Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 7383405" data-attributes="member: 58172">Spells that target creature, should be able to target objects as well. When used on a creature such a spell works reliably as described, when used on an object, it requires DM adjudication.Spells that can only target creatures without being able to target objects, seems to be a legacy of 4e that tried to balance the mechanics robustly. You can see the same pattern in play by looking at the Prestidigitation cantrip, that now severely reduces what it can do into a short list of specific effects. 4e tried to minimize DM adjudication for the sake of consistent and reliable rules, avoiding a game of ‘DM, may I?’By contrast, 5e embraces the centrality of DM adjudication. So, the 5e DM should adjudicate what *does* happen when a creature-only spell targets an object.I care strongly about balance. At the same time, I like spells that encourage players to think creatively, outside of the box. Also, I require spells to ‘make sense’ even in a magical setting. So things like Ray of Frost should affect objects as well. I find it strange that Finger of Death affects objects, but I can visualize the object becoming decrepit, fragile, neglected, and in disrepair − the same way I visualize the Shadowfell mirror world.I feel 5e should encourage DMs to embrace adjudication and surprising uses of spells. The entire benefit of DM authority is the ability of the game to adjudicate outcomes based on narrative, as opposed to mechanical formulas.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yaarel, post: 7383405, member: 58172"] Spells that target creature, should be able to target objects as well. When used on a creature such a spell works reliably as described, when used on an object, it requires DM adjudication. Spells that can only target creatures without being able to target objects, seems to be a legacy of 4e that tried to balance the mechanics robustly. You can see the same pattern in play by looking at the Prestidigitation cantrip, that now severely reduces what it can do into a short list of specific effects. 4e tried to minimize DM adjudication for the sake of consistent and reliable rules, avoiding a game of ‘DM, may I?’ By contrast, 5e embraces the centrality of DM adjudication. So, the 5e DM should adjudicate what *does* happen when a creature-only spell targets an object. I care strongly about balance. At the same time, I like spells that encourage players to think creatively, outside of the box. Also, I require spells to ‘make sense’ even in a magical setting. So things like Ray of Frost should affect objects as well. I find it strange that Finger of Death affects objects, but I can visualize the object becoming decrepit, fragile, neglected, and in disrepair − the same way I visualize the Shadowfell mirror world. I feel 5e should encourage DMs to embrace adjudication and surprising uses of spells. The entire benefit of DM authority is the ability of the game to adjudicate outcomes based on narrative, as opposed to mechanical formulas. [/QUOTE]

Verification