Hey everyone, I'm new to d&d sort of. I've only been playing one campaign so far. My DM is saying that parasites are not a disease. I have argued that they are definitely considered diseases. (essentially I asked if something had a disease in it to an npc that would know and I suddenly started sprouting mushrooms on myself because it was a parasite.) So I'm curious.

IRL: If it’s a “fungal infection” it is a disease. If it is a “fungal parasite” it is not, however the parasite might lead to a “parasitic infection” which would be a disease even though the parasite that caused it is not.

In D&D: Whatever your DM says goes.

(snickers at the GM making mushrooms sprout up)

As Sposta said, there are diseases that are parasites, but parasites are not necessarily diseases. Malaria is a parasite and a disease, but fleas are also parasites and not a disease (literally speaking).

In game terms, only things called diseases are diseases. See mummy rot. It used to be a hybrid curse/disease in previous editions, now its a curse. Sposta's following response is spot on, because the GM determines what is called a disease.

When it comes to conditions, the natural follow on question is "How can the effect be removed?"  ... it's 100% very fair to expect any homebrew effect to fit the mechanics of in-game conditions so that in-game counters can be applied. If they aren't willing to call it diseased, they'll need to classify it in some other manner related to the effects. Are the parasites causing detrimental effects similar to exhaustion? Then treat it as such, and effects that remove exhaustion should remove your parasite.

Detrimental effects/conditions in game are clear, and most in-game effects have clear counters. Reasonable counters typically include Lesser Restoration, Greater Restoration, and Remove Curse. If those don't work, higher level options like Heal, Wish or Divine Intervention should be your Hail Mary options.

If none of them work, then your DM clearly has some sort of agenda that you'll have to just accept. It's frustrating, and unfortunate, but that's probably somehow tied to a plot mechanic that you'll just have to ride along with. Sorry. I've been in your shoes, it takes some restraint. Good luck.

(edits for tooltip maintenance)

The point of overlap between disease and curse is a murky one and not one we can necessarily apply real world scientific perspective to. Maybe you should look at the origin of the parasite to help you decide.

Unfortunately my party is a long way from gaining the wish and heal skills and what not. My DM also nerfed restoration spells too, they said they were too powerful so they only removed a stage of disease for each spell slot used instead. I don't know much about diseases and parasites and the like in dnd though. Thankyou for the response though I appreciate it.

Oh, I thought only one person replied to my post. Sorry about that! Ok so maybe I'm wrong then. Well, a question then because I'm thinking this is where stuff gets weird. I am playing a monk. I am not level 10 yet, but at level 10 I become immune to poison and disease, if the parasite caused a disease, would that mean I'm immune to the parasite but not the disease it causes? That seems a bit... odd. I don't know though hence why I'm asking.

Edit: was clarifying what monk level 10 ability is.

Quote from TrueDark >>

Oh, I thought only one person replied to my post. Sorry about that! Ok so maybe I'm wrong then. Well, a question then because I'm thinking this is where stuff gets weird. I am playing a monk. I am not level 10 yet, but if the parasite caused a disease, would that mean I'm immune to the parasite but not the disease it causes? That seems a bit... odd. I don't know though hence why I'm asking.

 No, the other way around. You would not be immune to the parasite, but would be immune to the disease it causes. Like having a tapeworm but not getting malnutrition.

Quote from TrueDark >>

My DM also nerfed restoration spells too, they said they were too powerful so they only removed a stage of disease for each spell slot used instead.

Imposing additional detrimental conditions and then limiting the way you can treat them? We're no longer talking about Rules and Mechanics, this is probably Homebrew turf.

Nerfing restoration spells is like saying your Fireball burned too hot, you only get 4d6 damage. I sincerely wish you guys good luck, but in this case, the conditions and cures are whatever the DM says they are.

In terms of the manner the game is meant to be run, the GM is within normal suggestions to impose something that can't be normally removed, and to make certain spells weaker than normal- especially the likes of Restoration. Official modules regularly have effects, objects, NPCs and creatures that are exempt from or modify certain rules- going both in favor of and against players.

