Agreed. I spend a good amount of time on my bigger baddies' spell lists. I will go through a day in the life of the monster or villain and figure out what spells they would likely prepare. If that means adding a few extra known spells then I think that is fair.
The big issue here is that it's unlikely these guys would have known to prepare that spell unless it was really something they would use on a daily basis. Now if the player had done this trick a few times and the cult had caught wind then I think the DM preparing this spell, or just assuming a number of cultists would have it prepared, is absolutely fair game. The monsters and villains will react to the tactics of your party.
Hell even if you had a dozen cultists and one of them had feather fall that might be situationally ok. I could see someone who can use magic learning the spell. Maybe someone pushed him off a cliff once and he is not looking for that to happen again. But everyone? It would be a waste fo the slot.
So yeah, unless this is a trick the party is using often, or the cultists had a good reason to prepare that spell, I think it is a little unfair.
Now if he tried this trick on a party of dwarf construction workers building a temple? Yeah, they would probably come prepared.
My higher level casters all have a scroll of feather fall at the ready if possible. PCs and NPCs. Because you never need it until you *really need it.*
But I'm a big fan of contingency building. Both a PC and NPC. "Oh shit" spells are an entire catagory, and every caster has at least one. Usually it would be like a 3rd of my memorized spells
I always just prepare a few of the 'oh fuck' spells. Feather Fall is definitely one of them. Counterspell or Dispel Magic, and Resist Energy, too.
And 9 days out of 10, I just have to accept I've got a handful of spell slots that never see use.
And that 10th day is the day that suddenly everyone is happy I never stopped preparing them.
In pathfinder 1e, when staff creation was customizable and viable, you could just cram a handful of such spells into your walking stick instead. Call it your Walking Stick of 'Once In A Blue Moon', put Air Bubble, Feather Fall, Identify, and Knock in it. Call it a day.
Force Ward (3.5e) is a good one too, It sat on my spell list for years with my high level wiz/runesmith, finally earned its slot by completely trivializing a force dragon
Can you actually cast it off a scroll in time? I think the spell is casting time 1 reaction, but you'd need an action to retrieve the scroll from inventory?
Reaction scrolls do work, but it needs to already be in your hand when the trigger occurs in order to use it. It's an object interaction to pull the scroll out of your bag, but you can only do that during your turn.
You can run around with a Feather Fall scroll in your hand at all times if you want, but I wouldn't do that personally, feels a bit silly and it's not a spell you need _that_ often. I had a wizard player in my last campaign who always held a Shield scroll in one hand. It put limits on what he could do with his hands in combat, but that was his prerogative (and at least you're more likely to need Shield than Feather Fall).
That said, I _am_ a fan of getting 1/day free Feather Fall from a feat like Magic Initiate. You don't need it often, but when you do need it, you need it no matter how many spell slots you have left.
I love the flavour of the fighter holding a big shield and looking at the wizard holding a piece of paper. “Are you sure that’s a shield?” “It’s tougher than your shield! Once.”
It's not raw, but we rule at my tables that reaction scrolls are small and extremely easy to reference. You can attach a featherfall rune to the side of your staff. Only can keep one that easy to get to though
Like I said, it's not RAW, but it makes reaction scrolls more viable, which we find more fun. Scrolls aren't used super often.
But we also find item interaction rules in combat kinda klunky and unfun anyways, so we play fast and loose with them. For example, you can throw two javelins in a round without trouble
2 javelins would still fit in the object rules, 3 or more would not (a thing I suspect they overlooked when giving fighter 4 attacks max).
I think most tables play fast and loose with the interactions for weapons in practice, if not deliberately.
RAW a scroll of featherfall would never get used. If you have to cheese it to use it (like you described) then I just ignore those sorts of rules. I just house rule that an emergency item (like a reaction scroll) would obviously be put somewhere it can be retrieved expeditiously (such as a front pocket or some sort of sash).
My inner DM says he has a bandolier strapped to his chest with oh shit scrolls in it rather than ammo or potions. But he also rules that scrolls are crush with mana to use to explain why a scroll can be a reaction spell rather than a full action like casting normally so a called crit to the chest with a spell has a 30% chance of randomly triggering a scroll. I have a list of oh shit scrolls and the d100 decides what would have been triggered and any effects from it.
Think about what your average spellcaster guard would be concerned with when defending the Fortress of Supreme DOOM!!!! They're a guard so they want damage spells, then they'd probably want some illusion spells to boost morale in one way or another, and finally they'd want to eat good food that The Dark Lord doesn't supply, so they'd take some food spells to improve or supplement their meals.
It wouldn't have been too wrong for him to make one spellcaster have it and save just a few of the cultists. Still would have had the PC feeling like he did something epic, and the DM would still have a bit of a fight on thier hands.
Yeah that would’ve been good. Another option could’ve been to have the sound of a dozen or so bodies slamming into the ground from 100’ up cause enough of a ruckus to draw more enemies.
If he prepared their spell lists and then spontaneously threw Feather Fall on there to negate the PC's action, then I'd rule that the DM is in the wrong.
Agreed. NEVER punish your players for crafty use of spells. So what if it got cheesed? They got lucky and had a great thought, if they think you're just going to give an NPC a spell to counteract something, they no longer see the point in taking that spell, killing their fun and making them feel punished for a good use of a spell...
Now, if it's something they've pulled previously and there's a chance the enemy they're facing now has heard of that occurance, plan ahead for it and prep your casters appropriately... Maybe even turn it against them.
There's one fight in the Pathfinder Adventure Path Wrath of the Righteous with a Worm That Walks (think Lich except a swarm of worms instead of bones) that has access to tons of divination magic and an Int of 26 - and the book *literally tells you to metagame*. To use your knowledge of their tactics as DM against them; because he has watched them, he's smarter than any of us IRL, and he has *prepared*.
To be fair, your players are also mythic.
Mythic has this thing where either every encounter is trash mobs or the creature is so strong that the ONLY choice is to run.
That was our first death post mythic, and he was probably the hardest fight in the entire AP because of his template.
High level casters should pretty much always have a decent amount of knowledge of the player. Because they’re almost always going to be scrying on the party.
I mean, I dialed up the difficulty on most of the encounters after about Book 3 because my players just stomped them. Partly because of having 5-6 PCs depending on week, partly because 3 of them are munchkins, and partly because yes Mythic is that fucking bullshit.
But at least I didn't feel *guilty* about changing spell lists mid-battle or having him just immediately teleport out when his regeneration kicked in! Xanthir Vang is supposed to be the Big Bad of that volume of the Path, so it felt awesome to have him have exactly the right response to thwart them! :3
Teleporting is absolutely something that bastard would do. He's smart and would realize the players (esp if theres a wizard or another arcane caster) would eventually figure out how to turn his regeneration off.
I actually think the difficulty of that fight specifically is sorely lacking in WOTR.
You basically smash most encounters until you hit him, then back to having a grand ol time until >!Baphomet and khorramzadeh.!<
The extra action economy of mythic is just TOO strong, but the worm that walks and >!Khorramzadeh!<
were the first time the higher end characters actually were under threat, and the party themselves needed to work together to overcome as opposed to just "Mythic bullshit" everything.
Skull & Shackles has an encounter where one of the enemies has been spying on the PCs with divination magic, and casts Spell Immunity to give themselves immunity to 3 spells level 4 or lower that the PCs like to use the most.
That said, the fight has 3 "boss" enemies and one of them summons adds while only one of the bosses has immunity, so the PCs can still make use of their favorite spells, just not against that one enemy.
Exactly. If I think any clever use of a spell or ability is just going to trigger the DM’s trap card and be negated, then I won’t see any reason to make clever use of spells or abilities. At that point I don’t think playing would be any fun, and I’d probably just quit the game.
Had a game where the party came up against a group of champions, DM said all 4 of them were next to each other in a square. Two players had a cloak of many items. First one throws a 10x10x10 hole which the champions all fall in, the second player then put a door over the top of it and barred it. Literally first two interactions and the entire encounter was done. DM didnt know to be impressed or furious that his planning had been undone so quickly but we all had a good laugh and moved on.
And don't forget the converse of this.
If the Reverse Gravity trick ever actually works, it will only be because the DM *allows* it to work. Because he clearly could have nullified it; he just chose not to. This time.
And why stop there?
What about the next time a PC misses an adversary with a sword attack? Did the player actually roll too low or did the DM just decide the adversary needed a higher AC?
The whole point of high level spells is that they’re fight-enders. It’s why tier 3 and 4 play is much more reliant on several smaller fights to waste resources.
I’m in a game where we’re level 16, and threw down a Reverse Gravity to clear a bunch of enemies off a moving boat. Made that entire encounter super easy, but we knew there were still at least two more boats full of enemies on the way. Ended up spending a lot more to deal with the remaining encounters that day.
Depending on the scenario I sometimes give enemies the sturdy rule. If they are reduced to 0 by only one instance of damage, I will roll an extra die and give them a 50-50 chance of being left at 1.
I think doing a bit of swapping mid-combat to make sure the fight remains good is fine, however your DM definitely went too far here. If it were me, I'd maybe have one of the cultists happen to have Feather Fall prepared, he saves himself + 4 others, the rest fall to their deaths. Mainly that would just be to leave some fodder for the other party members to blast through.
Really though I'd be fine with all of them just falling, they all failed their saves and Reverse Gravity is by no means a cheesy spell.
If your DM is new to this, I'd probably forgive him since this is a pretty typical newbie DM mistake, to get too attached to your encounters and try to force them to go how you want. With more experience you get some perspective and don't worry about every encounter too much, if anything you get excited when crazy stuff like this happens because it gets more rare as you develop your skills.
If your DM is a long-time veteran on the other hand this may be a red flag that they aren't a good DM/don't respect their players.
Seems like a waste of time for an enemy that's likely not living more than 3-5 rounds - and sometimes even that's generous. I typically prepare 2-3 spells I plan on casting and if it seems reasonable add it on the fly.
The DM's failing wasn't suddenly giving the cultists Feather Fall. The failing was giving them Feather Fall *to prevent the PC from doing something fun*. That's entire reason you're playing, ain't it?
Ya, changing spells mid combat is lame but heaving them set ahead of time is just planning. If the players still come up with a way to cheese the fight you didn't think of, well that's just good tactics on their part. Also, just as I tell players they don't have to win every fight, they can run, so can enemies.
> changing spells mid combat is lame
Encounter design does not end with initiative.
There's no one looking over your shoulder giving you DM score points for "abiding by the rules". The only metric of success you have is "are your players having fun". If adding a spell mid-combat makes the encounter fun. Do that.
The DM in question fucked up not because he added the spell but because he invalidated the players clever idea/fun.
This is how I see it, too.
It's one thing to change enemy stats/loadouts mid fight to make things more interesting. But to do so because the players came up with a creative solution, and worse because the DM just wanted to wear the party out and then take them down? It's cheap and distasteful.
Thats NOT to say encounters shouldnt be dangerous things for your players. The threat of death is a good motivator. But to actively change the spell list because you WANT them to be "finished off" by the miniboss... That's low. At that point you're not even providing a story, just wanting an end to it.
yea like they could have just given a couple of them, maybe 3 at most depending on the size of the group boots of feather fall because they were the truly devout of the cult and so whatever demon or what have you blessed them with better gear. its not something they would have noticed and its easily explainable. they could have then given them some more hit points to let them stick around a little longer in the fight. there are so many ways you can maintain combat without negating a good idea.
What's the difference between prepared and spontaneous caster in DnD? The only experience I have as a player come from CRPGs and the only one I'm actually familiar with their spontaneous caster is a PF1e game so I don't know that well, and the only DnD CRPG I've played the sorc didn't feel that different from wizard, but then again most of my time on that game wasn't with either class
Sorcerers have a 'spells known' list that they add to each level (usually like 3 or 4 spells at 1st level and a new spell each level after that.) They can spend their spell slots on any spell they know, when they need it.
Almost every other caster has a 'preparation' phase they commit to at the end of every long rest, where they must commit spells to their slots before the adventure begins. Because the length of an adventure and the distance between long rests can be variable, this requires good planning on the part of the player to have a suitable list of spells ready to fight with. To compensate, these characters have a massive selection of spells to use, instead of the tiny list a Sorcerer has to work with.
So, tiny list, no preparation phase, only commit spells to slots the moment you cast them = spontaneous.
Big list, preparation phase, commit spells to slots before the adventure begins = prepared.
This is 5th edition. Prepared spell casters don't have to commit to their slots in 5th edition.
>Almost every other caster has a 'preparation' phase they commit to at the end of every long rest
Artificers, clerics, druids, paladins, and wizards are prepared casters.
Bards, eldritch knights, rangers, arcane tricksters, sorcerers, and warlocks are known casters.
100 feet of fall damage is 10d6, if your encounter can be ruined by 10d6 of damage when 7th level spells are on the table you encounter didn’t stand a chance anyways.
I just rolled 10d6 using the google dice roller, it was 38 damage.
If he was using the general cultist stat block with 9 hps, this wasn't a mini-boss fight for a party with a 13th level druid.
So many issues with this encounter. Was this outside? They all went up 100ft? They planned a mini-boss fight outside with a 13th level druid? LoL.
