Quote from Greenstone_Walker >>

I think of it like this.

Players: Oh, hi game designer. Hey, our characters are 5th level now. We don't want to deal with mundane stuff like bad sleep and poor trail food and cold campsites.
Game designer: I hear you. Here is tiny hut and create food and water. 

2nd tier characters shouldn't be worrying about setting up tents and campfires and so on. They should be worrying about regional threats and cities and the like.

 
It's 210 or so miles from the Town of Cikago to the City of Durango, with half coastal and half inland, if you take the Imperial Road and it ain't full of Merchants on the Western Route (which it will be unless it's winter or there's a bad storm off the sea).

While one might be able to get there with assorted spells at higher levels, for the most part getting there is still going to take a couple days at the very quickest, and while higher level character might be able to conjure some big ass building on some lord's land and hope to get away without consequences, those 5th to 9th level folks are still going to need to camp.

And if they aren't taking the crowded, slow moving Imperial Road, with its caravans and patrols and watch towers, then they are moving across country and so subject to attacks by bandits who often have a Corsair leading them (higher level Rogue), or of course the likely lair of a group of raiding Lemurians come up through the darn Agarthan Underdark. Then, not only are they dealing with difficult terrain, they have to deal with weather (coming of the Sea of Storms or up through the Crusade's Gap), but they are dealing with people who know the territory well enough to avoid the occasional patrols that are mostly confined to a 15 mile radius of a settlement that actually has a patrol.

Even if they are dealing with Regional problems.

A safe space while resting is kinda important even to them -- perhaps more so, because wen you start to deal with more regional threats, you have to travel more often.

But, as ever, it depends on the campaign and the setting. 

By the same measure above, a wizard with tiny hut in a city campaign is basically asking for an excuse to never cast a spell, lol.

Quote from Greenstone_Walker >>

I think of it like this.

Players: Oh, hi game designer. Hey, our characters are 5th level now. We don't want to deal with mundane stuff like bad sleep and poor trail food and cold campsites.
Game designer: I hear you. Here is tiny hut and create food and water. Also, nothing at all can harm you inside the hut. Like, nothing at all, except maybe dragon breath. And you fire ranged weapons out of it. And since it's a ritual spell, you can recast all day, every day.

2nd tier characters shouldn't be worrying about setting up tents and campfires and so on. They should be worrying about regional threats and cities and the like.

 
FIFY. And that's the problem: not that they have magic to help with basic shelter and rest. That's fine. But giving a 5th level character access to an invulnerable space that's infinitely renewable at no cost to them is overpowered.

And yeah, I know: enemies can have dispel magic. Enemies can wait them out. Enemies can bury the hut in rocks or tree limbs. But read above: any druid capable of assuming the form of a giant badger can safely tunnel the party out.

It's overpowered.

Quote from Greenstone_Walker >>

I think of it like this.

Players: Oh, hi game designer. Hey, our characters are 5th level now. We don't want to deal with mundane stuff like bad sleep and poor trail food and cold campsites.
Game designer: I hear you. Here is tiny hut and create food and water. 

2nd tier characters shouldn't be worrying about setting up tents and campfires and so on. They should be worrying about regional threats and cities and the like.

That's what the pre-5e tiny hut was: it stopped weather. Period, end of story. The 5e tiny hut is an inexplicable invulnerable fortress.

Quote from Xukuri >>

Quote from Greenstone_Walker >>

I think of it like this.

Players: Oh, hi game designer. Hey, our characters are 5th level now. We don't want to deal with mundane stuff like bad sleep and poor trail food and cold campsites.
Game designer: I hear you. Here is tiny hut and create food and water. Also, nothing at all can harm you inside the hut. Like, nothing at all, except maybe dragon breath. And you fire ranged weapons out of it. And since it's a ritual spell, you can recast all day, every day.

2nd tier characters shouldn't be worrying about setting up tents and campfires and so on. They should be worrying about regional threats and cities and the like.

 
FIFY. And that's the problem: not that they have magic to help with basic shelter and rest. That's fine. But giving a 5th level character access to an invulnerable space that's infinitely renewable at no cost to them is overpowered.

