D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[TwoSix]

I think that's why they don't just call it a "fireball" anymore. Because it isn't in a D&D sense.

Thinking about it a little further, even if I did narrate it as a fireball+ to emphasize the death knight was also a competent mage, I would have some kind of rationale as to why it was different. Something like "Three times per day, as a free action, the death knight can infuse an energetic spell (one that does fire, cold, acid, or lightning damage) with vitality draining necrotic energy. The spell that is being cast does an equivalent amount of dice as necrotic damage.)

It does 10d6 because the death knight is casting it as a 5th level spell equivalent.

I freeform that kind of narration for monsters all the time.

 

[James Gasik]

And yet, if I said a Death Knight throws a fireball at the party and then roll 10d6 fire and 10d6 necrotic damage (save for half), are players going to say "but but but fireball is only 5d6 + 1d6/level over 3rd in fire damage. Why is the death knight doing 20d6 in two different damage types?"

Death Knights have always been cheaters. Back in 2e, Fireball capped at 10d6, but the Death Knights were still doing 20d6 with their Fireballs!

 

[Remathilis]

I think that's why they don't just call it a "fireball" anymore. Because it isn't in a D&D sense.

It was for many editions though, as @James Gasik pointed out. They were casting fireball at beyond what an archmage could.

My point though remains that if players are auditing my dice rolls (and then demanding they too learn how to cast 20d6 necro fireballs) they are getting showed the door. Ymmv obviously.

 

[James Gasik]

Also, thinking about it, the 2e Death Knight's AC is somewhat inexplicable as well. He's not stated as wearing magic armor, nor using a shield (in fact, some Death Knights are equipped with two-handed swords), but, regardless of the quality of his armor, he's got AC 0 and Full Plate by itself is AC 1. Not a huge deal, really (oh no, he has one better AC than full plate!- though he retains this AC even if his armor is damaged or piecemeal), but it goes to show this sort of "unexplained property" isn't anything new to the game.

Also not stated is why every Death Knight owns a magic sword, but hey, at least that's lootable!

To the Death Knight's credit, however, they actually have an ability score other than Intelligence- their 18(00) Strength! And while it's not spelled out, it's easy to see why they have 9, 10-sided Hit Dice- the maximum amount of Hit Dice for a Warrior class (Fighter/Ranger/Paladin).

 

[Micah Sweet]

It was for many editions though, as @James Gasik pointed out. They were casting fireball at beyond what an archmage could.

My point though remains that if players are auditing my dice rolls (and then demanding they too learn how to cast 20d6 necro fireballs) they are getting showed the door. Ymmv obviously.

Of you want to learn the death knight fireball, all you have to do is become a death knight. Do something so horrible the gods curse you to eternal darkness and misery. I will absolutely give you those powers under those conditions.

 

[Rainynights]

Which is also not an official. I don't feel like doing the extra typing, or for that matter pretending like D&D wasn't revised. But you know, I figure people can call it what they want. It'll settle out in the end. 5E, as you will recall, wasn't even 5e at one point.

If you want to save a little extra typing and still acknowledge the revision could always treat it the way everyone treated 3 editions revision update and call it 5.5

 

[James Gasik]

I've taken to calling it 5e2024 in discussions. So far, it's evaded any controversy.

 

[TwoSix]

My point though remains that if players are auditing my dice rolls (and then demanding they too learn how to cast 20d6 necro fireballs) they are getting showed the door. Ymmv obviously.

Well, yea, absolutely. But my original point from many posts ago was that humanoids, particularly low-level ones, are more important to present as “PC-like” than other NPCs. Precisely because PCs themselves are low-level humanoids.

 

[Remathilis]

Well, yea, absolutely. But my original point from many posts ago was that humanoids, particularly low-level ones, are more important to present as “PC-like” than other NPCs. Precisely because PCs themselves are low-level humanoids.

A bad habit I hope most DMs can break players of.

 

[Maxperson]

Although less ambiguous, it is no less internally inconsistent. Either:

1) A 20th level character with 200hp can literally sustain 20x the physical damage that a 1st-level character with 10hp can

or

2) A hit point means something different at 1st-level and 20th-level

or

3) they mean the same thing at 1st level as at 20th level, but the 20th level character just has more of them.

The 1st level character has physical, luck, skill, etc. hit points just like the 20th level character.