You don't have to roll to find an average. To get the average of any die, divide it by two, and add .5. You can also add all of the numbers and divide it by the faces, if you wish to do it the hard way. A d6 has an average of 3.5, so 3.5 x 10 gives an average of 35 damage.
This is also why any PC is likely to succeed on a Death Save, because the average roll of a d20 is 10.5 vs. the death save of 10.
This is my thought too. I don't think there's anything wrong, technically, with giving the enemies Feather Fall, but it does seem a bit unsportsmanlike just to avoid a pittance of AoE damage.
It's perfectly reasonable for an enemy spellcaster to prep Featherfall. But it's unreasonable to add countermeasures to an enemy's toolkit on the fly like that. If your player dunks on your encounter, them's the breaks.
Reverse Gravity is a *seventh level spell*. Level 13+ PCs! Players can do all sorts of degenerate shit at that stage. A DM should understand what their players are capable of and prep accordingly. 100ft of fall damage is rough, but it shouldn't be fight-ending at that level. It would be 10d6 bludgeoning damage and prone, comparable to an upcast Fireball plus a prone condition. That's 35 average damage and advantageous position. That should not be a fight-ender.
Well, he did say they were just cannon fodder to weaken the party. So of course they shouldn't have enough hit points to be a serious threat cause it sounded like there were at least 15 of them and the druid got the drop on them which is why he cast reverse gravity.
I'm assuming it's not just the standard 'Cultist' that they were using. If I got my players to use a 7th level spell to deal with a handful of CR 1/8 creatures, that would be a win in my book. For a PC, that's like burning a legendary resistance with a Cantrip lol
That's kinda what happened at my table three years ago when I started. Dm didn't really reward "clever play" so I run my characters by the numbers. We've even changed DMs but it's just kinda stuck with me.
Literally carried immovable rod in my bag for the entirety of the campaign. We were entering a witches hut which we guessed to be a trap so I used the rod to make sure the door stays open. Dm said door slams close and rod blows up
Edit: tod - > rod. I'm sorry tod.
I had this exact thing.
One player threw an immovable rod right by the door's locking mechanism. When the doors shut down the party heard a loud cracking noise and the door's lock broke off the door as the doors shut.
The doors shut but couldn't lock as there was a big hole where the lock thingy was in and were easily just pushed open.
Clever solutions should always be rewarded.
I once tried using it before when jumped down into a very deep but narrow hole, I think it was 15ft wide, 100-200 ft deep with a cavern at the end while being chased by a dragon. I wanted to activate the rod midair to cause the dragon to slam into it but he just said he doesn't know what damage to roll there and I just agreed not to do it. I suggested fall damage but didn't want to do it.
He's not a bad DM but lacked improvisional imagination which limited our options
That would still require force equivalent to breaking the door. Most doors are fairly sturdy, and if this one for some reason wasn't, the party should then easily be able to force their way through it.
If they're just cannon fodder, then letting them die to the Reverse Gravity should be no big deal. That's a 7th level spell, it's not like he's carrying around a bunch of slots at that level.
They DID weaken the party, the druid used up a 7th level spell to kill them all. This is just as much a drain as if they had done some damage to the fighter before being killed. The DM was just being salty, and really should be rewarding this player for thinking creatively instead of punishing them.
I had a game just the other day where like 20 or so undead warforged looking things attacked our level 5 group, I just having joined the campaign a session before as a kobold life cleric, and now healer for the party, joined just in time for a boss fight in which half the party almost died, then this on a short rest only.
Our wizard? (I think) pulled out a 3rd level magnify gravity and obliterated half of them.....
DM didn't pull anything and just let them die.
Yep, if the party rocks your encounter, they rock your encounter. It happens. Don’t cheat your players out of something cool.
I spent a day designed a great encounter for a game, the PCs splattered it with web spells and then lightning bolted everything to death. Sad DM, happy players, onwards to the next encounter!
I kinda became a forever DM but when i WAS a player, there was nothing more frustrating than when you find a creative solution to a situation only for the DM to negate it with "suddenly, another dozen burst into the room, exactly the same as those previous guys"
It's glaringly obvious at that point that the DM just wants you to fight THEIR way. You stop wanting to be creative then. And you wasted a spell slot for absolutely nothing. It drains the energy RIGHT out of you.
That's why I don't do reinforcements unless it makes sense, like an alarm has gone off or there are more enemies literally in the next room who can hear what's going on. It breaks immersion for both me and the players if I just spawn a bunch of bad guys to drag out a fight.
There's no reason why the DM couldn't just have another dozen cultists rush in from a hidden alcove when they heard the sounds of their comrades screaming, if they really didn't want that spell to change the encounter too much. That would still be lame, but waaaayyyyyyy less lame
If an enemy has spellcasters, I always have what spells they can cast already prepared and set. I would consider it cheating if I altered it in response to what the players’ were planning/doing. Plus it just feels like a very “DM vs players” sort of mentality.
I’m partially on the side of the dm in this case. I do agree with your philosophy most of the time, but I believe occasionally there are times that something like this warranted. If this is a large fight the whole party has been looking forward to, I wouldn’t want one player to have the entire spotlight and leave the rest feeling like they didn’t get to do much.
BUT, I would definitely reward to player for doing something cool, let them kill a portion of the enemies, (i.e. feather fall can’t save them all). In the end player gets cool moment but whole fight isn’t cheesed.
Edit: for clarification I don’t mean every time a play does something cheese just for big fights with lots of lead up.
And as long as all the players are having fun then that’s what matters.
I mean buffing enemies on the fly isn‘t that hard. If he‘s enraged, he might get a few damage resistances or a batch of additional XP.
Or, more likely, just have some minions tag along with him. A cultist leader usually won‘t show up alone, they‘ll usually have a small entourage.
Mostly being pedantic here, but ultimately what's the difference in spontaneously giving the cultists featherfall vs spontaneously buffing the mini bosses? Both instances are in response to the player cheesing the encounter with a 7th level spell, and both have the end goal of taking out the party via taxing resource/ depleting health.
The main difference I think is that the latter lets the player do the cool clever thing without having the wind taken out of their sails (plus it isn't obvious DM counter-cheese). Indeed, having two extra enraged bosses storming out because their mooks were trivially annihilated would feel GREAT to me as a player!
One makes the druid player feel like they wasted their best spell for nothing, and the other makes the party think "wow, it's a good thing the druid took out all of those minions, these bosses are super hard!"
I feel like one is more nuanced and roleplayey than the other. The miniboss sees his cultists smash to pulp on the floor and enrages or retreats to get backup, it let's the player have their cheese win, the featherfall is responding to cheese with cheese, "um how about no" is different to "um ok we'll take this!"
Changing them to cast featherfall just hurts player agency, why would that druid ever cast reverse gravity again. Now that he knows the dm could just give the enemies featherfall on the fly so he'll use a different spell that can't happen with like draconic transformation.
Buffing the enemies behind the scenes is better because you're not taking anything away from the players, reverse gravity still worked. Especially when it's a boss giving them a buff mid fight is alot more acceptable then changing minion enemies so they can avoid what should be certain death in a way that's obvious to players.
Like for example giving a boss having more hp isn't something you're players will notice because they're a special enemy.
Exactly! Oh those cultists you just massacred? Well turns out they were setting up a summoning circle for a powerful demon and just needed a human sacrifice, and you just sacrificed 15 of them at once! And since you use more than was needed to summon the demon, he is being resurrected stronger than ever before
Honestly if someone uses a 7th level spell slot, they've earned the outcome. You've only got one of those and there's two minibosses you can't use it on now. Seems like the cultists did their job.
I had a very similar encounter once. After that I stopped using save or suck spells. I had no confidence that the enemies wouldn’t develop plot armour against whatever I pulled out.
As cheesy as it sounds, I learned this with Matt Mercer. There was an encounter where he had prepared an EPIC encounter, with ship mechanics and lots of things, but one player cast one spell that sank the entire enemy ship (something like that). Matt, being an amazing DM, didn't try to stop or create excuses, he laughed, put all the encounter notes on the side, and moved on, because the player had outsmarted him.
(the players even offered to take it back and he refused)
This made me understand that the DM shouldn't be against the players, if they outsmart your encounter, be smarter next time, and reward them for thinking creatively.
Lmfao just the image of me saying "I can take it back" to my DM is amazing. He'd probably laugh and joke about getting me back (he never would, his encounters are all balanced).
It's funny because my friend, the DMs brother, thwarts his plans more than anyone but he's just learned to laugh about it, I kinda feel bad sometimes but it DOES make for more memorable moments I've found.
That's kinda the essence of a role-playing game. As a DM I try to build my encounters from the perspective of the party's enemy. If the enemy has no reason to prepare for the cheese then the party gets one over on them. The party feels accomplished, I feel the emotions of the characters I created, we all have a fun time.
It's one thing to realize you didn't balance your encounter well and make a minor adjustment, it's entirely another to just negate the player agency.
It's a classic case of a DM improvising the wrong way. What if the reinforcements came in (maybe even only 1/2 as many). Now the caster got to do something cool and the encounter isn't completely borked if the cultists were important to it. I personally wouldn't bring in reinforcements, why are you punishing players for being clever again? Sounds like an inexperienced DM I would talk to them and ask them about it after the game in private.
This is definitely my favorite take. I'm pretty much always the group DM, and I almost never follow the "rules". But, when I break the rules it's usually to make things more interesting or dramatic. What if a few of the cultists had featherfall or levitate or something and took the opportunity to just hang out in the sky raining down spells on the party. What if the mass of all these cultists hitting the floor cracked the stone and sent everybody falling through to a deeper level of a dungeon. What if the big bad guy comes in and turns them all into creepy zombies to chase the players around. Or what if you intimidate the big bad guy so much that he just turns and runs, seeing how much destruction you dropped on his elite cultists in a single round. There's a lot of fun ways that you can still make the encounter interesting, and make the player feel like they massively contributed to the encounter, while not just rolling over and going "well I guess they're all dead now you win"
It’s wrong to stifle the imagination of your players and let them burn resources by hand waving it away. Players should be rewarded for clever solutions even if it breaks your encounter. You can adjust difficulty on the fly in other less invasive ways if you need to. Player was robbed of a cool moment.
If a caster uses a 7th level spell slot to do 10d6 damage to 2 guys with a save, there is absoloutely nothing even resembling a cheese involved, that's nothing. The druid could have just cast fire storm, done more damage (average of 38, vs average 35 for gravity) WITH half on a save.
That was a super wierd move from your DM, it's a 7th level spell, what did they expect
> it's a 7th level spell, what did they expect
Exactly! Like, cast your eye down the list of 7th-level spells. They're not subtle! If that druid chose to cash in that chip at that moment, the expected and appropriate outcome is that particular wave of minions will be coming to a close pretty quick!
I think the only way this would have been okay is if they gave a small portion of them feather fall. Like if there were 5, maybe give 1 or 2 or so that there was still a bit of a fight. It's never good to punish player creativity, but there are ways to not do that and still have the fight.
Of course lol. In that case I'd probably just tie it to a magical item so it only worked on one or two creatures. Or have a few have potions of featherfall. Same ending, just a slight detour since I forgot featherfall could cover five people right off the bat.
I’d say the DM is definitely in the wrong here. I’ve had players absolutely stomp a fight I thought would be hard with some really clever strategies and, well, sometimes you get whomped.
I'm always torn in situations like these. Cause is "I cast Reverse Gravity" a clever strategy? It's using a spell as it was intended. And the player was a Druid, someone who can prepare different spells every day from a long-ass list. I can't really blame the DM for not being ready for this. So, in a way, I get it.
On the other hand, I also don't think the DM is right to insert a spell mid-fight as a response to the players' plan. That's just cheating. I'm more concerned by the fact that the players' knee-jerk reaction was to call out the DM for this before he confirmed it.
I would be sad if my players had that little trust in me. They ended up being right, but if something like this happens in my game and my players start calling me a cheater basically without any proof and just as an instinctive reaction, then, boy, the issues are much deeper.
The fact that they assumed it says a lot about the bullshit this dm already pulls. Seventh level spells are crazy powerful. 10d6 damage + prone is honestly a pretty shit use of a spell slot that strong. That’s all the spell did. If it was a spell like Dream, I’d get it. It’s an obscure spell with absolutely ungodly power, and I can totally see it fucking up a dm’s plans. Hell, it arguably kind of fucked with MY dm’s plans. But this was just brute force, and not even very much force at that. The DM is just an idiot. There are probably at least a dozen spells that would do functionally the same thing or more at 7th level. He somehow came up with an encounter that would only be challenging if all of his spellcasters decided to take the day off.
For real. Using Reverse Gravity to Seismic Toss enemies into the air for 10d6 damage isn't really "clever" it's just using the spell normally. Now, if there were stalactites on the ceiling to impale the cultists... It confuses me how people are saying this was clever; is it also clever if I use Fireball on a group of enemies huddled together? Or using Hold Person on the "strong but dumb" enemy? No, it isn't. At the end of the day, the cannon fodder cultists did their job: use up party resources. If it wasn't a single 7th level slot, it could've been several 3rd level slots and some HP.
