D&D General What's the DC for a fighter to heal their ally with a prayer?

[Chaosmancer]

Or it is seen as a reasonable, non-toxic approach and is just ruled on.

Plenty of people think it is fine to choose your approach based on your build, so an eldritch knight fighter and low wisdom might think a religion skill approach is more effective and so choose that as their characterization approach if they can and run with it.

Some will see it as ugly instrumentalism, others will be completely fine with it by focusing on whether the characterization is reasonable and how well done it is.

I've never seen anyone treat that sort of play as perfectly fine and reasonable, and it certainly wasn't the impression given when that style was brought up earlier in the thread.

But, if it is perfectly fine... why not assume it?

I don't feel the options are that binary.

The options for why the fighter is doing it? Of course not.

But frankly, they fall down towards a binary choice. Would you allow them to do it, yes or no? You can't have someone half-allow this. You either allow it, or you don't. And I'm sure you know the types of things you wouldn't allow this for, because you've listed quite a few. So why not just answer "Yes, I would allow it under these circumstances" rather than continue equivocating and saying you can't know?

Coherent, but not obligatory to allow it. A DM can reasonably say that charisma checks or intimidate is the skill to influence a person and while athletics lets you bend a bar in front of the person you are trying to intimidate, the actual thing you are going for is not the bent bar but the persuasive impact on the target person.

Nothing is obligatory. We can sit here talking in circles about how "not everyone will allow X" until we've acknowledged every single rule in every single book and every single situation ever conceived is all "at the DM's choice" but that doesn't actually get us anywhere.

The game specifically calls it out as an option. The DM is not obliged to listen to the game, but they likely have a reason to listen or not listen. And we can talk about that, rather than just saying "everything is the DM's discretion"

A ton of varying considerations. Fiction is a big one. Tone of play. Are the rules hard or flexible. Does the DM want solid boundaries on supernatural effects or to regularly make judgment calls about what is reasonable supernatural effects to be done. It is a lot easier to make ad hoc judgments about things that would reasonably happen for things we have everyday familiarity with (social interactions, physical things) than for spontaneous magical effects.

These are going to vary person to person, and even game to game with the same DM. They might want things to go one way in Conan world but another in Forgotten Realms.

I said early on how I run things in my game, I go with the Conan/Eberron no direct evidence of the gods, clerics are essentially spellcasters of specific magical traditions. Anyone can pray, it is not going to have a supernatural effect unless there is more going on.

I do this for the themes and tone I want in my game. The PC cleric's cult is dedicated to a specific, non-omnipotent, not-omniscient dragon who exists in the world. I like character's using gods names as curses "Crom!" "Tyr's severed hand!" "Blood and souls for Arioch!" and not asking for divine favor.

I have specific DM decisions for my game that supports the game and story and theme and tone I want.

Okay, so you wouldn't allow it at your table because clerics are basically just wizards that heal, and faith cannot call miracles. Though, I would argue with you about Eberron, but I'll save that for later.

Why did we need all these paragraphs of laying out every single possible consideration?

I think this is primarily a DM call during the game. The player has stated their action, the DM adjudicates what happens. I think the DM should be primarily thinking about the game as a whole instead of the one player's desires.

If you as the DM are not receptive to the player's desires, the game will inevitably suffer. That doesn't mean you are a doormat, but you need to look to what the player's want, because that is the entire driving force behind the game.

Who knows. I played in one for years where the Melnibonean pantheon was the main one, everybody used euphemisms for the gods in character so that the AD&D demon lord name rules did not come into play. Meerclaw the Neutral goddess of cats was a big PC cleric favorite, and even she can be capricious and cruel and play with her prey, we did not want her showing up unexpectedly.

I'll go ahead and say "a very tiny minority" since most people don't even know what "Melnibonean" even is anymore.

Eberron, has been pretty mainstream and a popular D&D setting for three editions now. It is in the 5e PH. The actual existence of the gods in Eberron is a mystery. Divine magic goes with the mechanical effects, and there are tons of believers in world, but there is no direct evidence of the gods.

I think god cosmology varies widely in different D&D games.

Okay, so here I want to argue a bit about Eberron. Because, you are half right.

There is no direct evidence of the Gods being real.

