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

[Hussar]

Partially inspired by ...



I am curious about what the opinions of folks on here (@Faolyn , @Hussar , @Oofta , @FitzTheRuke , @mamba ,etc ...) are about a spell.

One of the other current threads ( D&D 5E - Wind Walk and Grappled ) has a question about interpreting Wind Walk. Wind Walk does not give immunity to grapple in the description, and clarification in sage advice says spells don't give other spells effects unless they say they do (so it doesn't convey what a spell like Gaseous Form would unless it explicitly says so Does the spell wind walk give you the benefits of gaseous form? ).

Spoiler: Wind Walk Description

You and up to ten willing creatures you can see within range assume a gaseous form for the duration, appearing as wisps of cloud. While in this cloud form, a creature has a flying speed of 300 feet and has resistance to damage from nonmagical weapons. The only actions a creature can take in this form are the Dash action or to revert to its normal form. Reverting takes 1 minute, during which time a creature is incapacitated and can’t move. Until the spell ends, a creature can revert to cloud form, which also requires the 1-minute transformation.

If a creature is in cloud form and flying when the effect ends, the creature descends 60 feet per round for 1 minute until it lands, which it does safely. If it can’t land after 1 minute, the creature falls the remaining distance.

There are certainly a huge variety of questions that could be made asked about this. Here are four:

* As a DM would you let a normal corporeal solid person A grapple a wind walking person B?

* As a DM would you let an air elemental A grapple a wind walking person B?

* As a DM would you let a person A with a bellows try and suck back the wind walking person B in something like a grapple?

* And the one I am most curious about - As a DM, do any of those change if it is player A vs NPC B as opposed to NPC A vs player B who tries it first?

Spoiler: My Answers

Emphatically no to the regular person, probably yes to the air elemental, probably yes to the bellows, and I would probably be a bit more likely to say yes on the last two if it was a player suggesting it than me thwarting a PC escape.

Irrelevant to the issue at hand.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And thus is well-written. If they were all this way this discussion need never have happened.

And that's a bridge too far. How would I, a random commoner in British Columbia, have any clue that the guy who just walked in is a folk hero back in France and because of this I have to give him shelter? (it does say "will" give shelter, not "may" or "might"; I have to do it)

Correct. And the farther afield you go from that village, the farther you have also left that background behind. You're a folk hero in your home village and the surrounding area and probably always will be - you've got free beer for life in the local pub - but what you did in your home village shouldn't make any difference to anything when you're in another village half a world away.

And this is where the RAW wording of some of these backgrounds really gets it wrong. Whether it's wrong in the name of brevity, or giving players an advantage, or whatever, it's still wrong; and it puts the DM in a bad place when she tries to impose a bit of common sense on things.

I say some of them are objectively bad as written, and the information I'm using to reach that conclusion is the actual poor wording of the rules.

Here Oofta and I probably diverge, in that I've no issue with mother-may-I in situations like this. I'd far rather a player ask "Do I think Jocasta's background will help here?" than have the player just assume it will help and be disappointed when it doesn't.

That explanation offered also forces one to ask, "What the heck is a character archetype from an in-universe?" Because what is being suggested is that in-universe characters recognize a story element as such.

 

[Hussar]

No.

Yes.

If they were forge-size bellows, maybe. Anything portable is almost certainly too small to have much if any effect.

Gust of Wind, on the other hand, would be bad news.

No. It works the same no matter who is involved.

Welp back to using spells. On Tiny Hut coming up. No fuss no muss no mess. Poof. Instant success.

Gee and one wonders why players ignore backgrounds.

/edit. Whoops. Wrong quote. Use the one where @Lanefan talks about backgrounds. On phone. Can’t fix.

 

[Oofta]

A very poor one, considering how often you've been insulting by saying that our ideas are ridiculous and illogical.


Clearly this shows you don't actually get what I mean, because I wasn't showing you the athlete to prove anything, but to show you how backgrounds are written.

The folk hero background doesn't say "there's a 50% chance that someone will recognize you from your folk heroing days" or "while you're within 100 miles of your home town, commoners will help you out." The sailor background doesn't say "you must have served on the ship you're trying to hitch a ride on." The criminal background doesn't say "name the messengers who you can call on to carry a message to your contact" or "you can only get in touch with your criminal contact via your messengers."

I'm well aware of what they say. I think they're stupid. No one is going to magically know someone is a folk hero unless they recognize them.

I choose to house rule and ignore the feature and give different more general bonuses. Stop telling me that I don't understand the rules, I simply don't like them and don't use them as written for the reasons I've explained. That you ignore.

 

[Cadence]

Irrelevant to the issue at hand.

It felt relevant to things like "Welp back to using spells. On Tiny Hut coming up. No fuss no muss no mess. Poof. Instant success."?

A player casts Wind Walk, presumably to escape. Who decides if it works by RAW (no escape, they can be grappled) or as per how one might assume from the description (being gaseous they can't be grappled). Does the player need to ask the DM?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

it’s only complicated if you want it to be true everywhere. If you limit it to the region you became a folk hero in, it becomes much easier

I mean, if you like - but that wasn't really what I was talking about. I mean that each character's reason for ANY of the stories behind their features will usually be described holistically, so it's difficult to give examples of anything without knowing anything about the given character or the campaign they belong to. Everything is just spitballing, and therefore automatically full of exploitable holes.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Well, I asked him to give me an example of how he would change the criminal background, and he refused to. So I feel that no, I wouldn't know what to expect from his game.

Sure, but typing out his examples is a far cry from what would happen, I assume, if you were to join an actual game. Also, he DID at some point, way back in this thread, IIRC, explain how he handles backgrounds. Maybe not the Criminal specifically, but in general. But I'll stop speaking for him. He's more than capable.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Based on the pages of back and forth though... it doesn't look like either one of those types of people are showing up to the conversation, LOL.

I don't know... maybe I haven't been obvious about it, but I've come around to seeing both sides, when I started primarily on the side of "allowing the feature to work in most situations" - though I'd still run it that way. I at least no longer think that anyone who chooses to do otherwise are somehow less creative or missing out. They're just doing things differently. I honestly believe that most of the arguments are miscommunications, and only some are even playstyle preferences! I've said it before - I suspect that all our games look more alike than we probably assume. Sure, there'd be stylistic differences, but I doubt that they're very vast. We'll never know, though!

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Today I learned...
When I would play a PC, I've been playing wrong. I always just though Backgrounds were optional. I could rarely ever find one that matched my character's "backstory".

Why would you think that? They absolutely ARE optional. You can make your own up! (Or is this a joke and I missed it? If so: Touche!)

 

[Hussar]

It felt relevant to things like "Welp back to using spells. On Tiny Hut coming up. No fuss no muss no mess. Poof. Instant success."?

A player casts Wind Walk, presumably to escape. Who decides if it works by RAW (no escape, they can be grappled) or as per how one might assume from the description (being gaseous they can't be grappled). Does the player need to ask the DM?

It’s irrelevant because there is no mundane equivalent. The discussion is about how magic becomes the default when things like backgrounds are subject to fiat.