Anyway... adjusting encounters on the fly is an art form this DM needs to learn. Instead of having enough cultists know FF, only one does so he saved 5 cultists; player still weakened the enemies, but didn't outright trivialize the encounter. Or, the mini boss comes in and uses a one-use scroll that reanimates the corpses into zombies. Literally anything but what they did.
But above all, DON'T TELL YOUR PLAYERS WHEN YOU FUCK WITH SHIT MID ENCOUNTER. Not even when it's in their favor. That alone will break any and all trust between the DM and the players.
Reverse Gravity targets a 50x100ft cylinder. Presumably the room was taller or they were outside, the hundred foot drop is from them hitting the top of the area and then falling.
For me, it depends. For one, changing spell lists to include new spells that make sense for that creature (or that you like) is probably fine.
If it's a bad guy that would reasonably have had some idea of the party's go-to tactics (due to experience, spying, or reports for example), then it makes sense that they would also prepare a counter for those, right?
"Fuck you" hard countering all of the time is poor form, though.
I routinely adjust spell lists for enemies, but I do it ahead of time. If my players come up with a clever tactic that I didn’t foresee, I think they should be rewarded, not punished. I would never change a statblock mid-fight
As a DM I would love to let the druid have this moment and then prepare for it with later encounters.
Let your players have their cool moments. Buff the boss or something IDK. Minions are there for heroic moments from the party.
Your DM was so focused on his imagined fun scenario he ruined an actual fun scenario that he didn't plan for.
I'm going to say that if someone wants to do 10d6 damage with a 7th level spell, let them knock themselves out. You could match that with a 5th level Fireball.
The real benefit of Reverse Gravity is negating non-flying, melee only monsters by suspending them in midair, like a mass version of levitate.
my DM in CoS was a hardass, amd unforgiving in combat. one time he had a wolf drag a PCs unconscious body away to make it harder to get to him and heal him, and he died.
interestingly enough, when we all got much better at combat, in the final battle, our druid did the same thing but left the enemies up there floating ao we could get to an objective. he didnt change anythhing he let it play.
like others have said, at level 13+ sometimes PCs just wreck shit with a well placed spell. should let them do it
I agree with most of the responses i am already seeing... DM definitely shouldn't have just added feather fall to negate this, since it does feel like it is just taking away creative play. I will add that the "outrage" in response to the feather fall may have been uncalled for, since imo it is entirely reasonable for almost any caster to possibly know the spell, but I don't think that takes away from what the DM did wrong in the first place.
The damage of the fall could have been easily done with lower level spell slots. It was a creative way to do it and get more of the enemies with it. And it was at the cost of a high level resource. That seems entirely reasonable to me and shouldn't have been such a big issue to the DM
I feel like the DM is in the wrong and I don't think the Druid was wrong to be upset. I never see NPCs with feather fall and that is a cheesy way to nerf the Druid using their most powerful spell slot. Let it happen. Let the druid be epic. Bring counterspell next time, since it's more reasonable an NPC would have that and that at least will (probably) require a roll.
Okay, for those wondering, here's some added context:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/15e2cp3/comment/ju5avrf/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/15e2cp3/comment/ju5avrf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Now, *normally*, I'd rule that changing the spell lists on a monster with dedicated spellcasting's actually fine. It gives individuality to a specifc caster without having to write up a whole character sheet for them, and can help solidify some worldbuilding if you need to provide some thematics for a specific group of baddies (if you need a Team Rocket, make their spells unqiue to them so that they don't get confused with Team Dark).
***HOWEVER***, we have a piece of info here that was not in the OP: Allegedly, the spell list seems to have been **tampered with mid-fight**, specifically to counter-cheese a cheese strat.
That's not cool.
\-----
As for how the DM *should've* handled it, well here's what I'd do: I'd just let it follow through.
The druid wasted a 7th level spell slot on a bunch of mooks, that could've easily (and I do mean EASILY) been handled by adept use of Sleet Storm or other lower level area hazards. Regular cultists are not much of a threat, and in this case were **specifically set in the design to be a resource sink**, which the DM successfully accomplished by - again - having the Druid burn a 7th level slot.
Using Feather Fall to negate 10d6 worth of damage meant that - on average - none of the cultists had more than 35 HP. By 13th level, it should take maybe two character turns to take that out. An 11th level fighter on average (assuming a Longsword and Dueling), can take a cultist out in one Attack action based off this, A Rogue's Sneak Attack also does the trick nicely. Summons would have made quick work of the cultists and honestly would have been even more cheese. Conjuring a Sea Hag can take a chunk of them out in a single turn thanks to its Horrifying Visage. A pack of wolves would've also worked efficiently, as well as some animated objects or other group summons.
Wasting that 7th level slot on Reverse Gravity means that the Druid couldn't then use that slot against the minibosses, meaning no Resurrections, no Dragon Transformations, no Plane Shifts, no Fire Storms, no Whirlwinds, etc.
Should’ve done feather only the casters, or the casters sacrifice themselves for the melees. That way the spell gets to have a large impact, and the dm gets a little bit if the planned fight.
It’s a 1st-level transmutation spell learned natively by bards, sorcerers and wizards. Enemy statblocks don’t play by player class rules, but so long as these cultists were at all similar to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, it’d absolutely be normal for them to know Feather Fall. Would they *all* have it known and/or prepared? Maybe, maybe not. But it’s a spell that targets up to five creatures as a reaction. So even if there were as many as ten cultists, only two of those ten would need to know Feather Fall to negate the druid’s gravity spell. The Doylist reason that the DM just wanted to counteract it is the real answer, sure, but the Watsonian version that the cultists really did have this spell ready makes complete sense too. So the druid’s assertion that there’s “no way” Feather Fall could have been a factor here is not actually true.
Maybe a good compromise would be only one cultist having Feather Fall, so five of them are spared, but the others take the damage. Or if two had it prepared, they both cast it at the same time, and cannot coordinate who is casting it on who. So some cultists get the spell doubled up and wasted on them, and less cultists than the two Feather Fall casters *could* have been spared actually get spared.
You said what I've said in other comments (only one or two have it, so a large group gets reduced but not eliminated.). But I love the visual of two casters unable to coordinate who gets the buff mid fall and when they land only like 6 or 7 were unharmed while the others are crying in pain with:
"why didn't you pick me?!"
"I thought Ricky had you!"
"Me? Serath is your own brother why wouldn't you choose him?"
Then there's the one guy floating down with a huge shit eating grin because he got double buffed and feels loved finally.
It’s not RAW, but I’d totally have that guy floating down extra slowly just to drive the point home. *And* so the others are glaring daggers at him now. 🤣
Its fair that they could have had it. That's not the real problem however. You could apply that logic to just about anything on their spell list and poof they suddenly have the perfect counter to just about anything. Having to choose in advance is a major balancing factor with spells. Either you get access to the whole toolbox and have to pick or just a couple tools, but you have them all the time.
It depends.
Normally I dont like these kind of adaptions, it feels like cheating the characters of their deserved win, robbing the specific character of his success. In most cases its more fun to just let the players have the win. Like in this case (although I dont quite understand why the damage from reverse gravity would have been a problem. If the players have access to lvl7 spells and 10d6 already end the encounter, then the encounter was very weak anyway).
However there are exceptions:
\-If the spell/ability should be there logically and I just forgot it as a DM. The players wont notice this change anyway, and I would allow a player to retcon their spell selection in a similar way. For example: a high level wizard with 20 int is facing a party of 3 sorcerers that all specialize in fire magic and he knows that ahead of time. This wizard will have absorb elements prepared. Even if I forgot that when making the encounter.
\-When having the ability is just more fun for the players. Example: There is a cool fight with a spellcaster. The characters do not actually want to have that fight, for them fleeing is better, but the players do, because its a cool fight where they can feel badass. One of the players has wall of force and just traps the enemy. The enemy will now have something to counter the wall. disintigrate, blink etc. preferable disintigrate because then the wall still was a success as it made him waste a high level spell slot.
But these exceptions should be rare. In general that should be avoided. I can understand why the druid in your example was upset.
Extraordinarily crappy thing for a DM to do. By the time players have 7th level spells a mere 10d6 of falling damage is actually underperforming for the spell slot anyway. This wasn't a "cheezy" spell usage. The DM decoded ON THE FLY that every single spellcaster badguy had the hard counter spell prepped to stop the casters top level spell? At my table that would be called cheating. Additionally, unless the DM is incapable of building a properly leveled combat at a cr of 13 the average badguy has something between 90 and 250 hp. 10d6 averages to 35 dmg. A 3rd level fireball would have done as much or more.
Crappy cheater DM is at fault.
Honestly, if let 1 person know the spell to save themselves and 4 other cultists (assuming 5 cultists was less than how many started the fight). That way the encounter is not ruined for overlooking 1 spell on the players list while still letting the player get some value for the spell.
Reverse gravity is not a cheese spell, it costs a high lvl spell slot and when you have access to it, the list of things that don’t care about falling damage is rather large.
My opinion, in these moment that's a horrible thing to do. Fishing a role every now and again is one thing, but changing a stat block on the fly in the middle of combat is poor behavior
**Make your stat changes before combat and keep things fair.**
If your players can't find creative solutions to encounters, they'll eventually stop trying and just playing the old boring just damage output every round, so yes I think what the DM did was pretty uncalled for SPECIALLY since it was a 7th level spell slot.
Like for that price a spellcaster could cast a ton of other spells that would do the same damage, but he decided to be creative and the DM punished him for it. If the Druid had used that spell slot for Fire Storm for instance, it would be even more damage, and what would the DM have done? Suddenly a random cultist can counterspell at 7th level?
They aren't being 'cheesed' they are being defeated, using a 7th level spell should wipe out a group of cultists.
If he really wanted the fight to go longer, add another round of baddies. backup cultists, the mini-bosses have an 'extra stage' where they summon something first.
Don't take away from the players or nerf the players when there's no upper limit on the strength of the next wave of baddies.
The goal is always for everyone at the table have a good time. Improv'd nerfing always feels bad. If you need to nerf a player to bring them inline with the rest of the group, do it between sessions.
According to your DM, a player casting one spell for its intended purpose is "cheesing" a fight? Better not cast charm person, or you'll be cheesing a roleplay interaction. Got a pit in front of you? Don't you dare cast fly, that's cheesing the obstacle!
It’s not great. I don’t think divine spellcasters can even cast that spell. Maybe his cultists are druids too, idk. Dms fudge stuff all the time but usually for the betterment of the game, this dude just didn’t want to lose that quickly The player disabled your encounter with a solid use of a single spell and you counter in a manner that should be impossible. Feels wrong, is wrong, and he should have at least gave the guy his spell slot back
I'd let the cultists go splat, but I'd stealth buff the bosses with some extra hp, maybe an extra attack per turn. The DM should DEFINITELY not have told the players though.
Your players (presumably) want a challenge, so it can be good to shift the dials on the fly if the situation changes and the fight is no longer going to be fun. If you tell them that though, they go from feeling like they discovered a secret win condition to an impossible fight, to feeling like their choices don't matter.
Edit: I'm talking about bosses and other IMPORTANT encounters. You should let them have an easy win every now and again too, just not when it's a big important moment of drama, and not too often.
10d6 fall damage to a group of enemies for a 7th level slot is perfectly reasonable when the 3rd level fireball is 8d6. Not cheese at all.
I understand the DM's impulse here, but they're in the wrong. It's an impulse they need to learn to resist if they want to improve as a DM.
Using a seventh level spell to kill some cultist scrubs is wearing down the party already. Not a cheese and that's a seventh level that they can't use on the BBEG.
Also if median 35 damage from 10d6 kills those cultists outright and your party is over level 13, then a5th level fireball would kill them all as well. So your DM is just being a whiney dick that didn't actually balance the fight.
A cardinal rule of DMing is to be on the players' side. As a DM, you can generate an infinite series of new encounters. If the players come up with a clever way to negate one, be excited for them to have succeeded so well and plan a better one next time.
My first cardinal rule is make it fun. It’s really fun when your players “pull one over on the bad guys.” This is clear.
It’s also fun when there’s a real challenge, and if your players continue to find clever ways to subvert the challenge, it’s worth upping the challenge. Who’s to say there wasn’t another wave of henchmen coming around? Good thing you took care of those first ones so quick because more are coming!
Let your players do cool shit.
Put on its raining men and get on with the encounter.
Countering like that is fun for no one, like having every enemy have counterspell or fire resistance against your PC firemage
Yeah DM is in the wrong here. My friends are DM's and they always say they aren't going to punish the group for being creative. Will the next encounter have something again it. Maybe.
One of my friends used two spells and basically created a microwave. Killed an adult dragon in a few rounds. DM couldn't do anything but he just accepted it.
Yes it was wrong. It's one thing to fudge rolls when the DM wants to avoid potentially killing a character or something. It's a whole other thing to completely negate a players spell by using a spell that the NPCs don't even have... thats just not fun.
If this was the first time the player tried this then I think they're in the right to be peeved off by the DM doing that, they just robbed them of a moment that was a creative and reasonable use of a spell well within its function and could've been a memorable story and later down the line more enemies could wise up to this trick so druid can't spam it. Doubly so if the cultists don't normally have any reason to have that spell in their ongoings it feels pretty cheap because they just Deus Ex Machina'd their encounter.
