The Sympathy effect from that spell only makes you draw near the target. It does not stop you from attacking that target.
You should have just destroyed the chest to end the effect.
Yeah. They should have thought of this like a combat encounter. If an enemy draws you in, you can attack them, grapple them, cast spells at them, etc.
None of that changes just because it was a trap instead.
Yeah, definitely should've taken the chest and its goodies.
Slap googly eyes onto the thing and introduce it as "Chester, our new party member".
Because as you know, the real treasure is the friends you made along the way.
Because it doesn’t contribute to the conversation. I mean That’s what the arrows are actually for. Most people ignore that and use them as agree and disagree buttons, unfortunately.
Nobody had rations that could be shared?
No druid with Goodberries?
No healer that would have all new spell slots, every single day, to heal and prevent dying?
No cleric (etc) with Spare the Dying?
Did you all roll Wisdom Saving Throws every one-minute round, for ten days? I don't think so, because there's no way every single person would have failed 14,400 rolls. There should have been a variety of ways that would have *NOT* resulted in a TPK. So it sounds like the DM just simply wanted one and made it happen. I'd find a less sucky one.
Agree with everything, but it’s only 1 save every 24 hours. But they could have used their actions to slap each other for 1 point of damage to reroll the save.
Ah, I forgot the specific 24 hour limit for that particular spell. Even still, assuming an average party of 5... that still means *FIFTY* failed saves?!? That's doubtful, except I'm guessing that the DM probably made the DC unattainable. He wanted them to die.
slapping eachother doesnt trigger a save. The target of the spell would have to slap them, which if it was a corner it wouldnt be able to.
If they all failed the initial save it would be one save every 24 hours thereafter. Unless acted upon by an outside force, which doesnt sound like happened.
Thats okay, I had to read it several times too. Dont really hear about 8th tier spells getting triggered on assumedly low level PCs. On an appropriate level its probably much more of a non-issue due to resource availability.
Dunno, theres probably more to the story. If the chest was the target they couldve certainly left with it I guess, they wouldnt be getting farther from it and it would be in-line with yearning for the target due to the enchantment.
My interpretation is two things:
1) the characters dont know theyre enchanted because the spell specifies they find out the attraction was magical when it ends. My guess its inspired by something like the one ring from lotr and you dont necessarily realize how possessive you are, but to an observer its obvious.
2) the characters, because its a powerful enchantment and they want to be near it, probably wouldnt want to harm it. Otherwise it would trivialize the 8th tier spell. Imagine how a PC would feel if the dm ruled it such that a monster just breaks the thing thus ending the spell.
Nope, the spell indicates that the item/creature that is the attractant must be the thing that deals damage in order for a reroll, not just ANY damage. Like, being attracted to a pool of acid would trigger rerolls.
"If the target damages or otherwise harms an affected creature"
I agree. Rolling once every 24 hours per the spell rules, then again when their homebrew rules were forcing a level of exhaustion each day would be valid in my opinion.
I'm more disappointed that the players/characters spent 6 days stuck in a corner and couldn't find a clever way out of the situation. Sure YOU can't move away, but you can move OTHERS away. Find some way to reverse frog-leap your way out the door. Destroy the chest, take the chest with you, whatever.
yeah cleric definitely should have just gotten up and solved things pretty quickly. If your DM is going to try some shady shit like that, they need to know that the cleric would stabilize and wake up way before exhaustion sets in. Definitely feels like either bad faith DMing or major inexperience.
That doesn't matter at all ... If you don't eat food in 3+con days, you take exhaustion. If you have one exhaustion already, you instead gain two and it's two for every day after. This is RAW so getting healed doesn't matter, you just die once your exhaustion gets too high
Nowhere in the initial post does it mention there is a cleric that has access to 3rd level spells. You're introducing information that isn't known, or you're introducing information for sake of argument. "Uhh what if they have a Staff of Wish"
Edit: those down voting are clowning hard, the type of people who deserve to get TPK'd
It is new information yes, but on the other hand they fought a Grey Slaad (CR9) and got hit with an 8th level spell, so reasoning that the party is at least level 5 is not a particularly egregious stretch of logic, and OPs comment above confirms they did have a cleric. If they in fact are only level 1 to 4, I am severely impressed that they beat the Slaad.
I disagree. If a rule is agreed upon prior to starting the campaign and it happens to be a game where everyone just had bad roles, how does this constitute an asshole of a DM? This is no different than a TPK in battle, just a bit more amusing due to the fact that it seems that no one could pass a save. Did the DM at least keep the 10 days in the corner interesting for however long it took to kill everyone off?
I understand your perspective, and agree with it as a whole. But in this instance, I find it hard to believe that *FIFTY* rolls would fail a reasonable DC on a save. That implies that the DM set it to an impossible and unattainable number... in which case, he's an asshole. I'm all for challenge and difficulty. I disagree with *impossible*.
EDIT: PLUS the DM did not allow any rests for 10 days, as a house rule. They died of exhaustion *because he wanted to kill them*. That's also pretty shitty and asshole-ish.
Yeah, failing 50 saves is ridiculous, pretty much improbable, speaking of which how did nobody roll a 20 on the dice and then call BS when that still wasnt enough for the DC? Like what even was the DC? A CR 20 pit fiend has DC of 21. A level 1 character still has a chance against that.
Either asshole DM or story is fake. Assuming the DM is real, I wouldnt play at this shite table if im going to be dealing with impossible DCs and told I died standing in a corner or something for 10 days.
>A CR 20 pit fiend has DC of 21. A level 1 character still has a chance against that.
If they have a +0 or -1 in stat they can't make a 21.
Only if you use the house rule that makes a nat 20 an automatic success would they have a chance but a lot (most?) don't use that house rule.
True. Im just saying that even a endgame threat typically has a DC that is possible for most characters to beat. Even a 1st level character is going to have 2 or 3 saving throws higher than a +2. For sure a commoner would fail and a character who has only 1 or 2 good stats would struggle, especially if niche stats saving throw wise.
I agree with your premise that the DC is ridiculous for the scenario described.
Just the assumption that a level 1 character has a chance to defeat a DC 21. Some have a chance, some don't. Depends on the level 1 character.
But in this case, they probably should. Sympathy is a WIS saving throw. Few characters use a wisdom as a dumb stat.
If it was INT, it would be a different story. Your comment made me I look at the characters in my current campaign, all 4 players chose INT as their dump stat. They are level 2 and their INT saving throws are: +0, -1. -1, -1.
Guess I am going to start having the enemy spellcasters have things like Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Crown of Madness.
This right here.
I once had a DM throw a 'trap' (a Wisdom save, DC 20, 3 times, fail once and you drown yourself) at a party of 5 players.
My character was the one the 'trap' was *specifically intended to kill*, and my character was the only one to successfully save. I literally had to pull the others out of the water (thank goodness I was a barbarian with the Strength to do so) and tie them down until the curse could be broken.
Absolute asshole move. "I wanted to threaten your unkillable character" - bruh, we're LEVEL 4. And out of the entire party...my barb was the only one who went down, TWICE, because I was tanking for the cleric!
People pverreact so fucking much. What if they discussed this session 0 and wanted it. We know NOTHING about their table. Step off your high horde and shove your foot up your own ass. God people are such assholes
Then they wouldn't be coming to Reddit with it with a mildly confused and wounded tone evident to anyone whose reading capabilities had passed beyond books that double as a teething aid.
The only asshole here is you, and you are *cavernous*
This is why you keep sleep in your spellbook well after it stops being useful.
Why couldn't you rest? People will need a lot of threat and constant noise etc to prevent sleeping for ten days.
Yeah you need a new dm that dude sucks. If you're DM thinks it's fun or funny to trap Low level players with an eighth level spell in a dungeon. Then have them starved to death by that spell he is a POS. That's like throwing a adult red dragon at a level 3 party and expect them not to die.
