Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steels12" data-source="post: 9256796" data-attributes="member: 7034129">I think you're kind of missing my overall point, which is that just because a spell explicitly says it has the ability to be a haven is not an absolute ruling. 200gp cost aside, I don't think any DM would seriously let their party put down an A5e Tiny Hut in the middle of a dungeon and let their party go &quot;neener neener, it says it's a haven, we get a long rest&quot; because it just... Like there's nothing stopping the active threats of the dungeon from slaughtering your party. This would overall just be an argument of &quot;necessary vs sufficient&quot;, but my intention is to INVERT that logic and say that just because a spell does not explicitly state itself as being &quot;a haven&quot; does not mean it cannot aid towards providing the necessary components FOR a haven, if that makes sense.Ultimately, to me as a DM, it comes down to reasonability. Sure, at any point an in COULD be burned down, but there's no reasonable expectation that it would. That's why the mind-state of my party is what's paramount to me, I'm sure we've all been safe in our beds at home but RIDDLED with anxiety over something and that's ruined our own &quot;long rest&quot;. But this is also why after a certain level I just stop having my party worry about travel unless they're in really high-tier areas. Even if they got caught by a group of bandits, what are a few 20-30 hp bandits going to do to a party of full level 10+ heroes? If anything I'd throw something like that in as a gag.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steels12, post: 9256796, member: 7034129"] I think you're kind of missing my overall point, which is that just because a spell explicitly says it has the ability to be a haven is not an absolute ruling. 200gp cost aside, I don't think any DM would seriously let their party put down an A5e Tiny Hut in the middle of a dungeon and let their party go "neener neener, it says it's a haven, we get a long rest" because it just... Like there's nothing stopping the active threats of the dungeon from slaughtering your party. This would overall just be an argument of "necessary vs sufficient", but my intention is to INVERT that logic and say that just because a spell does not explicitly state itself as being "a haven" does not mean it cannot aid towards providing the necessary components FOR a haven, if that makes sense. Ultimately, to me as a DM, it comes down to reasonability. Sure, at any point an in COULD be burned down, but there's no reasonable expectation that it would. That's why the mind-state of my party is what's paramount to me, I'm sure we've all been safe in our beds at home but RIDDLED with anxiety over something and that's ruined our own "long rest". But this is also why after a certain level I just stop having my party worry about travel unless they're in really high-tier areas. Even if they got caught by a group of bandits, what are a few 20-30 hp bandits going to do to a party of full level 10+ heroes? If anything I'd throw something like that in as a gag. [/QUOTE]

Verification