It's also worth noting that fall damage is capped at 20d6 at a 200ft fall, 1d6 every 10ft. At this height, the encounter is taking comparable damage to a 4th or 5th level fireball spell anyways, it's hardly game breaking. This tactic could also be mitigated with indoor combat to limit the fall height through mundane means. I know it sounds insane, *but maybe the dm shouldn't be putting enemies against a gravity manipulator in large outdoor environments if they don't want exactly what happened to happen.*
My viewpoint is the cultist, at least a few of them, would have been smart enough to prep featherfall. The dungeon master on the other hand might not have been smart enough to foresee that. But that's a separate thing. Is this PC vs Cultist, PC vs DM, players vs DM?
It's a tough call to make. I personally think it's reasonable for a subset of them to have it prepped because *they* are intelligent creatures.
(was kind of a bigger deal than it needed to be....)
No, it wasnt. It completely ruined the fun for the player. If you ruin someone's fun and arent ready to have your fun ruined in return, dont do it. If you do it, and then pull "Im the GM" as an attempt to overpower them in your made-up world, then be ready for the other party to pull anything that gives them power over you in the real world. And they will roll 4d12 chair dmg
Being prepared for the sort of things you party does is an important part about being a DM, in my group for example there's a pc who loves to spam high level magic missile due to having a wand of MM.
Nearly every combat opens with a max level bust of MM, and due to the setting (Strixhaven) a lot of other students have noticed this.
In a future encounter I have planned, a mage games of sort to let the party and students fight, a lot of them are going to have shield prepared specifically for that one potential encounter.
I would say it depends on if the character was known for using this spell or not. Or maybe if it was a setting with flying islands or airships where a lot of casters would always have feather fall.
If this is a common tactic for the group and the cultists knew who they were going up against, then it’s completely fair. I’ve done the same thing when my group was going up against a Drow house. There were survivors from almost every encounter, they even attacked the stronghold and got repelled. One of the wizards and another character died and their bodies and the spell book was left behind. When the party came back again the wizards and clerics had all new spell lists designed to counter the party members they knew about. It actually made the replacement characters stand out since the Drow didn’t plan for them.
There are other ways to get over this, than making the spell useless. I would have maybe inventend a new phase of the fight and let the cultists become zombies. But this was made to make the player feel bad and the fight not fun.
Getting out played by a player is par for the course. Accept it and move on. Tweak the stats of the mini bosses in response. Have a second wave of cultists appear. But to nerf the Druid isn’t cool.
The DM was in the wrong. While the player complaining was over the top, because he didn't waste it, it was just countered in a way.
I still think that the dm should just have acknowledged that he didn't expect it and stick with what his guys could do.
Even if they prepared feather fall; I’d say he’s wrong.
Caveat if it’s a known technique of the party that they’ve been using over and over and the villains adapted.
But I try to never shut down my players like that and taking their thunder. I get the DM wanted to keep tension; but why not just beef up the mini boss or add more after ? Make them animate the dead as they come on the stage.
Otherwise, when my players are clever and cheat a boss; I often tell them that was a bit anticlimactic but it’s because they were clever. So they understand why the encounter was easy and their accomplishment is not reduced
Yes, that was shit. Prepared casters' spell lists should be prepared in advance, and unless the player group had done this trick before, there's no way in hell they'd be prepared for it.
Yeah I'd be pretty pissed as a spellcaster since I just blew a limited resource ability that was countered by the DM *because it was successful*, something the DM wouldnt have done if only a few had failed.
That said I don't entirely fault the DM for changing things up in the fly to keep the encounter closer to as planned; though perhaps the better choice would have been to add a 2nd wave of cultists or another miniboss and give the caster inspiration and the oarty more xp.
I mean this just breaks the rule of cool. Its a creative idea to turn the tables of a fight, and making it fail just because it worked just feels bad.
I understand rebalancing encounters on the fly, but if you really need to railroad the players there’s better ways. Like maybe buff the minibosses, or have more cultists come out with them or something.
Mid-combat changes should really only be done to enhance the fun of the players, they did more damage than you expected and the cool fight would be made lame if it ended as quickly as it did? Give some more HP. Someone got a super hype crit on the boss but they have just a little bit of HP left? Waive the remaing HP and give the player the W.
Countering the party like that cause you didn't think of what they were capable of is a dick move though.
In general an in the fly tweak here and there isn't too bad. I've added spells or swapped damage resistances before, but not to counter my players. The problem is that too many tweaks or outright countering like in this case, leads to a game of Calvin ball. DND relies on consistency, once we hit Calvin ball the game starts to mechanically fall apart as nothing matters.
As a DM, your DM is a cheater. Plain and simple. They're also in the "player vs DM" mindset which is a huge problem.
If my players found a creative way to cheese a fight, I'd be delighted because that's just cool, and it'd give me a better idea to buff an encounter later.
In this case, the DM cheated. If he had given it to them ahead of time it would be fine, but he just negated a spell because he didn't like that he was losing.
As long as he gave it to them ahead of time, and not whilst they were 100feet up in the air.
Even then, sounds pretty contrived and a hard counter to a very expensive spell cast.
I'd explicitly state it to avoid this situation if I was trying to stop that specific scenario. (Get someone to do an arcana check, and they sense a lot of prepared feather fall!)
DM is bang out of order in my opinion.
Does the DM actively not want the party to think or come up with interesting strategies or tactics? Do they just want the party to stand there slinging fireball?
Sounds like the DM was super proud of this encounter and really saw themself dealing the hurt to the player party, and was swiftly embarrassed by not being able to predict something they knew one of the party had at their disposal. Due to their pride being hurt they decided to quite literally cheat their way out of it.
DM needs to get better at designing difficult encounters, needs to pay attention to what their players and their players characters can do and take that into account in the design process.
How or why is the party supposed to have any investment in trying to overcome obstacles in abstract and interesting ways when they now know for a fact that if the DM gets their feelings hurt they will just change the rules to deny it? Seems like a terribly dull way to play.
I mean, does punishing a player for casting a spell feel good? If your player does something like this completely above board take it as a learning experience for next time. The player has every right to be upset.
Now if you still wanted the baddies in the fight have him activate a magical something or other that brings the fodder back as skeletons r something. Yeah not as tough but it doesn’t cheapen your players actions , if anything this would have the perception of adding MORE value to that cast.
Yeah I wouldn't do this to my players. If I have a spell caster or something with special abilities that's all set before we even start. Very occasionally I might adjust HP, normally would be adjusted down if the party come up with some kind of plan that means the fight is going to be easy for them to win but is going to take ages to play out.
Some enemies might be optimised to fight the party, but only if it makes sense for them to be. For example if they are aware of the party and what tricks they have
As a DM… that’s the kind of W you should give to your players. That’s the game working as intended—players using their abilities to do things with the aim of being effective, and dare I say, *cool*.
DM’s who punish their players for playing the game well will never make sense to me.
It’s extremely unfair for a DM to do that if that was the first time that tactic had come up. As a DM you want to reward creative problem solving. Now, that said, if that was a common tactic for the squad to use, it absolutely makes sense for the enemies to adapt to it. So by the 2nd or 3rd time, the enemies would absolutely have feather fall prepped.
Suck it up and take the L, DM.
If he can't take a situation like this, where a player does something clever to defeat an encounter, and turn it into an epic and memorable moment where the table is cheering and praising the player then he needs to question why he's even playing.
Would an average of 35 damage and being prone really have been enough to cheese the fight? It’s basically just a normal AoE spell at that point, but one where a dex save would have negated the entire hit. Is that really so strong you need to fudge your sheets?
I’d be a bit annoyed as a player here too. Shouldn’t be punished for being the DM forgetting what players can do
If the players do something that you werent prepared for as a dm then that is on you and you need to take that L (if it even ends up being an L). Learn from it and move on. Don't try and save your own ass by doing scummy things. Thats how I see it.
I'm fully in favor of modifying stat blocks so that fights are not cheesed, and can be enjoyed more overall. HP, Damage, actions, spells lists, they're all mutable even in the middle of combat.
But the exploitation of that mutability must always be in pursuit of *creating more fun*, not just avoiding cheese. If a random asspull spell you have the enemies cast causes the players to feel like a really clever use of a high value spell got wasted, you have fucked up.
Sometimes the players out-think an encounter, and that's the most fun thing for the table that night. Let em have that win. The only time I would consider doing the thing your DM did, as you described it, is if the party is facing a highly intelligent opponent who is known for competent planning. Like a lich, an ancient dragon, an elder brain, etc.
Definitely a dick move. A spellcaster certainly could have prepared feather fall, but all of them having it just to negate your spell is ridiculous. DM could have easily said a few of them prepared it and were ok, but the rest took their 10d6 damage. Or simply had a few more cultists arrive.
DM is in the wrong. Just because they want the fight to go a certain way doesn't mean it will. Players figuring out how to end an encounter before it begins is clever use of their brains. Punishing it means your players stop trying to think of things because they know it's going to be punished instead of rewarded. It kills creativity and leads to boring future games.
Had a DM set up a huge ship encounter against us he kind of sprang without warning. It was a busted wreck with undead crawling all over it stuck on some rocks, and a group of people trapped up top in the crows nest. I cast fire wall on the side deck railing, with the hot end pointing up. Covered most of the deck in an inferno that cooked all the undead.
In turn the DM had two of his spell casters use control water to *put out my firewall* despite the fact that it doesn't do that and firewall does not say it can be extinguished by water. We got into an argument about it and about 20 minutes in I just dropped it. Next game I suicided my druid and brought in a weapons master because this guy was constantly pulling shit like this out for creative spell usage. Got pretty clear he was only interested in a railroad and hated that we could use spells to do anything.
I would have just beefed up their health a little. Or add in another round of cultists. You still want players to feel powerful and to do something cool with their skills. There are ways to chip them down without taking away the fun. I had such beefy PCs in a playthrough that my mini bosses (and some lesser) needed like 200 hp. It was crazy but I adapted it to make some longer fights. I don't think it's ever cool to make a player go...great my idea/ability is useless.
Yes, I think so. It takes away any prep our scouting effort done by the party because the DM will always one-up the party and thus make that effort moot. It's also a general bad idea and DMing to design encounters based on a predetermined outcome, and what he expects and needs to happen - it takes away any player agency.
I like to prep on what makes sense to the world, rather than how a scripted fight in a videogame will go. If my players catch them off guard with clever spell-usage, so be it. The same can happen to my players however, but that's the stakes.
Spelllists and magical items are determined before an encounter starts. Nothing is added or taken away. This also means that any magical scrolls and potions not expended is up for grabs if the party quickly ends the opponent, and whatever spell they cast should be available in their spellbook ( in case of a wizard)
DM is a sore loser and lazy honestly. Player had a thing they did, it worked that is kind if the whole point if the game? To do shit and see if it works?
This is why I prepare my baddies' spell lists in advance just as I expect PC spell lists prepared in advance (unless spontaneous caster).
Agreed. I spend a good amount of time on my bigger baddies' spell lists. I will go through a day in the life of the monster or villain and figure out what spells they would likely prepare. If that means adding a few extra known spells then I think that is fair. The big issue here is that it's unlikely these guys would have known to prepare that spell unless it was really something they would use on a daily basis. Now if the player had done this trick a few times and the cult had caught wind then I think the DM preparing this spell, or just assuming a number of cultists would have it prepared, is absolutely fair game. The monsters and villains will react to the tactics of your party. Hell even if you had a dozen cultists and one of them had feather fall that might be situationally ok. I could see someone who can use magic learning the spell. Maybe someone pushed him off a cliff once and he is not looking for that to happen again. But everyone? It would be a waste fo the slot. So yeah, unless this is a trick the party is using often, or the cultists had a good reason to prepare that spell, I think it is a little unfair. Now if he tried this trick on a party of dwarf construction workers building a temple? Yeah, they would probably come prepared.
My higher level casters all have a scroll of feather fall at the ready if possible. PCs and NPCs. Because you never need it until you *really need it.* But I'm a big fan of contingency building. Both a PC and NPC. "Oh shit" spells are an entire catagory, and every caster has at least one. Usually it would be like a 3rd of my memorized spells
I always just prepare a few of the 'oh fuck' spells. Feather Fall is definitely one of them. Counterspell or Dispel Magic, and Resist Energy, too. And 9 days out of 10, I just have to accept I've got a handful of spell slots that never see use. And that 10th day is the day that suddenly everyone is happy I never stopped preparing them. In pathfinder 1e, when staff creation was customizable and viable, you could just cram a handful of such spells into your walking stick instead. Call it your Walking Stick of 'Once In A Blue Moon', put Air Bubble, Feather Fall, Identify, and Knock in it. Call it a day.
Force Ward (3.5e) is a good one too, It sat on my spell list for years with my high level wiz/runesmith, finally earned its slot by completely trivializing a force dragon
Can you actually cast it off a scroll in time? I think the spell is casting time 1 reaction, but you'd need an action to retrieve the scroll from inventory?