There are literal mountains of evidence that FAITH leads to magical effects. The Blood of Vol is the perfect example. Now, maybe the gods are real and something like the Traveler is just messing with the followers of The Blood of Vol by making them think their powers come from themselves, but their entire religion is built around the idea that they are the source of divine power. And they have priests who pray to themselves and are able to heal and use divine magic. You also have the Silver Flame, which is a literal inferno of Divine Magic on the mortal plane. Seemingly powered by either an ascended mortal or just the faith of the followers

Now, this does depend on some specific examples, but we've gotten to a specific setting and place. If we are dealing with a Fighter who is a devout follower of the Blood of Vol... I'd be EVEN MORE likely to have this work in a desperate gamble, because now it isn't a matter of whether or not a real entity heard them, but whether or not their faith in miracles is strong enough to move the world.

I find Eberron actually the perfect example of why this sort of thing can work, because in Eberron there is a real argument that Divine Magic isn't special in anyway. You don't need to study, you don't need to pray. You need to BELIEVE. And I think the setting is full of people who have reported divine miracles happening in desperate times. The question isn't "does this happen?" but "Does this happen because of the people or does this happen as an intervention of the Gods?"

What literature are you thinking of? Most of the fantasy I read healing is either D&D inspired or is not prayer based. Wheel of Time magical healing is just magic, no prayers involved, for example.

Most Medieval and Christian texts. Tons of old medieval stories and even renaissance stories have this happen. Person has no magical powers, ends up in a desperate situation, boom, divine intervention.

And settings like Wheel of Time lack gods, or in the case of... What was Sparhawk from... The Elenium and the Tamuli by Eddings, in that setting there is no such thing as Magic that DOESN'T come from divine beings. At least not that I remember. All magic was divine magic.

DnD is very unique in being a setting that has explicit divine magic from the gods that is utterly separated from the arcane magic of wizards and other magic-users. Most fantasy literature everything is either one or the other.

A couple things going on here. D&D is big and sprawling with a lot of mechanics and considerations. It is easier to judge on the fly a natural reaction to a social interaction or a physical capability that has familiar real life reference than to judge a reasonable magical effect that is balanced in an open ended magic system. It is easier to use magical mechanics as specific discrete defined effects. In the middle of combat where quick resolution for pacing is important it can slow you down if you have to make an open ended power adjudication. Even if you use say action movie logic for resolving physical things instead of real world physics, that is easier to judge than magical reality defying effects. Magic and powers have implications and it is harder to think through open ended ones than discrete powers. There are story considerations, world logic implications, game power implications.

From the player side, discrete effects can be used and relied upon. Open ended stuff is open to DM vagaries, possible favoritism, and things turning out significantly differently than a player expects or wants.

There are also matters of individual taste as to how fantastic their games are. Is it real world with some discrete magic? High magic? Fairy tale bendable world rules? Is magic a sharp defined tool or an art.

Also this is touching on prayer, so there are some emotions for some in dealing with it as a topic.

Some of this stuff I just don't think applies. Like "world logic" problems come up all the time in DnD. This isn't unique in that. Game Power is, like we said, minimal.

Now, I do agree that there is a risk of allowing this once, but then not again, and players feeling like that isn't fair. But I think if you talk to them about it, explain that this was once and that they can't expect it to happen again, then that is far less likely to occur.

Getting late and I'm trying to catch up on the thread, so I'll leave it there.

 

[Voadam]

2) My (2) in the initial post; Rituals keying off of Religion. These are not Divine Power Sourced. You don't have to have Divine Power Source as prereq to employ them and you don't gain Divine Power Source with Ritualist. So, while you can try Divin-inator9000 away the entire Dungeon Mag improvised usage of Religion (which doesn't have Divine Power Source connected to it), Rituals are a giant, gaping confounder to your position (which is why they were included in the initial post).

So through NON DIVINE POWER SOURCE Religion Rituals, you can:

• Create persistent light from nothing.
• Purify pestilential/fetid water.
• Speak and understand languages you wouldn't otherwise.
• Speak with the dead.
• Call upon mystical sages from the Astral or elsewhere for auguries.
• Transport yourself and your allies to the Astral Sea.
• Summon a demon or adjure one.
• Demand an audience with an exarch of fate from Avandra, Ioun, Pelor, or the Raven Queen.

And much more. Without Divine Power Source.

Right, 4e rituals are trained only magic of untyped power source that can do magical effects. They sometimes involve prayers and religion skill checks as part of the magical ritual that generates a magical effect.