Keep in mind, it isn't supposed to be players vs GM. Give them the benefit of the doubt and assess their choices later.

Also, a GM doesn't have to tell a player how to fix anything, let alone give them the means to do so. "But I have Restoration and a heal check of 30!" "Okay, you discover that the parasite loves that you just cured its disease, and you have no idea how to cure it short of killing the host." (players look at each other) "You know you need piles of diamonds to do that? Besides, you're all infected. Help find the cure or live with it... c'mon guys, I worked all week on this."

If someone is afflicted with something, in-game or homebrew, and a seasoned Cleric casts Greater Restoration, and the DM says there's no effect ... then the next battle you better tell the Barbarian that his raged attacks did zero damage.

We're talking about classes and features/abilities that are designed to improve and sustain the health of the party that are now hand-waved to not doing anything. That might make the DM grin and tap his fingers together, but it makes the guy at the table who rolled the healer/support class feel like a worthless idiot.

DMs are free to tell their story, but effects and conditions are subject to the same mechanics that players can impose. You inflicted me with parasites? Cool, my character is now infectious and gets to inflict my enemies with parasites. And now they get to waste a 5th level spell slot and be disappointed. Goes both ways.

Not sure a 5th level spell with a costly consumable component is something I'd consider over-powered. Again, this is rules and mechanics forum. Mechanically, conditions and effects are capable of being removed by appropriate abilities/spells. 5th level not good enough? 7th Level Heal. Not good enough? 9th level Wish. Not good enough? Great, I've made it to level 17 but finally the parasites caught up to me because there's no "Remove Parasite" spell in game. I die when the mushroom spores finally consume my entire body.

So... Greater Restoration isn't some cure-all. It has specific effects, which I take considerable note doesn't include curing parasites or disease. And, yes, incidentally there are some monsters that are immune to physical attacks, and resistant to physical attacks that are considered magical. Curses also normally specify how they can be lifted; monsters typically say they can be lifted by spells, story-driven ones typically say they can't. You're not shoehorning the cleric in doing so. They have access to all their spells, it's not like they're a sorcerer who is stuck with a character who is now ****** because one spell didn't solve the quest. That's way better than looking at the barbarian who literally can do nothing but be a damage sponge because they only have physical attacks.

DeltaTango, I sense that you're disgruntled with not being able to handle whatever comes your way by virtue of how great the PCs are, but most quests aren't about flaunting how awesome the PCs are, they're about getting something done that the characters and associates couldn't do otherwise. At 17th level, yeah, you might run into some very dangerous parasites that are beyond a single spell to fix.

That's very RAW.

Sorry, Greater Restoration was an example, man.  Earlier I posted each of Lesser Resto, Remove Curse, Heal, Wish and Divine Intervention. So among parasites (not an actual condition) and diseased (actual condition), only one has actual counters in game.

Maybe I am genuinely disgruntled, not at you, or the OP, or the OP's DM, or my own DM... In a world governed by mechanics, rules, conditions and counters...  where even death can be overcome by spells like revivify, Raise Dead, Resurrection, and so on... to imagine that a parasite is insurmountable is a little lame. There are powerful bad guys. There are powerful PCs. To hand-wave either into power or suppression against the nature of the game is a little frustrating. Yes.

Ceremorphosis sounds lovely. "It was only possible to interrupt ceremorphosis and save the host before this initial stage was completed, and even so it was only possible to do so by killing the tadpole, which was complicated by its location. The safest way was to incinerate or crush the host's head and then use spells such as resurrection, or true resurrection." "After the initial stage was completed, the original creature was lost and beyond help, except for a miracle." (like wish or DI?)

Thanks for sharing a great example of a devastating in-game ability that still has in-game counters.