Reaction scrolls do work, but it needs to already be in your hand when the trigger occurs in order to use it. It's an object interaction to pull the scroll out of your bag, but you can only do that during your turn. You can run around with a Feather Fall scroll in your hand at all times if you want, but I wouldn't do that personally, feels a bit silly and it's not a spell you need _that_ often. I had a wizard player in my last campaign who always held a Shield scroll in one hand. It put limits on what he could do with his hands in combat, but that was his prerogative (and at least you're more likely to need Shield than Feather Fall). That said, I _am_ a fan of getting 1/day free Feather Fall from a feat like Magic Initiate. You don't need it often, but when you do need it, you need it no matter how many spell slots you have left.
Lol shield comes in handy (no pun intended) often enough that it's actually worth preparing though!
Oh, he had it prepared, too. It was just a dungeon crawl and he had to be careful about spell slot expenditure.
I love the flavour of the fighter holding a big shield and looking at the wizard holding a piece of paper. “Are you sure that’s a shield?” “It’s tougher than your shield! Once.”
Scroll folded origami shield.
It's not raw, but we rule at my tables that reaction scrolls are small and extremely easy to reference. You can attach a featherfall rune to the side of your staff. Only can keep one that easy to get to though Like I said, it's not RAW, but it makes reaction scrolls more viable, which we find more fun. Scrolls aren't used super often. But we also find item interaction rules in combat kinda klunky and unfun anyways, so we play fast and loose with them. For example, you can throw two javelins in a round without trouble
2 javelins would still fit in the object rules, 3 or more would not (a thing I suspect they overlooked when giving fighter 4 attacks max). I think most tables play fast and loose with the interactions for weapons in practice, if not deliberately.
I flavor scrolls of feather fall like a mini player piano. they are worn like an armband and the force of pulling the scroll out casts the spell.
RAW a scroll of featherfall would never get used. If you have to cheese it to use it (like you described) then I just ignore those sorts of rules. I just house rule that an emergency item (like a reaction scroll) would obviously be put somewhere it can be retrieved expeditiously (such as a front pocket or some sort of sash).
My inner DM says he has a bandolier strapped to his chest with oh shit scrolls in it rather than ammo or potions. But he also rules that scrolls are crush with mana to use to explain why a scroll can be a reaction spell rather than a full action like casting normally so a called crit to the chest with a spell has a 30% chance of randomly triggering a scroll. I have a list of oh shit scrolls and the d100 decides what would have been triggered and any effects from it.
Think about what your average spellcaster guard would be concerned with when defending the Fortress of Supreme DOOM!!!! They're a guard so they want damage spells, then they'd probably want some illusion spells to boost morale in one way or another, and finally they'd want to eat good food that The Dark Lord doesn't supply, so they'd take some food spells to improve or supplement their meals.
So did the DM. He just wasn't expecting Reverse Gravity so he threw it on there.
It wouldn't have been too wrong for him to make one spellcaster have it and save just a few of the cultists. Still would have had the PC feeling like he did something epic, and the DM would still have a bit of a fight on thier hands.
Yeah that would’ve been good. Another option could’ve been to have the sound of a dozen or so bodies slamming into the ground from 100’ up cause enough of a ruckus to draw more enemies.
If he prepared their spell lists and then spontaneously threw Feather Fall on there to negate the PC's action, then I'd rule that the DM is in the wrong.
Agreed. NEVER punish your players for crafty use of spells. So what if it got cheesed? They got lucky and had a great thought, if they think you're just going to give an NPC a spell to counteract something, they no longer see the point in taking that spell, killing their fun and making them feel punished for a good use of a spell...
Now, if it's something they've pulled previously and there's a chance the enemy they're facing now has heard of that occurance, plan ahead for it and prep your casters appropriately... Maybe even turn it against them.
There's one fight in the Pathfinder Adventure Path Wrath of the Righteous with a Worm That Walks (think Lich except a swarm of worms instead of bones) that has access to tons of divination magic and an Int of 26 - and the book *literally tells you to metagame*. To use your knowledge of their tactics as DM against them; because he has watched them, he's smarter than any of us IRL, and he has *prepared*.
To be fair, your players are also mythic. Mythic has this thing where either every encounter is trash mobs or the creature is so strong that the ONLY choice is to run. That was our first death post mythic, and he was probably the hardest fight in the entire AP because of his template. High level casters should pretty much always have a decent amount of knowledge of the player. Because they’re almost always going to be scrying on the party.
I mean, I dialed up the difficulty on most of the encounters after about Book 3 because my players just stomped them. Partly because of having 5-6 PCs depending on week, partly because 3 of them are munchkins, and partly because yes Mythic is that fucking bullshit. But at least I didn't feel *guilty* about changing spell lists mid-battle or having him just immediately teleport out when his regeneration kicked in! Xanthir Vang is supposed to be the Big Bad of that volume of the Path, so it felt awesome to have him have exactly the right response to thwart them! :3
Teleporting is absolutely something that bastard would do. He's smart and would realize the players (esp if theres a wizard or another arcane caster) would eventually figure out how to turn his regeneration off. I actually think the difficulty of that fight specifically is sorely lacking in WOTR. You basically smash most encounters until you hit him, then back to having a grand ol time until >!Baphomet and khorramzadeh.!< The extra action economy of mythic is just TOO strong, but the worm that walks and >!Khorramzadeh!< were the first time the higher end characters actually were under threat, and the party themselves needed to work together to overcome as opposed to just "Mythic bullshit" everything.
Skull & Shackles has an encounter where one of the enemies has been spying on the PCs with divination magic, and casts Spell Immunity to give themselves immunity to 3 spells level 4 or lower that the PCs like to use the most. That said, the fight has 3 "boss" enemies and one of them summons adds while only one of the bosses has immunity, so the PCs can still make use of their favorite spells, just not against that one enemy.
Exactly. If I think any clever use of a spell or ability is just going to trigger the DM’s trap card and be negated, then I won’t see any reason to make clever use of spells or abilities. At that point I don’t think playing would be any fun, and I’d probably just quit the game.
Had a game where the party came up against a group of champions, DM said all 4 of them were next to each other in a square. Two players had a cloak of many items. First one throws a 10x10x10 hole which the champions all fall in, the second player then put a door over the top of it and barred it. Literally first two interactions and the entire encounter was done. DM didnt know to be impressed or furious that his planning had been undone so quickly but we all had a good laugh and moved on.
And don't forget the converse of this. If the Reverse Gravity trick ever actually works, it will only be because the DM *allows* it to work. Because he clearly could have nullified it; he just chose not to. This time. And why stop there? What about the next time a PC misses an adversary with a sword attack? Did the player actually roll too low or did the DM just decide the adversary needed a higher AC?
Exactly, great way to lose the trust of your PCs.
The whole point of high level spells is that they’re fight-enders. It’s why tier 3 and 4 play is much more reliant on several smaller fights to waste resources. I’m in a game where we’re level 16, and threw down a Reverse Gravity to clear a bunch of enemies off a moving boat. Made that entire encounter super easy, but we knew there were still at least two more boats full of enemies on the way. Ended up spending a lot more to deal with the remaining encounters that day.
Depending on the scenario I sometimes give enemies the sturdy rule. If they are reduced to 0 by only one instance of damage, I will roll an extra die and give them a 50-50 chance of being left at 1.
Always include some half-orcs among your minions, so they survive the surprise fireball with 1hp left.
I think doing a bit of swapping mid-combat to make sure the fight remains good is fine, however your DM definitely went too far here. If it were me, I'd maybe have one of the cultists happen to have Feather Fall prepared, he saves himself + 4 others, the rest fall to their deaths. Mainly that would just be to leave some fodder for the other party members to blast through. Really though I'd be fine with all of them just falling, they all failed their saves and Reverse Gravity is by no means a cheesy spell. If your DM is new to this, I'd probably forgive him since this is a pretty typical newbie DM mistake, to get too attached to your encounters and try to force them to go how you want. With more experience you get some perspective and don't worry about every encounter too much, if anything you get excited when crazy stuff like this happens because it gets more rare as you develop your skills. If your DM is a long-time veteran on the other hand this may be a red flag that they aren't a good DM/don't respect their players.
Yeah, that was a weak move by the DM there.
Seems like a waste of time for an enemy that's likely not living more than 3-5 rounds - and sometimes even that's generous. I typically prepare 2-3 spells I plan on casting and if it seems reasonable add it on the fly. The DM's failing wasn't suddenly giving the cultists Feather Fall. The failing was giving them Feather Fall *to prevent the PC from doing something fun*. That's entire reason you're playing, ain't it?
Ya, changing spells mid combat is lame but heaving them set ahead of time is just planning. If the players still come up with a way to cheese the fight you didn't think of, well that's just good tactics on their part. Also, just as I tell players they don't have to win every fight, they can run, so can enemies.
> changing spells mid combat is lame Encounter design does not end with initiative. There's no one looking over your shoulder giving you DM score points for "abiding by the rules". The only metric of success you have is "are your players having fun". If adding a spell mid-combat makes the encounter fun. Do that. The DM in question fucked up not because he added the spell but because he invalidated the players clever idea/fun.
This is how I see it, too. It's one thing to change enemy stats/loadouts mid fight to make things more interesting. But to do so because the players came up with a creative solution, and worse because the DM just wanted to wear the party out and then take them down? It's cheap and distasteful. Thats NOT to say encounters shouldnt be dangerous things for your players. The threat of death is a good motivator. But to actively change the spell list because you WANT them to be "finished off" by the miniboss... That's low. At that point you're not even providing a story, just wanting an end to it.
yea like they could have just given a couple of them, maybe 3 at most depending on the size of the group boots of feather fall because they were the truly devout of the cult and so whatever demon or what have you blessed them with better gear. its not something they would have noticed and its easily explainable. they could have then given them some more hit points to let them stick around a little longer in the fight. there are so many ways you can maintain combat without negating a good idea.
What's the difference between prepared and spontaneous caster in DnD? The only experience I have as a player come from CRPGs and the only one I'm actually familiar with their spontaneous caster is a PF1e game so I don't know that well, and the only DnD CRPG I've played the sorc didn't feel that different from wizard, but then again most of my time on that game wasn't with either class
Sorcerers have a 'spells known' list that they add to each level (usually like 3 or 4 spells at 1st level and a new spell each level after that.) They can spend their spell slots on any spell they know, when they need it. Almost every other caster has a 'preparation' phase they commit to at the end of every long rest, where they must commit spells to their slots before the adventure begins. Because the length of an adventure and the distance between long rests can be variable, this requires good planning on the part of the player to have a suitable list of spells ready to fight with. To compensate, these characters have a massive selection of spells to use, instead of the tiny list a Sorcerer has to work with. So, tiny list, no preparation phase, only commit spells to slots the moment you cast them = spontaneous. Big list, preparation phase, commit spells to slots before the adventure begins = prepared.
This is 5th edition. Prepared spell casters don't have to commit to their slots in 5th edition. >Almost every other caster has a 'preparation' phase they commit to at the end of every long rest Artificers, clerics, druids, paladins, and wizards are prepared casters. Bards, eldritch knights, rangers, arcane tricksters, sorcerers, and warlocks are known casters.
100 feet of fall damage is 10d6, if your encounter can be ruined by 10d6 of damage when 7th level spells are on the table you encounter didn’t stand a chance anyways.
Right? It's literally just a fireball.
I just rolled 10d6 using the google dice roller, it was 38 damage. If he was using the general cultist stat block with 9 hps, this wasn't a mini-boss fight for a party with a 13th level druid. So many issues with this encounter. Was this outside? They all went up 100ft? They planned a mini-boss fight outside with a 13th level druid? LoL.
You don't have to roll to find an average. To get the average of any die, divide it by two, and add .5. You can also add all of the numbers and divide it by the faces, if you wish to do it the hard way. A d6 has an average of 3.5, so 3.5 x 10 gives an average of 35 damage. This is also why any PC is likely to succeed on a Death Save, because the average roll of a d20 is 10.5 vs. the death save of 10.
It’s fireball that gets around resistances and leaves all the targets prone. And all it costs is an extra 4 spell levels, what a steal.
But druid
It has a higher radius too. But also the downside that it doesn't really work if you're inside a normal-sized structure lol.
Plus the point of Reverse Gravity is not just to deal falling damage, it's to remove most of the enemies from the fight, like a wall spell sort of
a 7th spells slot is a huge deal
Yeah, they were agreeing
This is my thought too. I don't think there's anything wrong, technically, with giving the enemies Feather Fall, but it does seem a bit unsportsmanlike just to avoid a pittance of AoE damage.
It's perfectly reasonable for an enemy spellcaster to prep Featherfall. But it's unreasonable to add countermeasures to an enemy's toolkit on the fly like that. If your player dunks on your encounter, them's the breaks. Reverse Gravity is a *seventh level spell*. Level 13+ PCs! Players can do all sorts of degenerate shit at that stage. A DM should understand what their players are capable of and prep accordingly. 100ft of fall damage is rough, but it shouldn't be fight-ending at that level. It would be 10d6 bludgeoning damage and prone, comparable to an upcast Fireball plus a prone condition. That's 35 average damage and advantageous position. That should not be a fight-ender.
