Can a tenth level or higher cleric use Divine Intervention if the cleric is under the effects of the feeblemind spell? I notice that Divine Intervention requires you to "call on your deity", "Imploring your deity's aid", and "Describe the assistance you seek". All of those descriptions sound like a creature communicating in an intelligible way which makes me think that Divine Intervention cannot be used while the cleric is under the effects of the feeblemind spell.
Newborn babies can cry for their mothers' attention, so I see no reason why the Feebleminded cleric couldn't do the same to their deity. The unintelligible cry, being significantly different than the Cleric's normal petitions, would be enough for any deity who actually cares about the follower to see the need, and intervene.
Keep in mind, playing a spellcaster who's been Feebleminded is a severely unpleasant experience for a player, made exponentially worse by each encounter or session the character remains under the effect of Feeblemind. If the player comes up with an idea that could work, especially if it expends a resource or has only a slim chance of mechanically succeeding (both of which Divine Intervention checks the boxes for), then why not let the player use it?
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention break the game/encounter? No, it doesn't. It merely lets the player continue to play the game with the character the player has.
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention give the player a powerful roleplay moment that will likely be remembered longer than most other facets of the campaign? Yes, if your character is reduced to the intelligence of a house-fly by a curse, and spends an action screaming to the heavens, wordlessly for help, only having a 10ish % chance of it working, and the character's god answers by restoring the character's mind... The players will remember that moment long after the majority of the campaign has been forgotten.
TLDR:
Rules as Fun: Absolutely let the player do it.
RAW: There's an argument to be made either way... refer to RAF as the tie-breaker.
If it came up in a game I was running, I would tend towards allowing the cleric to use Divine Intervention because it would make sense in the context of the class, the game world, and the interaction of clerics with their diety (assuming the cleric was in good standing).
Here is the text:
Divine Intervention
"Imploring your deity’s aid requires you to use your action. Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice. If you roll a number equal to or lower than your cleric level, your deity intervenes. The DM chooses the nature of the intervention; the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate."
Feeblemind:
"On a failed save, the creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores become 1. The creature can't cast spells, activate magic items, understand language, or communicate in any intelligible way. The creature can, however, identify its friends, follow them, and even protect them."
Feeblemind DOES allow the cleric to identify their friends, follow them and protect them. The cleric also retains all of their wisdom, they only lose their intelligence. If the cleric can swing their mace, wear armor effectively, dodge, move, climb etc then I'd be inclined to allow a non-verbal appeal/prayer to their diety for help. The cleric might well do that instinctively because it is a fundamental part of their life. What else is a diety for?
This is perhaps an especially likely interaction since any cleric spell is an appropriate intervention and greater restoration is only a 5th level spell (which a 10th level cleric could cast themselves). It would seem to be a very reasonable request. Even if the cleric player did not request to use the ability explicitly, depending on the diety, the diety would likely care about a high level cleric (10th level cleric's can't be that common), and might proactively offer this divine intervention.
P.S. Just as an additional note on divine intervention, a bit off topic. Appropriate interventions consist of "the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate". This includes cleric domain spells. The Arcana Cleric can choose one wizard spell from level 6,7,8 and 9 as cleric domain spells. So, RAW, all the wizard spells from levels 6 to 9 would also be appropriate for divine intervention. Most DMs I know would not feel constrained by the limits placed on "divine intervention" and would just put in whatever made the most sense to the story. However, for those who do care, opening up the high level wizard spells including Wish as possible results for Divine Intervention gives the DM a lot of flexibility.
Newborn babies can cry for their mothers' attention, so I see no reason why the Feebleminded cleric couldn't do the same to their deity. The unintelligible cry, being significantly different than the Cleric's normal petitions, would be enough for any deity who actually cares about the follower to see the need, and intervene.
Keep in mind, playing a spellcaster who's been Feebleminded is a severely unpleasant experience for a player, made exponentially worse by each encounter or session the character remains under the effect of Feeblemind. If the player comes up with an idea that could work, especially if it expends a resource or has only a slim chance of mechanically succeeding (both of which Divine Intervention checks the boxes for), then why not let the player use it?
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention break the game/encounter? No, it doesn't. It merely lets the player continue to play the game with the character the player has.
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention give the player a powerful roleplay moment that will likely be remembered longer than most other facets of the campaign? Yes, if your character is reduced to the intelligence of a house-fly by a curse, and spends an action screaming to the heavens, wordlessly for help, only having a 10ish % chance of it working, and the character's god answers by restoring the character's mind... The players will remember that moment long after the majority of the campaign has been forgotten.
TLDR:
Rules as Fun: Absolutely let the player do it.
RAW: There's an argument to be made either way... refer to RAF as the tie-breaker.
So you have no problem then when a char casts the spell, and the DM then says "The NPC shakes it off, as it still contacted its god who took the effect away."
That's not remotely what I said, but I think you already know that.
One of the key cornerstones of D&D is player agency. Allowing a character who's reached the upper levels as a Cleric, embodying a lifetime of devout servitude to a deity, to let out a cry of desperation for a slim chance to have an affliction removed is simply allowing the player to have agency in a narratively potent way.
Your hypothetical toxic DM taking away player agency by arbitrarily deciding that an NPC shook off an affect that the character would have no mechanical way of doing is exactly the opposite of what I said.
Your hypothetical toxic DM taking away player agency by arbitrarily deciding that an NPC shook off an affect that the character would have no mechanical way of doing is exactly the opposite of what I said.