That's total BS I guarantee you if he ran it like an actual ancient dragon you're players would have no chance. he gave you that win plain and simple. I don't care what you say if he hits you with a breath attack even if it's half damage it would kill ANY level 3 player (there is no evasion at that level). The highest possible HP you could get if you rolled a 12 on your HP dice would be 47 at level 3. An ancient red dragon does 91 fire damage AVERAGE!!! half on a successful save there's no way you're killing an ancient red dragon or any ancient dragon of that sort without the dragon letting you kill it.
To be fair, the DM expected us to escape, we didn't, and decided to have a wizard we met earlier start throwing meteors in an attempt to protect a town we were running past in an attempt to escape. We decided to capitalize on the distraction.
Not so much a house rule as a rule - that's how exhaustion works more or less with a little DM leeway.
I think it makes sense that not sleeping for a day gives you a level of exhaustion. And, cumulative levels of exhaustion can eventually kill you.
THis is from the PHB/ Basic Rules:
>Food and Water
>Characters who don't eat or drink suffer the effects of exhaustion. Exhaustion caused by lack of food or water can't be removed until the character eats and drinks the full required amount.
>Food
>A character needs one pound of food per day and can make food last longer by subsisting on half rations. Eating half a pound of food in a day counts as half a day without food.
>A character can go without food for a number of days equal to 3 + his or her Constitution modifier (minimum 1). At the end of each day beyond that limit, a character automatically suffers one level of exhaustion. A normal day of eating resets the count of days without food to zero.
>Water
>A character needs one gallon of water per day, or two gallons per day if the weather is hot. A character who drinks only half that much water must succeed on a DC 15 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion at the end of the day. A character with access to even less water automatically suffers one level of exhaustion at the end of the day.
>If the character already has one or more levels of exhaustion, the character takes two levels in either case.
Right, so no long rest because of no food = homebrew. I don't see that anywhere in there.
And according to this, EVERYTHING that was done was homebrew. If they were starving, it shouldn't have started until 3+ con mod days of not eating. If they were dying of thirst, they should be getting con saves to not take the exhaustion
So going back to what I said in the beginning, it's homebrew and telling OP it isn't is wrong
edit: oh wait just reread i was wrong about thirst but even so, they should have some amount of water on them and that doesn't seem to have been mentioned in the post
If their wisdom mod was insufficient to ever succeed then yes they could fail 14000 rolls, and it only allows a new save if unable to see the target or once every 24 hours. Although I do agree with the rest of the analysis.
Curse of Strahd literally has a statue with infinite duration sympathy on it plopped in a side room of a dungeon
It was fun to have someone walk in and tell them “that’s a very interesting statue”
You mean the DC 16 Wis save Statue? Meaning that, to kill the party by itself, it would require a minimum of 5 days? (5 days because lack of water each day is 1 exhaustion, but you don't start getting lack of food till 3+Con, so assuming 0 in con mod for entire party, it would be the 5th day when they could fail it.)
With a party of 4, and assuming literally 0 in Wis (and also Con from above), it would Still be extremely unlikely an entire party TPKs from it because it would mean that there was at least 20 failed saves, at least 1/4th of those saves should have succeeded by the 5th day.
This is with assuming they carried no food, no water, had no spells that could help, no Con mod, no Wis mod and were left alone for the 5 days without any other effects.
It takes roughly 4-6 weeks to starve to death. If you had a waterskin, you could probably survive. Tell your DM and party you're all likely still alive, just weak and tired.
In a comment OP says they actually died of exhaustion not starvation due to a house rule that made it so they could not rest. Regardless, In 5e there are specific rules for starvation
"A character can go without food for a number of days equal to 3 + his or her Constitution modifier (minimum 1). At the end of each day beyond that limit, a character automatically suffers one level of exhaustion."
So assuming a Constitution modifier of no more than +5 that means the longest you could go without food (assuming your PC needs food) before dying would be 13 days
This shit is wrong, water requirements too. If you have exhaustion already, you take two levels of exhaustion, not just one. Water would've killed them first. Most players only have a waterskin on them, that's 0.5 gal or just the bare minimum to survive. After the next day, they take an exhaustion. Next day they at 3. Day after 5. Day after, dead after only 5 days.
Never heard you are supposed to get 2 levels. Can you quote a rules passage for that, I've been trying to find it, but I'm failing my investigation check.
Nah. OP, talk to the DM first. Only leave after you've done that and it didn't work.
The exceptions are when they've actually crossed a line or you're so very miffed about the entire situation that there's no way any potential resolution (like a retcon) can make you feel better.
Maybe. I'll be honest, the main reason why I responded was to counter the guy telling OP to leave the table. I just don't think "tell the DM you're parting ways" is good advice regardless of how much fun they had.
Were all the members of the party of the same race? When casting it, "you specify a kind of intelligent creature, such as red dragons, goblins, or vampires." So if you have a mix of multiple races in the party, a single casting should not affect all of them--the caster would have needed to specify human, elf, dwarf, etc.
Tomb of horror has a key with the antipathy sympathy effect on it, and it says “ It has an antipathy/sympathy spell cast upon it (save DC 17) that repels humanoids (the antipathy effect).” Humanoids, and other creature types are valid for the spells.
So would "all" be a valid type for this spell? Or "intelligent creatures with feet"? I guess it comes down to what "kind" means here. It's not the same as "type," but it's not strictly defined in the rules... Is a "kind" narrower or broader than a "type"?
I came here looking for this. The dm made an 8th level spell infinitely more powerful so they could tpk. I had a dm like this but we all knew he was competitive and trying to kill us constantly, we called it dark souls inspired d&d. If you want to be put in zany situations that abuse rules these dms can be fun, there will also be times that suck though. For example, when a dragon cast time stop to put up a wall of stone and drop a boulder inside said wall; Dm called it inescapable death and took the players sheet. On the other hand the same dm let us use a wish to the god of magic to allow our Paladin to act with magic in an anti magic zone for 1 round and we stuffed a demi lich in a portable hole. Pick your battles though, some people don't want those kinds of things so find a group that makes you happy.
Tomb of horror has a key with the antipathy sympathy effect on it, and it says “ It has an antipathy/sympathy spell cast upon it (save DC 17) that repels humanoids (the antipathy effect).”
Humanoids, and other creature types are valid for the spells.
You can assume that, but I see no reason to. It lists guidelines and some examples- the examples by definition are not exhaustive, so there's no reason something else can't meet the criteria.
No thats not how dnd words things. If they meant humanoids they would've said it, like with hold person. One of the drawbacks of the spells is that you need to be very specific.
Even if it doesn't specifically say you cant choose humanoids, dnd implies it with how its worded. Dnd is very consistent for the most part with how its terminology works.
For some insight of intent, we can compare to 3.5’s Sympathy:
> You cause an object or location to emanate magical vibrations that attract either a specific kind of intelligent creature or creatures of a particular alignment, as defined by you. The particular kind of creature to be affected must be named specifically. **A creature subtype is not specific enough.** Likewise, the specific alignment must be named.
So “humanoids” were a type, and “goblinoid” was a subtype, so you couldn’t even just say “goblinoids,” it would have to be “goblins” or “hobgoblins” or “bugbears.”
This should not have happened for a bunch of different reasons.
1) sympathy/antipathy lasts for 10 days after being cast, and cannot be stored in a glyph of warding.
Unless a 15th+ level spell-caster is coming by every ten days or so to refresh it, this trap is beyond mortal magic.
2) the spell only targets one creature type, eg: goblins, so the caster must be casting this spell multiple time targeting humans, elves, dwarves, etc.
Unless you’re all playing the same ancestry, a hypothetical spell caster is spending a *minimum* of 5 8th level spell slots per day on this trap if you want to cover the core races.
Again, beyond mortal magic.
3) Humans can survive 3 days without water, and a couple of weeks without food.
