics of what my players pick on level-ups etc.
Your examples might suggest you're thinking of either new DMs, or someone that only runs one-shots so they have no idea of what any of the characters at the table can do due to previous sessions' experiences.
Comparing 5e to like 3e characters, it absolutely is.
Damage stacking is WAY less prevalent now than it was in previous editions, so in that context being able to add in +1d4 damage to your attacks without concentration is quite powerful.
Similar Threads
