Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bacon Bits" data-source="post: 7873756" data-attributes="member: 6777737">I would generally say that the rest-enablers have not been a problem in our campaigns. The amount of hate the spells got in the other thread was grossly disproportionate, IMO.First of all, attacking the players while they rest isn't that critical to the game. It's just not. You might like the verisimilitude it brings, but it's really not that interesting of a concept.Second, the mere existence of these spells says pretty clearly that the designers intend that if the PCs try to rest hard enough, they should be able to do it. The game assumes that it's possible. Consequently, I see no real problem with alarm, rope trick, or magnificent mansion. Similarly, goodberry and create food and water mean that the game assumes food and water should be problems that magic can readily solve. If you don't like that you're free to change the game.I think the only remotely questionable spell is tiny hut, and even then I don't think the hate was entirely warranted. I kept seeing people say that their players were using multiple tiny hut spells to block off parts of the dungeon. This struck me as strange, because even in 5e the spell specifies that the spell immediately ends if the caster leaves the area of effect.It's worth noting, too, that in prior editions where tiny hut didn't hedge creatures out that it cost 1 action to cast. It was quite a useful combat spell in 3e simply because it provided concealment for all occupants.If I were to change tiny hut at all, I would make it work kind of like like sanctuary or invisibility. I would take this:Shuffle it around for clarity, and change it to this:</blockquote>

Verification