D&D General Has Tiny Hut actually affected your game? Or has it otherwise mattered?

[Hussar]

i think it's fine as an offensive damage type, but i could see a point to removing it as an energy construct material.

Well, the problem is that it gets added to so much. Why does an artificer's construct deal force damage with a bite? Well, mechanically that's so it bypasses any damage resistance. But, it makes zero sense. And, really, what is "force" damage? A mace deals force damage but we call it bludgeoning. An arrow deals force damage but we call it piercing. So, why is a magic missile "force" damage and not piercing, magic? Basically, force got added as the damage type that nothing resists.

Personally, I think I'd rather that force spells dealt a damage type that represents the type of force they are dealing. Your Spiritual Weapon deals blunt/slashing/piercing depending on what type of weapon you choose. Magic missile, way back when, was an actual arrow - so, let's make it piercing again. Give it the magic type and we're off to the races.

Or, put it this way. If I hit an ooze with a slashing weapon, I get two oozes. But, I use a longsword as a Spiritual Weapon and it just deals damage? Why? And, this way it gets around that Order of the Scribe shenanigans of trying to make every damaging spell force damage so they can bypass all damage resistances.

I get why they added force as a damage type - they wanted something that can bypass all the mechanics. But, to me, that's kinda pointless. It makes force just the best damage type in nearly every circumstance unless something is vulnerable to a particular damage type.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Well, the problem is that it gets added to so much. Why does an artificer's construct deal force damage with a bite? Well, mechanically that's so it bypasses any damage resistance. But, it makes zero sense. And, really, what is "force" damage? A mace deals force damage but we call it bludgeoning. An arrow deals force damage but we call it piercing. So, why is a magic missile "force" damage and not piercing, magic? Basically, force got added as the damage type that nothing resists.

Personally, I think I'd rather that force spells dealt a damage type that represents the type of force they are dealing. Your Spiritual Weapon deals blunt/slashing/piercing depending on what type of weapon you choose. Magic missile, way back when, was an actual arrow - so, let's make it piercing again. Give it the magic type and we're off to the races.

Or, put it this way. If I hit an ooze with a slashing weapon, I get two oozes. But, I use a longsword as a Spiritual Weapon and it just deals damage? Why? And, this way it gets around that Order of the Scribe shenanigans of trying to make every damaging spell force damage so they can bypass all damage resistances.

I get why they added force as a damage type - they wanted something that can bypass all the mechanics. But, to me, that's kinda pointless. It makes force just the best damage type in nearly every circumstance unless something is vulnerable to a particular damage type.

Personally I interpret force as like, raw untyped magic damage, a pure energy sort of thing rather than the type of kinetic force of weapons and such, I do agree force is probably a little overused and slapped on too much stuff as a ‘we don’t want to deal with considering resistance’ pass by the designers and a good number of its instances could probably be altered to be magical B/S/P, like the artificer’s construct’s bite should just do magical piercing, as a result i think the point of force damage has gotten muddied, it’s not as powerful as other magic types but it’s what you use when nothing else is working, to hit intangible or evasive foes, it’s not fancy but it’s reliable and will get the job done.

 

[Hussar]

Personally I interpret force as like, raw untyped magic damage, a pure energy sort of thing rather than the type of kinetic force of weapons and such, I do agree force is probably a little overused and slapped on too much stuff as a ‘we don’t want to deal with considering resistance’ pass by the designers and a good number of its instances could probably be altered to be magical B/S/P, like the artificer’s construct’s bite should just do magical piercing, as a result i think the point of force damage has gotten muddied, it’s not as powerful as other magic types but it’s what you use when nothing else is working, to hit intangible or evasive foes, it’s not fancy but it’s reliable and will get the job done.

Thing is though, we already have that - magic damage. It's what weapons do to bypass resistances. So, why give wizards yet another way to be more effective? Just change "force" to "magic" and we're good to go. Then remove all the "force area" effect spells like Forcecage and Leo's Hut and turn them into physical effects. To me, that's a lot more flavorful and it stops players from constantly trying to game the system by turning everything into a force effect. Order of Scribe wizards, and I saw more than a few of them, are annoying as hell. Every single direct damage spell just gets turned into "Force" damage which makes feats that change damage types pointless. While there are no official 3rd level force damage spells, wizards can create their own spells. (never minding that my player lied to me about being able to use upcast versions of spells for energy substitution and I made the stupid mistake of actually trusting players).

My point being, we don't actually need force as an energy type. It doesn't really serve any purpose other than to be the "get out of jail free" energy type.

 

[Maxperson]

Why do we have Wall of Force anyway? What's the point?

My theory is that Gygax wanted force fields in the game.

 

[SkidAce]

Well, the problem is that it gets added to so much. Why does an artificer's construct deal force damage with a bite? Well, mechanically that's so it bypasses any damage resistance. But, it makes zero sense. And, really, what is "force" damage? A mace deals force damage but we call it bludgeoning. An arrow deals force damage but we call it piercing. So, why is a magic missile "force" damage and not piercing, magic? Basically, force got added as the damage type that nothing resists.

Personally, I think I'd rather that force spells dealt a damage type that represents the type of force they are dealing. Your Spiritual Weapon deals blunt/slashing/piercing depending on what type of weapon you choose. Magic missile, way back when, was an actual arrow - so, let's make it piercing again. Give it the magic type and we're off to the races.

Or, put it this way. If I hit an ooze with a slashing weapon, I get two oozes. But, I use a longsword as a Spiritual Weapon and it just deals damage? Why? And, this way it gets around that Order of the Scribe shenanigans of trying to make every damaging spell force damage so they can bypass all damage resistances.

I get why they added force as a damage type - they wanted something that can bypass all the mechanics. But, to me, that's kinda pointless. It makes force just the best damage type in nearly every circumstance unless something is vulnerable to a particular damage type.

I always thought of it as "solid energy", like force fields and stuff. Magic missile condensed the energy and shoots it, a Wall of Force is a barrier. Makes sense for some constructs and even Spiritual Weapon if looked at this way.