Short Term User was assuming that NPCs work to the same rules as PCs, if a PC can use divine intervention to remove feeblemind then so can an NPC cleric that has just had feeblemind cast on in by a PC. It doesn't always apply (for example NPCs rarely make death saves) but many tables apply that rule at least in general.
I think the key part are "Imploring you diety's aid" and whether it requires the ability to communicate in an intelligable way. "Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice" Is clearly describing the action of the player not the PC. RAW I think imploring your dietys aid is a form of comminication and for the diety to understand it it must be intelligable though I see nothing wrong with alowing it as a "rule of cool"
There are MANY spells that remove player agency right from level 1; sleep does not even give you a saving throw and you can not act for one minute or until someone else chooses to wake you. The fact that feeblemind removes player agency is not a problem (and a cleric is probably in a better situation that a wizard to at least do something my hitting the enemy with a mace). The problem is feeblemind is if it results in player agency being removed for 30 days. The hypothetical DM is on "toxic" if they cast feeblemind on the only party member with access to greater restoration, heal or wish.
In my campaign, no deity would perform a Divine Intervention following a cleric cry or whining, it just wound,'t be perceived as seeking assistance. It must be more described than snifff sniff HUUUUOOOUUUUAAANNNNNNNNNN sniff sniff ☺.
Is it possible? Yes. Whether it's likely to work would be up to the DM. The DM is the actual deity in this situation. I think it's appropriate that the DM would use multiple forms of context cues to determine A) If the Deity was paying attention to the Cleric at the time the Divine Intervention was requested, and B) if the Deity feels inclined to provide the assistance.
What do I mean by context? Some examples include whether the Cleric PC has been appropriately tithing at temples to the god in question, whether the Cleric has been spreading the core messages of the deity to NPCs that they meet, whether the Cleric has a track record of attempting to communicate with the deity by other means prior to this special request, and, of course, whether this current quest the cleric is on is one that is supported already by the deity.
What do I mean by context? Some examples include whether the Cleric PC has been appropriately tithing at temples to the god in question, whether the Cleric has been spreading the core messages of the deity to NPCs that they meet, whether the Cleric has a track record of attempting to communicate with the deity by other means prior to this special request, and, of course, whether this current quest the cleric is on is one that is supported already by the deity.
A god has countless followers. It may have hundreds of high level PC's and NPC's, maybe even thousands, in any world created by the DM. To suggest that a god has an open channel to any particular PC or NPC, listening for grunts and howls, that breaks all verisimilitude. And out of game, if a DM manages to successfully cast Feeblemind on a char, which is no mean feat, the last thing that DM is going to do is handwave away the effects, given how many resources go into an 8th level spell.
You can rule however you want at your table. I'm just stating what i would do if I were the DM. I included a paragraph of context for why a particular deity would give a rat's **** about the cleric in question. Whether that context applies would have some influence over how the deity (AKA myself as the DM) might respond.
Your hypothetical toxic DM taking away player agency by arbitrarily deciding that an NPC shook off an affect that the character would have no mechanical way of doing is exactly the opposite of what I said.
Short Term User was assuming that NPCs work to the same rules as PCs, if a PC can use divine intervention to remove feeblemind then so can an NPC cleric that has just had feeblemind cast on in by a PC. It doesn't always apply (for example NPCs rarely make death saves) but many tables apply that rule at least in general.
I think the key part are "Imploring you diety's aid" and whether it requires the ability to communicate in an intelligable way. "Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice" Is clearly describing the action of the player not the PC. RAW I think imploring your dietys aid is a form of comminication and for the diety to understand it it must be intelligable though I see nothing wrong with alowing it as a "rule of cool"
There are MANY spells that remove player agency right from level 1; sleep does not even give you a saving throw and you can not act for one minute or until someone else chooses to wake you. The fact that feeblemind removes player agency is not a problem (and a cleric is probably in a better situation that a wizard to at least do something my hitting the enemy with a mace). The problem is feeblemind is if it results in player agency being removed for 30 days. The hypothetical DM is on "toxic" if they cast feeblemind on the only party member with access to greater restoration, heal or wish.
That's an erroneous assumption. NPCs do not by design have the same abilities as player characters. Please show me any NPC statblock from any WotC book where the NPC can call upon Divine Intervention. Just because a DM can do something, doesn't mean the DM should do that thing, one example being putting character levels on NPCs. If it's done, there needs to be sufficient build-up so the party knows what they're up against (the comment I replied to implied no such build-up, as the description is just a hand-wave negation of the effect).
and the DM then says "The NPC shakes it off, as it still contacted its god who took the effect away."
To have an NPC hard-counter a player's ability without appropriate build-up to the expectation that the character had that level of power comes across as cheap and unfair. The game is the story of the heroes, played by the players. The DM's "character" is the setting in which the players' character become heroes (or antiheroes depending on the campaign). Thus it's appropriate to err on the side of letting the party being epic, rather than undercutting them, just because you can.
A normally articulate champion of a deity making a wordless, baleful cry to the heavens is demonstrating the assistance needed, which I believe is sufficient and equivalent to describing it for the sake of requesting Divine Intervention. As I said, A mother knows what a baby is crying for, without the baby needing to put the need into words, and a champion-of-the-realm, high-level Cleric who's been feebleminded should be able to communicate with a deity to the same extent that a baby can communicate with its mother.
