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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 7542509" data-attributes="member: 6802951">Some of this sort of thing has been discussed in Eberron, its associated Dragonshards, and in Keith Baker's blog and podcast. However only the blog and podcast go into 5e-specific rules: The base setting info and Dragonshards are set up to explain things from a 3.5ed point of view.However, I'm not aware of any more general official discussion of how rules mechanics designed for PC parties might change base setting assumptions and similar. Generally Druidic beliefs do not gibe with the level of organisation, and being a full Druid is often something that you are called to be rather than something that you can be trained to be.In many settings, only the most rural/wilderness areas might have a population density of Druids capably of this being a factor. - Bear in mind that the actual chance of a given NPC having any PC class levels may be around 10%.I'm pretty sure that it has been mentioned that one of the factors that allowed the Eldeen Reaches to gain independence from Aundair were the logistical support provided by the druids taking part in the conflicts, removing the need for supply trains etc. Generally one of your opponents' few and valuable spellcasters burning a spell slot on killing a single grunt in your army is  a tradeoff that most military leaders would be happy to accept. Unless a force consisted of a small number of powerful champions going up against a foe known to emphasise that spell, its unlikely that any general countermeasures would be taken, particularly if they would be a tradeoff against defending yourself against a much more likely form of attack: Getting stabbed by an enemy soldier.Elite forces going up against opponents known to make widespread use of the spell are a pretty edge case, but would probably be considered more like a party of PCs and would take the sort of precautions that PCs might. (Note that all metal armour will have a fairly substantial level of padding underneath it as standard. Trying to increase insulation is likely to run into heatstroke or mobility issues, or both.) PC-level opponents (or even PC-classed opponents) are rare. Certainly too rare for special rules to be introduced to military conflicts most likely.Methods of restricting spellcasters probably consist of hoods, gags, and manacles with built-in metal gloves. However people skilled enough to conceal thieves tools from a search and picking the lock are very unusual. Its fairly unlikely that an obvious prisoner would even get to roll for a bluff/persuasion check to be released.If a military leader was put in the sort of position where they had captured a  group of powerful PCs, they would probably go with either some form of honourable parole agreement, nonlethal beatings to keep them unconscious, ensuring that they couldn't get a full long rest, or just executing them and claiming that they fought to the death if asked.Knowing what effects what spells can do is a function of Intelligence (Arcana) checks, and few soldiers would have proficiency in that. In an environment where many soldiers won't see a spell, trying to cover all possible effects of all known spells, on the off-chance that a caster might throw an illusory damage spell probably isn't worth it.Illusions are probably more valuable used to create terrain features, or reserve units than throwing a fake fireball.Using magical means to commit crimes such as defrauding or forgery are probably covered in the laws of a nation, and a crime committed by use of magic will often have harsher penalties.</blockquote>

Verification