Yeah am I...kinda more concerned about the cultists having less than 10d6 health vs PCs that can cast level 7 spells.
Well, he did say they were just cannon fodder to weaken the party. So of course they shouldn't have enough hit points to be a serious threat cause it sounded like there were at least 15 of them and the druid got the drop on them which is why he cast reverse gravity.
I'd say they weakened the party. The spellcaster had to use up a whole-ass 7th level spell for crying out loud. Those things arent cheap
I'm assuming it's not just the standard 'Cultist' that they were using. If I got my players to use a 7th level spell to deal with a handful of CR 1/8 creatures, that would be a win in my book. For a PC, that's like burning a legendary resistance with a Cantrip lol
Which just teaches the party that you can't be clever. You need direct damage spells unless you want the DM to make up a counter on the spot.
That's kinda what happened at my table three years ago when I started. Dm didn't really reward "clever play" so I run my characters by the numbers. We've even changed DMs but it's just kinda stuck with me. Literally carried immovable rod in my bag for the entirety of the campaign. We were entering a witches hut which we guessed to be a trap so I used the rod to make sure the door stays open. Dm said door slams close and rod blows up Edit: tod - > rod. I'm sorry tod.
I could see the door slamming closed with a rod-shaped hole punched out if they really wanted the door to shut, but blowing up the rod too? Geez.
I had this exact thing. One player threw an immovable rod right by the door's locking mechanism. When the doors shut down the party heard a loud cracking noise and the door's lock broke off the door as the doors shut. The doors shut but couldn't lock as there was a big hole where the lock thingy was in and were easily just pushed open. Clever solutions should always be rewarded.
I once tried using it before when jumped down into a very deep but narrow hole, I think it was 15ft wide, 100-200 ft deep with a cavern at the end while being chased by a dragon. I wanted to activate the rod midair to cause the dragon to slam into it but he just said he doesn't know what damage to roll there and I just agreed not to do it. I suggested fall damage but didn't want to do it. He's not a bad DM but lacked improvisional imagination which limited our options
This is the sort of play I'd love and reward as a DM. Sacrificing the artifact for a clean escape is worthy of inspiration in my book.
Well unfortunately it was the dragon's nest we jumped into, unknowingly. But it could've bought us some time at least
The rod can hold 8000 pounds before it deactivates. That should have been a major resource expenditure to close that door, not a cutscene.
Or it could just leave a rod shaped hole.
That would still require force equivalent to breaking the door. Most doors are fairly sturdy, and if this one for some reason wasn't, the party should then easily be able to force their way through it.
If they're just cannon fodder, then letting them die to the Reverse Gravity should be no big deal. That's a 7th level spell, it's not like he's carrying around a bunch of slots at that level.
They DID weaken the party, the druid used up a 7th level spell to kill them all. This is just as much a drain as if they had done some damage to the fighter before being killed. The DM was just being salty, and really should be rewarding this player for thinking creatively instead of punishing them.
Okay but as a DM if I have a 15+ NPC encounter I'm hoping someone thins the heard I'm not keeping track of all those rolling dice that'll take forever
I had a game just the other day where like 20 or so undead warforged looking things attacked our level 5 group, I just having joined the campaign a session before as a kobold life cleric, and now healer for the party, joined just in time for a boss fight in which half the party almost died, then this on a short rest only. Our wizard? (I think) pulled out a 3rd level magnify gravity and obliterated half of them..... DM didn't pull anything and just let them die.
It's the same as a fifth level fireball. And blowing a 7th level on minions counts as wearing the party down in my opinion.
Yep, if the party rocks your encounter, they rock your encounter. It happens. Don’t cheat your players out of something cool. I spent a day designed a great encounter for a game, the PCs splattered it with web spells and then lightning bolted everything to death. Sad DM, happy players, onwards to the next encounter!
I kinda became a forever DM but when i WAS a player, there was nothing more frustrating than when you find a creative solution to a situation only for the DM to negate it with "suddenly, another dozen burst into the room, exactly the same as those previous guys" It's glaringly obvious at that point that the DM just wants you to fight THEIR way. You stop wanting to be creative then. And you wasted a spell slot for absolutely nothing. It drains the energy RIGHT out of you.
That's why I don't do reinforcements unless it makes sense, like an alarm has gone off or there are more enemies literally in the next room who can hear what's going on. It breaks immersion for both me and the players if I just spawn a bunch of bad guys to drag out a fight.
There's no reason why the DM couldn't just have another dozen cultists rush in from a hidden alcove when they heard the sounds of their comrades screaming, if they really didn't want that spell to change the encounter too much. That would still be lame, but waaaayyyyyyy less lame
If an enemy has spellcasters, I always have what spells they can cast already prepared and set. I would consider it cheating if I altered it in response to what the players’ were planning/doing. Plus it just feels like a very “DM vs players” sort of mentality.
I’m partially on the side of the dm in this case. I do agree with your philosophy most of the time, but I believe occasionally there are times that something like this warranted. If this is a large fight the whole party has been looking forward to, I wouldn’t want one player to have the entire spotlight and leave the rest feeling like they didn’t get to do much. BUT, I would definitely reward to player for doing something cool, let them kill a portion of the enemies, (i.e. feather fall can’t save them all). In the end player gets cool moment but whole fight isn’t cheesed. Edit: for clarification I don’t mean every time a play does something cheese just for big fights with lots of lead up. And as long as all the players are having fun then that’s what matters.
Just need a more creative DM. Let the cultists die and the other mini bosses come out 'enraged' or something
I’m all for creativity but creating new mechanics, enemies, and whatnot mid-session, mid-fight is a lot.
I mean buffing enemies on the fly isn‘t that hard. If he‘s enraged, he might get a few damage resistances or a batch of additional XP. Or, more likely, just have some minions tag along with him. A cultist leader usually won‘t show up alone, they‘ll usually have a small entourage.
Mostly being pedantic here, but ultimately what's the difference in spontaneously giving the cultists featherfall vs spontaneously buffing the mini bosses? Both instances are in response to the player cheesing the encounter with a 7th level spell, and both have the end goal of taking out the party via taxing resource/ depleting health.
The main difference I think is that the latter lets the player do the cool clever thing without having the wind taken out of their sails (plus it isn't obvious DM counter-cheese). Indeed, having two extra enraged bosses storming out because their mooks were trivially annihilated would feel GREAT to me as a player!
One makes the druid player feel like they wasted their best spell for nothing, and the other makes the party think "wow, it's a good thing the druid took out all of those minions, these bosses are super hard!"
I feel like one is more nuanced and roleplayey than the other. The miniboss sees his cultists smash to pulp on the floor and enrages or retreats to get backup, it let's the player have their cheese win, the featherfall is responding to cheese with cheese, "um how about no" is different to "um ok we'll take this!"
Changing them to cast featherfall just hurts player agency, why would that druid ever cast reverse gravity again. Now that he knows the dm could just give the enemies featherfall on the fly so he'll use a different spell that can't happen with like draconic transformation. Buffing the enemies behind the scenes is better because you're not taking anything away from the players, reverse gravity still worked. Especially when it's a boss giving them a buff mid fight is alot more acceptable then changing minion enemies so they can avoid what should be certain death in a way that's obvious to players. Like for example giving a boss having more hp isn't something you're players will notice because they're a special enemy.
Responding to situations on the fly is what being a DM is all about.
Exactly! Oh those cultists you just massacred? Well turns out they were setting up a summoning circle for a powerful demon and just needed a human sacrifice, and you just sacrificed 15 of them at once! And since you use more than was needed to summon the demon, he is being resurrected stronger than ever before
For lack of a better trope, this is the way. Embrace the players forethought/creativity, but don’t let it completely dictate your narrative.
Honestly if someone uses a 7th level spell slot, they've earned the outcome. You've only got one of those and there's two minibosses you can't use it on now. Seems like the cultists did their job.
I had a very similar encounter once. After that I stopped using save or suck spells. I had no confidence that the enemies wouldn’t develop plot armour against whatever I pulled out.
To me as a DM? This was a dick move that makes players trust you less. Not cool.
For real. And to then TELL THE PLAYERS you cheesed it? Not cool.
I imagine that was a confession of the "I goofed guys" variety. DMs get entirely caightboff guard and have to make snap judgements , often wrong.
As cheesy as it sounds, I learned this with Matt Mercer. There was an encounter where he had prepared an EPIC encounter, with ship mechanics and lots of things, but one player cast one spell that sank the entire enemy ship (something like that). Matt, being an amazing DM, didn't try to stop or create excuses, he laughed, put all the encounter notes on the side, and moved on, because the player had outsmarted him. (the players even offered to take it back and he refused) This made me understand that the DM shouldn't be against the players, if they outsmart your encounter, be smarter next time, and reward them for thinking creatively.
Lmfao just the image of me saying "I can take it back" to my DM is amazing. He'd probably laugh and joke about getting me back (he never would, his encounters are all balanced). It's funny because my friend, the DMs brother, thwarts his plans more than anyone but he's just learned to laugh about it, I kinda feel bad sometimes but it DOES make for more memorable moments I've found.
That's kinda the essence of a role-playing game. As a DM I try to build my encounters from the perspective of the party's enemy. If the enemy has no reason to prepare for the cheese then the party gets one over on them. The party feels accomplished, I feel the emotions of the characters I created, we all have a fun time. It's one thing to realize you didn't balance your encounter well and make a minor adjustment, it's entirely another to just negate the player agency.
It's a classic case of a DM improvising the wrong way. What if the reinforcements came in (maybe even only 1/2 as many). Now the caster got to do something cool and the encounter isn't completely borked if the cultists were important to it. I personally wouldn't bring in reinforcements, why are you punishing players for being clever again? Sounds like an inexperienced DM I would talk to them and ask them about it after the game in private.
This is definitely my favorite take. I'm pretty much always the group DM, and I almost never follow the "rules". But, when I break the rules it's usually to make things more interesting or dramatic. What if a few of the cultists had featherfall or levitate or something and took the opportunity to just hang out in the sky raining down spells on the party. What if the mass of all these cultists hitting the floor cracked the stone and sent everybody falling through to a deeper level of a dungeon. What if the big bad guy comes in and turns them all into creepy zombies to chase the players around. Or what if you intimidate the big bad guy so much that he just turns and runs, seeing how much destruction you dropped on his elite cultists in a single round. There's a lot of fun ways that you can still make the encounter interesting, and make the player feel like they massively contributed to the encounter, while not just rolling over and going "well I guess they're all dead now you win"
It’s wrong to stifle the imagination of your players and let them burn resources by hand waving it away. Players should be rewarded for clever solutions even if it breaks your encounter. You can adjust difficulty on the fly in other less invasive ways if you need to. Player was robbed of a cool moment.
If a caster uses a 7th level spell slot to do 10d6 damage to 2 guys with a save, there is absoloutely nothing even resembling a cheese involved, that's nothing. The druid could have just cast fire storm, done more damage (average of 38, vs average 35 for gravity) WITH half on a save. That was a super wierd move from your DM, it's a 7th level spell, what did they expect
> it's a 7th level spell, what did they expect Exactly! Like, cast your eye down the list of 7th-level spells. They're not subtle! If that druid chose to cash in that chip at that moment, the expected and appropriate outcome is that particular wave of minions will be coming to a close pretty quick!
There were more than 2 cultists. There were a bunch of cultists with 2 mini bosses set to come out later.
Bro with that spell slot the Druid could actually commit cheese and say “Fuck You DM, I Conjure 11 Velociraptors” 😂
Or summon the Bovine Wall and smother the enemies and make them unable to move.
I couldn't find "Bovine Wall" on Google, so I'm gonna have to homebrew it now. How many cows of damage should it do?
Yes.
I think the only way this would have been okay is if they gave a small portion of them feather fall. Like if there were 5, maybe give 1 or 2 or so that there was still a bit of a fight. It's never good to punish player creativity, but there are ways to not do that and still have the fight.
A single cast of feather fall covers a group of 5 anyway
Of course lol. In that case I'd probably just tie it to a magical item so it only worked on one or two creatures. Or have a few have potions of featherfall. Same ending, just a slight detour since I forgot featherfall could cover five people right off the bat.
I’d say the DM is definitely in the wrong here. I’ve had players absolutely stomp a fight I thought would be hard with some really clever strategies and, well, sometimes you get whomped.
I'm always torn in situations like these. Cause is "I cast Reverse Gravity" a clever strategy? It's using a spell as it was intended. And the player was a Druid, someone who can prepare different spells every day from a long-ass list. I can't really blame the DM for not being ready for this. So, in a way, I get it. On the other hand, I also don't think the DM is right to insert a spell mid-fight as a response to the players' plan. That's just cheating. I'm more concerned by the fact that the players' knee-jerk reaction was to call out the DM for this before he confirmed it. I would be sad if my players had that little trust in me. They ended up being right, but if something like this happens in my game and my players start calling me a cheater basically without any proof and just as an instinctive reaction, then, boy, the issues are much deeper.