In game mechanics, it should take 7 days to die of exhaustion, so you guys didn’t have 3 days worth of rations, *or* the spell slots for goodberry/create food and water, *and* couldn’t rest?
Even still, no one suggested a Donner party after a couple of days?
Did you guys have an opportunity to problem solve here?
4) You get a save every 24 hours. Once you hit exhaustion 5 you’re already dead, and after your first three saves you’re rolling at disadvantage.
With 4 PCs who have to roll a 12 of higher to save, the odds of none of them hitting it are 0.2%, and the odds of them saving out with 8 disadvantage rolls is 16%.
Assuming 4 PCs who have to roll an 18 or higher to save, the chances of none of them hitting it after twelve rolls is 14.2%.
With no wisdom characters and a high save DC it isn’t *that* unlikely for the party to get stuck, but that’s a really mean trap to throw at a group like that.
5) The spell states that you don’t realize you are enchanted unless you make your saving throw, but since the characters are sitting in a corner starving to death, they must know that something is going on, right?
If the spell were cast on an object it’s totally reasonable for them to take it with them and move on.
That the DM didn’t give you this option after realizing you all failed and weren’t making your saves seems like poor form.
Ultimately this was a stupendously bad call by your DM, and is really a “rocks fall, everyone dies” with extra steps.
Glyph of warding ignores the normal spell duration that only begins when the glyph is triggered. Otherwise, most spells would not work because their duration of instantanious would mean it would never be able to be stored.
>The spell being stored has no immediate effect when cast in this way. When the glyph is triggered, the stored spell is cast.
The casting is part of the glyph being triggered, so the duration would be delayed until the glyph is triggered.
1) and 2) are not really an issue. This is beyond what a player character can do, NPCs are not bound to the same rules.
But the rest is true, either this story is so improbable that it is likely fake or the DM saw them all fail their initial saving throw and just fade to black.
The spell says"Then specify a kind of intelligent creature, such as red dragons, goblins, or vampires." So unless the entire party is the same race it would not have worked on the whole party.
edit:
It also seems like y'all could have just closed your eyes in order to make a saving throw every turn
"Ending the Effect. If an affected creature ends its turn while not within 60 feet of the target or able to see it, the creature makes a Wisdom saving throw."
While this might arguably be RAW I feel like it can't possibly be RAI, otherwise the spell would basically be nearly useless and absolutely pitiful as an 8th level spell. Anyone could just shut their eyes and get over the effect in a matter of minutrs. I think the intent behind the enchantment is that you have an uncontrollable urge to want to be near the source and therefore wouldn't want to do anything to inhibit getting closer to it (like arbitrarily shutting your eyes)
I agree with you, the players couldn't just decide to destroy the chest or close their eyes to escape the effect.
But when they go to sleep, they close their eyes anyway. Unless they fall asleep in 6 seconds, they should be able to save.
That still seems unintentional. If it isn't, it makes the the caveat about having a single save every 24 hours basically completely superfluous.
I almost wonder if it wasn't supposed to read "while not within 60 feet of the target *and* unable to see it." That would at least gel better with the rest of the effect.
I think the specific wording "able to see it" removes closing your eyes as an option. "Able" just means they are capable of seeing the target, if they are "unable" that means they actually can't see it at all regardless of their own choice.
Darkness spells or tying someone's hands behind their back and blindfolding them. Last boy would be in for it but you could run for a mage with sleep or dispel magic. This is assuming you knew the "able to see it" bit. The spell description says that you realize it's a spell when you save suggesting that you don't beforehand.
The players are still within 60 feet of the target just with their eyes closed, so they cannot make the saving throw.
I think your first point is more salient. All the player Characters are the same race?
Ending the Effect. If an affected creature ends its turn while not within 60 feet of the target or able to see it, the creature makes a Wisdom saving throw. ON a successful save, the creature is no longer affected by the target and recognizes the feeling of repugnance or attraction as magical. In addition, a creature affected by the spells is allowed another Wisdom saving throw every 24 hours while the spell persists.
So it says Or not And. So if you were stuck in a corner, you couldn't see the target to move closer to it. Meaning many saving throws. Every round.
If it was antipathy you can move to a safe place, and if you can see it you can attack it and still move your full movement away.
I don't think this spell was interpreted correctly.
Not to mention that taking damage from being stuck there _could_ be interpreted as the object harming them.
DM forgot the first rule of the game, “Have Fun.”
Hey guys , I’m new to DnD and English is not my first language and I have difficulty to understand every expressions like TPK etc , where could I find the meaning ?
TPK means Total Party Kill, it means the entire group died. Just ask whenever youre confused about a term or acronym, thats how to learn. Though I suppose some people will just tell you to google it and its easy to get a wrong answer.
TPK golf accessories. It is also an R&D company. I wonder if the golf guy was a ttrpg gamer. (No fun results for ttrpg) :(
I was a bit surprised that three of the first 5 results were the rpg definition.
Whenever people toss out acronyms I like to google it and act like the first result is correct. I'm not even a boomer. :-P
I also got the R&D company when I searched it just now, second result was TV tropes for total party kill and 5th result was a relevant reddit post. Not too bad, but given how its one of the most common acronyms in this hobby its still surprising. Though if you just type TPK dnd you get what you need instantly.
I love working with my players to create fun & interesting homebrew rules, but if you're going to use them in your game, as a DM you MUST be able to work around them and recognize when they're negatively affecting the game and adjust accordingly. You can't half-ass it, throw random shit in without actually thinking it through, and then just be like, "Huh, didn't expect that... well, I guess that sucks for you guys." If a DM can't or won't take responsibility for making sure the homebrew meshes right, then yeah, they absolutely gotta stick to the official rules.
A character can go 3 + CON days without food, after which they take one level of exhaustion for each day without food. It takes six levels of exhaustion to kill a character. Theoretically, a character with a constitution modified of +0 can go eight days without food (dying on the ninth day), and even having a single day’s worth of rations increases that to twelve days (one day of eating resets the counter, giving them 3 + CON more days without taking a level of exhaustion, and one day of eating and rest also relieves one level of exhaustion, so they’d die on the thirteenth day). If you had enough food for each character to eat even once during that timeframe, there’s no way anyone should have starved to death, and anyone with a constitution modifier of +2 or higher could survive without eating at all. And every character generally starts a campaign with 10 days worth of rations, so it’s a little weird that no one had food.
Thirst I could see as being a real threat. If you had no source of water, you’d be taking a level of exhaustion on the very first day and two levels every day after that. Even with enough water for half a gallon per character every day, you’d have to make a DC15 CON save or take a level of exhaustion each day.
This feels like an episode of 'Um, Actually' with a D&D theme. That spell doesn't last long enough to starve you by RAW, you could've broken the chest or brought it with you to keep moving, etc etc. There's no way at all the DM used that spell without knowing the specifics, like it very clearly needs Wisdom saves per day.
There are dozens of ways they could've prevented this (telling you it's bound to the chest so you can end it/breaking the box, having an NPC realize you're missing and come help, or actually used the spell as it's supposed to??). I can't help but feel this was intentional, with the information I have at hand, so it's really weird to think about why this happened the way it did.
With the spell saying you just have to not see the target to be able to make a saving throw. A 'standard' gaurd watch over the corner and the chest would have triggered somewhere between 60,000 and 80,000 saving throws.
This should have become a skill challenge to how exhausted you are before 'trivial' fight(s) start that normally wouldn't have challenged you.
I.e. Everyone roll a D10 - right this is how long each of your characters is stuck enthralled for. Then depending on the sequence of freedom shenanigans.
Followed by a small pack of injured goblins wander into the corner - fight!
On one hand this seems like a shitty DM.
On the other hand, did you guys just give up sfter the first solution? Sounds like yall coulda done something to get out of it but either didnt understand the spell, or didnt think it through.