And yeah, I know: enemies can have dispel magic. Enemies can wait them out. Enemies can bury the hut in rocks or tree limbs. But read above: any druid capable of assuming the form of a giant badger can safely tunnel the party out.

It's overpowered.

I suppose Magic Circle and Summon lesser demon are also overpowered (one of which yanks a creature against its will with no save from an entirely different plane).

As is lightning bolt and fireball, of course. 

and pretty sure that a spell slot is a cost.

Except lightning bolt and fireball aren't ritual spells.

Tiny hut is. As long as the caster has ten minutes, they can cast it all day, every day. Once the hut is up, they're practically guaranteed safety unless a caster with dispel magic or much higher level magic comes along. Just about any other threat is wholly nullified by the hut. At 5th level.

And yeah, I'm not a fan of many of the lower level summoning spells.

Quote from AEDorsay >>

and pretty sure that a spell slot is a cost.

 Tiny Hut is a ritual. A wizard doesn't even need to prepare it -- other than the (modest) cost of copying it into a spellbook, it's free.

Quote from Xukuri >> 

And yeah, I know: enemies can have dispel magic. Enemies can wait them out. Enemies can bury the hut in rocks or tree limbs. But read above: any druid capable of assuming the form of a giant badger can safely tunnel the party out.

It's overpowered.

 Realistically as a GM, how many times do you attack your party when they are camping?

It is difficult to completely impractical to cast in combat. Doesn't seem so bad to me.

Quote from Wysperra >>

Realistically as a GM, how many times do you attack your party when they are camping?

If the PCs go and find a safe spot, very unlikely. If they camp in a stupid location, very likely. However, this point goes both ways: why does the spell need to provide defense if attacking while camping doesn't happen in the first place?

Quote from Wysperra >>

It is difficult to completely impractical to cast in combat. Doesn't seem so bad to me.

It's impractical for attacking immobile monsters, but if there are monsters that are mobile and you have information about where they'll be, it's completely viable.

Quote from Kotath >>

If the party has a wizard, which is also not a given. 

The spell is less free for a bard or twilight cleric, because it counts against spells known, but still doesn't require a spell slot. Obviously, if no-one has the spell it doesn't cause any issues.

Quote from Wysperra >>.

 Realistically as a GM, how many times do you attack your party when they are camping?

 How many times do you have a Tarrasque attack your party? Would you be happy if they released a spell that, without a save or attack roll, would insta-kill any Tarrasque?

It's not about the number of times that an event comes up, that just makes the point bigger. It's the fact that it's taking away an entire class of scenarios the DM could use to make the game more interesting. And it's not just the midnight raid by wolves - Tiny Hut also, by virtue of the effects but also by the lack of need to set watch, also generally precludes events like random visits by creatures (including friendly ones) in the middle of the night, witnessing strange goings ons in the woods, giving clues from the watch-out's observations and more.

It's one of those spells that sound innocuous, but have significant ramifications. That's why I'd initially rule that.it has a floor, but hold the door open for changing that if I feel that it starts getting in the way of fun. 

I've said this in other threads, but two very simple ways of curbing tiny hut abuse is strip out the ritual tag and give it a required material component cost (a token resembling a house that costs 50 gp or something).

Actually, my preferred solution to abuse was inspired by this video. Changes to tiny hut:

• Ritual tag removed
• Hut has a floor
• Objects cannot pass into or out of hut
• Hut has AC = caster’s save DC; if hut takes 20 or more hit points of damage from single attack, caster must make concentration check; failure means the hut vanishes

tiny hut was never a problem for me, not the same way goodberry and and all the survival problems were...

i think your problem is the item system which most people do not use anymore,.contrary to what we did back in 1e and 2e where items were of utmost importance.
if i told you, in real life you can only bring 3 items out of your entire house with you on a trip that will last 10 days... what would you bring with you ?
the thing is, based on your competence that question can be literally answered differently each times.

the same is true for tiny hut... it takes 1 minutes to setup, even as a ritual it takes 11 minutes to setup.
there is no way you can do this in combat and even before combat that would mean you have plenty of time to setup. thats the DM choice at this point, not the players choice. the players only do with what they have. most often then not, it is the DM not calculating time passing by, players get into a fortress and comes out the other side as if only 2 minutes have passed. every checks, ever cast time, adds more timeto the equation. time that players may have or not, if they have time, then why would you strip them away from a perfectly good timed spell ?

the other thing you guys don't calculate is the fact that the caster has to stay within the thing, if he leaves, the thing is gone before its time.

