Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sage Genesis" data-source="post: 6529629" data-attributes="member: 6706099">Incidentally, the original Pathfinder tree is for me a (minor) example of game design failure. The flavor text states that it's a disease - because that's what fungal infections are, even in D&D. The mechanics say that it isn't. This is a situation that never should have happened in the first place.As to the question itself, I would go with "yes, it is a disease and the Paladin is immune." There are two reasons for this.First, unleashing a high level creature with 1d6 Dex damage and two attacks per round on a Dex 6 character is just ridiculous. Just kill the character right away and stop pretending like there's any gameplay still going on.Second, 5e is not beholden to the (in this case incorrectly used) classifications that Pathfinder uses. This ability is a fungus. It's a disease. Whether it was or wasn't so in PF is completely meaningless, game conversions don't work if you just slavishly copy over words without regard for their context.I'd also like to weigh in on the Dark Souls comparison. In those games, if you die you can relatively easily respawn at the last save point. Then you can try again and again, learning the correct tactics and skills to bypass the monster. But in D&D you typically have to reroll your entire character. You will not learn the correct tactic in dealing with the treant other than "be someone else with a higher Dex and hope the dice favor you". Or maybe they will just learn not to fight the thing entirely. That's also a valid lesson, but not really one shared with Dark Souls. The two approaches, and therefore experiences, are simply too different.I would strongly advice reconsidering this idea.</blockquote>

Verification