Endure Elements

[Jcosby]

Small suggestion - don't assume every group is the same. Some people would find it intensely exciting to deal with issues such as a lack of water/food, fatigue, encumbrance, etc. Some wouldn't. Unless a poster tells you that his group is having problems and not enjoying the game (which Jcosby didn't), assume that they are and don't tell the other person that he's playing/DMing the game "wrong".

I agree with everyone so far. After taking some time to think about the spell and effects I'm happy with the way the spell works inside of the game. I don't want to punish my players (Ok yes I do! JK) but I want to make sure they are taking on the risks when they need too.

After thinking about this spell and talking with the players I have decided it just about right. The group is very happy with the fact that they can pretty much survive in the desert without much concern about water/heat but they are very unhappy about giving up a total of 7 first level spell slots. (Large group) So I think this is the balance I was looking for, also I agree with the other poster that said if the duration was less then 24hrs it would just be a pain to track etc. 24hrs makes it so I don't have to worry about the duration, recasting etc.

As for tracking encumbrance, weight, etc. My players aren't overly happy about it what player would be? Does it take away from the fun they are having? I'd have to say no. The players I have in my game have no problem with telling me they don't like something. What it does is it introduces some real life problems when considering what they can carry and what they can't.

Does the Druid with a 10 Str wear Hide armor or go with Leather or even goto a craftsman and try to have Bone-Studded Leather made to lighten her load. Does the barbarian weight himself down with extra suits of armor from NPCs the party has defeated making him medium or heavy load knowing that will slow down his travel and make combat more difficult.

Does the Mage just shoot into combat hoping for the 19-20 to hit wasting his bolts when he doesn't have an endless supply? These are questions the group of players I play with like to tackle. They add that bit of realism without going over board and I think they were meant for D&D.

Also I love the debates it creates within the group. The characters that are more "greedy" want to take every single piece of loot they get so they can sell it and gain more coin. Others are more practical and want to only take items that are worth the effort.

In my opinion anything that creates interaction between party members is a good thing.

Wow I hijacked my own thread. In the end, Endure Elements is just fine and I think everyone should run their own game the way they want too. Its all about having fun.

Jeff

 

[atom crash]

The group is very happy with the fact that they can pretty much survive in the desert without much concern about water/heat but they are very unhappy about giving up a total of 7 first level spell slots.

Here's the trade-off. In order to "beat" the environmental dangers, the party has to use up some of its resources. They don't get something for nothing. Sounds fair to me. But you already know all that.

And I doubt you really want them to have to roleplay dying of dehydration. You just want to make them use up a few spell slots before some monstrous threat bursts out of the sand in front of them.

 

[Solarious]

Personally, I would just tack on a +4 bonus to all environment-related effects from the dessert and be done with it. It's a 1'st level spell for crying out loud, it can't really do anything miraculous unless you let it. Maybe Endure Elements is the equivilent of standing in the shade all the time, but even under the shade the heat will get to you. And speaking of which, there is no actual shade to block the sun from heating the sand underneath you, so that's another strike.

But hey, your game. Do whatever you feel is right for the campaign.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Personally, I would just tack on a +4 bonus to all environment-related effects from the dessert and be done with it.

Wouldn't be worth casting that though, IMO.

Cheers

 

[Corsair]

Personally, I would just tack on a +4 bonus to all environment-related effects from the dessert and be done with it. It's a 1'st level spell for crying out loud, it can't really do anything miraculous unless you let it. Maybe Endure Elements is the equivilent of standing in the shade all the time, but even under the shade the heat will get to you. And speaking of which, there is no actual shade to block the sun from heating the sand underneath you, so that's another strike.

But hey, your game. Do whatever you feel is right for the campaign.

I wouldn't walk out on a game over something silly like this, but I would certainly feel cheated as a player if as soon as I tried to use a spell to do exactly what it says it does, the DM told me that in fact it didn't, I'd be more than a bit miffed.

Endure Elements very explicitly states what it does. It gives a specific protection against a specific (and relatively rare) source of harm. Why punish a player for using a spell appropriate for the situation?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Maybe Endure Elements is the equivilent of standing in the shade all the time, but even under the shade the heat will get to you. And speaking of which, there is no actual shade to block the sun from heating the sand underneath you, so that's another strike.

Fortunately, the hot sand underneath you isn't a problem, since you suffer no harm from being in a hot or cold environment.

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

Personally, I would just tack on a +4 bonus to all environment-related effects from the dessert and be done with it. It's a 1'st level spell for crying out loud, it can't really do anything miraculous unless you let it. Maybe Endure Elements is the equivilent of standing in the shade all the time, but even under the shade the heat will get to you. And speaking of which, there is no actual shade to block the sun from heating the sand underneath you, so that's another strike.

Psst. I think the fix you're looking for is "ban endure elements".

 

[UltimaGabe]

if you are protected from the heat of the day you are not protected from the cold of the night which is fierce enough to crack rocks...

Just one little nitpick.

The cold from a night in the desert is NOT fierce enough to crack rocks by any means. True, it's cold- colder than here, anyway- and many rocks in the desert do crack as a result of it. However, they're not cracking as a result of the cold- they're cracking as a result of the rapid heating and cooling of their environment- specifically, it's hot during the day, and very quickly becomes cold, then hot, then cold, and so on- resulting in the rocks cracking. However, if a rock isn't made hot to begin with (or, let's say, a PC with an Endure Elements spell resistant to heat), then nothing bad will happen to them, since their temperature isn't fluctuating much.

On another note, cold alone is never fierce enough to crack rocks- at least, not until you get to subzero temperatures, and even then it's not too common. If it were, then there wouldn't be any really tall mountains, because once the tops became cold enough they'd crack and break down.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Hyperbole, I've used it a million times and it always gets misjudged!

Would you be happier if I'd said that real-world night time desert temperatures can drop into the sub 40 degrees farenheit range and thus:

An unprotected character in cold weather (below 40° F) must make a Fortitude save each hour (DC 15, + 1 per previous check) or take 1d6 points of nonlethal damage. A character who has the Survival skill may receive a bonus on this saving throw and may be able to apply this bonus to other characters as well (see the skill Description).

Fantasy settings normally have greater extremes than the real world too IME.

That better?