Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nyeshet" data-source="post: 2909744" data-attributes="member: 18363">I'm not so certain of this. In a campaign that involves a wilderness trek through difficult regions (deserts, swamps, etc) running out of (edible) food or drinkable water should be a concern. Maybe not a major concern, but a concern nonetheless. So being able to go a day without food should have a cost, albeit not necessarily a major one. Of course, I'm also of the opinion that the rules for Survival checks - specifically the one for finding food (10 = enough for self, every +2 over = enough for +1 other) is too low. The check should allow one to find tracks, to follow the tracks (say one check per hour) and eventually have a chance for surprise when confronting the animal. Then a minor combat round or three should occur in which the animal is slain, and another check or two (perhaps different skills) is used to deal with the carcass (skin it perhaps, remove any non-edible parts, gather trophies such as antlers, fangs, teeth, or carveable bones) after which perhaps a Survival check or two would be needed to find the way back to camp - or find a place to set up camp if it had not yet been already set up. All of this should take at least an hour of game time - perhaps more if the animal was some distance off, unusually difficult to track (due to the animals' abilities or the type of terrain or the weather, etc). Survival could also be used to find edible roots, but in a desert surrounded by sand for miles there wouldn't be much chance of success. If in a swamp, Survival may help you find potentially edible plants readily enough, but then there is the check - knowledge (nature) or perhaps survival with a -2 or even -4 penalty - to determine if the plants found are edible, poisonous, perhaps diseased, or need to be treated prior to consumption (such as boiling to remove minor toxins, as is done with some types of acorns). A magical ability that allows one to get around all of this should have a cost. It should not be a minor, negligible cost. On the other hand, it should not be a burdensome cost for, say, a fifth level caster. A notable cost, yes, but not a burdensome one - unless applied to the entire party. Then it should be burdensome at fifth level, notable at maybe seventh or eighth level, and negligible around perhaps tenth to twelth level. That's my take on it, anyway.I admit that my view is somewhat different from the core view, which allows one to feed the entire party - if in a forest or a field - with a simple DC 16 Survival check (10 for self, +6 for 3 others). Poor weather or attempting it in winter may add a few more points to the DC, but the fact remains that rolling a 20 (total, not natural) Survival check will negate the need for having food and water for the day for a party in the more common terrains (field, forest) in most or all seasons. That is simply far too lenient on the PCs, in my opinion. They should work for their supper if they weren't foresightful enough to bring it with them.</blockquote>

Verification