Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7751500" data-attributes="member: 29398">OK.But why not have all this info in one place - the spell write-up - rather than having to check three places to piece it together?  Further, having the effects on objects be in the DMG rather than the PH or spell write-up doesn't make it all that accessible to players, most of whom probably wouldn't own the DMG unless they were also DMs.I'm not saying 5e is any better in some of these regards; if it wants to perpetuate what I see as mistakes then so be it.What I want from a spell write-up (any edition) is that where necessary it go into some of the more obvious what-ifs and rulings said spell is liable to generate.  1e's Fireball and Lightning Bolt entries kind of try to do this, though both could certainly go further.Also different is that both spells have been "simplified" since 1e - Fireball no longer fills to a volume and Lightning Bolts no longer rebound, thus requiring less verbiage in their write-ups.Are they more clear?  4e doesn't have the convenience of by-material saving throw matrices, so a DM is left on her own to determine how difficult it is for wood to save as opposed to soft metal or hard metal or leather.  Seems odd for what otherwise came across as a rules-not-rulings type of system.Can someone explain what karaoke has to do with any of this?  That's the third or fourth time it's come up...Perhaps, but I'd still prefer to see these things in the spell write-up anyway - even if it repeats what's written elsewhere - just so it's all in one place.It was 33 10x10x10 cubes (33000 cu ft); each 10' cube would hold 8 5' cubes, which would mean 264 5' cubes would be about the same volume as a 1e fireball.But despite 4e's famous Rule 0 (or page 42, whatever it was), there wasn't much encouragement to houserule it or change it much; unlike 1e which carried a strong sentiment of "make the game your own" (even though Gygax then railed against people doing exactly this!).And here, oddly enough, I agree with you.  But someone else already making that ruling saves me from having to do it; equals less work for me (and "official" backup should anyone want to argue the point). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification