Level Up (A5E) I'm worried that Create Water will break my party's cleric.

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the question, since purify food and drink needs to be cast on Supply and create or destroy water doesn't create Supply.
Before I stopped to think about it, the create water felt odd with not being potable, even in smaller amount.

Thinking about it, it makes sense from the standpoint of supply being food AND water, that it wouldn't make supply.

And so, keeping with the simplified accounting of supply it doesn't really do anything to have it either potable or purifiable.

---

I'm imagining the case in the desert where someone sabotages the waterskins (or they decide to eat the camels) or at sea where the water barrels are bad but they can catch fish. Or where the way stop's well had bodies chucked in it and is fouled. (Or do any of the things that get you supply specify if it is only the food part, or only the water part? )

What changes as far as the supply rules if the created water is potable or purify food and water work in them separately (even if not "supply")? Does it make those story ideas doable?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Faolyn

(she/her)
You'd need to read the description of purify food and drink.
I did. It said it purified Supply. Which is why I guessed that it may not work on created water... but it seems kinda weird to me. I can just homebrew it to allow it, though. I mean, two spell slots ain't cheap, especially at lower levels, so it's not like it's something that'll just allow the PCs to breeze through a journey.

Or I can just get rid of create and destroy water in the first place, since it's not really useful, unless you need to water some plants.
 





lichmaster

Adventurer
We nerfed a fair number of things in service of the supply system. Take a look at the new text of the bag of holding item, too. No supply, no bodies, no bulky items.
Totally understand that. But this spell becomes so situationally useful that I'd personally never bother preparing it, and even less so spend spell slots for it. How many times can you reasonably expect to extinguish fires or do something that requires very large amounts of unpotable water?
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Totally understand that. But this spell becomes so situationally useful that I'd personally never bother preparing it, and even less so spend spell slots for it. How many times can you reasonably expect to extinguish fires or do something that requires very large amounts of unpotable water?
I think it’s OK that in a list of hundreds of spells some are more situational than others.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
I think it’s OK that in a list of hundreds of spells some are more situational than others.

I'm imagining the case in the desert where someone sabotages the waterskins (or they decide to eat the camels) or at sea where theybrun out of fresh water but can catch fish. Or where the waystops well had bodies chucked in it and is fouled. (Or do any of the things that get you supply specify if it is only the food part, or only the water part? )

What changes as far as the supply rules if the created water is potable or purify food and water work in them separately (even if not "supply")? Does it make those story ideas doable?

Or is part of going with supply not having those things come up?
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I'm imagining the case in the desert where someone sabotages the waterskins (or they decide to eat the camels) or at sea where theybrun out of fresh water but can catch fish. Or where the waystops well had bodies chucked in it and is fouled. (Or do any of the things that get you supply specify if it is only the food part, or only the water part? )

What changes as far as the supply rules if the created water is potable or purify food and water work in them separately (even if not "supply")? Does it make those story ideas doable?

Or is part of going with supply not having those things come up?
I’m sorry, but I don’t understand the question.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
I’m sorry, but I don’t understand the question.
Sorry, I'll try again.

Am I correct about the following two things?

1) Supply represents both food and water together.

And

2) The goal of the supply system is to allow for resource management in exploration that is: consequential, easy to track, allows some skills and class abilities to shine, and isn't easily beaten with spells.


If so, then:

A) Should create water never have made supply since supply is both food and water?

B) What is the point of create water making non-potable water, and purify food and drink not working on created water if supply needs both food and water anyway? Is it to stop debates about whether supply gathering could take less time/supply could weigh less if they used magic for the water?

If I'm substantially right on all of those, then:

C) Does using RAW supply mean that poking a hole in water skins in a drought stricken wasteland or water barrels at sea is just as effective a sabotage in A5e as it would be in real life, even if the party's caster had create water and purify food and drink? (Since the party would have no way of supplementing the food with water).

I think my problem is that feels like a really strange outcome to me, that in spite of the water making/purifying caster and piles of food, the party is doomed. Is that outcome just part of the price for the simplicity of the raw system?
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
A) Should create water never have made supply since supply is both food and water?
Which spell are you referring to? Create or Destroy water? That was errated up above.
B) What is the point of create water making non-potable water, and purify food and drink not working on created water if supply needs both food and water anyway? Is it to stop debates about whether supply gathering could take less time/supply could weigh less if they used magic for the water?
The fluff text is not really relevant; only Supply is Supply. if a spell doesn't say it created Supply then it doesn't create Supply.
If I'm substantially right on all of those, does using RAW supply mean that poking a hole in water skins in a drought stricken wasteland or water barrels at sea is just as effective a sabotage in A5e as it would be in real life, even if the party's caster had create water and purify food and drink? (Since the party would have no way of supplementing the food with water).