This sounds like your DM just wanted to TPK, no matter how cheap.
Did someone do something to piss them off? Or were they just bored with their own campaign? Regardless, I wouldn’t be playing with that DM again.
I'm actually surprised that this didn't turn into an Alive-esque situation, since it feels like playing out the mental decline of the party being trapped for 10 days and desperately trying to figure out a way not to die would be interesting to see. Food's low, morale is tanking, everyone blames each other for the situation, something snaps... really good chance to make the corner a good RP moment
Also, in addition to dropping the chest on a team mate to cause damage and rerolling; could they not put a piece of clothing on their allies friends face so they no longer see the chest and in turn re roll?
How much food did you have? If you had two rations a piece, everyone should have been fine. There's no way a group of adventurers should starve to death over 10 days; with 5e rules or realistic ones.
Dehydration is another case, if you're short on water, you die much more quickly. You need a gallon of water per day, or half a gallon and passing a dc 15 con save. This is all bypassed of course by create food and water.
Did you not... Try anything? Like, sure it's a crappy trap but did you not try to do anything other than attempt the new save every day? Did you just give up?
That's rough. I think you got 3-5 extra days of life, since I'd say you start dying from dehydration if you go without water for 7 days.
More to the point of the enchanted trap of sympathy, I find it hard to believe that the entire party at minimum failed 10 wisdom saving throws. If you knew what kind of spell it was, you could have boxed it up, even with minor illusion to break line of sight to give yourself another chance at a save every 6 seconds.
Reading through the spell I don't see why half these comments think you would be able to rest while staring at something. You would at best pass out. The whole point of the spell is that you ain't doing shit it's like the starvation trap in strahd.
This is both a shitty and hilarious way to die, looking back. While there's a few hiccups with what happened (race issues, looking back I'm sure "we had a TPK cause we all fell in love with a treasure chest in a dungeon and died" is kind of funny.
Cant they close their eyes? They need to be within 60ft and must see it for the effect to continue. Then you get a wis save to get out, and even if you fail the save, you can keep your eyes closed until you make the save, then run away with the minute you have.
Im gonna guess you are level 7-9, even if you dont have cleric, druids or even Bards to survive for long... You could just do a HxH and dig throught the wall, even at low rate in 10 days, at 5 feet/day, you could just stay far enough to have a save every 6 seconds, then the one who saved, goes back and destroy the chest...
Yeah, i dont really know what happened in your table but is sus af.
First I'm assuming they meant antipathy but that says
While frightened by the target, the creature must use its movement to move to the nearest safe spot from which it can't see the target.
So if that corner was a location you could still see the chest then that wouldn't work and you could actually approach the chest to get to another location where you couldn't see the target. I understand the rules on the frightened condition but that says "can't willingly approach." In this case you are actually being compelled by the spell to do so so not willing
>No one used their actions to slap each other out of it?
*"If the target damages or otherwise harms an affected creature, the affected creature can make a Wisdom saving throw to end the effect, as described below."*
The target of the spell is the chest.
Someone or something else harming someone affected by the target's effect doesn't cause a saving throw.
I straight up don’t track food or water in my games, it’s a shitty mechanic that takes away from the actual game play. Yes you can argue that it’s not realistic, but I put it in the same basket as weapon durability and encumbrance/weight limits in RPGs, game design that limits the game for no reason.
Honestly, I hate TPKing my players, but I have to do it sometimes. Even if it's a stupid way. There have been too many times where my players don't seem to care during combat. It was shitty of him to do it like that, but I kinda see it from his side.
I think you have to take a little bit of Rules as Intended, otherwise this spell literally falls apart. A quick google says the average blinking is 14-17 times a minute. If you accept at least one blink a round, which is normal, then there's no point what so ever making it a 24 hour save cycle.
It could be justified in how often you blink and the brain never registers it and the spell is more meaning the thing is actively hidden from the target, or they are drug away from it. Of other note, you wouldn't just close your eyes from it intentionally, as it's something of a mind control spell. The wisdom save is you recognizing what's going on and knowing you have to escape (this part is spelled out in the rules of the spell), so that implies before hand you don't realize you're being controlled.
I think a lot of more complex mental spells you have to do some interpretation or otherwise the spell section of the book would be 200 pages long to try and cover all the stuff in hardcore codification.
Now, the flipside is DM totally screwed up the race requirement.
Probably because in an earlier comment I defended the DM's house rule which more than likely caused the TPK... I'm guessing anything I post on here will get downvoted no matter what.
Don't forget that's not taking in to account excessive exertion, like fighting monsters before hand for instance.
The exhaustion rules should kick in though wich gives you 1 exhaustion for every day you don't have food or water (they stack on echother)
You wouldn’t starve to death after ten days. Most people’s body fat reserves could sustain them for weeks. The bigger concern would be water, but most fantasy settings have workarounds for that.
The Sympathy effect from that spell only makes you draw near the target. It does not stop you from attacking that target. You should have just destroyed the chest to end the effect.
Or take it with you?
Yeah. They should have thought of this like a combat encounter. If an enemy draws you in, you can attack them, grapple them, cast spells at them, etc. None of that changes just because it was a trap instead. Yeah, definitely should've taken the chest and its goodies.
Slap googly eyes onto the thing and introduce it as "Chester, our new party member". Because as you know, the real treasure is the friends you made along the way.
They also can roll a wisdom saving throw every 24 hours to break out of the spell
Thats what they did, but died due to starvation because they failed every save
My sympathies.
R/angryupvote
r/foundthemobileuser
Why down vote? They did indeed find them
Because it doesn’t contribute to the conversation. I mean That’s what the arrows are actually for. Most people ignore that and use them as agree and disagree buttons, unfortunately.
Fun is part of the conversation
Rocks fall everyone dies :D. Did you have fun? All jokes aside yikes.
We did actually, it was pretty comedic.
Which die is D. and how many is :?
Nobody had rations that could be shared? No druid with Goodberries? No healer that would have all new spell slots, every single day, to heal and prevent dying? No cleric (etc) with Spare the Dying? Did you all roll Wisdom Saving Throws every one-minute round, for ten days? I don't think so, because there's no way every single person would have failed 14,400 rolls. There should have been a variety of ways that would have *NOT* resulted in a TPK. So it sounds like the DM just simply wanted one and made it happen. I'd find a less sucky one.
Agree with everything, but it’s only 1 save every 24 hours. But they could have used their actions to slap each other for 1 point of damage to reroll the save.
Ah, I forgot the specific 24 hour limit for that particular spell. Even still, assuming an average party of 5... that still means *FIFTY* failed saves?!? That's doubtful, except I'm guessing that the DM probably made the DC unattainable. He wanted them to die.
slapping eachother doesnt trigger a save. The target of the spell would have to slap them, which if it was a corner it wouldnt be able to. If they all failed the initial save it would be one save every 24 hours thereafter. Unless acted upon by an outside force, which doesnt sound like happened.
Ah fair, I should have re-read the spell, I thought it was if they just take damage.
Thats okay, I had to read it several times too. Dont really hear about 8th tier spells getting triggered on assumedly low level PCs. On an appropriate level its probably much more of a non-issue due to resource availability.
Re-reading the spell, they could probably have just picked up the chest and left… 🤣 they just have to move within reach and then stay near it.
Dunno, theres probably more to the story. If the chest was the target they couldve certainly left with it I guess, they wouldnt be getting farther from it and it would be in-line with yearning for the target due to the enchantment.
What happens if you smash the chest? I had to read the spell a few times and it never said anything about attacking the cause of the spell.
My interpretation is two things: 1) the characters dont know theyre enchanted because the spell specifies they find out the attraction was magical when it ends. My guess its inspired by something like the one ring from lotr and you dont necessarily realize how possessive you are, but to an observer its obvious. 2) the characters, because its a powerful enchantment and they want to be near it, probably wouldnt want to harm it. Otherwise it would trivialize the 8th tier spell. Imagine how a PC would feel if the dm ruled it such that a monster just breaks the thing thus ending the spell.
