this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2024
612 points (95.4% liked)
Greentext
4604 readers
338 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I fuckin hate this notion in modern dnd (which is a misconception in the first place) that its just "let a d20 decide: the game". That's not how the game has ever been played. If you wanna have goofy mad-lib games with your friends where you just roll dice and laugh that's fine but you've never, in 50 years, had to roll to see if you're able to cast Cure Wounds or Heal.
That is a mechanic in some other games where spellcasting isn't a guaranteed thing. But not in core Dungeons and Dragons.
I guess since in many cases you do actually need to roll a dice, like when peeforming a touch or ranged touch spell, people just assume it always happens.
And even in this case. Cure wounds is a spell like any other and it is subject to a will saving throw. So to be correct the pc that was targeted by the spell would indeed roll in order to save from the unintended heal - but thats really just assuming the spell could be used like this, which in my interpretation it cannot.
So again, even if the caster rolls no dice in this case, the target could. I think this leads to people thinking there must always be a roll.
Edit: fix paragraphs
Will isn't an attribute/stat in dnd 5e and the only roll one would make for cure wounds is the amount of healing applied.
Thats not what I said.
Never played 5e but in 3.5e the target of the spell - not the spellcaster - can roll a dice. The target can perform a will save to reduce healing amount by half.
didn't dnd 2e have you roll a d20 if you cast while wearing armor? too low of a roll and the cast fails? No crit effects, just simple pass/fail, right?
https://aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=361
It was a rule in Pathfinder, so presumably it was a rule in 3e.
Pathfinder has that too, so it presumably carried through 3.5e. It's why wizards don't wear armor, and only applies to arcane casters, and classes that are meant to wear some armor like bards get exemptions for the tiers of armor they're meant to wear.
Like in warhammer fantasy, where a guy i've played with managed to cast one spell during a fight that took 30-60 mins irl
I wish my DM would accept this. I was born with this power but I might fail to cast it? Why am I not rolling to see if I walk properly since that was a learned ability.
Shadowdark has d20 rolls for spellcasting and by all accounts it's fantastic. If you succeed the roll you cast the spell and expend no resources. If you fail you can't cast the spell for the rest of the day. I don't believe for a second that it's what the OP in this post was playing though.
Octodad: Pen&Paper edition?
QWOP tabletop edition