Community

Do note what it says. Read it as what it says. not what you want it to say or twist it. It says YOU can LET the Player describe spell effects. No where in there is The Player Can Reflavor an effect if they so choose. No where in this section does it say Permission is automatically granted to the player unless the dm says otherwise. No where in the section does it say permission is granted by anything other than the Dm.

Dec 29, 2009 -- 5:59AM, Cpt_Micha wrote:

Source DMG 3.5 Page 34.
Spoiler: Show

Describing Spell Effects
Magic is flashy. When characters cast spells or use magic items you should describe what the spell looks, sounds smells or feels like as well as it's game effects.

Posters note: Now, what does that say to you? The very first line in the DMG tells YOU (as in the DM) that YOU should describe spell looks, smells, and feels like as well as it's game effects. NOT the player. NOT the Caster. YOU. The DM. resuming section.

A Magic Missile could be a dagger shaped burst of energy that flies through the air. It could also be a fistlike creation of force that bashes into it's target or the sudden appearence of a demonic head that spits out a blast of energy. When someone becomes invisible he or she fades away. A summoned fiend appears with a flash of blood red energy and a smell of brimestone. Other spells have more obvious visual effects. A fireball and lightning bolt, for example appear pretty much like they are described in the Player's Handbook. For dramatic flair however, you could describe the lightning bolt as being a thin line of blue lightning and the fireball as a blast of green fire with red twinkling bursts within it.

Posters note: this next part, contradicts what is above by quite abit. Summoning a demonic head to spit out a blast of energy for Magic missile is just fine. But the coming reflavoring of fireball is apparently too far when it's done by a player.

You can let players, describe the spells that their characters cast. Don't however, allow a player to use an original description that makes a spell seem more powerful than it is. A fireball spell that creates an illusion of a dragon breathing flame goes too far.

Poster's note: this little three sentences is what You as in Sam. Have taken out of context. You can let is an option in context with the above paragraphs. It is not something Players have a right to do as part of the rules, it is quite explicitly spelled out that if you as a player are describing the spell it is because the DM is letting you do so. Because the Dm LET you. Infact, it goes so far as to limit the Player in the extent that he or she is allowed to describe spells or effects. For the DM it's okay to reflavor however they want, however a Player's not allowed nearly the same freedom as the Dm.

Spells without obvious visual effects can be described as well. Since a target who makes his saving throw against a spell knows that something has happened to him, you could describe a charm spell or compulsion spell as a cold claw threatening to enclose his mind that he manages to shake off. (if the spell worked, the target would not be aware of such an effect, for his mind would not entirely be his own)

Sound can be a powerful descriptive force. You could say that a lightning bolt is accompanied by a clap of thunder. A cone of cold sounds like a rush of wind followed by a tinkling of crystalline ice.

Well my PHB happily says:

"You can alter this description as you like, to fit your own idea of what your power looks like."

Right there in the first paragraph on page 55.

Anyone can homebrew rules, the DM gets to decide if those rules are ok for the campaign just like everything else.

You might try DMG2 where it tells the DM to let players describe stuff as well....

Dec 29, 2009 -- 7:57AM, Herrozerro wrote:

Reread the section.

Which I have for everyone's literary convenience not only posted once but twice now.

It is even on this very page in the thread.

Dec 29, 2009 -- 7:59AM, Samyueru wrote:

Note that I'm not claiming that the DMG is the perfect book for the reflavor rule; it isn't. What I am claiming is that it's a rule, and as such, is used in games. If a DM does not want his players to reflavor his spells, then he should tell them that the reflavor rule is not allowed, but that's a house rule.

Try page 55 PHB first paragraph.

It says right there to reflavour your powers.

Can we stop this silliness now?