Sleep is not even in the same ballpark as Feeblemind. Sleep is easily avoided and easily remedied. Feeblemind is neither, and as I said, the level to which its use is toxic is determined by how long the player isn't able to play the character they built due to having an Intelligence and Charisma of one.
And honestly, allowing a player character to have a 10% chance of getting back into the fight... one chance that can't be attempted again for 24 hours, is not a big ask. It's comparable in game effect to a character rolling a natural 20 on a death-save and hopping back into the fight.
This isn't "Rule of Cool", it's "rules as fun". It's a scenario the game's creators didn't think of, and the DM has the authority to say that it makes sense and will be allowed. No DM is required to do so, you're perfectly free to stick with a draconian interpretation of the rules, but I won't play at such a table.
Newborn babies can cry for their mothers' attention, so I see no reason why the Feebleminded cleric couldn't do the same to their deity. The unintelligible cry, being significantly different than the Cleric's normal petitions, would be enough for any deity who actually cares about the follower to see the need, and intervene.
Keep in mind, playing a spellcaster who's been Feebleminded is a severely unpleasant experience for a player, made exponentially worse by each encounter or session the character remains under the effect of Feeblemind. If the player comes up with an idea that could work, especially if it expends a resource or has only a slim chance of mechanically succeeding (both of which Divine Intervention checks the boxes for), then why not let the player use it?
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention break the game/encounter? No, it doesn't. It merely lets the player continue to play the game with the character the player has.
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention give the player a powerful roleplay moment that will likely be remembered longer than most other facets of the campaign? Yes, if your character is reduced to the intelligence of a house-fly by a curse, and spends an action screaming to the heavens, wordlessly for help, only having a 10ish % chance of it working, and the character's god answers by restoring the character's mind... The players will remember that moment long after the majority of the campaign has been forgotten.
TLDR:
Rules as Fun: Absolutely let the player do it.
RAW: There's an argument to be made either way... refer to RAF as the tie-breaker.
So you have no problem then when a char casts the spell, and the DM then says "The NPC shakes it off, as it still contacted its god who took the effect away."
That's not remotely what I said, but I think you already know that.
One of the key cornerstones of D&D is player agency. Allowing a character who's reached the upper levels as a Cleric, embodying a lifetime of devout servitude to a deity, to let out a cry of desperation for a slim chance to have an affliction removed is simply allowing the player to have agency in a narratively potent way.
Your hypothetical toxic DM taking away player agency by arbitrarily deciding that an NPC shook off an affect that the character would have no mechanical way of doing is exactly the opposite of what I said.
See my post above. You are entirely mis-stating what I said.
So you won't play at a table where the NPC's have the same options of success or failure as a PC. BTW, I always start building my NPC's from the same stat mechanics and features as the PC's have access to. And as for your "10% chance to get back into the fight", you ignore the fact that the chances of Feeblemind actually being successful on a PC are slim, in any party of high level chars (and yes, if the party is encountering an NPC that can cast an 8th level spell WILL be a high level party).
Chars WILL face challenges. Some are brutal challenges. Sometimes, chars die. That is D&D.
You keep saying the chances of feeblemind being successful in a high level party are slim my experiance is the opposite. I don't have all the books but in Volo's there are 3 monsters with feeblemind one CR7 (DC15) one CR9 (DC17) and one CR13 (DC16), so in theory a party could face feeblemind at or before level 7 but I will assume the party is at least level so so it can have access to greater restoration.
A cleric prioritises wisdom followed by con and either dex or str. Int is usually a dump stat (it is for most non wizards and artificers) having an intelligence modifier of -1 or 0 is most common, it will rarelty exceed +1.
A cleric is proficient in Wisdom and Charisma saving throws so no help there.
So without anything else to achieve a fairly moderate DC of 16 a cleric with intelligence of 10 has a 75% chance of failing the save. At truely high levels save DCs are often over 20 and it would be impossible for the cleric to save
Everything else is circumstantial, there may or may not be a paladin in the party, if there is there is a chance that the cleric wis within their aura to get a +3 to +5 on the save. The cleric might be under bless, though concentration is often used for higher levels spells at this point (say spirit guardians), there may be a bard in the party who has chosen to inspire the cleric, the cleric might be under so they have advantage on the roll. they might have a luckstone granting them a +1 to saves. Combining all these with the chances of them happening might mean that on average the cleric might have a 35% chance of succeeding the and for tier 4 play the cleric might have a chance of success if they roll something like a 19.
There may occasionally be a PC who can do something reactively for example an artificer with flash of genius or a divination wizard with portent but again even if there is such a PC they might not be able to help if the cleric fails by more than 5 flash of genius doesn't work if the cleric needs a 15 to succeed it is very likely the divination wizard diesn't have a 15 or higher they have not used that day.
Is it possible? Yes. Whether it's likely to work would be up to the DM. The DM is the actual deity in this situation. I think it's appropriate that the DM would use multiple forms of context cues to determine A) If the Deity was paying attention to the Cleric at the time the Divine Intervention was requested, and B) if the Deity feels inclined to provide the assistance.
What do I mean by context? Some examples include whether the Cleric PC has been appropriately tithing at temples to the god in question, whether the Cleric has been spreading the core messages of the deity to NPCs that they meet, whether the Cleric has a track record of attempting to communicate with the deity by other means prior to this special request, and, of course, whether this current quest the cleric is on is one that is supported already by the deity.