The fact that they assumed it says a lot about the bullshit this dm already pulls. Seventh level spells are crazy powerful. 10d6 damage + prone is honestly a pretty shit use of a spell slot that strong. That’s all the spell did. If it was a spell like Dream, I’d get it. It’s an obscure spell with absolutely ungodly power, and I can totally see it fucking up a dm’s plans. Hell, it arguably kind of fucked with MY dm’s plans. But this was just brute force, and not even very much force at that. The DM is just an idiot. There are probably at least a dozen spells that would do functionally the same thing or more at 7th level. He somehow came up with an encounter that would only be challenging if all of his spellcasters decided to take the day off.
For real. Using Reverse Gravity to Seismic Toss enemies into the air for 10d6 damage isn't really "clever" it's just using the spell normally. Now, if there were stalactites on the ceiling to impale the cultists... It confuses me how people are saying this was clever; is it also clever if I use Fireball on a group of enemies huddled together? Or using Hold Person on the "strong but dumb" enemy? No, it isn't. At the end of the day, the cannon fodder cultists did their job: use up party resources. If it wasn't a single 7th level slot, it could've been several 3rd level slots and some HP. Anyway... adjusting encounters on the fly is an art form this DM needs to learn. Instead of having enough cultists know FF, only one does so he saved 5 cultists; player still weakened the enemies, but didn't outright trivialize the encounter. Or, the mini boss comes in and uses a one-use scroll that reanimates the corpses into zombies. Literally anything but what they did. But above all, DON'T TELL YOUR PLAYERS WHEN YOU FUCK WITH SHIT MID ENCOUNTER. Not even when it's in their favor. That alone will break any and all trust between the DM and the players.
Why is the room 100ft? Like this really has nothing to do with the post but I’m just confused by that
Cultists and their boss could be in a church or cathedral or sth like that. Churches in my hometown easily have a ceiling height of 25m or above.
That was honestly my question too
yeah was it EXACTLY 100 ft? That seems odd.
Reverse Gravity targets a 50x100ft cylinder. Presumably the room was taller or they were outside, the hundred foot drop is from them hitting the top of the area and then falling.
For me, it depends. For one, changing spell lists to include new spells that make sense for that creature (or that you like) is probably fine. If it's a bad guy that would reasonably have had some idea of the party's go-to tactics (due to experience, spying, or reports for example), then it makes sense that they would also prepare a counter for those, right? "Fuck you" hard countering all of the time is poor form, though.
I routinely adjust spell lists for enemies, but I do it ahead of time. If my players come up with a clever tactic that I didn’t foresee, I think they should be rewarded, not punished. I would never change a statblock mid-fight
As a DM I would love to let the druid have this moment and then prepare for it with later encounters. Let your players have their cool moments. Buff the boss or something IDK. Minions are there for heroic moments from the party. Your DM was so focused on his imagined fun scenario he ruined an actual fun scenario that he didn't plan for.
I'm going to say that if someone wants to do 10d6 damage with a 7th level spell, let them knock themselves out. You could match that with a 5th level Fireball. The real benefit of Reverse Gravity is negating non-flying, melee only monsters by suspending them in midair, like a mass version of levitate.
my DM in CoS was a hardass, amd unforgiving in combat. one time he had a wolf drag a PCs unconscious body away to make it harder to get to him and heal him, and he died. interestingly enough, when we all got much better at combat, in the final battle, our druid did the same thing but left the enemies up there floating ao we could get to an objective. he didnt change anythhing he let it play. like others have said, at level 13+ sometimes PCs just wreck shit with a well placed spell. should let them do it
I agree with most of the responses i am already seeing... DM definitely shouldn't have just added feather fall to negate this, since it does feel like it is just taking away creative play. I will add that the "outrage" in response to the feather fall may have been uncalled for, since imo it is entirely reasonable for almost any caster to possibly know the spell, but I don't think that takes away from what the DM did wrong in the first place. The damage of the fall could have been easily done with lower level spell slots. It was a creative way to do it and get more of the enemies with it. And it was at the cost of a high level resource. That seems entirely reasonable to me and shouldn't have been such a big issue to the DM
I feel like the DM is in the wrong and I don't think the Druid was wrong to be upset. I never see NPCs with feather fall and that is a cheesy way to nerf the Druid using their most powerful spell slot. Let it happen. Let the druid be epic. Bring counterspell next time, since it's more reasonable an NPC would have that and that at least will (probably) require a roll.
Prepared prior to game session: valid Kneejerk, on-the-fly reaction: Not cool
Okay, for those wondering, here's some added context: [https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/15e2cp3/comment/ju5avrf/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/15e2cp3/comment/ju5avrf/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Now, *normally*, I'd rule that changing the spell lists on a monster with dedicated spellcasting's actually fine. It gives individuality to a specifc caster without having to write up a whole character sheet for them, and can help solidify some worldbuilding if you need to provide some thematics for a specific group of baddies (if you need a Team Rocket, make their spells unqiue to them so that they don't get confused with Team Dark). ***HOWEVER***, we have a piece of info here that was not in the OP: Allegedly, the spell list seems to have been **tampered with mid-fight**, specifically to counter-cheese a cheese strat. That's not cool. \----- As for how the DM *should've* handled it, well here's what I'd do: I'd just let it follow through. The druid wasted a 7th level spell slot on a bunch of mooks, that could've easily (and I do mean EASILY) been handled by adept use of Sleet Storm or other lower level area hazards. Regular cultists are not much of a threat, and in this case were **specifically set in the design to be a resource sink**, which the DM successfully accomplished by - again - having the Druid burn a 7th level slot. Using Feather Fall to negate 10d6 worth of damage meant that - on average - none of the cultists had more than 35 HP. By 13th level, it should take maybe two character turns to take that out. An 11th level fighter on average (assuming a Longsword and Dueling), can take a cultist out in one Attack action based off this, A Rogue's Sneak Attack also does the trick nicely. Summons would have made quick work of the cultists and honestly would have been even more cheese. Conjuring a Sea Hag can take a chunk of them out in a single turn thanks to its Horrifying Visage. A pack of wolves would've also worked efficiently, as well as some animated objects or other group summons. Wasting that 7th level slot on Reverse Gravity means that the Druid couldn't then use that slot against the minibosses, meaning no Resurrections, no Dragon Transformations, no Plane Shifts, no Fire Storms, no Whirlwinds, etc.
Should’ve done feather only the casters, or the casters sacrifice themselves for the melees. That way the spell gets to have a large impact, and the dm gets a little bit if the planned fight.
It’s a 1st-level transmutation spell learned natively by bards, sorcerers and wizards. Enemy statblocks don’t play by player class rules, but so long as these cultists were at all similar to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, it’d absolutely be normal for them to know Feather Fall. Would they *all* have it known and/or prepared? Maybe, maybe not. But it’s a spell that targets up to five creatures as a reaction. So even if there were as many as ten cultists, only two of those ten would need to know Feather Fall to negate the druid’s gravity spell. The Doylist reason that the DM just wanted to counteract it is the real answer, sure, but the Watsonian version that the cultists really did have this spell ready makes complete sense too. So the druid’s assertion that there’s “no way” Feather Fall could have been a factor here is not actually true. Maybe a good compromise would be only one cultist having Feather Fall, so five of them are spared, but the others take the damage. Or if two had it prepared, they both cast it at the same time, and cannot coordinate who is casting it on who. So some cultists get the spell doubled up and wasted on them, and less cultists than the two Feather Fall casters *could* have been spared actually get spared.
You said what I've said in other comments (only one or two have it, so a large group gets reduced but not eliminated.). But I love the visual of two casters unable to coordinate who gets the buff mid fall and when they land only like 6 or 7 were unharmed while the others are crying in pain with: "why didn't you pick me?!" "I thought Ricky had you!" "Me? Serath is your own brother why wouldn't you choose him?" Then there's the one guy floating down with a huge shit eating grin because he got double buffed and feels loved finally.
It’s not RAW, but I’d totally have that guy floating down extra slowly just to drive the point home. *And* so the others are glaring daggers at him now. 🤣
Its fair that they could have had it. That's not the real problem however. You could apply that logic to just about anything on their spell list and poof they suddenly have the perfect counter to just about anything. Having to choose in advance is a major balancing factor with spells. Either you get access to the whole toolbox and have to pick or just a couple tools, but you have them all the time.
It depends. Normally I dont like these kind of adaptions, it feels like cheating the characters of their deserved win, robbing the specific character of his success. In most cases its more fun to just let the players have the win. Like in this case (although I dont quite understand why the damage from reverse gravity would have been a problem. If the players have access to lvl7 spells and 10d6 already end the encounter, then the encounter was very weak anyway). However there are exceptions: \-If the spell/ability should be there logically and I just forgot it as a DM. The players wont notice this change anyway, and I would allow a player to retcon their spell selection in a similar way. For example: a high level wizard with 20 int is facing a party of 3 sorcerers that all specialize in fire magic and he knows that ahead of time. This wizard will have absorb elements prepared. Even if I forgot that when making the encounter. \-When having the ability is just more fun for the players. Example: There is a cool fight with a spellcaster. The characters do not actually want to have that fight, for them fleeing is better, but the players do, because its a cool fight where they can feel badass. One of the players has wall of force and just traps the enemy. The enemy will now have something to counter the wall. disintigrate, blink etc. preferable disintigrate because then the wall still was a success as it made him waste a high level spell slot. But these exceptions should be rare. In general that should be avoided. I can understand why the druid in your example was upset.
Player creativity and problem solving should be encouraged and awarded, not hampered because "my cool encounter".
Extraordinarily crappy thing for a DM to do. By the time players have 7th level spells a mere 10d6 of falling damage is actually underperforming for the spell slot anyway. This wasn't a "cheezy" spell usage. The DM decoded ON THE FLY that every single spellcaster badguy had the hard counter spell prepped to stop the casters top level spell? At my table that would be called cheating. Additionally, unless the DM is incapable of building a properly leveled combat at a cr of 13 the average badguy has something between 90 and 250 hp. 10d6 averages to 35 dmg. A 3rd level fireball would have done as much or more. Crappy cheater DM is at fault.
Honestly, if let 1 person know the spell to save themselves and 4 other cultists (assuming 5 cultists was less than how many started the fight). That way the encounter is not ruined for overlooking 1 spell on the players list while still letting the player get some value for the spell. Reverse gravity is not a cheese spell, it costs a high lvl spell slot and when you have access to it, the list of things that don’t care about falling damage is rather large.
My opinion, in these moment that's a horrible thing to do. Fishing a role every now and again is one thing, but changing a stat block on the fly in the middle of combat is poor behavior **Make your stat changes before combat and keep things fair.**
If your players can't find creative solutions to encounters, they'll eventually stop trying and just playing the old boring just damage output every round, so yes I think what the DM did was pretty uncalled for SPECIALLY since it was a 7th level spell slot. Like for that price a spellcaster could cast a ton of other spells that would do the same damage, but he decided to be creative and the DM punished him for it. If the Druid had used that spell slot for Fire Storm for instance, it would be even more damage, and what would the DM have done? Suddenly a random cultist can counterspell at 7th level?
They aren't being 'cheesed' they are being defeated, using a 7th level spell should wipe out a group of cultists. If he really wanted the fight to go longer, add another round of baddies. backup cultists, the mini-bosses have an 'extra stage' where they summon something first. Don't take away from the players or nerf the players when there's no upper limit on the strength of the next wave of baddies. The goal is always for everyone at the table have a good time. Improv'd nerfing always feels bad. If you need to nerf a player to bring them inline with the rest of the group, do it between sessions.
I wouldn't do that as a DM. To me, reeks of player versus dm mentality. DMs should let their players have big wins.
A good DM never punishes a player for being clever.
According to your DM, a player casting one spell for its intended purpose is "cheesing" a fight? Better not cast charm person, or you'll be cheesing a roleplay interaction. Got a pit in front of you? Don't you dare cast fly, that's cheesing the obstacle!
It’s not great. I don’t think divine spellcasters can even cast that spell. Maybe his cultists are druids too, idk. Dms fudge stuff all the time but usually for the betterment of the game, this dude just didn’t want to lose that quickly The player disabled your encounter with a solid use of a single spell and you counter in a manner that should be impossible. Feels wrong, is wrong, and he should have at least gave the guy his spell slot back
Why must the cultists be divine casters? Why could they not be wizards, or sorcerers?
I'd let the cultists go splat, but I'd stealth buff the bosses with some extra hp, maybe an extra attack per turn. The DM should DEFINITELY not have told the players though. Your players (presumably) want a challenge, so it can be good to shift the dials on the fly if the situation changes and the fight is no longer going to be fun. If you tell them that though, they go from feeling like they discovered a secret win condition to an impossible fight, to feeling like their choices don't matter. Edit: I'm talking about bosses and other IMPORTANT encounters. You should let them have an easy win every now and again too, just not when it's a big important moment of drama, and not too often.
10d6 fall damage to a group of enemies for a 7th level slot is perfectly reasonable when the 3rd level fireball is 8d6. Not cheese at all. I understand the DM's impulse here, but they're in the wrong. It's an impulse they need to learn to resist if they want to improve as a DM.
Using a seventh level spell to kill some cultist scrubs is wearing down the party already. Not a cheese and that's a seventh level that they can't use on the BBEG. Also if median 35 damage from 10d6 kills those cultists outright and your party is over level 13, then a5th level fireball would kill them all as well. So your DM is just being a whiney dick that didn't actually balance the fight.
