D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[Micah Sweet]

So what? you just get stuck with the condition until the party levels up enough or someone rolls up a Cleric? Because if the DM decided there were no high level cleric out in the world then you can't do squat. That's basically 'DM may I' taken to the extreme. That, to me, feels like a violation of player agency, that there is literally nothing you can choose to do. It's no different than 'Rock falls, everybody dies', just slower.

The swingingness between party is particularly grating. If it's meant to be difficult to deal with, make it difficult for EVERYBODY regardless of party composition.

You go back to town to get it fixed, or you suck it up. If the DM provides zero way to fix the issue via NPC, that's being a bad DM. But I'm in favor of having bad things happen to the PCs that can't just be fixed in the field.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Well, I’ve given several reasons:
1. Not gating the resolution of certain challenges behind magic encourages non-standard party composition;
2. Rewarding player choices: a character taking Expertise in Medicine tends to be sub-optimal. Having the occasional situation where it is clutch rewards player choices.
3. World-building: if the party retreats to their original village for healing, the aged village healer might have Expertise in healing (or might not). The aged village healer being a 9th level cleric strains verisimilitude.
4. Class balance: One of the main defenses for casters’ power level is that they trade power for versatility. A caster isn’t supposed to be as good at certain tasks as a specialist, but is more flexible at a variety of tasks. That isn’t the case for either Mummy Rot or the Clay Golem’s Slam. The caster is simply better than the specialist.
5. Expertise should feel special: Rogues get 4 Expertise slots, bards 2. Everyone else needs to trade a valuable feat for it. Unless you take Expertise in a skill with a combat application, it often doesn’t feel very special. Hence, challenges that require someone to be an expert in their field to even attempt.
6. Challenge: the justification for Mummy Rot or the Clay Golem’s Slam is supposed to be to challenge the players. But it’s not really a challenge, is it? It’s a luck-based mission: did you fail the saving throw (set deliberately low because of the deadliness of the effect)? Do you have the correct party composition to turn the encounter into a speed bump?
7. @DND_Reborn ’s premise was that he was feeling somewhat burnt out by high levels of magic.


I’ll accept that there are certain challenges that can be overcome only with magic, but the onus is on you to make the case in favour of it.

“Why wouldn’t it be?” isn’t an argument; and “because it’s magic!” is a tautology.

"Why would it be?" Isn't an argument either. There is no onus; it's just a matter of personal preference, and you and I disagree.

 

[Undrave]

You go back to town to get it fixed, or you suck it up. If the DM provides zero way to fix the issue via NPC, that's being a bad DM. But I'm in favor of having bad things happen to the PCs that can't just be fixed in the field.

"Hey guys, I'm taking away some of your HP until you get Greater Restoration. No there's no 9th level Cleric in this country. Guess the Paladin's gotta go to level 17 to learn it. Just suck it up, it's just 11 levels."

Things that 'can't be fixed in the field' are perfectly fine. Clay Golem Slam, however, CAN be fixed in the field... if you're a specific caster. Very easily even. The component cost is a joke.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

"Hey guys, I'm taking away some of your HP until you get Greater Restoration. No there's no 9th level Cleric in this country. Guess the Paladin's gotta go to level 17 to learn it. Just suck it up, it's just 11 levels."

Things that 'can't be fixed in the field' are perfectly fine. Clay Golem Slam, however, CAN be fixed in the field... if you're a specific caster. Very easily even. The component cost is a joke.

and it's easy to say "thats a bad DM" but it's a mistake a good one or new one can make easy.

"this looks cool" followed by "oh that's in the CR range" mixed with already telling everyone the highest level cleric in the 3 towns they have been to is 5th level... and the 6th level party WOULD be more powerful but they don't have a cleric, they have a bard a fighter a rogue and a wizard... now the melee combatants have what might as well be a foreever debuff unless the DM brings in a deus ex machina high level cleric

 

[Andvari]

In practice, it doesn’t work that way.

