I think the fact that there’s a 9 page thread suggests otherwise.I don't think you can just ignore the title of the spell. A trap is defined in the DMG. It seems clear.
I think the fact that there’s a 9 page thread suggests otherwise.I don't think you can just ignore the title of the spell. A trap is defined in the DMG. It seems clear.
If i understand correctly, el-remmen (OP) is looking at modifying this spell for his houserules, and is looking for suggestions. Adherence to RAW isn't an overarching concern, I don't think.I don't think you can just ignore the title of the spell. A trap is defined in the DMG. It seems clear.
For me the questions for this and several other spells are, how do people rule what I see as vague, is the spell functioning how I think it should, and is it worth revising?If i understand correctly, el-remmen (OP) is looking at modifying this spell for his houserules, and is looking for suggestions. Adherence to RAW isn't an overarching concern, I don't think.
He gives us a situation and then asks:If i understand correctly, el-remmen (OP) is looking at modifying this spell for his houserules, and is looking for suggestions. Adherence to RAW isn't an overarching concern, I don't think.
That partly implies RAW.How would you/do you rule it?

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.