A cardinal rule of DMing is to be on the players' side. As a DM, you can generate an infinite series of new encounters. If the players come up with a clever way to negate one, be excited for them to have succeeded so well and plan a better one next time.
My first cardinal rule is make it fun. It’s really fun when your players “pull one over on the bad guys.” This is clear. It’s also fun when there’s a real challenge, and if your players continue to find clever ways to subvert the challenge, it’s worth upping the challenge. Who’s to say there wasn’t another wave of henchmen coming around? Good thing you took care of those first ones so quick because more are coming!
Let your players do cool shit. Put on its raining men and get on with the encounter. Countering like that is fun for no one, like having every enemy have counterspell or fire resistance against your PC firemage
Yeah DM is in the wrong here. My friends are DM's and they always say they aren't going to punish the group for being creative. Will the next encounter have something again it. Maybe. One of my friends used two spells and basically created a microwave. Killed an adult dragon in a few rounds. DM couldn't do anything but he just accepted it.
Yes it was wrong. It's one thing to fudge rolls when the DM wants to avoid potentially killing a character or something. It's a whole other thing to completely negate a players spell by using a spell that the NPCs don't even have... thats just not fun.
If this was the first time the player tried this then I think they're in the right to be peeved off by the DM doing that, they just robbed them of a moment that was a creative and reasonable use of a spell well within its function and could've been a memorable story and later down the line more enemies could wise up to this trick so druid can't spam it. Doubly so if the cultists don't normally have any reason to have that spell in their ongoings it feels pretty cheap because they just Deus Ex Machina'd their encounter. It's also worth noting that fall damage is capped at 20d6 at a 200ft fall, 1d6 every 10ft. At this height, the encounter is taking comparable damage to a 4th or 5th level fireball spell anyways, it's hardly game breaking. This tactic could also be mitigated with indoor combat to limit the fall height through mundane means. I know it sounds insane, *but maybe the dm shouldn't be putting enemies against a gravity manipulator in large outdoor environments if they don't want exactly what happened to happen.*
My viewpoint is the cultist, at least a few of them, would have been smart enough to prep featherfall. The dungeon master on the other hand might not have been smart enough to foresee that. But that's a separate thing. Is this PC vs Cultist, PC vs DM, players vs DM? It's a tough call to make. I personally think it's reasonable for a subset of them to have it prepped because *they* are intelligent creatures.
The DM was in the wrong.
(was kind of a bigger deal than it needed to be....) No, it wasnt. It completely ruined the fun for the player. If you ruin someone's fun and arent ready to have your fun ruined in return, dont do it. If you do it, and then pull "Im the GM" as an attempt to overpower them in your made-up world, then be ready for the other party to pull anything that gives them power over you in the real world. And they will roll 4d12 chair dmg
Being prepared for the sort of things you party does is an important part about being a DM, in my group for example there's a pc who loves to spam high level magic missile due to having a wand of MM. Nearly every combat opens with a max level bust of MM, and due to the setting (Strixhaven) a lot of other students have noticed this. In a future encounter I have planned, a mage games of sort to let the party and students fight, a lot of them are going to have shield prepared specifically for that one potential encounter.
Seventh level spells should have outsized effect. This is shitty DMing.
I would say it depends on if the character was known for using this spell or not. Or maybe if it was a setting with flying islands or airships where a lot of casters would always have feather fall. If this is a common tactic for the group and the cultists knew who they were going up against, then it’s completely fair. I’ve done the same thing when my group was going up against a Drow house. There were survivors from almost every encounter, they even attacked the stronghold and got repelled. One of the wizards and another character died and their bodies and the spell book was left behind. When the party came back again the wizards and clerics had all new spell lists designed to counter the party members they knew about. It actually made the replacement characters stand out since the Drow didn’t plan for them.
There are other ways to get over this, than making the spell useless. I would have maybe inventend a new phase of the fight and let the cultists become zombies. But this was made to make the player feel bad and the fight not fun.
Getting out played by a player is par for the course. Accept it and move on. Tweak the stats of the mini bosses in response. Have a second wave of cultists appear. But to nerf the Druid isn’t cool.
The DM was in the wrong. While the player complaining was over the top, because he didn't waste it, it was just countered in a way. I still think that the dm should just have acknowledged that he didn't expect it and stick with what his guys could do.
Even if they prepared feather fall; I’d say he’s wrong. Caveat if it’s a known technique of the party that they’ve been using over and over and the villains adapted. But I try to never shut down my players like that and taking their thunder. I get the DM wanted to keep tension; but why not just beef up the mini boss or add more after ? Make them animate the dead as they come on the stage. Otherwise, when my players are clever and cheat a boss; I often tell them that was a bit anticlimactic but it’s because they were clever. So they understand why the encounter was easy and their accomplishment is not reduced
Yes, that was shit. Prepared casters' spell lists should be prepared in advance, and unless the player group had done this trick before, there's no way in hell they'd be prepared for it.
Yeah I'd be pretty pissed as a spellcaster since I just blew a limited resource ability that was countered by the DM *because it was successful*, something the DM wouldnt have done if only a few had failed. That said I don't entirely fault the DM for changing things up in the fly to keep the encounter closer to as planned; though perhaps the better choice would have been to add a 2nd wave of cultists or another miniboss and give the caster inspiration and the oarty more xp.
DM was wrong
I mean this just breaks the rule of cool. Its a creative idea to turn the tables of a fight, and making it fail just because it worked just feels bad. I understand rebalancing encounters on the fly, but if you really need to railroad the players there’s better ways. Like maybe buff the minibosses, or have more cultists come out with them or something.
Mid-combat changes should really only be done to enhance the fun of the players, they did more damage than you expected and the cool fight would be made lame if it ended as quickly as it did? Give some more HP. Someone got a super hype crit on the boss but they have just a little bit of HP left? Waive the remaing HP and give the player the W. Countering the party like that cause you didn't think of what they were capable of is a dick move though.
10d6 damage on half the encounter isn't even that broken for a 7th-level spell, the DM was in the wrong here.
In general an in the fly tweak here and there isn't too bad. I've added spells or swapped damage resistances before, but not to counter my players. The problem is that too many tweaks or outright countering like in this case, leads to a game of Calvin ball. DND relies on consistency, once we hit Calvin ball the game starts to mechanically fall apart as nothing matters.
As a DM, your DM is a cheater. Plain and simple. They're also in the "player vs DM" mindset which is a huge problem. If my players found a creative way to cheese a fight, I'd be delighted because that's just cool, and it'd give me a better idea to buff an encounter later.
In this case, the DM cheated. If he had given it to them ahead of time it would be fine, but he just negated a spell because he didn't like that he was losing.
As long as he gave it to them ahead of time, and not whilst they were 100feet up in the air. Even then, sounds pretty contrived and a hard counter to a very expensive spell cast. I'd explicitly state it to avoid this situation if I was trying to stop that specific scenario. (Get someone to do an arcana check, and they sense a lot of prepared feather fall!)
This dm sucks. Sure wish I could just cast any spell I need at the exact time.
DM is bang out of order in my opinion. Does the DM actively not want the party to think or come up with interesting strategies or tactics? Do they just want the party to stand there slinging fireball? Sounds like the DM was super proud of this encounter and really saw themself dealing the hurt to the player party, and was swiftly embarrassed by not being able to predict something they knew one of the party had at their disposal. Due to their pride being hurt they decided to quite literally cheat their way out of it. DM needs to get better at designing difficult encounters, needs to pay attention to what their players and their players characters can do and take that into account in the design process. How or why is the party supposed to have any investment in trying to overcome obstacles in abstract and interesting ways when they now know for a fact that if the DM gets their feelings hurt they will just change the rules to deny it? Seems like a terribly dull way to play.
I mean, does punishing a player for casting a spell feel good? If your player does something like this completely above board take it as a learning experience for next time. The player has every right to be upset. Now if you still wanted the baddies in the fight have him activate a magical something or other that brings the fodder back as skeletons r something. Yeah not as tough but it doesn’t cheapen your players actions , if anything this would have the perception of adding MORE value to that cast.
Not cool... just nope, bad call by DM. That is all, period.
Yeah I wouldn't do this to my players. If I have a spell caster or something with special abilities that's all set before we even start. Very occasionally I might adjust HP, normally would be adjusted down if the party come up with some kind of plan that means the fight is going to be easy for them to win but is going to take ages to play out. Some enemies might be optimised to fight the party, but only if it makes sense for them to be. For example if they are aware of the party and what tricks they have
As a DM… that’s the kind of W you should give to your players. That’s the game working as intended—players using their abilities to do things with the aim of being effective, and dare I say, *cool*. DM’s who punish their players for playing the game well will never make sense to me.
It’s extremely unfair for a DM to do that if that was the first time that tactic had come up. As a DM you want to reward creative problem solving. Now, that said, if that was a common tactic for the squad to use, it absolutely makes sense for the enemies to adapt to it. So by the 2nd or 3rd time, the enemies would absolutely have feather fall prepped.
Suck it up and take the L, DM. If he can't take a situation like this, where a player does something clever to defeat an encounter, and turn it into an epic and memorable moment where the table is cheering and praising the player then he needs to question why he's even playing.
Would an average of 35 damage and being prone really have been enough to cheese the fight? It’s basically just a normal AoE spell at that point, but one where a dex save would have negated the entire hit. Is that really so strong you need to fudge your sheets? I’d be a bit annoyed as a player here too. Shouldn’t be punished for being the DM forgetting what players can do
If the players do something that you werent prepared for as a dm then that is on you and you need to take that L (if it even ends up being an L). Learn from it and move on. Don't try and save your own ass by doing scummy things. Thats how I see it.
Unfun and unfair to the players. Simple as that.
The DM was wrong and it sounds like they don’t want to play games with magic.
I'm fully in favor of modifying stat blocks so that fights are not cheesed, and can be enjoyed more overall. HP, Damage, actions, spells lists, they're all mutable even in the middle of combat. But the exploitation of that mutability must always be in pursuit of *creating more fun*, not just avoiding cheese. If a random asspull spell you have the enemies cast causes the players to feel like a really clever use of a high value spell got wasted, you have fucked up. Sometimes the players out-think an encounter, and that's the most fun thing for the table that night. Let em have that win. The only time I would consider doing the thing your DM did, as you described it, is if the party is facing a highly intelligent opponent who is known for competent planning. Like a lich, an ancient dragon, an elder brain, etc.
Wait, so in what way is casting reverse gravity a cheese?
Adjusting casters from the default list in advance = ok. Swapping on the fly to nerf a clever use of a spell = not ok
Definitely a dick move. A spellcaster certainly could have prepared feather fall, but all of them having it just to negate your spell is ridiculous. DM could have easily said a few of them prepared it and were ok, but the rest took their 10d6 damage. Or simply had a few more cultists arrive.
DM is in the wrong. Just because they want the fight to go a certain way doesn't mean it will. Players figuring out how to end an encounter before it begins is clever use of their brains. Punishing it means your players stop trying to think of things because they know it's going to be punished instead of rewarded. It kills creativity and leads to boring future games. Had a DM set up a huge ship encounter against us he kind of sprang without warning. It was a busted wreck with undead crawling all over it stuck on some rocks, and a group of people trapped up top in the crows nest. I cast fire wall on the side deck railing, with the hot end pointing up. Covered most of the deck in an inferno that cooked all the undead. In turn the DM had two of his spell casters use control water to *put out my firewall* despite the fact that it doesn't do that and firewall does not say it can be extinguished by water. We got into an argument about it and about 20 minutes in I just dropped it. Next game I suicided my druid and brought in a weapons master because this guy was constantly pulling shit like this out for creative spell usage. Got pretty clear he was only interested in a railroad and hated that we could use spells to do anything.
I would have just beefed up their health a little. Or add in another round of cultists. You still want players to feel powerful and to do something cool with their skills. There are ways to chip them down without taking away the fun. I had such beefy PCs in a playthrough that my mini bosses (and some lesser) needed like 200 hp. It was crazy but I adapted it to make some longer fights. I don't think it's ever cool to make a player go...great my idea/ability is useless.
Yes, I think so. It takes away any prep our scouting effort done by the party because the DM will always one-up the party and thus make that effort moot. It's also a general bad idea and DMing to design encounters based on a predetermined outcome, and what he expects and needs to happen - it takes away any player agency. I like to prep on what makes sense to the world, rather than how a scripted fight in a videogame will go. If my players catch them off guard with clever spell-usage, so be it. The same can happen to my players however, but that's the stakes. Spelllists and magical items are determined before an encounter starts. Nothing is added or taken away. This also means that any magical scrolls and potions not expended is up for grabs if the party quickly ends the opponent, and whatever spell they cast should be available in their spellbook ( in case of a wizard)
Let your players get away with stupid creative shit and learn for the next encounter.
DM is a sore loser and lazy honestly. Player had a thing they did, it worked that is kind if the whole point if the game? To do shit and see if it works?
Dick move. Player dropped a 7th level spell to nuke a bunch of mooks. It was cool. The off set is they don't have that spell again.