D&D 5E Worldbuilding: destruction and siege via Mold Earth?

[greg kaye]

No, because structures are not built on loose earth. The cantrip specifically calls out that the effected dirt must be loose earth. If someone constructs a building on top of loose earth, the building will fall down on its own...no need for a caster to help with that.

Cities like Tel Aviv are built on sand dunes. It works because the packed sands are fairly rigid as long as they are undisturbed. ...

The sands remain rigid under downward pressure but, in my understanding, minimal upward pressure could cause them to move due to a lack of bonding between the generally loose ground.

 

[overgeeked]

The sands remain rigid under downward pressure but, in my understanding, minimal upward pressure could cause them to move due to a lack of bonding between the generally loose ground.

So while the structure exists...there is downward pressure which makes the sand not loose. So the spell has zero effect...because the spell only effects loose earth.

 

[greg kaye]

... If something's buried under even 1-2 inches of dirt you cannot see it. So no, you cannot see whatever is under that layer of dirt...even if it's just more dirt. An argument could be made that the PC just has to see a point of the effected area, but that in no way implies that the PC can see the whole volume of dirt. ...

The PC can only see the surface of the dirt. Nonetheless, the cantrip description states "You choose a portion of dirt or stone that you can see within range and that fits within a 5-foot cube". Even though you can only see the dirt particles on the visible surface, the spell permits effects on contents that fit within the 5-foot cube.

 

[greg kaye]

So while the structure exists...there is downward pressure which makes the sand not loose. So the spell has zero effect...because the spell only effects loose earth.

Certainly. Sand directly beneath a building would be effectively clamped in position. However, if you removed sand to the side, a sand slip might potentially result.

 

[overgeeked]

Certainly. Sand directly beneath a building would be effectively clamped in position. However, if you removed sand to the side, a sand slip might potentially result.

Sure. If you're in the desert, and if the structure is built on loose sand, and if...and if...and if.

Assuming good faith readings of the spell, there's at least 3 different interpretations going in this thread. Chalk that up to the designers insistence on the use of "natural language" when they should have written the game's rules more clearly and with more precision of language.

Bottom line: anything not explicitly listed in the spell is purely the territory of the referee's adjudication. Making a long series of assumptions about how the referee will rule things then getting mad that you're wrong about your assumptions is a terrible idea. Lots of people still do it, including the person I had rage quit over this very cantrip.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

There are three stipulations to the spell. 1) loose earth, and; 2) that you can see, and; 3) no more than two lasting effects.

If the earth is not loose and/or if you cannot see it, you cannot effect that earth.

I can see it right there... no one can with out serius magic see all 8 sides of a 5ft cube, so your ruling is it can't do what it says it does,

If you want to do anything more than move the loose earth that you can see, that requires 1 of the 2 lasting effects...which are also precisely delineated. That is how spells work. You get to do this cool thing within these limitations.

the move the earth is a stated ability

To try to argue those stipulations/limitations away is to cheese the spell's description.

I am not cheesing I am littarly asking for what it says.

If you target an area of loose earth, you can instantaneously excavate it, move it along the ground, and deposit it up to 5 feet away.

the spell says I can target an area of loose earth you alone are adding I have to be able to see the bottom.

A wall is a constructed object that is designed to not fall down.

or is a bunch of stuff thrown on top of each other

A big mound of loose earth is not a wall.

it blocks line of sight and makes it hard to get through/over... it's a wall. Is that it you don't like me describing my shoveled dirt as a wall?!?

To make a wall you'd need to manipulate the loose earth somehow. One way would be to compact it. Another would be to manipulate it with a lasting effect of the cantrip...which you can only have two going at one time.

none of that is needed though if you use a back hoe and digg out a 5ft by 5ft by 5ft hole and dropped all the dirt from the hole on one side you would see what I mean.

A 5ft cube of loose earth will not stay a 5ft cube of loose earth. It will settle.

more or less agree

The edges will collapse and spread out.

yup

You'll end up with a loose mound, the apex of which will be roughly 5ft high, the edges of which will stretch several feet in all directions.

no it wont it wont stretch into the whole... maybe behind it.

The cantrip does not transform loose earth into a Lego brick of compacted dirt.

no body said it did

The "wall" this creates would be some level of cover at best.

what do you think the wall is for?

 

[greg kaye]

Assuming ...

which you did regarding your "zero effect" assertion which I disputed.

 

[Umbran]

the idea that it's the players fault for using a poorly designed mechanic to thier benefit, is a very toxic one to video games and rpg's.

"Anything not specifically prohibited is allowed," may work in some legal arguments, but our gaming tables are not courts of law. Maybe some consideration as to the limits of game systems is in order for good play all around. Call it the RPG version of good sportsmanship.

If you want to defend it then lets just call it bad game design.

All mechanics and rules have limitations, places where they apply, and places where they don't, things they do well, and things they do poorly. It is not "bad design" - it is simply unavoidable. Perfection is denied us.

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

The PC can only see the surface of the dirt. Nonetheless, the cantrip description states "You choose a portion of dirt or stone that you can see within range and that fits within a 5-foot cube". Even though you can only see the dirt particles on the visible surface, the spell permits effects on contents that fit within the 5-foot cube.

right I am not trying to build a stone temple here I am digging a trench, one that I understand was common for soldier to dig inWW2 in even pact dirt... I have no issue with "Oh this earth isn't loose" but don't tell me because I can't see all sides of the 5ft of dirt the spell can't do what it says it does,

 

[AmandaBarbarian]

Bottom line: anything not explicitly listed in the spell is purely the territory of the referee's adjudication. Making a long series of assumptions about how the referee will rule things then getting mad that you're wrong about your assumptions is a terrible idea. Lots of people still do it, including the person I had rage quit over this very cantrip.

when you flat out say it can't move 5ft of loose earth because I can't see all sides of it, that isn't an assumption