So this trained only magic for magical effects that not everyone can do seems different in kind from just praying (which anyone can do) to get a magical effect.

 

[Chaosmancer]

How would you rule if a cleric tried to cast magic missile having seen the party wizard cast it? OR

Depends on how good they are with Arcana. If they've been working on learning the spell I might allow them to make a spell attack roll that deals 1d4+1 force damage. At the cost of a spell slot, since that is how magic works.

The wizard digging into his reserves to bolster himself (essentially Second Wind)? OR

If there was a good reason to allow it? Spend a HD, but you can't recover that Hit Die for 1d4 weeks, as you have strained something in your body with the attempt.

The fighter picking up the holy symbol of the fallen cleric in an attempt to turn undead? OR

This one likely doesn't work. Turning undead is an act of literally channeling the divine. It isn't something that can be done but someone not prepared to main-line divine magic straight through their soul.

If the situation was dire enough, and the fighter determined enough, and the god paying attention enough... I may allow it, but it would wreck the fighter something fierce. Not sure how I'd rule the cost for that. Multiple levels of exhaustion? Massive HP damage.

The bard attempting to lose himself in the blood-lust (essentially Rage)? OR

Rage? Not going to happen. There is a lot more going on in how a Barbarian functions than just getting angry. This is a full on supernatural effect with multiple bonuses attached. Now, if they wanted to copy Reckless Attack, much more doable, might say that if they get hit they take an extra 1d4 damage, from being completely exposed.

Now, I have allowed for drugs that give rage-like effects. They are very bad for you. Like, one had a good chance of killing you from your heart giving out when the effects ended. You want to drink a bottle of magic cocaine and go hulking out? We can do that, but you are going to be heavily wrecked in the aftermath.

The druid donning heavy armour and casting druidic spells?

Specific rules come into play. You cannot cast in armor you are not proficient in. If the druid is proficient in heavy armor, then they can cast as normal. If they aren't, they can't.

You don't have to answer these...but you can see where players can take it...
That is why it makes it so divisive. Really, I'm not sure why this is a surprise to anyone in a game with Classes.

Doesn't seem like it was that hard for me.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The magic is in the rite... you just need to perform it correctly... just like using a magic item. Mundane usage

'What difference is there in the magic being in a rite, like prayer, that your perform correctly... and praying to call magic that comes from the gods?

This reads to me like saying you can't harness lightning, you can only manipulate electrical fields created by the flowing of electrons. I don't see the difference.

 

[pemerton]

Nothing you've presented actually shows someone's prayers being answered by a divine being.

@Manbearcat gave multiple examples of powers that lack the divine keyword, that are described in their flavour text as prayers, that are linked (in build terms) to the Religion skill, and that allow restoration of hit points or improve saving throws. But you assert these have no relevance to the scenario in the OP?

Show me a clear example of supernatural divine power being invested in someone through prayers

The concept of supernatural divine power isn't defined in 4e D&D, so I'm not 100% sure what you would count as an example of it.

To me, this looks like one (4e PHB, pp 61-2): "on rare occasions a deity moves to directly ordain a worthy worshiper without any sort of priestly hierarchy involved."

Rituals and rites are magical in and of themselves... they are a tool and your roll is to use them correctly, in the same way a scroll can allow someone to use magic but isn't them casting magic or being granted it directly by a greater power because they mumbled a prayer or arcane giberish.

What 4e rulebook are you referring to here? I've read a lot of them, and don't recall reading this.

The rules for Rituals in 4e D&D (PHB p 296) say that "Rituals are complex ceremonies that create magic effects." They don't say where the magic comes from. Some require a check using Religion skill to perform. Given that Religion skill covers knowledge of "gods, religious
traditions and ceremonies, divine effects, holy symbols, and theology" (PHB p 187) it seems probable that those particular rituals - ie the ones resolved via a Religion check - involve performing religious ceremonies, invoking the power of gods, and/or manifesting divine effects. If they didn't, then how would that sort of knowledge be salient at all?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Is this a 4e thread? It seemed like a general question from the OP.

 

[pemerton]

Is this a 4e thread? It seemed like a general question from the OP.

It's D&D general. Which reinforces that there are a range of possible answers. For my part, I think the answer is different in classic D&D (Ggyax's AD&D or Moldvay/Cook/Marsh B/X) from what it is in 4e.

