D&D General Has Tiny Hut actually affected your game? Or has it otherwise mattered?

[BaronVonOwn]

Personally I despise Tiny Hut because long rests are one of the most broken things about D&D. It's already hard enough to balance encounters without this spell.

Instead of banning it, I had a wild idea: what if it was a concentration spell? Meaning whoever is casting it has to stay up and maintain the spell all night, not gaining a rest and making a noble and desperate sacrifice to save the party? Or should there be no drawbacks to playing a higher level wizard?

 

[bloodtide]

Sure, but you're still having to make modifications to the game or focus on enemies who can use magic a lot more. The game as presented has many, many monsters who don't use magic, so it's still a case of: inexperienced DM runs game out of box, is stymied by low level spell effects vs. experienced DM nerfs or "effectively" nerfs player strategies by having the world react to them behind the scenes..

I don't think the onus of dealing with the problem WotC created should have to be on the DM in the first place.

The game is presented as many, many monsters don't use magic? I don't see it.

Sure, lazy cheep WotC can't be bothered to type any lore or even put a magic using monster variant for each monster. They can't be bothered with an "Orc Hexbalde".

WotC makes the game....poorly.....much like nearly all publishers or creators...and it has always been up to the DM to fix things.

My "nerf" makes the spell a simple magical tent to for camping and traveling. Not a beyond epic world changing spell....at 3rd level.

Superhero movies would be boring if there were no supervillains.

Would they? Or would only cheesy corny silly superhero movies be boring without cartoon villains?

 

[James Gasik]

The game is presented as many, many monsters don't use magic? I don't see it.

Sure, lazy cheep WotC can't be bothered to type any lore or even put a magic using monster variant for each monster. They can't be bothered with an "Orc Hexbalde".

Uh, ok. Go through the Monster Manual again. Note how many monsters are presented with spellcasting. Let me reiterate the point I am making.

Imagine this mysterious creature, the Novice DM. He's got the core books, he's ready to start running adventures for his friends! The books tell him that it's important to have a certain amount of encounters per adventuring "day", ie, between Long Rests. He may discover the price of having a "day" with fewer encounters, or one large encounter on his own.

Eventually, his players start using tactics given to them by the game itself, to ensure that if they want to rest, they can. This might cause a problem. He goes online to search for answers.

He is told: "oh yeah, make sure you use more creatures that can cast Dispel Magic, including NPC's, and make sure you create variant spellcasting versions of monsters you want to use".

The game did not tell him to do this. It didn't even suggest it, really. He is forced to go out of his way to solve a problem that came packaged with the game itself.

Is it really a stretch to say "man, I don't think the game should be forcing the DM to do that"?

 

[Baron Opal II]

So, as the thread title says, has it been of any meaningful affect in your game, and if so, how so?

"Yes, but..."

I've nerfed it to be what it once was, a very handy magical tent. It's a curiosity until the party had to hike across an arctic / glacier climate. Then it was indispensable in saving resources.

 

[TheSword]

Yes, @GuyBoy in Curse of Strahd negated the points-of-dim-light nature of the setting by making camp in the woods with tiny hut. It’s the reason the spell doesn’t exist in my games. He know it too

 

[Mistwell]

One of our main DMs, early in 5e, had most of the monsters in the dungeon gather in the room of our tiny hut waiting (looking first, and then hiding out around the corner) for the 8 hours to expire so they could all pound the crap out of us.

That's all it took to convince us to use the spell more sparingly and only in a relatively safe out of the way place.

 

[James Gasik]

One of our main DMs, early in 5e, had most of the monsters in the dungeon gather in the room of our tiny hut waiting (looking first, and then hiding out around the corner) for the 8 hours to expire so they could all pound the crap out of us.

That's all it took to convince us to use the spell more sparingly and only in a relatively safe out of the way place.

That's why you always also use Alarm to ward any possible approaches to your resting spot!

 

[Zardnaar]

That's why you always also use Alarm to ward any possible approaches to your resting spot!

You know they're our there. . Every critter in the dungeon us surrounding you. Congrats.

 

[jayoungr]

Example? These are the kind of situations I'm curious about.

The most recent one was in a supplemental side aventure to Descent into Avernus called Encounters in Avernus:

 

[Epic Meepo]

Well, except that the caster has to stay inside the hut or the spell ends.

Fair point. It would be a handful of NPC mages locking down strategic choke points. I still contend mid-tier NPCs shouldn't be able to use a 3rd-level spell in the PHB to install indestructible forcefields in their lairs. Forcefields that can be battered down over time, sure. But indestructible? To me, that narrative feels a bit over the top for a 3rd-level spell that's essentially supposed to be a fancy tent. Could just be me, though.