D&D (2024) Making spell descriptions less dense?

[Neonchameleon]

Well, I'm not naming "games". There really only two ways to control problem players: specific rules or a DMs iron fist.

There are however ways to prevent players being problem players and it's generally better to head things off upstream. Specific rules won't actually solve problem players and DM iron fists can create them.

For that matter Kender are so reviled because they turn otherwise non-problem players who are trying to be good players and follow the game's guidance into problem players.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

For fireballs to nearly instantaneously melt gold/silver/copper, they are either a lot hotter than 1,000 degrees F. or normal rules of physics don't apply.

I ignore that part of the spell. It makes no sense.

Fireballs, make no sense from a physics perspective any temperature that threatens to melt metal will boil your eyeballs and fry the lining of you lungs, mouth and throat. Even at temperatures of a few hundreds of degrees the best one could hope for is to be exhaling at the moment of the flash and have your eyes closed or you are dead or dying.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Fireballs, make no sense from a physics perspective any temperature that threatens to melt metal will boil your eyeballs and fry the lining of you lungs, mouth and throat. Even at temperatures of a few hundreds of degrees the best one could hope for is to be exhaling at the moment of the flash and have your eyes closed or you are dead or dying.

I think my fundamental problem with pre-4e fireballs is that most of D&D appears to have action movie physics. The metal melting comes from a looney tunes cartoon. It's wrong genre and wrong level of gonzo

 

[Clint_L]

Fireballs, make no sense from a physics perspective any temperature that threatens to melt metal will boil your eyeballs and fry the lining of you lungs, mouth and throat. Even at temperatures of a few hundreds of degrees the best one could hope for is to be exhaling at the moment of the flash and have your eyes closed or you are dead or dying.

This is all true! To what extent should we make IRL physics the arbiter of magical effects, though? Because that seems like quite a slippery slope.

 

[Bill Zebub]

any temperature that threatens to melt metal will boil your eyeballs and fry the lining of you lungs, mouth and throat.

Yes that’s why ignore the part about melting metal.

Even at temperatures of a few hundreds of degrees the best one could hope for is to be exhaling at the moment of the flash and have your eyes closed or you are dead or dying.

It depends on how long it lasts. 1/1000 of a second would be pretty survivable.

In any event, assuming normal humans have just a few hit points, yes fireball is insta-death.

 

[GMMichael]

So functionally, the knock spell could be written in One D&D more succinctly as (taking it from 137 words to 29 words)....

It could, and should, have been written in 5e like that.

This is my knock:

Alter 2
Range: close
Target: single
D/M: 0/yes
Effect: you change the shape, but not the composition, of an object no heavier than half of your body weight.
Half: (MP) anyone touching the object during your magic actions can defend against this power to negate the effect.

About 47 words. Lots of room for GM interpretation. Affects locks, bars, bolts, doorstops, and possibly doors (depending on how much you weigh). It's up to the GM whether you can affect a bar without knowing its exact location on the other side of the door, or if a lock is a separate object from a door. (Also contributing: the quality of your roll.)

Since someone mentioned fireball:

Fire 3
Range: short
Target: multi
D/M: -4/no
Effect: the targets take d8 physical damage from heat.
Half: (P) no effect.

Will it melt metal? Ask your GM.

 

[Mistwell]

This. 100% this. DnD is moving more towards "lawyer speak" for both spells, feats and abilities to combat the rise of the cheesemakers.

You know the ones. The ones that say you can get the benefits of both dueling and 2WF at the same time by attacking with your offhand first, then sheathing that weapon and then attacking with your main hand.

Because it's technically allowed in the rules, this stuff really messes up organised play.

I dislike it a lot but I don't know what to do about it other than having two descriptions - one fun and flavoured, and one, preferably online so it doesn't affect word count, that is the full legal text with disclaimers.

I think this is the entire idea behind sage advice?

 

[Lojaan]

I think this is the entire idea behind sage advice?

If it is then it failed.

 

[Mistwell]

If it is then it failed.

How so?

 

[TwoSix]

Which is pretty much D&D in a nutshell. The game of D&D * is * a cartoon-- or at the very least, story and myth.

Anyone who thinks D&D models physical reality in anything is fooling themselves.

Which is exactly why spells shouldn't try to explain things in terms of physics (the melting metals of the 3.5 fireball mentioned above is a classic example of what not to do). Spells should be operating on fairy tale logic, on intent and imagery, not as an alternate physics engine.

Knock should just open a door, with a loud knocking sound, unless the door is magically warded against opening. Having a conversation about "is the door actually bolted or barred, not locked" defeats the imagery. Unlocking a belt or armor clasps defeats the imagery. The image of the spell is a magical knock that bypasses a door. That's all it should do, and it also shouldn't do any less.