It's not odd at all, I've told you what my approach is, and you seem to think that it's not the right one for you, so I would like to see what your approach would produce on that spell.
You might have me missed up with the other poster. Besides your approach seems to be to wait until the issue comes up and then solve it at the table. Asking me to solve it now, not at the table, is already different from your approach
And this is exactly where my approach comes from, I cannot foresee all the cases, but I'll create an ad hoc ruling depending on the exact circumstances and use of the spell, using the overall consistency of the world as my main guideline, as well as MGF.
Your approach was far more than that. You've already determined that the effect of the spell will increase if the suggestion is "more like a persuasion" and decrease if it is "more like a domination". You also said that you would take into account the power of the spell, which means you have analyzed various spell slot levels and determined how powerful each should be. That is a lot of analysis and consideration, exactly the type of thing you are saying you don't want because of powergamers trying to lock you down.
OK, since you were mentioning falling, I made a connection to events like what happened in AD&D where a 20th paladin just jumped down into a mile-deep chasm, took her 70 points of falling damage (the average of the cap for falling damage), healed a bit and started chasing demons.
See, and here is the thing. You saying this makes me think that you see that as a problem. That that event shouldn't have happened, because it wasn't how you pictured the game. But it is also exactly what the rules of the game SAID should happen.
This is what I'm talking about. The character, as a person in this world, knows how devastating a fall is, and knows they can make it. They have tales of people who did something exactly like this, and so they came up with a plan that utilized the physics of their world. However, those physics aren't OUR physics, and so many people would decry this as a problem, possibly accuse the player of powergaming or metagaming.
This is why things need to be confirmed and checked. Why players and DMs need to get on the same page. Now, personally, I don't cap fall damage. Every 10 ft is 1d6 and if that means you take 520d6 damage, then that's what it means. I also tell players this, so they know. And if that changed, I'd let them know, because they need a working knowledge of the physics of the game to make decisions. Can you shove a 1 ton monster 15 ft Mr. Halfling? Normally no, but if you are a Battlemaster fighter with Pushing Attack then you can, and we need to figure out how that happens. If I'm just going to rule "no, your ability does not work" then I need to tell them that before they try to use it, because the game rules as they stand, the physics as they stand, don't put a weight limit on Pushing attack.
This isn't about destroying the shared story by locking it down with rules. This is about making sure people are aware of their options in this world where the rules are different.
It's exactly as with suggestion, I can't foresee all the types of buildings that there might be, from the ones with apparent stones to those completely smooth, those with windows or not, etc.
Just as with suggestion, I'm not going to caracterise it, if the player asks me "does it look hard to climb", I will tell him how hard it looks which will give him an idea about the DC, and if he is clever, he will probably mention that it would be easier with climbing gear, etc.
I'm still not sure what you expect of the DM in advance.
To understand that unless the building is completely glass smooth there is no check. And even then, if the player has a climb speed, per the rules, it doesn't matter that it is completely glass smooth.
See, I had a character with a 40 ft move speed, 80 if they dashed, and a climb speed. I had a DM who wanted to tell me it was impossible for that character to free-climb a 50 ft tall stone wall. Not one that was glass smooth, just rough stone. They were thinking that it was impossible for a person to climb five stories in 6 seconds with no gear. And they are right, no human in our world can do that. But, DnD isn't our world, and the character wasn't human, they very much could do what I was saying I did.
So, do I expect you to have memorized every building that will ever appear in your games? No. Do I expect to be on the same page as you about whether or not you are throwing the climbing rules out the window in favor of your version of realism? Yes, because I'm not going to bother investing in being able to climb and jump with no checks if you are going to insist on checks anyways for "realism"
Unless people are abusing the system with hasted tabaxi monks, I thought that the jumping distances are fairly clear in the books. I'm still not sure what you are looking for from your DM.
How is a Tabaxi Monk (completely legal choice) with Haste (completely legal spell) abusing the system? See, this is what I'm talking about. How am I, the player, supposed to know that you are going to declare a combination of legal abilities "abuse" and start nerfing them?
The rules are clear. I've still had DMs ask a player who makes a running jump with a 12 strength to roll athletics to clear a 10 ft pit. And, then, maybe the player is going to ask how you are going to handle rolling for a jump when it does need a roll, because those rules are very much not clear.
That's fine, it's just that at our tables, I don't need to pull back the curtain, and I think it's good because sometimes the reason for which something works or not is not something that their characters could or should know about, so it avoids me having to jump through loops in these cases, which actually happen fairly frequently when there is a question of that kind. Which, however, happens infrequently because I really think that we share a common understanding as to how the fantasy worlds of D&D "work", including the planes and their bizarre effects (for "known" planes, but of course if the characters travel to a bizarre plane, I find it normal that they don't understand why things work strangely, at least at first until they can figure it out).
People very much do not share a common understanding of DnD worlds. They should, but time and again I've found people who don't understand how these rules apply. And I don't see what "hoops" you think you need to jump through just to talk to your players and answer questions.
I would not answer it, because it might just be wasting time for everyone. It is also my experience that people looking for abilities 6 levels ahear are not "idling" planning ahead. They are doing a build, and I've never seen anyone do that without some level of powergaming in mind. But maybe you can provide me examples of "idling planning ahead for six levels that had nothing to do with optimising/powergaming"...
Sure. I sat down at my friend's table a few weeks ago. He had to step out to take care of his daughter and pregnant wife. I knew that in a few levels we would be getting a feat, and I decided to go ahead and pass the time while he was busy looking at the feats and thinking of my options and narrowing down what I would want in those levels.
I've got no build, just looking ahead with what I know of the game, the party, and my available options, and considering what I will likely do. And if I'd come across something that might raise a question, then I'd ask him. Likely after the game or via a text during the week.
You say you might be wasting time... but first of all how much time do you expect a question to "waste" and secondly, while they may not decide to take the option they were asking about, that doesn't automatically mean that answering the question is a waste of time. Sure, anything might happen. But that doesn't mean looking ahead and seeking clarity is a waste of time.
And I certainly don't do that. Monsters do not have a label saying "I'm a standard demon" or "I'm a homebrewed demon, I have strange abilities". Show, don't tell, when my Glabrezu who had fused with the essence of the Infinite Staircase (a homebrewed mythic monster) came by and had parts of the staircase meld and explode, they knew they were in trouble, but not more than when they pissed off the completely standard Grey Slaad.
Sometimes it is obvious to them, like when they faced a monster that was basically a fusion of an Aboleth and a Beholder. But sometimes, there is something strange going on, and I like to highlight that. Especially if the monster has an ability that breaks the standard rules of the game.
And if that's fine with your group, great. Our groups, on the other hand, are not playing that way at all, we know nothing about each other's character, we don't know everything that is going on or how special places work (and there are a lot of them, and mysterious physically, magically, in terms of intrigues, of NPCs, etc.). We just listen to the DM (and it rewards engagement and attentiveness), and try things out in character, with what we think our character knows. It's part of the mystery of the multiverse, and it makes discovering its secrets part of the journey.
I hasten to say that this is not a judgement of any kind, all tables are different and to each his own. Some players enjoy some aspects more than others, it's up to the DM to take this into account to provide the best experience he can for his table.
And I think that is the key. I've run into far more DMs who decry us for "metagaming" and "ruining the mystery" by seeking to understand what is going on. And I've had a few players who have been a bit off balance because they are getting more information than they are used to, and realizing that the things they are used to fearing... aren't to be feared. They don't have to look at the treasure and wonder "is touching this going to kill me?" or things like that.