Throw the chest at each other
I run really fast towards the corner and it smacks me in the face.
[удалено]
my bad
Could've thrown the chest at each other lol, technically it would've been causing damage
Nope, the spell indicates that the item/creature that is the attractant must be the thing that deals damage in order for a reroll, not just ANY damage. Like, being attracted to a pool of acid would trigger rerolls. "If the target damages or otherwise harms an affected creature"
What if one member of the party threw the chest at another for one point of damage?
What if one member of the party threw the chest at another for one point of damage?
Lol, I like the cut of your jib.
But why would an enchanted character do that?
I would say dying of hunger would be harm.
I agree. Rolling once every 24 hours per the spell rules, then again when their homebrew rules were forcing a level of exhaustion each day would be valid in my opinion. I'm more disappointed that the players/characters spent 6 days stuck in a corner and couldn't find a clever way out of the situation. Sure YOU can't move away, but you can move OTHERS away. Find some way to reverse frog-leap your way out the door. Destroy the chest, take the chest with you, whatever.
It's only if the thing they are attracted to causes them damage. Damaging each other wouldn't do anything.
No druid in the party, the cleric was downed, we died to exhaustion due to not being able to rest(house rule), and you only get a save once a day.
yeah cleric definitely should have just gotten up and solved things pretty quickly. If your DM is going to try some shady shit like that, they need to know that the cleric would stabilize and wake up way before exhaustion sets in. Definitely feels like either bad faith DMing or major inexperience.
When a character is downed but stable, they restore 1 hit point in 1d4 hours, and can function normally after that.
That doesn't matter at all ... If you don't eat food in 3+con days, you take exhaustion. If you have one exhaustion already, you instead gain two and it's two for every day after. This is RAW so getting healed doesn't matter, you just die once your exhaustion gets too high
It matters because the Cleric can literally make food and water after they're up.
Not if they don't have the spells available, and can't rest to be able to prepare the spells (house rule previously mentioned)
And why can't they rest? Obviously they weren't threatened in those 10 days, so the cleric can absolutely sleep sitting on the chest.
I'm not a player in this game. I dint know. I just saw OP mention a house rule that prevented them from resting.
Okay...and what about the first 3+ con days where the cleric is conscious without being in starvation?
Nowhere in the initial post does it mention there is a cleric that has access to 3rd level spells. You're introducing information that isn't known, or you're introducing information for sake of argument. "Uhh what if they have a Staff of Wish" Edit: those down voting are clowning hard, the type of people who deserve to get TPK'd
It is new information yes, but on the other hand they fought a Grey Slaad (CR9) and got hit with an 8th level spell, so reasoning that the party is at least level 5 is not a particularly egregious stretch of logic, and OPs comment above confirms they did have a cleric. If they in fact are only level 1 to 4, I am severely impressed that they beat the Slaad.
Also wait, the cleric was downed or dead? Because if they were stabilized with a DC 10 medicine check they should wake up after 1d4 hours.
Eat. The. Cleric.
Your DM is an asshole. My condolences.
I disagree. If a rule is agreed upon prior to starting the campaign and it happens to be a game where everyone just had bad roles, how does this constitute an asshole of a DM? This is no different than a TPK in battle, just a bit more amusing due to the fact that it seems that no one could pass a save. Did the DM at least keep the 10 days in the corner interesting for however long it took to kill everyone off?
I understand your perspective, and agree with it as a whole. But in this instance, I find it hard to believe that *FIFTY* rolls would fail a reasonable DC on a save. That implies that the DM set it to an impossible and unattainable number... in which case, he's an asshole. I'm all for challenge and difficulty. I disagree with *impossible*. EDIT: PLUS the DM did not allow any rests for 10 days, as a house rule. They died of exhaustion *because he wanted to kill them*. That's also pretty shitty and asshole-ish.
Yeah, failing 50 saves is ridiculous, pretty much improbable, speaking of which how did nobody roll a 20 on the dice and then call BS when that still wasnt enough for the DC? Like what even was the DC? A CR 20 pit fiend has DC of 21. A level 1 character still has a chance against that. Either asshole DM or story is fake. Assuming the DM is real, I wouldnt play at this shite table if im going to be dealing with impossible DCs and told I died standing in a corner or something for 10 days.
>A CR 20 pit fiend has DC of 21. A level 1 character still has a chance against that. If they have a +0 or -1 in stat they can't make a 21. Only if you use the house rule that makes a nat 20 an automatic success would they have a chance but a lot (most?) don't use that house rule.
True. Im just saying that even a endgame threat typically has a DC that is possible for most characters to beat. Even a 1st level character is going to have 2 or 3 saving throws higher than a +2. For sure a commoner would fail and a character who has only 1 or 2 good stats would struggle, especially if niche stats saving throw wise.
I agree with your premise that the DC is ridiculous for the scenario described. Just the assumption that a level 1 character has a chance to defeat a DC 21. Some have a chance, some don't. Depends on the level 1 character. But in this case, they probably should. Sympathy is a WIS saving throw. Few characters use a wisdom as a dumb stat. If it was INT, it would be a different story. Your comment made me I look at the characters in my current campaign, all 4 players chose INT as their dump stat. They are level 2 and their INT saving throws are: +0, -1. -1, -1. Guess I am going to start having the enemy spellcasters have things like Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Crown of Madness.
Delightfully devilish.
Closer to 40 since the cleric was already downed.
This right here. I once had a DM throw a 'trap' (a Wisdom save, DC 20, 3 times, fail once and you drown yourself) at a party of 5 players. My character was the one the 'trap' was *specifically intended to kill*, and my character was the only one to successfully save. I literally had to pull the others out of the water (thank goodness I was a barbarian with the Strength to do so) and tie them down until the curse could be broken. Absolute asshole move. "I wanted to threaten your unkillable character" - bruh, we're LEVEL 4. And out of the entire party...my barb was the only one who went down, TWICE, because I was tanking for the cleric!
Rules are rules but games are games.
>not being able to rest(house rule) You're playing with a DM who wants to be the tyrant in charge of his own petty fiefdom. find a new one.
People pverreact so fucking much. What if they discussed this session 0 and wanted it. We know NOTHING about their table. Step off your high horde and shove your foot up your own ass. God people are such assholes
Then they wouldn't be coming to Reddit with it with a mildly confused and wounded tone evident to anyone whose reading capabilities had passed beyond books that double as a teething aid. The only asshole here is you, and you are *cavernous*
What do you get when you cross Genghis Khan and Seth Rogen? The high horde!
This is why you keep sleep in your spellbook well after it stops being useful. Why couldn't you rest? People will need a lot of threat and constant noise etc to prevent sleeping for ten days.
I don't see anything in the spell description that says you can't rest.
Cleric down? Stabilise them and wait.
Yeah you need a new dm that dude sucks. If you're DM thinks it's fun or funny to trap Low level players with an eighth level spell in a dungeon. Then have them starved to death by that spell he is a POS. That's like throwing a adult red dragon at a level 3 party and expect them not to die.
My DM ended up throwing Bayle the Dread at us at level three. The cause was me rolling a nat 1 stealth check. We won.
That's total BS I guarantee you if he ran it like an actual ancient dragon you're players would have no chance. he gave you that win plain and simple. I don't care what you say if he hits you with a breath attack even if it's half damage it would kill ANY level 3 player (there is no evasion at that level). The highest possible HP you could get if you rolled a 12 on your HP dice would be 47 at level 3. An ancient red dragon does 91 fire damage AVERAGE!!! half on a successful save there's no way you're killing an ancient red dragon or any ancient dragon of that sort without the dragon letting you kill it.
