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

[Cadence]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Stalker0]

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

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.

 

[lichmaster]

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]

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]

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.