this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
170 points (96.2% liked)

RPGMemes

13849 readers
1214 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

And this is why my group is ok saying "that rule is profoundly dumb" and ignoring it while suspecting Crawford of being involved.

[–] jounniy@ttrpg.network 1 points 9 minutes ago

That one has nothing to do with Crawford far as I'm aware. It’s just plain stupid interaction of several rules. You are definetly intended to be able to just cast disintegrate on the wall.

Some rules are intended in a certain way and just handled poorly. The above case is (I personally think) one of them. Others are actually intended to work a certain way because of designing aspects (like verbal components having to be said at a normal volume) but simply people decide to ditch them anyway, because they like something else better. Both are valid, but they are different.

[–] Skua@kbin.earth 2 points 12 minutes ago

Ironically here, Crawford actually thinks that the text of disintegrate does in fact permit you to target a wall of force that you can't see. I don't quite understand how he thinks it says that, but it does at least confirm the intention

[–] Aielman15@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

Crawford also rules that See Invisibility doesn't remove the advantage/disadvantage on attack rolls because it doesn't say so in the spell's effect, so... Yeah, I always ignore what he says.