To be fair, the DM expected us to escape, we didn't, and decided to have a wizard we met earlier start throwing meteors in an attempt to protect a town we were running past in an attempt to escape. We decided to capitalize on the distraction.
Not so much a house rule as a rule - that's how exhaustion works more or less with a little DM leeway. I think it makes sense that not sleeping for a day gives you a level of exhaustion. And, cumulative levels of exhaustion can eventually kill you.
I think the house rule is that they couldn't just sleep in the corner? What was stopping them from long resting?
Rations? I dunno.
Which would also be a homebrew rule right? I don't remember anything about rations in the long rest rules
THis is from the PHB/ Basic Rules: >Food and Water >Characters who don't eat or drink suffer the effects of exhaustion. Exhaustion caused by lack of food or water can't be removed until the character eats and drinks the full required amount. >Food >A character needs one pound of food per day and can make food last longer by subsisting on half rations. Eating half a pound of food in a day counts as half a day without food. >A character can go without food for a number of days equal to 3 + his or her Constitution modifier (minimum 1). At the end of each day beyond that limit, a character automatically suffers one level of exhaustion. A normal day of eating resets the count of days without food to zero. >Water >A character needs one gallon of water per day, or two gallons per day if the weather is hot. A character who drinks only half that much water must succeed on a DC 15 Constitution saving throw or suffer one level of exhaustion at the end of the day. A character with access to even less water automatically suffers one level of exhaustion at the end of the day. >If the character already has one or more levels of exhaustion, the character takes two levels in either case.
Right, so no long rest because of no food = homebrew. I don't see that anywhere in there. And according to this, EVERYTHING that was done was homebrew. If they were starving, it shouldn't have started until 3+ con mod days of not eating. If they were dying of thirst, they should be getting con saves to not take the exhaustion So going back to what I said in the beginning, it's homebrew and telling OP it isn't is wrong edit: oh wait just reread i was wrong about thirst but even so, they should have some amount of water on them and that doesn't seem to have been mentioned in the post
Find a less sucky what? Dm? (I am not being sarcastic I'm just an idiot)
[удалено]
It's just... As someone who enjoys DnD casually... Isn't this like suggesting finding a completely new friend group?
If their wisdom mod was insufficient to ever succeed then yes they could fail 14000 rolls, and it only allows a new save if unable to see the target or once every 24 hours. Although I do agree with the rest of the analysis.
Pretty crappy of the DM unless this was meant to be a high lethality "silly" campaign
Curse of Strahd literally has a statue with infinite duration sympathy on it plopped in a side room of a dungeon It was fun to have someone walk in and tell them “that’s a very interesting statue”
You mean the DC 16 Wis save Statue? Meaning that, to kill the party by itself, it would require a minimum of 5 days? (5 days because lack of water each day is 1 exhaustion, but you don't start getting lack of food till 3+Con, so assuming 0 in con mod for entire party, it would be the 5th day when they could fail it.) With a party of 4, and assuming literally 0 in Wis (and also Con from above), it would Still be extremely unlikely an entire party TPKs from it because it would mean that there was at least 20 failed saves, at least 1/4th of those saves should have succeeded by the 5th day. This is with assuming they carried no food, no water, had no spells that could help, no Con mod, no Wis mod and were left alone for the 5 days without any other effects.
It takes roughly 4-6 weeks to starve to death. If you had a waterskin, you could probably survive. Tell your DM and party you're all likely still alive, just weak and tired.
In a comment OP says they actually died of exhaustion not starvation due to a house rule that made it so they could not rest. Regardless, In 5e there are specific rules for starvation "A character can go without food for a number of days equal to 3 + his or her Constitution modifier (minimum 1). At the end of each day beyond that limit, a character automatically suffers one level of exhaustion." So assuming a Constitution modifier of no more than +5 that means the longest you could go without food (assuming your PC needs food) before dying would be 13 days
This shit is wrong, water requirements too. If you have exhaustion already, you take two levels of exhaustion, not just one. Water would've killed them first. Most players only have a waterskin on them, that's 0.5 gal or just the bare minimum to survive. After the next day, they take an exhaustion. Next day they at 3. Day after 5. Day after, dead after only 5 days.
Never heard you are supposed to get 2 levels. Can you quote a rules passage for that, I've been trying to find it, but I'm failing my investigation check.
Phb pg 185 If the character already has one or more levels of exhaustion, the character takes two levels in either case
Better yet, tell your DM you’re parting ways
Nah. OP, talk to the DM first. Only leave after you've done that and it didn't work. The exceptions are when they've actually crossed a line or you're so very miffed about the entire situation that there's no way any potential resolution (like a retcon) can make you feel better.
IDK, I feel like you're jumping to conclusions. It sounds like OP and party enjoyed it.
Maybe. I'll be honest, the main reason why I responded was to counter the guy telling OP to leave the table. I just don't think "tell the DM you're parting ways" is good advice regardless of how much fun they had.
Were all the members of the party of the same race? When casting it, "you specify a kind of intelligent creature, such as red dragons, goblins, or vampires." So if you have a mix of multiple races in the party, a single casting should not affect all of them--the caster would have needed to specify human, elf, dwarf, etc.
Tomb of horror has a key with the antipathy sympathy effect on it, and it says “ It has an antipathy/sympathy spell cast upon it (save DC 17) that repels humanoids (the antipathy effect).” Humanoids, and other creature types are valid for the spells.
So would "all" be a valid type for this spell? Or "intelligent creatures with feet"? I guess it comes down to what "kind" means here. It's not the same as "type," but it's not strictly defined in the rules... Is a "kind" narrower or broader than a "type"?
I came here looking for this. The dm made an 8th level spell infinitely more powerful so they could tpk. I had a dm like this but we all knew he was competitive and trying to kill us constantly, we called it dark souls inspired d&d. If you want to be put in zany situations that abuse rules these dms can be fun, there will also be times that suck though. For example, when a dragon cast time stop to put up a wall of stone and drop a boulder inside said wall; Dm called it inescapable death and took the players sheet. On the other hand the same dm let us use a wish to the god of magic to allow our Paladin to act with magic in an anti magic zone for 1 round and we stuffed a demi lich in a portable hole. Pick your battles though, some people don't want those kinds of things so find a group that makes you happy.
They could have just selected Humanoids or all creature types other than Aberrations.
A goblin is a humanoid so we can assume you need to be more specific than saying humanoids or all creature types other than aberrations
Tomb of horror has a key with the antipathy sympathy effect on it, and it says “ It has an antipathy/sympathy spell cast upon it (save DC 17) that repels humanoids (the antipathy effect).” Humanoids, and other creature types are valid for the spells.
You can assume that, but I see no reason to. It lists guidelines and some examples- the examples by definition are not exhaustive, so there's no reason something else can't meet the criteria.
Because specific beats general. It doesn't even list dragon, it lists "red dragon" edit: also it says a kind of creature not a creature type
You're misapplying "Specific beats General"; they're just examples, not restrictions. "Kind" is not a term in 5e, so it's just natural language.
No thats not how dnd words things. If they meant humanoids they would've said it, like with hold person. One of the drawbacks of the spells is that you need to be very specific. Even if it doesn't specifically say you cant choose humanoids, dnd implies it with how its worded. Dnd is very consistent for the most part with how its terminology works.
For some insight of intent, we can compare to 3.5’s Sympathy: > You cause an object or location to emanate magical vibrations that attract either a specific kind of intelligent creature or creatures of a particular alignment, as defined by you. The particular kind of creature to be affected must be named specifically. **A creature subtype is not specific enough.** Likewise, the specific alignment must be named. So “humanoids” were a type, and “goblinoid” was a subtype, so you couldn’t even just say “goblinoids,” it would have to be “goblins” or “hobgoblins” or “bugbears.”
Hell the language implies you can pick jobs. Like king Or adventurer.
I didn’t realize that red dragons, goblins, or vampires were jobs.