Point, though, was that wish would be ineffective- only Miracle could save them. So if a 5e character were subjected to this, where there is no Miracle (a decision I agree with), there is no cure whatsoever, and an infected PC will die- and if not killed in such a way that the parasite is killed, the PC dies permanently, short of godly influence. This being a generic example, a story-specific one, as mentioned earlier, can preclude simple single-spell solutions entirely.

You kind of walked into agreeing that some things can't be done by player's in-game powers.

Solid points, Nightsky. I'm a big fan. Words and rules matter. In-game powers matter. Solutions exist to nearly every condition. To impose a new condition that doesn't account for any solution is a little broken, in my humble opinion (especially intended for the DM that says Restoration effects are too powerful...).

To stay on topic of the OP thread, parasites as a condition don't exist in game. There are similar in-game effects that parasites can replicate. Adjudicating how parasitic effects take place and get resolved are up to your DM, and is recommended to model existing in-game effects with existing in-game counters. There's a lot of discretion to apply, but to simply rule that you're f***** without any reasonable counter is pretty lame for the people at the table.

I like this game a lot. I imagine a lot of you guys do too. I like this forum a lot. I've been reading here a long time, and a lot of time in the rulebooks. I'm not perfect, but I try to stay informed. And again, in this particular thread... this is not a Rules and Mechanics concern. It's a homebrew concern. Because parasites is not an in-game condition. And until that DM classifies it into a specific category, there's no real mechanical way to adjudicate it. Good luck, OP. Your DM should provide some additional clarification that your in-game wise/intelligent PCs/NPCs should be aware of. If they don't, I'm sorry. You'll need to hope that you find a scroll of "Tough Actin' Tinactin" to resolve that fungal infection.

Quote from NightskyPirate >>

Point, though, was that wish would be ineffective- only Miracle could save them. So if a 5e character were subjected to this, where there is no Miracle (a decision I agree with), there is no cure whatsoever, and an infected PC will die- and if not killed in such a way that the parasite is killed, the PC dies permanently, short of godly influence. This being a generic example, a story-specific one, as mentioned earlier, can preclude simple single-spell solutions entirely.

You kind of walked into agreeing that some things can't be done by player's in-game powers.

 I would make it so now the players had to go on a quest for a high ranking clerical member.  Better hurry though, only X amount of time before that tadpole does what it does.

To me, treating "parasites" differently from "disease" seems like pedantic hair-splitting. Do we need to adjudicate the difference between bacterial infections, viral infections, autoimmune disorders? Would malaria not count as a disease?

Seems sketchy to me. DM can do whatever they want of course, but I'm definitely giving them some side-eye here.

The way I think of it, a parasite can cause a disease without being a disease. But every condition that a DM inflicts on a PC should have a cure or cures.

With that said, I would also like to point out that there are actual parasites in D&D that are not diseases, but are killed by curing diseases.

For Malaria, totally, obviously a disease.

Fleas? Not so much. Ceremorphosis? Hard nope. Both are parasites.

Quote from ftl >>

To me, treating "parasites" differently from "disease" seems like pedantic hair-splitting. Do we need to adjudicate the difference between bacterial infections, viral infections, autoimmune disorders? Would malaria not count as a disease?

Seems sketchy to me. DM can do whatever they want of course, but I'm definitely giving them some side-eye here.

 Yeah this is basically a gotcha. "You can heal diseases? Well, then this isn't a disease. You're just sick until you die."

Now maybe there are story implications here and the DM just really needs someone to be infected for a plot hook or dramatic moment or whatever. But there may also be a misalignment of expectations here where the DM wants to tell a gritty, bleak story where even heroes succumb to the environment and the party is just expecting a typical fantasy hack n' slash.

Either way, if you asked an NPC about whatever the contaminated thing was and got a technically-right-but-clearly-misleading answer, that kind of thing erodes all trust between the players and the DM to the point where the game stops being any kind of roleplaying and just devolves to trying to outthink the person behind the screen. A game like that needs 100% buy-in first cause it's not fun for most people.