D&D (2024) Should Goodberry get improve like Cure and Healing word?

[Micah Sweet]

I think this is the correct answer. Here at ENWorld, I think we skew both older than the average TTRPGer and skew more towards DMs than players.

Also note that D&D has become more and more combat-focused over the years. Exploration, Survival, Dominions, all of these things are less and less supported by the rules the farther through editions you go. Furthermore, especially starting at 3rd edition, there was a significant power jump for first-level characters versus "normal" citizens. Why?

Because D&D is no longer focused on the "simulationists" and those interested in verisimilitude or those who want to re-create the hero's journey. It's focused on players who want to "do superheroic stuff" and skip what they see as the "boring" parts.

The changes to Goodberry, Healing spells, Action Economy, Bounded Accuracy, Hit Points, and all of the other things we see complained about here individually ... are really people missing the forest for the trees - we're all here complaining that this individual tree doesn't fit in a coniferous forest because it's a deciduous tree ... without looking around and realizing we're no longer in a coniferous forest.

So Goodberry in 5.5E is fine in context; 5.5E is a system that is interested in recreating combat among heroic (or superheroic) characters. If I want to focus on something else, or on a lower-powered game, 5.5E (or 5E or 4E or even 3E for that matter) is the wrong system, and just as I wouldn't complain my screwdriver does a horrible job at tightening bolts. If I want to focus on survival games (or dominion or horror or whatever), I'll use the right tool for the job and use a different game system just like I'd put down a screwdriver and go get a wrench to tighten bolts.

I agree, but I'm still sad about it, because I feel different games shouldn't go under the same name.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This works well with my change to having the spell consume its material components. The berries grow on the sprig, and the spell makes them magical, but once you’ve plucked them all off you need a new sprig’s worth of berries to cast it again.

This is the ideal solution, since if the DM wants to make food scarcity a plot point they can just make berries unavailable.

 

[ezo]

Back when things like material components hadn't fallen to the power of, "get to the action".

Fewer and fewer groups want to bother with the "survival essentials" (food, water, material components, etc.).

This works well with my change to having the spell consume its material components. The berries grow on the sprig, and the spell makes them magical, but once you’ve plucked them all off you need a new sprig’s worth of berries to cast it again.

Yep, this is a good way to represent that aspect. At 1 gp per casting, it isn't hard to say you have 5 or more uses, but they will run out and shouldn't be used unless you have to. Sure, much of the time you can replenish that, but there will be times you cannot - climate, terrain, etc.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Actually, originally you had to HAVE the berries, and the spell just made them magical:

True. We seldom paid any attention to that, since then I had to determine what plants had berries in what season. Which was interesting when I was 15, less so now. Particularly when the players said "okay, this is too useful a spell. We build a greenhouse!"

I mean, I like simulation. I read accounts of adventures on K2 and the rescue of the Thai kid's soccer team from a flooded cave to give me an idea of what would be reasonable hazards on an adventure. That detail though, just a bit to fine for me at this point.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I think this is the correct answer. Here at ENWorld, I think we skew both older than the average TTRPGer and skew more towards DMs than players.

Also note that D&D has become more and more combat-focused over the years. Exploration, Survival, Dominions, all of these things are less and less supported by the rules the farther through editions you go. Furthermore, especially starting at 3rd edition, there was a significant power jump for first-level characters versus "normal" citizens. Why?

Because D&D is no longer focused on the "simulationists" and those interested in verisimilitude or those who want to re-create the hero's journey. It's focused on players who want to "do superheroic stuff" and skip what they see as the "boring" parts.

People keep using simulation and v-tude as to gussy up preferences with an appearance of authority. It's no more simulationist to have 1st level characters be "superheroes" than it is to have them be 1HP weenies who are easily killed by a house cat's claw/claw/bite/rake. Possibly even less. Skipping the stick counting (torches, arrows, poles) with magical handwavium doesn't make the world less real. In fact, acknowledging that heroes who break the laws of reality daily don't have to worry about the same stuff dirt farmers do makes more sense.

I don't get the narrative that it's somehow more simulationist to have D&D take place in a medieval Europe pastiche (with tons of anachronisms) with no grand societal changes made despite the utterly fantastic nature of the world or the magical capabilities of the inhabitants. 5E D&D specifically is pretty high magic by default. Every class has access to magic, and many (most?) of the species have innate magic. There are systems that handle low magic well, but D&D is not really one of them, and has not been for 25+ years. It's sort of like complaining that RIFTS isnt more grounded.

 

[Micah Sweet]

People keep using simulation and v-tude as to gussy up preferences with an appearance of authority. It's no more simulationist to have 1st level characters be "superheroes" than it is to have them be 1HP weenies who are easily killed by a house cat's claw/claw/bite/rake. Possibly even less. Skipping the stick counting (torches, arrows, poles) with magical handwavium doesn't make the world less real. In fact, acknowledging that heroes who break the laws of reality daily don't have to worry about the same stuff dirt farmers do makes more sense.

I don't get the narrative that it's somehow more simulationist to have D&D take place in a medieval Europe pastiche (with tons of anachronisms) with no grand societal changes made despite the utterly fantastic nature of the world or the magical capabilities of the inhabitants. 5E D&D specifically is pretty high magic by default. Every class has access to magic, and many (most?) of the species have innate magic. There are systems that handle low magic well, but D&D is not really one of them, and has not been for 25+ years. It's sort of like complaining that RIFTS isnt more grounded.

Have you considered not attacking the preferences of others? It might win a few more hearts and minds.

Anyway, I think you're confusing physics simulation with genre simulation. I can't speak for everyone, but when I call myself a simulationist I mean that I value mechanics that model the physical world of the setting as accurately as possible. For me that usually means that things are like real life unless they obviously aren't. I'm not trying to model any particular narrative conventions, which is why PCs who have the power of superheroes in D&D are not what I want.

 

[Blue]

Indeed. Never noticed that. RAW you can only ever eat it yourself.

I disagree. It's not "A creature can use an action to use the Magic action to activate", which would imply that you need to activate it yourself. It's "eat", which as part of it's definition as a word includes that others can feed you. All the spell description is telling you is how long it takes to eat.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Have you considered not attacking the preferences of others? It might win a few more hearts and minds.

Anyway, I think you're confusing physics simulation with genre simulation. I can't speak for everyone, but when I call myself a simulationist I mean that I value mechanics that model the physical world of the setting as accurately as possible.

Which are reflected in the rules. The rules say 1st level heroes aren't one cat scratch away from death. TRy imagining a world where that is the case and go from there. It's not their fault you're locked into imagining the game world the same way as it was 50 years and 5 editions ago.

 

[ezo]

True. We seldom paid any attention to that, since then I had to determine what plants had berries in what season. Which was interesting when I was 15, less so now. Particularly when the players said "okay, this is too useful a spell. We build a greenhouse!"

I mean, I like simulation. I read accounts of adventures on K2 and the rescue of the Thai kid's soccer team from a flooded cave to give me an idea of what would be reasonable hazards on an adventure. That detail though, just a bit to fine for me at this point.

Which is why a simple check is all that is needed. You don't have to go crazy with details, but when the check is failed, it reminds players this spelll is not the be-all-end-all spell they think it is.

 

[Vaalingrade]

We need a Strongberry that lets you ignore encumbrance.