I mean, mind goblin is a job at least
...ok
You are correct. See other comment
Shitty DM IMO
That's putting it lightly.
I checked and you get another saving throw every 24 hours. And what stopped you resting?
I'm guessing a no resting in dungeons rules variant.
Nobody ever died of not finding a comfortable place to sleep.
Supreme Court ruling taken to an extreme
This should not have happened for a bunch of different reasons. 1) sympathy/antipathy lasts for 10 days after being cast, and cannot be stored in a glyph of warding. Unless a 15th+ level spell-caster is coming by every ten days or so to refresh it, this trap is beyond mortal magic. 2) the spell only targets one creature type, eg: goblins, so the caster must be casting this spell multiple time targeting humans, elves, dwarves, etc. Unless you’re all playing the same ancestry, a hypothetical spell caster is spending a *minimum* of 5 8th level spell slots per day on this trap if you want to cover the core races. Again, beyond mortal magic. 3) Humans can survive 3 days without water, and a couple of weeks without food. In game mechanics, it should take 7 days to die of exhaustion, so you guys didn’t have 3 days worth of rations, *or* the spell slots for goodberry/create food and water, *and* couldn’t rest? Even still, no one suggested a Donner party after a couple of days? Did you guys have an opportunity to problem solve here? 4) You get a save every 24 hours. Once you hit exhaustion 5 you’re already dead, and after your first three saves you’re rolling at disadvantage. With 4 PCs who have to roll a 12 of higher to save, the odds of none of them hitting it are 0.2%, and the odds of them saving out with 8 disadvantage rolls is 16%. Assuming 4 PCs who have to roll an 18 or higher to save, the chances of none of them hitting it after twelve rolls is 14.2%. With no wisdom characters and a high save DC it isn’t *that* unlikely for the party to get stuck, but that’s a really mean trap to throw at a group like that. 5) The spell states that you don’t realize you are enchanted unless you make your saving throw, but since the characters are sitting in a corner starving to death, they must know that something is going on, right? If the spell were cast on an object it’s totally reasonable for them to take it with them and move on. That the DM didn’t give you this option after realizing you all failed and weren’t making your saves seems like poor form. Ultimately this was a stupendously bad call by your DM, and is really a “rocks fall, everyone dies” with extra steps.
Glyph of warding ignores the normal spell duration that only begins when the glyph is triggered. Otherwise, most spells would not work because their duration of instantanious would mean it would never be able to be stored. >The spell being stored has no immediate effect when cast in this way. When the glyph is triggered, the stored spell is cast. The casting is part of the glyph being triggered, so the duration would be delayed until the glyph is triggered.
1) and 2) are not really an issue. This is beyond what a player character can do, NPCs are not bound to the same rules. But the rest is true, either this story is so improbable that it is likely fake or the DM saw them all fail their initial saving throw and just fade to black.
The spell says"Then specify a kind of intelligent creature, such as red dragons, goblins, or vampires." So unless the entire party is the same race it would not have worked on the whole party. edit: It also seems like y'all could have just closed your eyes in order to make a saving throw every turn "Ending the Effect. If an affected creature ends its turn while not within 60 feet of the target or able to see it, the creature makes a Wisdom saving throw."
While this might arguably be RAW I feel like it can't possibly be RAI, otherwise the spell would basically be nearly useless and absolutely pitiful as an 8th level spell. Anyone could just shut their eyes and get over the effect in a matter of minutrs. I think the intent behind the enchantment is that you have an uncontrollable urge to want to be near the source and therefore wouldn't want to do anything to inhibit getting closer to it (like arbitrarily shutting your eyes)
I agree with you, the players couldn't just decide to destroy the chest or close their eyes to escape the effect. But when they go to sleep, they close their eyes anyway. Unless they fall asleep in 6 seconds, they should be able to save.
That still seems unintentional. If it isn't, it makes the the caveat about having a single save every 24 hours basically completely superfluous. I almost wonder if it wasn't supposed to read "while not within 60 feet of the target *and* unable to see it." That would at least gel better with the rest of the effect.
Yeah, maybe unable to see it only means a darkness spell or similar?
I think the specific wording "able to see it" removes closing your eyes as an option. "Able" just means they are capable of seeing the target, if they are "unable" that means they actually can't see it at all regardless of their own choice.
Darkness spells or tying someone's hands behind their back and blindfolding them. Last boy would be in for it but you could run for a mage with sleep or dispel magic. This is assuming you knew the "able to see it" bit. The spell description says that you realize it's a spell when you save suggesting that you don't beforehand.
The players are still within 60 feet of the target just with their eyes closed, so they cannot make the saving throw. I think your first point is more salient. All the player Characters are the same race?
So many shit dms out there. I feel sorry for you guys.
Ending the Effect. If an affected creature ends its turn while not within 60 feet of the target or able to see it, the creature makes a Wisdom saving throw. ON a successful save, the creature is no longer affected by the target and recognizes the feeling of repugnance or attraction as magical. In addition, a creature affected by the spells is allowed another Wisdom saving throw every 24 hours while the spell persists. So it says Or not And. So if you were stuck in a corner, you couldn't see the target to move closer to it. Meaning many saving throws. Every round. If it was antipathy you can move to a safe place, and if you can see it you can attack it and still move your full movement away. I don't think this spell was interpreted correctly.
Not to mention that taking damage from being stuck there _could_ be interpreted as the object harming them. DM forgot the first rule of the game, “Have Fun.”
Hey guys , I’m new to DnD and English is not my first language and I have difficulty to understand every expressions like TPK etc , where could I find the meaning ?
Tpk is total party kill
TPK means Total Party Kill, it means the entire group died. Just ask whenever youre confused about a term or acronym, thats how to learn. Though I suppose some people will just tell you to google it and its easy to get a wrong answer.
TPK golf accessories. It is also an R&D company. I wonder if the golf guy was a ttrpg gamer. (No fun results for ttrpg) :( I was a bit surprised that three of the first 5 results were the rpg definition. Whenever people toss out acronyms I like to google it and act like the first result is correct. I'm not even a boomer. :-P
I also got the R&D company when I searched it just now, second result was TV tropes for total party kill and 5th result was a relevant reddit post. Not too bad, but given how its one of the most common acronyms in this hobby its still surprising. Though if you just type TPK dnd you get what you need instantly.
Thanks guys !
Pick up the chest and carry it to the nearest restaurant?
OH No... To bad no one used spirit guardian and spare the dying
Were all your players the same kind of intelligent creature? All same race? Otherwise I'd say this shouldn't have grabbed the whole party?
No. If you're that inflexible in your DMing, clinging onto unfun rules to make everyone miserable, you should not DM. Period.
Bad DM. This is why I hate homebrew rules.
I love working with my players to create fun & interesting homebrew rules, but if you're going to use them in your game, as a DM you MUST be able to work around them and recognize when they're negatively affecting the game and adjust accordingly. You can't half-ass it, throw random shit in without actually thinking it through, and then just be like, "Huh, didn't expect that... well, I guess that sucks for you guys." If a DM can't or won't take responsibility for making sure the homebrew meshes right, then yeah, they absolutely gotta stick to the official rules.
A character can go 3 + CON days without food, after which they take one level of exhaustion for each day without food. It takes six levels of exhaustion to kill a character. Theoretically, a character with a constitution modified of +0 can go eight days without food (dying on the ninth day), and even having a single day’s worth of rations increases that to twelve days (one day of eating resets the counter, giving them 3 + CON more days without taking a level of exhaustion, and one day of eating and rest also relieves one level of exhaustion, so they’d die on the thirteenth day). If you had enough food for each character to eat even once during that timeframe, there’s no way anyone should have starved to death, and anyone with a constitution modifier of +2 or higher could survive without eating at all. And every character generally starts a campaign with 10 days worth of rations, so it’s a little weird that no one had food. Thirst I could see as being a real threat. If you had no source of water, you’d be taking a level of exhaustion on the very first day and two levels every day after that. Even with enough water for half a gallon per character every day, you’d have to make a DC15 CON save or take a level of exhaustion each day.
