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

[Olgar Shiverstone]

IME tiny huts come in two varieties: one containing and orc with a pie, and one containing a colossal red dragon.

Leomund hasn't been an issue.

 

[James Gasik]

So what I've learned about this is that you should totally make illusory Tiny Huts to mess with enemies, because they automatically recognize one on the spot and have countermeasures prepared to deal with one.

Well, that's what I would do, if illusions didn't suck in 5e and there was one that could make an illusory object for longer than ten minutes...

 

[DrJawaPhD]

So what I've learned about this is that you should totally make illusory Tiny Huts to mess with enemies, because they automatically recognize one on the spot and have countermeasures prepared to deal with one.

This honestly is a great idea and I'm going to remember to use this some time when we know enemies are nearby and need to set up a diversion

 

[AlViking]

So what I've learned about this is that you should totally make illusory Tiny Huts to mess with enemies, because they automatically recognize one on the spot and have countermeasures prepared to deal with one.

Well, that's what I would do, if illusions didn't suck in 5e and there was one that could make an illusory object for longer than ten minutes...

Even better have an NPC cast it when the PCs are defending a location.

 

[Seramus]

Even better have an NPC cast it when the PCs are defending a location.

Enemies can start casting it even before approaching the party's location, then walk over to finish the cast in the last handful of seconds.

It's concentration, so subject to being interrupted, but a heck of a dirty tactic if they can pull it off.

 

[Hussar]

Honestly?

Tiny Hut is extremely problematic in white-room game theory analysis, but I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen that spell actually get used in the game. And I've been playing for decades.

That must be nice.

I had a group recently that insisted on using it as an impenetrable fortress ALL THE TIME. They had various means of scouting forward - invisible familiars, various other things - which meant they would move up, drop the Hut and then use it as a fire base. It was being used constantly.

I have to ask, for those of you who don't see it all that often, how many full casters do you typically see in your group. In my last group, of the 5 PC's, 4 were full casters and 1 was a half caster. Three campaigns in a row. When you have groups that are that caster heavy, something like Hut becomes a real PITA.

My current group has 2 full casters of the 5 characters, and I don't think anyone took Hut, so, it's obviously not an issue.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

In 10+ years of DMing 1 to 4 games a week, I have never seen it used, not even after giving it to a couple of PreGens I made.

 

[Hussar]

Honestly, I think it's like a lot of things in the game. If you've never seen it used, you don't really realize just how disruptive it can be. But, once you've been on the receiving end of players abusing Hut to the most they possible can, it gets really easy to fall into the trap of thinking that all players will abuse this.

 

[GrimCo]

I have to ask, for those of you who don't see it all that often, how many full casters do you typically see in your group.

Our party compositions tend to be caster heavy. In last campaign we had 4 (warlock, wizard, bard and druid), but generally, at least 2/4 are full casters and other two are either mc with full caster, half casters (with fc mc sometimes), or casting subclass.

 

[Hussar]

Our party compositions tend to be caster heavy. In last campaign we had 4 (warlock, wizard, bard and druid), but generally, at least 2/4 are full casters and other two are either mc with full caster, half casters (with fc mc sometimes), or casting subclass.

See, kind of caster is going to matter too. Druid can't cast Hut. Warlock probably won't have it unless he's a tomelok. Now, Bard and Wizard can have it, so, it might come up. Again, like I said, if you've never had a player who started abusing it, it's hard to see how it would be a problem. But, as soon as you get a couple of players who decide that invulnerable fire bases are a great idea - it becomes a HUGE PITA.

I solved it by saying that all Force effects are opaque. You can't see through them. Stopped all the crap of hiding in the bubble and shooting anything you could see.

To be fair, all you really have to do is dispel it a couple of times and then the players generally get the hint. You don't have to do it every time, but, if they know you will do it, then they start getting a little more judicious about using it.

That or areas of things like Phaesress like in the Underdark where you get the possibility of wildmagic effects every time you cast a spell. That tends to make things a little more interesting too.

But, honestly, I think that Tiny Hut should be exactly what it says on the tin - a tiny hut. Make it a small house with windows and the like, give it an unseen servant to do the cooking and whatnot and not make it an invulnerable force bubble. Heck, just make Force effects subject to damage would probably solve most of the problems. Say a Threshold of 10 (or 20 if you like) and 50 HP. Poof, problem solved.