 

[Voadam]

I've never seen anyone treat that sort of play as perfectly fine and reasonable, and it certainly wasn't the impression given when that style was brought up earlier in the thread.

But, if it is perfectly fine... why not assume it?

Some feel its inauthentic and trying to cheat the system. I generally feel its a fine approach. Whatcha gonna do?

The options for why the fighter is doing it? Of course not.

Yet you presented that as the binary options.

But frankly, they fall down towards a binary choice. Would you allow them to do it, yes or no? You can't have someone half-allow this. You either allow it, or you don't. And I'm sure you know the types of things you wouldn't allow this for, because you've listed quite a few. So why not just answer "Yes, I would allow it under these circumstances" rather than continue equivocating and saying you can't know?

Disallowing anything happening in response to the prayer is easy. Allowing it opens up all sorts of nonbinary options of how to resolve the attempt, to what effect (stabilizing, a couple hp, a full heal), what cost, is it repeatable, who answers, how does it manifest.

Nothing is obligatory. We can sit here talking in circles about how "not everyone will allow X" until we've acknowledged every single rule in every single book and every single situation ever conceived is all "at the DM's choice" but that doesn't actually get us anywhere.

I am saying there are multiple valid options that lead to different game experiences that can be fun game experiences. I am not advocating that any of them is the way things should be. I am against one true wayism.

I have my preferred option which I stated in my first response in this thread, but I think others are reasonable and can be within the normal parameters of the freedom that D&D gives on how D&D worlds work.

The game specifically calls it out as an option. The DM is not obliged to listen to the game, but they likely have a reason to listen or not listen. And we can talk about that, rather than just saying "everything is the DM's discretion"

I see it much more as the game is pretty open and does not preclude it as an option. I think the specific mechanics are the things called out by the game. Even in 4e. 4e just has more open ended mechanics like their version of the arcana skill.

Okay, so you wouldn't allow it at your table because clerics are basically just wizards that heal, and faith cannot call miracles. Though, I would argue with you about Eberron, but I'll save that for later.

Why did we need all these paragraphs of laying out every single possible consideration?

Because I believe we are talking about D&D and D&D is open to a lot of options that involve a lot of consideration. Again I am not advocating that one way is best. I legitimately feel there are multiple fun valid different ways to approach this stuff in the game.

Okay, so here I want to argue a bit about Eberron. Because, you are half right.

There is no direct evidence of the Gods being real.

There are literal mountains of evidence that FAITH leads to magical effects. The Blood of Vol is the perfect example. Now, maybe the gods are real and something like the Traveler is just messing with the followers of The Blood of Vol by making them think their powers come from themselves, but their entire religion is built around the idea that they are the source of divine power. And they have priests who pray to themselves and are able to heal and use divine magic. You also have the Silver Flame, which is a literal inferno of Divine Magic on the mortal plane. Seemingly powered by either an ascended mortal or just the faith of the followers

Now, this does depend on some specific examples, but we've gotten to a specific setting and place. If we are dealing with a Fighter who is a devout follower of the Blood of Vol... I'd be EVEN MORE likely to have this work in a desperate gamble, because now it isn't a matter of whether or not a real entity heard them, but whether or not their faith in miracles is strong enough to move the world.

I find Eberron actually the perfect example of why this sort of thing can work, because in Eberron there is a real argument that Divine Magic isn't special in anyway. You don't need to study, you don't need to pray. You need to BELIEVE. And I think the setting is full of people who have reported divine miracles happening in desperate times. The question isn't "does this happen?" but "Does this happen because of the people or does this happen as an intervention of the Gods?"

I have not gotten the same impression of Eberron stuff that you have.

Eberron clerics seem to be a magical spellcasting tradition that taps divine power. I don't read it as belief powering clerics.

From the 3.5 Eberron Campaign Setting book pages 34-35 on clerics as a class.

"Other clerics across Eberron serve no church and claim no allegiance to any deity. They recognize the power of the deities, but not their authority over mortal life. They hold principles of alignment or other abstract ideals higher than the deities who claim these ideals in their portfolios, and they draw divine power from the pervasive spiritual force in the world instead of channeling it through deities. These clerics are usually outcasts and loners, but the reality of their power is impossible to deny, and it lends credence to their unorthodox theology."

I don't take that as belief powering divine magic here, rather just not getting power from a god.

