D&D 5E (2014) Dispel Evil and Good cleric spell 5th level in use

I have the final fight tonight with the ghost dragon in its lair. I'm not sure but likely will have an auto-hit on allies that become possessed, but a to-hit against other monsters that the ghost possesses. I think it is mostly to have the player that is possessed be able to do something in short order. I usually make them roll to hit other allies, which they all seem to like.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So what, anytime it is dramatically appropriate, we should just pretend the D&D magic system doesn't exist?
TBH, yes. D&D's magic sucks and often the game is poorly balanced for team play and excitement. This is why bosses have legendary resistance - to give them a chance to be interesting.

RAW Strahd is a one round speedbump for any semi competent party, assuming everyone even gets a chance to act before his pathetic HP total is vaporized. How is that memorable or fun?

I'll take a set piece any day. BTW, in my scenario, DIspel Evil still works, it just requires setup.
 
Last edited:

Magic Missile is the most obvious, but there's also Heat Metal, Cloud of Daggers, and Reverse Gravity.

Oh and I guess I should mention Immovable Object, as it's actually an offensive touch spell with no save.
Magic Missile is a sacred cow. Cloud of Daggers isn't a ranged attack at all. It's an area effect like Blade Barrier. Same with Reverse Gravity. Heat Metal doesn't attack a creature. It heats an object.

Of those examples, only Magic Missile is a ranged attack and the auto miss is only there as a sacred cow. I have a vague recollection that the playtest tried it with to hit rolls and got shot down, but I could easily be wrong about that.
 

So what, anytime it is dramatically appropriate, we should just pretend the D&D magic system doesn't exist? "Yeah, uh, it's really important that you can't interact with this plot point in any way until it's dramatically appropriate, and I don't know why you'd want to, that can't possibly be satisfying."

I don't want to get too absurd on this point, but that's a slippery slope. "Hey guys, let's play D&D, where you get these cool abilities, but don't use them if it would derail the story I'm trying to tell".

It's like why I don't even bother to prepare DIvination spells anymore, because on the off chance they could tell me something useful, the DM likely doesn't want me to know what that is because it would derail their campaign.
I think you’re forgetting that in 5e NPCs and Monsters don’t follow PC construction rules. There are foes that can cast multiple leveled spells in a round and that bypass restrictions that players have for balance reasons.

Where there is space for interpretation the DM should absolutely be encouraged to do so to a reasonable extent.

@aco175 made a really good call.
 

In 5e typically spells that auto hit also have a save. Spells that have no save typically require a hit roll.

I agree, and spells that have a save also usually damage enemies when they make that save. This emphasizes my point. When you make your save against Lightning Bolt, it still hits you. When you make your save against Hellish Rebuke it still hits you.

You can damage someone with a Lightning bolt or Hellish Rebuke without rolling anything to hit them. They automatically hit and damage the enemy, regardless of what they roll on their save.

In the 2024 rules Inflict Wounds automatically damages an enemy. This is a touch spell and you can automatically touch your opponent and damage him without rolling any attack roll, whether the enemy saves or not.

I question the logic that some spells which don't say they require an attack roll can automatically "hit" an enemy, and other spells that don't require an attack roll can't automatically "hit" an enemy in a similar situation.

I think it is pretty simple; the spells that require an attack roll say so. The spells that require a save say so. The spells that don't state these things require neither.
 




It never came back up in the final fight with the ghost dragon. It did try to possess the cleric and he made the save. Then it was able to take over the fighter with a 20 AC and cloak of displacement so that make things tougher. The players were all for taking out the fighter to remove the ghost but I also threw in a dozen mummies to make the fight tougher and to give the druid who was throwing around walls of fire something vulnerable to fire, but things backfired and I almost had a TPK.

The mummies have a power that automatically curses you if you get hit so that you cannot gain HP. Well in the first bout of fighting with the ghost and mummies, most all the front line people were hit and getting beat up thinking no big deal. I allowed the cleric to make a check to recall that mummies do not let you heal but he failed. A few rounds later everyone needs a heal and nothing happens. Now the fighter is possessed and being beat down and a few mummies are running around since the druid was all out of fire spells even before entering this room.

In the end the fighter went down, but the cleric had cast death ward before entering the room and so he pops back up at 1HP, but I allowed this to kick out the ghost. The fighter withdraws along with his henchman who are all below 5hp. The barbarian and cleric are below 30hp. The mage and druid are in the back doing ok and manage to lightning bolt the ghost for something. In the end, it got tense but all managed to survive and the cleric can take like 10 remove curses in the morning.

The cleric did cast protection from good and evil on the fighter, which says it helps you with following saves, but I did give the fighter a new save to end possession which he still failed since it was a CHA20 save.
 

If y'all had fun during this encounter kudos!

From rules perspective i think of the following element;

  • Mounting a creature must be willing. I assume it otherwise moves within it's space to prevent it which in such case would have the Cleric fall through its space.
  • Spell effect that touch as part of their effect tells you when an attack roll is needed, for Dispel Evil & Good Banishment does, Break Enchantment doesn't, only requiring an action to reach for it.
 

Remove ads

Top