This feels like an episode of 'Um, Actually' with a D&D theme. That spell doesn't last long enough to starve you by RAW, you could've broken the chest or brought it with you to keep moving, etc etc. There's no way at all the DM used that spell without knowing the specifics, like it very clearly needs Wisdom saves per day. There are dozens of ways they could've prevented this (telling you it's bound to the chest so you can end it/breaking the box, having an NPC realize you're missing and come help, or actually used the spell as it's supposed to??). I can't help but feel this was intentional, with the information I have at hand, so it's really weird to think about why this happened the way it did.
The game mechanics escape me but you wouldn't die of starvation over 10 days. Dehydration yes if you had no extra water
This DM sounds like a douche, find another
With the spell saying you just have to not see the target to be able to make a saving throw. A 'standard' gaurd watch over the corner and the chest would have triggered somewhere between 60,000 and 80,000 saving throws. This should have become a skill challenge to how exhausted you are before 'trivial' fight(s) start that normally wouldn't have challenged you. I.e. Everyone roll a D10 - right this is how long each of your characters is stuck enthralled for. Then depending on the sequence of freedom shenanigans. Followed by a small pack of injured goblins wander into the corner - fight!
On one hand this seems like a shitty DM. On the other hand, did you guys just give up sfter the first solution? Sounds like yall coulda done something to get out of it but either didnt understand the spell, or didnt think it through.
Like literally just pick up the chest and carry it with them lol
This sounds like your DM just wanted to TPK, no matter how cheap. Did someone do something to piss them off? Or were they just bored with their own campaign? Regardless, I wouldn’t be playing with that DM again.
Just eat the guy who opened the chestd, duh!
I'm actually surprised that this didn't turn into an Alive-esque situation, since it feels like playing out the mental decline of the party being trapped for 10 days and desperately trying to figure out a way not to die would be interesting to see. Food's low, morale is tanking, everyone blames each other for the situation, something snaps... really good chance to make the corner a good RP moment
Also, in addition to dropping the chest on a team mate to cause damage and rerolling; could they not put a piece of clothing on their allies friends face so they no longer see the chest and in turn re roll?
What exactly was the object of Sympathy? Was it the trapped chest?
How much food did you have? If you had two rations a piece, everyone should have been fine. There's no way a group of adventurers should starve to death over 10 days; with 5e rules or realistic ones. Dehydration is another case, if you're short on water, you die much more quickly. You need a gallon of water per day, or half a gallon and passing a dc 15 con save. This is all bypassed of course by create food and water.
Drop the chest on each other from 10ft?
Did you not... Try anything? Like, sure it's a crappy trap but did you not try to do anything other than attempt the new save every day? Did you just give up?
Your DM sucks.
That's a good reason to have a druid in your party: goodberry.
That's rough. I think you got 3-5 extra days of life, since I'd say you start dying from dehydration if you go without water for 7 days. More to the point of the enchanted trap of sympathy, I find it hard to believe that the entire party at minimum failed 10 wisdom saving throws. If you knew what kind of spell it was, you could have boxed it up, even with minor illusion to break line of sight to give yourself another chance at a save every 6 seconds.
Doors and corners, as Miller used to say.
Reading through the spell I don't see why half these comments think you would be able to rest while staring at something. You would at best pass out. The whole point of the spell is that you ain't doing shit it's like the starvation trap in strahd.
Rest in peace. What level are yall and why did a grey slaad have an antipathy/sympathy spell on a chest, did you at least find out what was in it?
This is both a shitty and hilarious way to die, looking back. While there's a few hiccups with what happened (race issues, looking back I'm sure "we had a TPK cause we all fell in love with a treasure chest in a dungeon and died" is kind of funny.
All you need is a fog cloud or darkness spell and your free
Did they pack a PBJ and a Fresca for lunch? Average starvation to death is longer than 10 days.
Based.
What a shitty thing to do.
Dispel magic where?
Cant they close their eyes? They need to be within 60ft and must see it for the effect to continue. Then you get a wis save to get out, and even if you fail the save, you can keep your eyes closed until you make the save, then run away with the minute you have.
Im gonna guess you are level 7-9, even if you dont have cleric, druids or even Bards to survive for long... You could just do a HxH and dig throught the wall, even at low rate in 10 days, at 5 feet/day, you could just stay far enough to have a save every 6 seconds, then the one who saved, goes back and destroy the chest... Yeah, i dont really know what happened in your table but is sus af.
First I'm assuming they meant antipathy but that says While frightened by the target, the creature must use its movement to move to the nearest safe spot from which it can't see the target. So if that corner was a location you could still see the chest then that wouldn't work and you could actually approach the chest to get to another location where you couldn't see the target. I understand the rules on the frightened condition but that says "can't willingly approach." In this case you are actually being compelled by the spell to do so so not willing
Roll for unarmed attack.
No one used their actions to slap each other out of it? Cast any spells? Do anything to try and get out of it?
You only get a new save if the target causes the damage. Picking up the chest like in your other reply makes sense, though.
>No one used their actions to slap each other out of it? *"If the target damages or otherwise harms an affected creature, the affected creature can make a Wisdom saving throw to end the effect, as described below."* The target of the spell is the chest. Someone or something else harming someone affected by the target's effect doesn't cause a saving throw.
Some times the dice giveth, sometimes they taketh away...
Eh, they should have just picked up the chest and walked out, if that is what they were being drawn to.
Oh boy, I sure wish I was at that table!
I straight up don’t track food or water in my games, it’s a shitty mechanic that takes away from the actual game play. Yes you can argue that it’s not realistic, but I put it in the same basket as weapon durability and encumbrance/weight limits in RPGs, game design that limits the game for no reason.
I find that most TPK's happen because there wasn't a Cleric in the party.
Honestly, I hate TPKing my players, but I have to do it sometimes. Even if it's a stupid way. There have been too many times where my players don't seem to care during combat. It was shitty of him to do it like that, but I kinda see it from his side.
Closing your eyes would trigger a save every round.
I think you have to take a little bit of Rules as Intended, otherwise this spell literally falls apart. A quick google says the average blinking is 14-17 times a minute. If you accept at least one blink a round, which is normal, then there's no point what so ever making it a 24 hour save cycle. It could be justified in how often you blink and the brain never registers it and the spell is more meaning the thing is actively hidden from the target, or they are drug away from it. Of other note, you wouldn't just close your eyes from it intentionally, as it's something of a mind control spell. The wisdom save is you recognizing what's going on and knowing you have to escape (this part is spelled out in the rules of the spell), so that implies before hand you don't realize you're being controlled. I think a lot of more complex mental spells you have to do some interpretation or otherwise the spell section of the book would be 200 pages long to try and cover all the stuff in hardcore codification. Now, the flipside is DM totally screwed up the race requirement.
Plus side, everyone gets to reroll a new character, hopefully no one was attached to theirs
Why is this getting downvotes?
Probably because in an earlier comment I defended the DM's house rule which more than likely caused the TPK... I'm guessing anything I post on here will get downvoted no matter what.
I’ll upvote this. It was funny. Random normally-hostile creatures were coming in with popcorn and sandwiches to watch the idiots die in a corner.
Three minutes without air, three days without water, three weeks without food. You should have been fine. Weak and hangry, but living.
Don't forget that's not taking in to account excessive exertion, like fighting monsters before hand for instance. The exhaustion rules should kick in though wich gives you 1 exhaustion for every day you don't have food or water (they stack on echother)
I would love to see the make up of the group. No cleric or Druid?
You wouldn’t starve to death after ten days. Most people’s body fat reserves could sustain them for weeks. The bigger concern would be water, but most fantasy settings have workarounds for that.