It looks like it works exactly that way in practice, though.

The classes that can remove disease either get it as part of their loadout and can’t change it (Paladins), or there is essentially no cost for them to do so (Clerics and Druids prepare spells, so it costs them a single prepared slot).
Meanwhile, a character that devotes resources to solve this precise issue (some combination of skills, expertise, features or magic) can’t.

What makes a skill any class can take on the side more costly than needing to take 5* cleric levels and spend a precious spell slot? Also, mummy rot is not the only ailment in the game.

The only way in which the existing rules are superior is that they preserve the supremacy of magic. Why is that a consideration?

Do you have a source saying preservation of the supremacy of magic was a consideration for mummy rot? Personally, I suspect it's, referencing the superstitions of the mummy's curse* that supposedly strikes those who disturb Egyptian mummies. In which case we're talking thematic/dramatic/story-telling considerations.

* Looking up the mummy on roll20, (I only have the 5E PHB), mummy's rot appears to literally be a curse, requiring remove curse (3) to get rid of. And if it were a disease, having to take 3 levels in a class that can cast lesser restoration is still quite a lot of effort, even ignoring the spell slot.

 

[Undrave]

and it's easy to say "thats a bad DM" but it's a mistake a good one or new one can make easy.

"this looks cool" followed by "oh that's in the CR range" mixed with already telling everyone the highest level cleric in the 3 towns they have been to is 5th level... and the 6th level party WOULD be more powerful but they don't have a cleric, they have a bard a fighter a rogue and a wizard... now the melee combatants have what might as well be a foreever debuff unless the DM brings in a deus ex machina high level cleric

Even the Celestial Sorcerer can't learn Greater Restoration...

 

[Andvari]

So what? you just get stuck with the condition until the party levels up enough or someone rolls up a Cleric? Because if the DM decided there were no high level cleric out in the world then you can't do squat. That's basically 'DM may I' taken to the extreme. That, to me, feels like a violation of player agency, that there is literally nothing you can choose to do. It's no different than 'Rock falls, everybody dies', just slower.

That's a DM problem with the DM, though. Not the condition.

 

[Undrave]

and it's easy to say "thats a bad DM" but it's a mistake a good one or new one can make easy.

"this looks cool" followed by "oh that's in the CR range" mixed with already telling everyone the highest level cleric in the 3 towns they have been to is 5th level... and the 6th level party WOULD be more powerful but they don't have a cleric, they have a bard a fighter a rogue and a wizard... now the melee combatants have what might as well be a foreever debuff unless the DM brings in a deus ex machina high level cleric

That's a DM problem with the DM, though. Not the condition.

See GM's post above.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"Hey guys, I'm taking away some of your HP until you get Greater Restoration. No there's no 9th level Cleric in this country. Guess the Paladin's gotta go to level 17 to learn it. Just suck it up, it's just 11 levels."

Things that 'can't be fixed in the field' are perfectly fine. Clay Golem Slam, however, CAN be fixed in the field... if you're a specific caster. Very easily even. The component cost is a joke.

I'm assuming the party is below 9th level themselves. And I said that an NPC caster should be available back in civilization, or that's bad DMing. Did you actually read my post?

 

[Micah Sweet]

and it's easy to say "thats a bad DM" but it's a mistake a good one or new one can make easy.

"this looks cool" followed by "oh that's in the CR range" mixed with already telling everyone the highest level cleric in the 3 towns they have been to is 5th level... and the 6th level party WOULD be more powerful but they don't have a cleric, they have a bard a fighter a rogue and a wizard... now the melee combatants have what might as well be a foreever debuff unless the DM brings in a deus ex machina high level cleric

You make a mistake like that, you change the setting a bit to include the relevant NPC:

"Actually, you remember hearing about an legendary healer in the nearby forest who might be powerful enough to heal your friends dreadful wounds..."

No harm, no foul. I really don't see the problem here.