Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ohmyn" data-source="post: 7627207" data-attributes="member: 6999115">The issue here is whether or not the DM can cancel their ability in the RAW, such as at an AL table. There's a difference between the DM being able to use their almighty god powers to do whatever they want at a house table, and an ability in RAW telling the DM they get final say in how effective the player's spell is going to be. This isn't a case of "a mean DM can do this", it's a case that every DM, even mean or otherwise, is told specifically to decide the power of this spell on the spot. If the Hexblade at the table is highly effective, the RAW table DM can't just tell them they have less AC or do less damage, but if the summoning Druid is highly effective at the table, the DM can just give them crap summons because they don't like it (here's a shark on land). Imagine if when you cast a damaging spell, it dealt 1d6, 2d6, or 12d6, as chosen by your DM. That's not a good RAW mechanic for a player's spell to have.Not going to comment too hard on that as it's fully subjective based on how the DM handles combat, but I will say that the spells also require you to issue verbal commands for the creatures to follow, and if you don't issue a command, they do nothing and will only defend themselves from hostile creatures. Even if they miss you casting the spell, I'm sure you'll get their attention when you're shouting out orders.I think he's more making the point that it takes just a small amount of attention to make them entirely not a threat, or to force them expend a larger amount of their limited resources to have any real effect, than other characters would have to do in similar situations. This is especially true when the Druid has a more limited selection of ways to defend themselves, even going as far as being prohibited in wearing most armors in the game, and doesn't have the defensive class/spell options that other classes have available for contingency.</blockquote>

Verification