I don't expect Eberron non-clerics to pray and get cleric equivalent magical effects. Do you know of examples where people with straight up faith do stuff without say the trained spellcasting tradition of clerics or a specific feat? Clerics can clearly believe most anything and still do cleric stuff, but that seems more consistent with the class and not the belief being the operating factor.

Also there is the whole discussion about corrupt clerics keeping their powers on pages 35-36.

"A cleric who violates the tenets of her church or deity might risk punishment at the hands of the church (though not necessarily, particularly in regions where the church is very corrupt), but risks no loss of spells or class features and need not atone. This rule supersedes the information under Ex-Clerics on page 33 of the Player’s Handbook."

This seems to suggest that clerics who don't believe but are putting on a mummery of faith would still cast clerical magic.

I do like that Faiths of Eberron says up front that "This book presents religious information through the eyes of believers, often stating as fact events that more properly belong in myth or legend."

I have not read a ton of Eberron. I have skimmed a bunch and like a lot of it, and played in the setting and adopted a bunch of elements into my homebrew setting, but most of my knowledge is high vantage point stuff. The stuff I have read though gives me a different sense than you seem to have on belief and magical effects in the system.

I am open to seeing specifics that point a different direction though if you can point them out.

 

[Voadam]

@Manbearcat gave multiple examples of powers that lack the divine keyword, that are described in their flavour text as prayers, that are linked (in build terms) to the Religion skill, and that allow restoration of hit points or improve saving throws. But you assert these have no relevance to the scenario in the OP?

The concept of supernatural divine power isn't defined in 4e D&D, so I'm not 100% sure what you would count as an example of it.

To me, this looks like one (4e PHB, pp 61-2): "on rare occasions a deity moves to directly ordain a worthy worshiper without any sort of priestly hierarchy involved."

To me that looks like the god acting, not through prayers.

This particular quote seems to say that gods can do the same thing (invest a cleric with cleric power) as clerics can. Clerics being able to essentially knight people as new clerics I thought was a fun interesting piece of 4e lore.

What 4e rulebook are you referring to here? I've read a lot of them, and don't recall reading this.

The rules for Rituals in 4e D&D (PHB p 296) say that "Rituals are complex ceremonies that create magic effects." They don't say where the magic comes from. Some require a check using Religion skill to perform. Given that Religion skill covers knowledge of "gods, religious
traditions and ceremonies, divine effects, holy symbols, and theology" (PHB p 187) it seems probable that those particular rituals - ie the ones resolved via a Religion check - involve performing religious ceremonies, invoking the power of gods, and/or manifesting divine effects. If they didn't, then how would that sort of knowledge be salient at all?

4e rituals are magic that not everybody can do. Having a ritual book, performing the ceremony, and making a high relevant skill check is insufficient on its own to perform a magical ritual and activate the ritual magic effect.

Page 298:

"Owning a ritual book isn’t enough to let you perform the ritual or rituals in it. You must first master a ritual by studying it for 8 uninterrupted hours. (If you gained a ritual by creating its book yourself or by obtaining it as a class feature, you have already mastered it.)
You must meet two requirements to master a ritual. You must have the Ritual Caster feat (clerics and wizards get this feat at 1st level), and your level must equal or exceed the ritual’s level. If you meet those requirements and spend 8 hours studying a ritual, you can add it to your list of mastered rituals. As long as you have the ritual’s book handy, you can perform a mastered ritual whenever you want."

Alternatively without a book you can cast off a ritual scroll which is "A scroll is a condensed version of a ritual, partially cast and primed"

So 4e rituals are specific magic that only some can do that sometimes involve prayers when causing a religious themed magical effect.

You can take this as there are examples of things being close to prayers causing magic effects. So you could come up with something to make a prayer only magical effect using ritual magic as a baseline yardstick to start from. Alternatively you could look at 4e ritual magic involving prayers and say without the magic, prayers are just prayers without magic.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Doesn't seem like it was that hard for me.

There was a reason why I told you that I do not expect you to answer each and every one of those examples.
My post was about realising the endless improvised actions that may now come into play once you open that door where Class loses some of it niche.
Some DMs might have an issue with it, some not.
The point was not how easy it was for you. The point was to understand how others may not like it.

Just think on the entire multi-class issue where someone dips their toes into 1 level of another class and now has access to everything of the other class. People took issue with it. Now you're saying you don't even need to level dip.

It has nothing to do with how creative Chaosmancer is at the improvisational action table.