Why is dream a 5th-level spell?

[Nifft]

I thought you might be thinking of nightmare...which may or may not do damage, but does mess you up.

Nah, IMHO nightmare is about the right level.

Cheers, -- N

 

[irdeggman]

This bit: Basically, if you don't know the target's sleeping habits, you could be in a trance for a while.

Which could be even less convenient than 10 minute casting time.

Cheers, -- N

But that is not the required time - it could take that long isn't the same as it does take that long.

Also don't forget that the caster doesn't have to be the messenger (different than sending).

You, or a messenger touched by you, sends a phantasmal message to others in the form of a dream.

So if the caster pays a begger 1 cp to "take a nap" then it takes 1 minute (casting time) and the caster is free to go about doing what he wants to while he waits for "delivery".

Technically you could also use your familiar and keep it in one of those Belts of Many Pockets. (Target 1 living creature touched)

 

[Nifft]

But that is not the required time - it could take that long isn't the same as it does take that long.

Yes, true. I should have said "potentially hours of sleep".

So if the caster pays a begger 1 cp to "take a nap" then it takes 1 minute (casting time) and the caster is free to go about doing what he wants to while he waits for "delivery".

Technically you could also use your familiar and keep it in one of those Belts of Many Pockets. (Target 1 living creature touched)

You have a lot more faith in the abilities of beggars and familiars than may be justified. But I'd love for a PC in my game to try the former.

"The whole night before the attack, your name plagued my dreams, Sir Smartypants! Some strange fellow kept repeating that you had a vital message for me, and then he would go on about hands, and shrimp, and the millennium! It was quite prophetic, I suppose. If only you yourself had seen fit to contact me with a sending, we might not have fared so poorly in the battle."

Cheers, -- N

 

[Nellisir]

One wonders how many quasi-insta-communciation spells we need, and if dream could not be altered to do something a bit more...interesting, and make it worth that 5th level spell slot.

 

[irdeggman]

Yes, true. I should have said "potentially hours of sleep".

You have a lot more faith in the abilities of beggars and familiars than may be justified. But I'd love for a PC in my game to try the former.

Maybe a beggar is not that trustworthy but a familar should definitely work. And if you don't play it a familiar as being as smart (11 Int by 9th master) or as loyal as I see them then you might be downplaying them tremendously. They are more powerfully linked to their master (and intelligent) than are animal companions (although some still confuse the two as roughly equivalent).

FAMILIARS
Familiars are magically linked to their masters. In some sense, the
familiar and the master are practically one being.

"Color" text from the PHB helps to put a familiar in a clearer perspective than the SRD does.

They are smart enough and at 9th level of a wizard master, it has an INT of 11 (assuming it is not an improved familiar) and can readily communicate with its master.

The spell (Dream) does not state anywhere that the messenger must be able to communicate effectively only that it delivers the message. Like sneding it also does not state that both parties need to speak the same language.

A follower could likewise be used - heck even an injured party member who requires rest to recover.

I do like your description of the Dream and how it is "perceived" though.

Just to reiterate, I am not saying in any way that I think Dream should be a 5th level spell only that is about equivalent in power to Sending and that they should be the same level.

 

[Nifft]

Just to reiterate, I am not saying in any way that I think Dream should be a 5th level spell only that is about equivalent in power to Sending and that they should be the same level.

Agree, though keep in mind sending is 5th level for Wizards. :\ Only Clerics get to have nice things.

(Regarding familiars, I'm not saying they're disloyal, I'm saying they can't speak! Except Ravens, of course.)

@ Nellisir: throw in animal messenger and whispering winds too. How many "me, too, but different!" spells do Druids need?

Cheers, -- N

 

[irdeggman]

(Regarding familiars, I'm not saying they're disloyal, I'm saying they can't speak! Except Ravens, of course.)

Ahh but the spell doesn't require "speach", I know it is kind of rules lawyere but it also fits with the fact that neither Sending nor Dream require the two parties to be able to "communicate" as in "understand the same language". It is interesting that spells that used to have the caveat that the target had to understand you no longer say that (e.g., command).

 

[Nellisir]

Ahh but the spell doesn't require "speach", I know it is kind of rules lawyere but it also fits with the fact that neither Sending nor Dream require the two parties to be able to "communicate" as in "understand the same language". It is interesting that spells that used to have the caveat that the target had to understand you no longer say that (e.g., command).

Command is language-dependant; dream is not. Interesting tactic using a familiar to convey a dream.

I don't think allowing two-way communication via a dream spell would be unreasonable, particularly as a 5th-level spell. Or maybe it can include a suggestion.