A god has countless followers. It may have hundreds of high level PC's and NPC's, maybe even thousands, in any world created by the DM. To suggest that a god has an open channel to any particular PC or NPC, listening for grunts and howls, that breaks all verisimilitude. And out of game, if a DM manages to successfully cast Feeblemind on a char, which is no mean feat, the last thing that DM is going to do is handwave away the effects, given how many resources go into an 8th level spell.
What are you talking about with respect to Feeblemind being hard to cast successfully on a PC? If a combat involves an enemy with sufficient character levels to have access to Feeblemind, the DC is likely 18+ on that INT save and most PCs have an INT save modifier of 0 or less (including Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Clerics). The enemies also almost certainly have Counterspell to win any Counterspell duels that result over the casting - and to counter any attempts to Dispel or Greater Restore the affected PC.
What are you talking about with respect to Feeblemind being hard to cast successfully on a PC? If a combat involves an enemy with sufficient character levels to have access to Feeblemind, the DC is likely 18+ on that INT save and most PCs have an INT save modifier of 0 or less (including Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Clerics). The enemies also almost certainly have Counterspell to win any Counterspell duels that result over the casting - and to counter any attempts to Dispel or Greater Restore the affected PC.
It is easy to avoid counterspell entirely when casting feeblemind. Feeblemind has a range of 150ft and counterspell has a range of 60ft . I would also point out that the duration of feeblemind is instantanious, so dispel magic (which ends a spell) has no effect as the spell has already ended.
Thank you for the input. For reference, my campaign also uses NPC villains with character sheets; however, sometimes that takes too long and I'd start using stat blocks from source books. There does happen to be one enemy in my campaign that has access to Divine Intervention. I have one villain in my campaign which is a bodak that has features from The Undead Warlock. This warlock has access to feeblemind and would want the Cleric (who can produce sunlight) to be out of commission for the fight. That is my only reasoning for wanting to do this. The Cleric is Level 11 though; so, Divine Intervention is something I need to be aware of.
Newborn babies can cry for their mothers' attention, so I see no reason why the Feebleminded cleric couldn't do the same to their deity. The unintelligible cry, being significantly different than the Cleric's normal petitions, would be enough for any deity who actually cares about the follower to see the need, and intervene.
Keep in mind, playing a spellcaster who's been Feebleminded is a severely unpleasant experience for a player, made exponentially worse by each encounter or session the character remains under the effect of Feeblemind. If the player comes up with an idea that could work, especially if it expends a resource or has only a slim chance of mechanically succeeding (both of which Divine Intervention checks the boxes for), then why not let the player use it?
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention break the game/encounter? No, it doesn't. It merely lets the player continue to play the game with the character the player has.
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention give the player a powerful roleplay moment that will likely be remembered longer than most other facets of the campaign? Yes, if your character is reduced to the intelligence of a house-fly by a curse, and spends an action screaming to the heavens, wordlessly for help, only having a 10ish % chance of it working, and the character's god answers by restoring the character's mind... The players will remember that moment long after the majority of the campaign has been forgotten.
TLDR:
Rules as Fun: Absolutely let the player do it.
RAW: There's an argument to be made either way... refer to RAF as the tie-breaker.
So you have no problem then when a char casts the spell, and the DM then says "The NPC shakes it off, as it still contacted its god who took the effect away."
What do you think Legendary Saves represent or what counterspell does? The NPC just shakes off the effect or prevents it before it can happen rather than having to suffer for some time. Divine intervention is only 10% /day at 10th level - though a 20th level cleric might be able to do it almost immediately - on the other hand, it seems a pretty reasonable intervention for a god to provide their 20th level cleric suddenly hit by a feeblemind spell.
P.S. However, the question fundamentally comes down to how the DM runs their game world and how they choose to interpret the spell and its interaction with Divine Intervention.
Divine Intervention only says "Describe the assistance you seek" and that they "implore their diety". Feeblemind says that the creature "can't communicate in any intelligible way". Clearly, the affected cleric can't use words or thoughts to describe the assistance they seek. However, feeblemind doesn't take away the character's knowledge. They still know how to move, fight, dodge, disengage, swing a weapon, recognize and protect their friends - so clearly the spell does not leave them in a vegetative state. Their wisdom, the primary stat for a cleric, is unaffected.
This is why any interaction comes down to a DM call on how they want to run their game world. How involved are dieties? They are GODS. Are they omniscient? Are they omnipotent? Presumably, gods can interact with and be aware of many creatures at once, worshippers, priests etc .. they are probably the ultimate at multitasking. Would the god care? This has a lot to do with the game world, the nature of the gods in that world, the level of interaction they have with their followers and the beliefs and mores held by that god and their followers. A neutral or evil god might laugh at the cleric's predicament, a good god might think of it as a good learning experience and not intervene.
A cleric affected by feeblemind can still worship. They can still have faith. It wouldn't be verbal or reasoned but they have likely been doing it for years. Could a god interpret a non-verbal plea for assistance from a worshipper, especially a cleric. In most game worlds yes since gods are powerful extra planar beings with special abilities. Could a non-verbal concept of a plea for help constitute "describe the assistance you seek" - completely up to the DM and some will say no, some maybe and some yes.
Strictly RAW, I might lean towards no since "describe" could be interpreted to require intelligible communication. However, again, these are gods that are involved and a god might be easily capable of interpreting the intent of a cleric imploring their aid even non-verbally or without reasoned thought behind it. Especially when the assistance sought is so simple and easy to provide. Does that constitute a "description of the aid you seek"? DM call in my opinion.