A 10-foot-radius immobile dome of force springs into existence around and above you and remains stationary for the duration. The spell ends if you leave its area.

Nine creatures of Medium size or smaller can fit inside the dome with you. The spell fails if its area includes a larger creature or more than nine creatures. Creatures and objects within the dome when you cast this spell can move through it freely. All other creatures and objects are barred from passing through it. Spells and other magical effects can't extend through the dome or be cast through it. The atmosphere inside the space is comfortable and dry, regardless of the weather outside.

Until the spell ends, you can command the interior to become dimly lit or dark. The dome is opaque from the outside, of any color you choose, but it is transparent from the inside.

* - (a small crystal bead)

so this is what is important...the one who casted the dome is rendred completely useless. he cannot cast from the dome, he cannot leave it. so setting this up for an encounter might save your party, but in the end clever way of playing will not stop the monsters from killing the players. a good exemple of that is in critical role campaign 2. they used tiny hut against the white dragon... the players were fine inside the dome, but they couldn'T do a thing from inside it. and if they left the players would of died, leaving them with only one option, teleporting the **** out of their.

if you can't play around the weaknesses of the spells, then as a DM you are needing a few more arrows in your quivers.
honestly i never had a problem with tiny hut.
even the exempoles you guys gave hapenned to me a few times, i clapped my hands at the players for being clever and using their time right.
if anythig it was my mistake to give them them to prepare. so it wasn'T their fault or the spells fault.

Really, if you think about it right, Leomund's Tiny Hut is a clever trap you set for yourself. 

If the GM really wants to punish use of it, forget about sandstorms. Just build a giant bonfire on top of it. Or set up a circle of ballistae. And/or cast Darkness on top of it, so the players have no idea what awaits them when it ends. 

When Hut ends, and the darkness spell is dropped, the area around is now silly with traps, and a bajillion hobgoblins have readied actions - first a line of pikemen, then a line of ballistae, then a line of archers. Good luch with that.

How many tables run games where that kind of resource management (water, toilet space) is a constant factor?

Ideally, any time the party leaves a city or town, you'd make them forage for food or water. But that takes up precious game time, and when you're lucky to game twice a month, spending time rolling for discovery of potable water feels like a waste.

Also, clerics get spells that purify or create food and water at lower levels (in fact, create food and water is gained at the same time arcane casters get access to tiny hut) so this really shouldn't be a factor for most parties.

The main problem with tiny hut isn't that it protects from weather. It's not even that it prevents attacking the PCs in the middle of the night -- that's not something that happens in most games anyway. The problem is that it means you can stop thinking about whether this camping/resting spot is safe.

Without tiny hut, if you're trekking through the Forest of Dread and want to spend some time resting, you go and search around to find a safe resting spot, and that poking around gives the DM all sorts of opportunities to have the PCs stumble over interesting stuff (or just deny the ability to take a rest). With tiny hut, you just plop down and cast your spell.

Tiny Hut is an open world campaign spell.

Because there are games out there with that kind of resource management, even at tier 4. THere are games out there that have limits (like if you want to learn a spell, you have to go and find it) and games out there where you have to choose between a spell to survive a blizzard and a fireball to survive a band of yeti. One chance, both can kill you, pick your poison -- a long rest after 12 encounters so far that day and an environment that is sucign the life out of you or fight the Yeti.

The ice mites were the worst of it.  And that game has frostbite and heat exhaustion, diseases and shadow moving critters.

I am fairly sure that Eberron and FR have little need for such a spell. After all, they are safe worlds. You don't starve or go thirsty there, you don't run out of arrows or have to buy a new sword after that critical fumble.

Just because your Dms don't bother with such things, don't put in the effort to make the game a challenge or have reason for it doesn't mean that such is true of all of them.