I think my problem is that feels like a really strange outcome to me, that in spite of the water making/purifying caster and piles of food, the party is doomed. Is that outcome just part of the price for the simplicity of the raw system?
I'm sorry, I'm not following.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Which spell are you referring to? Create or Destroy water? That was errated up above.

Create water. I was wondering if it never made sense for create "water" to be able to make supply since supply is both food and water.

The fluff text is not really relevant; only Supply is Supply. if a spell doesn't say it created Supply then it doesn't create Supply.

Naming and fluff disconnect bothers me sometimes and so I'm trying to work past it here. (Something I was unable to do with the "day" in 13th age having nothing to do with a calendar day).


I'm sorry, I'm not following.

A regular occurrence in desert or ocean settings is for the water skins/barrels to be sabotaged leading to the characters being in desperate stakes even though they have lots of non-water food left.

In A5e how does that play out? Would it just be sabotaging the supply in general since that's the only way the food and water exist (as a unit called supply)?
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
Create water. I was wondering if it never made sense for create "water" to be able to make supply since supply is both food and water.
There's no spell called create water.
Naming and fluff disconnect bothers me sometimes and so I'm trying to work past it here. (Something I was unable to do with the "day" in 13th age having nothing to do with a calendar day).




A regular occurrence in desert or ocean settings is for the water skins/barrels to be sabotaged leading to the characters being in desperate stakes even though they have lots of non-water food left.

In A5e how does that play out? Would it just be sabotaging the supply in general since that's the only way the food and water exist (as a unit called supply)?
We don't itemize the individual items in Supply, if that's what you're asking? It's just Supply.
 

lichmaster

Adventurer
I think it’s OK that in a list of hundreds of spells some are more situational than others.
I totally agree with that. I simply think it could be pretty much forgotten in the overall economy of the game, and it would be a shame. It could be one of those spells that could be memorable for the one time you can cast it for good effect, but in the end you never manage to because given its overall lack of actual use it never gets prepared or the spell slot never gets burned for it. Maybe it's just me, but spending spell slots for a cosmetic effect seems a terrible deal. In a more flexible system like Elements of Magic you don't have to prepare it, just spend MP, so the deal is much better.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
We don't itemize the individual items in Supply, if that's what you're asking? It's just Supply.

Close enough, thank you. It looks like what I'd want to do in the sabotage situations I described would be to switch to the "Desperate Supplies" option in the T&T book, house rule supply as breakable down into 1 day of food and 1 day of water in that case, and think about house ruling the Create or Destroy water spell to create potable water.


So, just two more questions. Are these correct?

1) Create Food and Water would turn 1 Supply into 3 Supply (as Supply contains at least one serving of food or water).

2) Create Food and Water can not be used on the water created by Create or Destroy Water as that water is non-potable.


Note: In your list of future errata, page 636 of the AG needs to have "create or destroy water" removed from the top of the second column.
 


lichmaster

Adventurer
I think this is also fine for divine spells, as you can swap them in and out as you want. If it was an arcane spell you had to learn that would be much more oppressive.
That is true, but still you cannot prepare an unlimited amount. Especially at low levels, when you can only prepare a bunch of spells, cosmetic or very situational spells are extremely expensive in this sense
 

Stalker0

Legend
That is true, but still you cannot prepare an unlimited amount. Especially at low levels, when you can only prepare a bunch of spells, cosmetic or very situational spells are extremely expensive in this sense
Situational spells give benefits to prepared groups that have intel. If your facing a monster that lies in a cavern and uses fog as a main weapon of concealment, than destroy water is pretty useful.

If you know your going into a desert, being able to cool down could be a major benefit, etc.

I wouldn't have this spell prepared on a normal day, but with special circumstances, sure. And that's the power of the cleric/druid, they can swap their spells as the need arises, so its really no cost to them to do so.
 

lichmaster

Adventurer
Situational spells give benefits to prepared groups that have intel. If your facing a monster that lies in a cavern and uses fog as a main weapon of concealment, than destroy water is pretty useful.

If you know your going into a desert, being able to cool down could be a major benefit, etc.

I wouldn't have this spell prepared on a normal day, but with special circumstances, sure. And that's the power of the cleric/druid, they can swap their spells as the need arises, so its really no cost to them to do so.
Well, they can swap out the spell, but only after a long rest.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top