P.P.S. In a similar vein, I see a lot of DMs give far more leeway to a polymorphed creature who only retains alignment and personality (not knowledge/memory/skills etc) but then the DM allows them to optimally select targets, move to attack the wizard at the back rather than the tasty fighter with the sword right in front of them or take any number of actions completely unjustified by the intelligence and knowledge of the beast they have become.
Interpreting both Polymorph and Feeblemind in play and the effects on the player's available range of actions and choices are both a DM's call.
There are dozens of options available to players at high levels to beat a single roll.
Name a few that are not any of:
A small boost that might reduce the chance of failure a bit but is far from a guarantee (e.g. flash of genius and the luck feat), lets say at least a 50% chance of success if the roll is failed by 10 (probably an average roll by a +0 int PC who isn't Int based).
Are effective then the caster of feeblemind is 150 ft away
Do not depend on knowing in advance that feeblemind is going to be cast on on which PC
Do not make the party completely ineffective (having the whole party stay in an anti magic field might be effective but I would not think it is an effective solution as in most cases the enemy could just take cover from arrow attacks and wait for the party to eithe leave or the spell to end).
The only two I can think of are: Portent: This requires the party to have a Divination Wizard who happens to have an unused portent dice of the required number Convergent Future: It works if there is a chronurgy Wizard in the party (withing 60 ft of the target) but the price is pretty high especially if it is needed multiple times.
There may be others but if they are dependent on a particular sub-class being in the party you will need dozens of alternatives (a party of 5 will cover about 4% of the available subclasses).
If been in about 4 games where feeblemind was cast and on each occassion the player failed the save, it was cast on my level 19 (8 int) monk, diamond soul and an Ioun stone of mastery gave me a chance to succeed the saving throw but it was still only about 25%. The rest of the party were all spell casters but none had the ability to prevent the feeblemind going through. On all the occasions it has happened either during combat or immediately afterwards someone was able to cast greater restoration or similar to end the condition.
Is it possible? Yes. Whether it's likely to work would be up to the DM. The DM is the actual deity in this situation. I think it's appropriate that the DM would use multiple forms of context cues to determine A) If the Deity was paying attention to the Cleric at the time the Divine Intervention was requested, and B) if the Deity feels inclined to provide the assistance.
What do I mean by context? Some examples include whether the Cleric PC has been appropriately tithing at temples to the god in question, whether the Cleric has been spreading the core messages of the deity to NPCs that they meet, whether the Cleric has a track record of attempting to communicate with the deity by other means prior to this special request, and, of course, whether this current quest the cleric is on is one that is supported already by the deity.
A god has countless followers. It may have hundreds of high level PC's and NPC's, maybe even thousands, in any world created by the DM. To suggest that a god has an open channel to any particular PC or NPC, listening for grunts and howls, that breaks all verisimilitude. And out of game, if a DM manages to successfully cast Feeblemind on a char, which is no mean feat, the last thing that DM is going to do is handwave away the effects, given how many resources go into an 8th level spell.
What are you talking about with respect to Feeblemind being hard to cast successfully on a PC? If a combat involves an enemy with sufficient character levels to have access to Feeblemind, the DC is likely 18+ on that INT save and most PCs have an INT save modifier of 0 or less (including Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Clerics). The enemies also almost certainly have Counterspell to win any Counterspell duels that result over the casting - and to counter any attempts to Dispel or Greater Restore the affected PC.
There are dozens of options available to players at high levels to beat a single roll.
Name them!
An enemy mage casts Feeblemind DC 18 on the cleric with a -1 Intelligence modifier. You have a party of 4, level 9 characters, and only 2 of them get to act prior to the enemy mage. Tell me how you achieve at least a 75% success chance for that cleric.
A paladin is unlikely to have +5 cha at level 9 (my current level 9 campaign the aura is +3) but a dc of 18 seems high to me so I will go with it. We were talking about a cleric (a smart enemy will feeblemind a spellcaster that can do virtually nothing when feebleminded a fighter can still wield a sword, targeting the character who can remove the c9ndition is optimal) but Indomitable would not stack with luck anyway.
So a cleric with 8 int, a ring of protection and the luck feat standing within 10ft of the paladin has a 64% chance of making the save odds are in his favor but hardly needing "no mean feat" by the dm to be successful. The bad guy should be smarter than that though seeing the cleric standing next to the paladin they might cast it on the sorcerer instead, or if the whole party are huddled together do an AOE to try and get then to split (e.g black tenticals) or just take advantage of their positioning (dark star).
Yes there are a lot of features that can be used but rarely more than one or two will be in play, a cleric with luck and standing in a paladin aura is considerably better off than average in the games I have been in (I would use my first 3 ASI as a cleric on getting Wis to 20 and either warcaster or resiliant con) maybe in party in 3 has a paladin and it is not always possible to stand next to him, yes you can throw in an Artificer with flash of genius but I would but that as an alternative to 5he paladin relying on both being in the party is very optimistic.
I have taken 2 PCs to level 20 and another to 17, including a level 20 cleric who had a mantle of spell resistance but advantage is no good if you need to roll a natural 21. There was no paladin or Artificer in the party if she was lucky she might have a bardic inspiration which would give her a chance on feeblemind but probly less than 50%. In my experience at high levels you increase the chance of succeeding saves you are proficient 8n but decrease the chance if you not proficient, features and magic items just do not keep up with the dc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Can a tenth level or higher cleric use Divine Intervention if the cleric is under the effects of the feeblemind spell? I notice that Divine Intervention requires you to "call on your deity", "Imploring your deity's aid", and "Describe the assistance you seek". All of those descriptions sound like a creature communicating in an intelligible way which makes me think that Divine Intervention cannot be used while the cleric is under the effects of the feeblemind spell.
