D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

Plan to adopt the new core rules?

  • Yep

    Votes: 245 54.3%
  • Nope

    Votes: 206 45.7%

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
By the rules it should be dead after falling, depending how high in the air you got it.

Then again, either they've become much more generous with Telekinesis than I'm used to over the years or whoever's casting it is of colossal level; as a 10x10' cube of jelly would weigh a huge amount.
It is odd, in fact. TK can move an object that weighs only up to 1000 pounds, but lets you move a Huge or smaller creature 30' in any direction, even upwards, with no mention of weight. Now I don't know about you, but I would think most Huge creatures are going to weigh several thousand pounds at least. It's like the square cube law doesn't exist in 5e, lol.

OTOH, this is consistent with how grapple forced movement (and forced movement in general in 5e) doesn't care about weights or encumbrance, only size.

EDIT: before someone says "well obviously a DM should just house rule that", the problem is, such a ruling could cause the entire grapple system to fall apart. Let's say an 18 Strength human weighs, oh, I don't know, 190 pounds (a little over 86 kg for non-Imperials). The default carry capacity rules (seen by many as being very generous to begin with) would let this human carry around Strength score x 15 pounds, or 270. With a suit of plate (65 pounds), a shield (6 pounds), a longsword (3 pounds), and a mere 7 pounds of gear, this 18 Strength human would be unable to move his evil doppleganger (created via mirror of opposition) more than 5 feet a turn...except they couldn't even do that, because when trying to move a grappled opponent, your speed is halved!
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

If only they used “off balance” instead of prone. Sigh. So many arguments could have been avoided.

I’ve seen cubes off balance pretty much every time one of my players throw a damn die.
Well, at least in 5e it implies pretty literal prone, or something like it, as it gives disadvantage to ranged attackers by being low on the ground. It also is a position you can willingly assume.
 


James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
Well, at least in 5e it implies pretty literal prone, or something like it, as it gives disadvantage to ranged attackers by being low on the ground. It also is a position you can willingly assume.
Curiously, you can be prone in the air and not fall if being held aloft by a fly spell or can hover, and still apparently claim protection from ranged attacks.
 


James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
Technically. I obviously wouldn’t allow that.
Curious- are you talking about the idea of going prone on purpose in the air, or simply ignoring that part of the prone condition entirely?

Because a similar situation can happen if you are knocked prone while swimming.

I mostly bring this up because if the bullet point regarding ranged attacks is intended to reflect being prone on the ground, then there really should be a separate condition for other situations, like how a rider could be knocked prone, make their save to remain in the saddle, and be prone on the back of a horse, which I'm not sure should make you a harder target to hit or not (you haven't become a smaller target, though I suppose it's easier to hit the horse than the rider in such a situation).
 

Curious- are you talking about the idea of going prone on purpose in the air, or simply ignoring that part of the prone condition entirely?

Because a similar situation can happen if you are knocked prone while swimming.

I mostly bring this up because if the bullet point regarding ranged attacks is intended to reflect being prone on the ground, then there really should be a separate condition for other situations, like how a rider could be knocked prone, make their save to remain in the saddle, and be prone on the back of a horse, which I'm not sure should make you a harder target to hit or not (you haven't become a smaller target, though I suppose it's easier to hit the horse than the rider in such a situation).
I mostly mean the ranged attack penalty. It should only apply when it makes sense. But whole concept of "prone" is somewhat questionable if you're floating in the water or in the air.
 

Hussar

Legend
/snip:)

'Grappling' doesn't equate with 'wrestling'; the latter is a subset of the former.
But how does something without hands "grapple"? After all, a green slime can't actually grab anything. For that matter, how does a snake "grapple". Snakes don't have hands. They cannot "grab" something. It makes no sense. :p

I'd also point out that "detect life" no longer exists.

Well, at least in 5e it implies pretty literal prone, or something like it, as it gives disadvantage to ranged attackers by being low on the ground. It also is a position you can willingly assume.
Although, "off balance" could easily encapsulate all of that. But, in any case, I'm not the one insisting on literal definitions. I couldn't care less that you can knock an ooze prone. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I just find it hilarious where people draw the line. "Oh, we must use the dictionary definition of the word in THIS case, but, in that other case, oh, well, common sense and creativity should prevail."

It's so self serving. Might as well just say, "I like it this way and not that way." At least that would be honest.
 



Remove ads

Top