It doesn't even make it hard to do or "require too much tracking" -- I'm sorry, if you are whining about tracking food for a week or making a hunting roll, you haven't truly played D&D. And if the DM is too uninterested in such things, that's fine -- but it doesn't make it the norm, nor does it make it the only possible outcome.

Nor, for a party of 9 medium or smaller creature is a 20' wide, 10' high space all that cramped. And you can cook in it -- the air stays comfortable, so smoke isn't an issue, nor is heat from a fire.

Just because your games don't have a good reason for a place that is safe for the period of one long rest (which, I seem to recall, is a big deal) doesn't mean that other games don't.

Y'all need a good wilderness campaign, lol. Everyone seems to think they are "boring slogs" full of "ticking off resources" -- and if you think that's a wilderness campaign, then you haven't actually been in one. You'd think that Neverwinter is a half day from Waterdeep, not nearly 700 miles with only Thornhold to rest in.

And have you ever camped at Thornhold? The place is full of thorns! And Baldur's Gate is even further south -- nearly 1500 miles of rugged travel by river and road, full of horror. You think they name that stuff "troll" whatever for no good reason? Cross country, over difficult terrain? With weather?

24 miles a day. make it a 12 hour day, give it 30 miles a day, at a normal pace. oh, wait, difficult terrain, that's only 15 miles a day. Horses dying on ya after a few days, but eh. Cold rain, maybe even snow. Got lucky yesterday, only three random encounters, and they were all doable -- but this morning it was more about running because that Absalom was way over your level.

And just what the hell is an Absalom, anyway! That's not in any guidebook to monsters! 

Tiny Hut is a spell that not only makes great sense, it comes at a time when the adventures that folks start to take on are harder, require more careful thought, and move beyond chopping a few monsters up and foiling some minor villain's henchman plot.

D&D worlds are not supposed to be Tame.

Always enjoy being told I'm not "really" playing D&D. A helpful, constructive stance.

Beyond responding to that bit of crap:

See Pantagruel's response. No one - no one - is saying tiny hut's ability to protect from the elements is bad or overpowered. No one is saying their campaign worlds, whether homebrewed or official content, are so safe as to negate the need for the tiny hut spell. You are responding, for the most part, to straw men.

Quote from Acromos >>

Really, if you think about it right, Leomund's Tiny Hut is a clever trap you set for yourself. 

If the GM really wants to punish use of it, forget about sandstorms. Just build a giant bonfire on top of it. Or set up a circle of ballistae. And/or cast Darkness on top of it, so the players have no idea what awaits them when it ends. 

When Hut ends, and the darkness spell is dropped, the area around is now silly with traps, and a bajillion hobgoblins have readied actions - first a line of pikemen, then a line of ballistae, then a line of archers. Good luch with that.

Oh I can't believe I haven't heard the darkness angle before - that is diabolical.  Even of there isn't anything waiting the terrorizing value is high.

Quote from TraxTheTricky >>

 

 

Oh I can't believe I haven't heard the darkness angle before - that is diabolical.  Even of there isn't anything waiting the terrorizing value is high.

 Isn't it though? It propably wouldn't take very long before one of the PC's felt the need to sneak out, try to discern what was going on. You'd have great value - as the villains - of some sort of creature with blindsight, tremorsense or any other ability to make sure you could handily detect and capture such a sally. As a GM, you could have so much fun with this. And all while providing valuable education to your players. 

Really, what's not to like? =D

Quote from Acromos >>

Quote from TraxTheTricky >>

 

 

Oh I can't believe I haven't heard the darkness angle before - that is diabolical.  Even of there isn't anything waiting the terrorizing value is high.

 Isn't it though? It propably wouldn't take very long before one of the PC's felt the need to sneak out, try to discern what was going on. You'd have great value - as the villains - of some sort of creature with blindsight, tremorsense or any other ability to make sure you could handily detect and capture such a sally. As a GM, you could have so much fun with this. And all while providing valuable education to your players. 

Really, what's not to like? =D

 I was a player in a game once where we had been facing off with a vampire and had to hole up in our Tiny Hut.  It was terrifying enough the noises and bats and shit that the vampire did around us, but if my DM had this darkness trick in mind, oh boy!