While under feeblemind a cleric can't communicate in any intelligible way and shouldn't be able to successfully describe the assistance required.
Newborn babies can cry for their mothers' attention, so I see no reason why the Feebleminded cleric couldn't do the same to their deity. The unintelligible cry, being significantly different than the Cleric's normal petitions, would be enough for any deity who actually cares about the follower to see the need, and intervene.
Keep in mind, playing a spellcaster who's been Feebleminded is a severely unpleasant experience for a player, made exponentially worse by each encounter or session the character remains under the effect of Feeblemind. If the player comes up with an idea that could work, especially if it expends a resource or has only a slim chance of mechanically succeeding (both of which Divine Intervention checks the boxes for), then why not let the player use it?
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention break the game/encounter? No, it doesn't. It merely lets the player continue to play the game with the character the player has.
Does letting the player attempt to remove it via Divine Intervention give the player a powerful roleplay moment that will likely be remembered longer than most other facets of the campaign? Yes, if your character is reduced to the intelligence of a house-fly by a curse, and spends an action screaming to the heavens, wordlessly for help, only having a 10ish % chance of it working, and the character's god answers by restoring the character's mind... The players will remember that moment long after the majority of the campaign has been forgotten.
TLDR:
Rules as Fun: Absolutely let the player do it.
RAW: There's an argument to be made either way... refer to RAF as the tie-breaker.
If it came up in a game I was running, I would tend towards allowing the cleric to use Divine Intervention because it would make sense in the context of the class, the game world, and the interaction of clerics with their diety (assuming the cleric was in good standing).
Here is the text:
Divine Intervention
"Imploring your deity’s aid requires you to use your action. Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice. If you roll a number equal to or lower than your cleric level, your deity intervenes. The DM chooses the nature of the intervention; the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate."
Feeblemind:
"On a failed save, the creature's Intelligence and Charisma scores become 1. The creature can't cast spells, activate magic items, understand language, or communicate in any intelligible way. The creature can, however, identify its friends, follow them, and even protect them."
Feeblemind DOES allow the cleric to identify their friends, follow them and protect them. The cleric also retains all of their wisdom, they only lose their intelligence. If the cleric can swing their mace, wear armor effectively, dodge, move, climb etc then I'd be inclined to allow a non-verbal appeal/prayer to their diety for help. The cleric might well do that instinctively because it is a fundamental part of their life. What else is a diety for?
This is perhaps an especially likely interaction since any cleric spell is an appropriate intervention and greater restoration is only a 5th level spell (which a 10th level cleric could cast themselves). It would seem to be a very reasonable request. Even if the cleric player did not request to use the ability explicitly, depending on the diety, the diety would likely care about a high level cleric (10th level cleric's can't be that common), and might proactively offer this divine intervention.
P.S. Just as an additional note on divine intervention, a bit off topic. Appropriate interventions consist of "the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate". This includes cleric domain spells. The Arcana Cleric can choose one wizard spell from level 6,7,8 and 9 as cleric domain spells. So, RAW, all the wizard spells from levels 6 to 9 would also be appropriate for divine intervention. Most DMs I know would not feel constrained by the limits placed on "divine intervention" and would just put in whatever made the most sense to the story. However, for those who do care, opening up the high level wizard spells including Wish as possible results for Divine Intervention gives the DM a lot of flexibility.
That's not remotely what I said, but I think you already know that.
One of the key cornerstones of D&D is player agency. Allowing a character who's reached the upper levels as a Cleric, embodying a lifetime of devout servitude to a deity, to let out a cry of desperation for a slim chance to have an affliction removed is simply allowing the player to have agency in a narratively potent way.
Your hypothetical toxic DM taking away player agency by arbitrarily deciding that an NPC shook off an affect that the character would have no mechanical way of doing is exactly the opposite of what I said.
Short Term User was assuming that NPCs work to the same rules as PCs, if a PC can use divine intervention to remove feeblemind then so can an NPC cleric that has just had feeblemind cast on in by a PC. It doesn't always apply (for example NPCs rarely make death saves) but many tables apply that rule at least in general.
I think the key part are "Imploring you diety's aid" and whether it requires the ability to communicate in an intelligable way. "Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice" Is clearly describing the action of the player not the PC. RAW I think imploring your dietys aid is a form of comminication and for the diety to understand it it must be intelligable though I see nothing wrong with alowing it as a "rule of cool"
There are MANY spells that remove player agency right from level 1; sleep does not even give you a saving throw and you can not act for one minute or until someone else chooses to wake you. The fact that feeblemind removes player agency is not a problem (and a cleric is probably in a better situation that a wizard to at least do something my hitting the enemy with a mace). The problem is feeblemind is if it results in player agency being removed for 30 days. The hypothetical DM is on "toxic" if they cast feeblemind on the only party member with access to greater restoration, heal or wish.
In my campaign, no deity would perform a Divine Intervention following a cleric cry or whining, it just wound,'t be perceived as seeking assistance. It must be more described than snifff sniff HUUUUOOOUUUUAAANNNNNNNNNN sniff sniff ☺.
Is it possible? Yes. Whether it's likely to work would be up to the DM. The DM is the actual deity in this situation. I think it's appropriate that the DM would use multiple forms of context cues to determine A) If the Deity was paying attention to the Cleric at the time the Divine Intervention was requested, and B) if the Deity feels inclined to provide the assistance.
