this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
217 points (93.9% liked)

RPGMemes

10323 readers
472 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] booty@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Well it depends on the circumstance. The "captured target" you mention is helpless. You absolutely can oneshot him with any number of cantrips, or other mundane actions. You could oneshot him with a "use an object" action if that object is a lever controlling a trapdoor over a deep pit.

Point is, you certainly can drown someone with 30 gallons of water. You just have to set up for it correctly. I don't really like the implication of your comment and the original post that it's unreasonable to try such a thing just because the number used to categorize the spell is too low.

[–] Eris235@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

If the target is already captured or subdued, nothing can oneshot them. That's just coup de grace.

"one shot" says to me that it instantly kill or removes as a threat an as-of-yet untouched and un-interacted-with target.

[–] ShranTheWaterPoloFan@startrek.website 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When people try to drown someone with create water they aren't talking about creating water then drowning the person the old fashioned way, it's "I cast create water in the lungs of that guy!"

Other popular "ideas" include - -Casting light on someone's eyes so they go blind -Trying to target eardrums with shatter -Conflating charm person with dominate person -Attacking with mage hand -prestidigitation solves every problem and has no limits

It's not that there is an arbitrary "number too low" problem, it's that these spells explicitly state what they can do. Players sometimes feel "creativity" means they perform actions the spell doesn't allow, and moreover are actually achieved by much more powerful spells.

[–] TheLepidopterists@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Casting light on someone's eyes so they go blind

Funny enough, in b/x D&D this was explicitly allowed. They got a save though, and light was a 1st level spell, not a cantrip so it was more like color spray that also gave you a magical light that followed you around afterward than an infinitely castable save or suck cantrip.

[–] booty@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it's "I cast create water in the lungs of that guy!"

I mean that just obviously doesn't work because you don't have a clear path to that guy's lungs. His clothes and skin and bones are in the way. Furthermore, a creature's lungs are not a container, and even if they were, it would be difficult to argue that they are an open container. But there are still a wide variety of ways it would be possible to drown someone using create water, and personally, I would sooner assume that the hypothetical player involved is considering one of those ways rather than a completely nonsensical way that doesn't even begin to fit with the basic rules of spellcasting.

[–] sammytheman666@ttrpg.network 8 points 1 year ago

Its a resource management game. Either you use your imagination and roll a few chance dice, or you use an appropriate resource for it. Which is why killing a target that isnt already captures with a cantrip one shot doesnt work.

[–] TwilightVulpine@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't know why anyone would put that much effort into doing something so convoluted if not just to prove the point that they could. Which feels like it's against the spirit of the game.

It's not even the "use object" action that kills them as much as fall damage, which is not defined by the level of the one pulling the lever. This is more comparable binding someone to an anchor and pushing them into a body of water. It's not a personal ability, it's an environmental effect.

I don’t really like the implication of your comment and the original post that it’s unreasonable to try such a thing just because the number used to categorize the spell is too low.

This seems the best reason to refuse it, frankly. Spells have a reference of how damaging they ought to be, that's what HP is supposed to measure. It'd be just as easy to say "but if fire/acid/steel hits the target just in the right way that'd kill them on the spot". The main reference we have to whether it hit them good and how much they can endure is the HP. Why shouldn't we be using the numbers the game gave us expressly for the purpose of measuring power?

If we are just gonna bypass these basic mechanics with improv, why not to let the Fighter player say that they are trying to cut off the enemy's head with every hit? But if we let that fly we aren't playing D&D anymore, just some loosely d20 based improv.

A 1st level spell focused on damage does at most 3d8, but Create Water is definitely not focused on that. The most generous version of that I could accept is 3d4 damage with a dex save for no damage, because if they close their mouth and stop breathing it just doesn't work. You might end up running out of spells slots before the target dies.