What do I mean by context? Some examples include whether the Cleric PC has been appropriately tithing at temples to the god in question, whether the Cleric has been spreading the core messages of the deity to NPCs that they meet, whether the Cleric has a track record of attempting to communicate with the deity by other means prior to this special request, and, of course, whether this current quest the cleric is on is one that is supported already by the deity.
You can rule however you want at your table. I'm just stating what i would do if I were the DM. I included a paragraph of context for why a particular deity would give a rat's **** about the cleric in question. Whether that context applies would have some influence over how the deity (AKA myself as the DM) might respond.
That's an erroneous assumption. NPCs do not by design have the same abilities as player characters. Please show me any NPC statblock from any WotC book where the NPC can call upon Divine Intervention. Just because a DM can do something, doesn't mean the DM should do that thing, one example being putting character levels on NPCs. If it's done, there needs to be sufficient build-up so the party knows what they're up against (the comment I replied to implied no such build-up, as the description is just a hand-wave negation of the effect).
To have an NPC hard-counter a player's ability without appropriate build-up to the expectation that the character had that level of power comes across as cheap and unfair. The game is the story of the heroes, played by the players. The DM's "character" is the setting in which the players' character become heroes (or antiheroes depending on the campaign). Thus it's appropriate to err on the side of letting the party being epic, rather than undercutting them, just because you can.
A normally articulate champion of a deity making a wordless, baleful cry to the heavens is demonstrating the assistance needed, which I believe is sufficient and equivalent to describing it for the sake of requesting Divine Intervention. As I said, A mother knows what a baby is crying for, without the baby needing to put the need into words, and a champion-of-the-realm, high-level Cleric who's been feebleminded should be able to communicate with a deity to the same extent that a baby can communicate with its mother.
Sleep is not even in the same ballpark as Feeblemind. Sleep is easily avoided and easily remedied. Feeblemind is neither, and as I said, the level to which its use is toxic is determined by how long the player isn't able to play the character they built due to having an Intelligence and Charisma of one.
And honestly, allowing a player character to have a 10% chance of getting back into the fight... one chance that can't be attempted again for 24 hours, is not a big ask. It's comparable in game effect to a character rolling a natural 20 on a death-save and hopping back into the fight.
This isn't "Rule of Cool", it's "rules as fun". It's a scenario the game's creators didn't think of, and the DM has the authority to say that it makes sense and will be allowed. No DM is required to do so, you're perfectly free to stick with a draconian interpretation of the rules, but I won't play at such a table.
I didn't mis-state anything. I quoted you.
You keep saying the chances of feeblemind being successful in a high level party are slim my experiance is the opposite. I don't have all the books but in Volo's there are 3 monsters with feeblemind one CR7 (DC15) one CR9 (DC17) and one CR13 (DC16), so in theory a party could face feeblemind at or before level 7 but I will assume the party is at least level so so it can have access to greater restoration.
A cleric prioritises wisdom followed by con and either dex or str. Int is usually a dump stat (it is for most non wizards and artificers) having an intelligence modifier of -1 or 0 is most common, it will rarelty exceed +1.
A cleric is proficient in Wisdom and Charisma saving throws so no help there.
So without anything else to achieve a fairly moderate DC of 16 a cleric with intelligence of 10 has a 75% chance of failing the save. At truely high levels save DCs are often over 20 and it would be impossible for the cleric to save
Everything else is circumstantial, there may or may not be a paladin in the party, if there is there is a chance that the cleric wis within their aura to get a +3 to +5 on the save. The cleric might be under bless, though concentration is often used for higher levels spells at this point (say spirit guardians), there may be a bard in the party who has chosen to inspire the cleric, the cleric might be under so they have advantage on the roll. they might have a luckstone granting them a +1 to saves. Combining all these with the chances of them happening might mean that on average the cleric might have a 35% chance of succeeding the and for tier 4 play the cleric might have a chance of success if they roll something like a 19.
There may occasionally be a PC who can do something reactively for example an artificer with flash of genius or a divination wizard with portent but again even if there is such a PC they might not be able to help if the cleric fails by more than 5 flash of genius doesn't work if the cleric needs a 15 to succeed it is very likely the divination wizard diesn't have a 15 or higher they have not used that day.
What are you talking about with respect to Feeblemind being hard to cast successfully on a PC? If a combat involves an enemy with sufficient character levels to have access to Feeblemind, the DC is likely 18+ on that INT save and most PCs have an INT save modifier of 0 or less (including Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Clerics). The enemies also almost certainly have Counterspell to win any Counterspell duels that result over the casting - and to counter any attempts to Dispel or Greater Restore the affected PC.
It is easy to avoid counterspell entirely when casting feeblemind. Feeblemind has a range of 150ft and counterspell has a range of 60ft . I would also point out that the duration of feeblemind is instantanious, so dispel magic (which ends a spell) has no effect as the spell has already ended.
Thank you for the input. For reference, my campaign also uses NPC villains with character sheets; however, sometimes that takes too long and I'd start using stat blocks from source books. There does happen to be one enemy in my campaign that has access to Divine Intervention. I have one villain in my campaign which is a bodak that has features from The Undead Warlock. This warlock has access to feeblemind and would want the Cleric (who can produce sunlight) to be out of commission for the fight. That is my only reasoning for wanting to do this. The Cleric is Level 11 though; so, Divine Intervention is something I need to be aware of.
What do you think Legendary Saves represent or what counterspell does? The NPC just shakes off the effect or prevents it before it can happen rather than having to suffer for some time. Divine intervention is only 10% /day at 10th level - though a 20th level cleric might be able to do it almost immediately - on the other hand, it seems a pretty reasonable intervention for a god to provide their 20th level cleric suddenly hit by a feeblemind spell.
P.S. However, the question fundamentally comes down to how the DM runs their game world and how they choose to interpret the spell and its interaction with Divine Intervention.
Divine Intervention only says "Describe the assistance you seek" and that they "implore their diety". Feeblemind says that the creature "can't communicate in any intelligible way". Clearly, the affected cleric can't use words or thoughts to describe the assistance they seek. However, feeblemind doesn't take away the character's knowledge. They still know how to move, fight, dodge, disengage, swing a weapon, recognize and protect their friends - so clearly the spell does not leave them in a vegetative state. Their wisdom, the primary stat for a cleric, is unaffected.
This is why any interaction comes down to a DM call on how they want to run their game world. How involved are dieties? They are GODS. Are they omniscient? Are they omnipotent? Presumably, gods can interact with and be aware of many creatures at once, worshippers, priests etc .. they are probably the ultimate at multitasking. Would the god care? This has a lot to do with the game world, the nature of the gods in that world, the level of interaction they have with their followers and the beliefs and mores held by that god and their followers. A neutral or evil god might laugh at the cleric's predicament, a good god might think of it as a good learning experience and not intervene.
A cleric affected by feeblemind can still worship. They can still have faith. It wouldn't be verbal or reasoned but they have likely been doing it for years. Could a god interpret a non-verbal plea for assistance from a worshipper, especially a cleric. In most game worlds yes since gods are powerful extra planar beings with special abilities. Could a non-verbal concept of a plea for help constitute "describe the assistance you seek" - completely up to the DM and some will say no, some maybe and some yes.
Strictly RAW, I might lean towards no since "describe" could be interpreted to require intelligible communication. However, again, these are gods that are involved and a god might be easily capable of interpreting the intent of a cleric imploring their aid even non-verbally or without reasoned thought behind it. Especially when the assistance sought is so simple and easy to provide. Does that constitute a "description of the aid you seek"? DM call in my opinion.
P.P.S. In a similar vein, I see a lot of DMs give far more leeway to a polymorphed creature who only retains alignment and personality (not knowledge/memory/skills etc) but then the DM allows them to optimally select targets, move to attack the wizard at the back rather than the tasty fighter with the sword right in front of them or take any number of actions completely unjustified by the intelligence and knowledge of the beast they have become.
Interpreting both Polymorph and Feeblemind in play and the effects on the player's available range of actions and choices are both a DM's call.
Name a few that are not any of:
The only two I can think of are:
Portent: This requires the party to have a Divination Wizard who happens to have an unused portent dice of the required number
Convergent Future: It works if there is a chronurgy Wizard in the party (withing 60 ft of the target) but the price is pretty high especially if it is needed multiple times.
There may be others but if they are dependent on a particular sub-class being in the party you will need dozens of alternatives (a party of 5 will cover about 4% of the available subclasses).
If been in about 4 games where feeblemind was cast and on each occassion the player failed the save, it was cast on my level 19 (8 int) monk, diamond soul and an Ioun stone of mastery gave me a chance to succeed the saving throw but it was still only about 25%. The rest of the party were all spell casters but none had the ability to prevent the feeblemind going through. On all the occasions it has happened either during combat or immediately afterwards someone was able to cast greater restoration or similar to end the condition.
Name them!
An enemy mage casts Feeblemind DC 18 on the cleric with a -1 Intelligence modifier. You have a party of 4, level 9 characters, and only 2 of them get to act prior to the enemy mage. Tell me how you achieve at least a 75% success chance for that cleric.
A paladin is unlikely to have +5 cha at level 9 (my current level 9 campaign the aura is +3) but a dc of 18 seems high to me so I will go with it. We were talking about a cleric (a smart enemy will feeblemind a spellcaster that can do virtually nothing when feebleminded a fighter can still wield a sword, targeting the character who can remove the c9ndition is optimal) but Indomitable would not stack with luck anyway.
So a cleric with 8 int, a ring of protection and the luck feat standing within 10ft of the paladin has a 64% chance of making the save odds are in his favor but hardly needing "no mean feat" by the dm to be successful. The bad guy should be smarter than that though seeing the cleric standing next to the paladin they might cast it on the sorcerer instead, or if the whole party are huddled together do an AOE to try and get then to split (e.g black tenticals) or just take advantage of their positioning (dark star).
Yes there are a lot of features that can be used but rarely more than one or two will be in play, a cleric with luck and standing in a paladin aura is considerably better off than average in the games I have been in (I would use my first 3 ASI as a cleric on getting Wis to 20 and either warcaster or resiliant con) maybe in party in 3 has a paladin and it is not always possible to stand next to him, yes you can throw in an Artificer with flash of genius but I would but that as an alternative to 5he paladin relying on both being in the party is very optimistic.
I have taken 2 PCs to level 20 and another to 17, including a level 20 cleric who had a mantle of spell resistance but advantage is no good if you need to roll a natural 21. There was no paladin or Artificer in the party if she was lucky she might have a bardic inspiration which would give her a chance on feeblemind but probly less than 50%. In my experience at high levels you increase the chance of succeeding saves you are proficient 8n but decrease the chance if you not proficient, features and magic items just do not keep up with the dc.