It is back!!! What we do know about VR Guide to Ravenloft?

[Mephisto of the FoS]

True Resurrection is the only spell that lists replacing injured or missing internal organs among its effects.

I guess it refers to characters who have died, Alanik didn't die he just became paralysed and preferred to keep his money for retirement than spending it to be able to walk. OK what kind of person would prefer keep their money than walk again?

[Five]

The paralyzed effect of a spinal injury feels like physical effect not healed by lesser restoration. Like you wouldn't regrow eyes that were removed just because it removes blindness.

Well, if you rule that lesser restoration can remove permanent blindness, then that means it restores sight by way of healing (or otherwise reversing/undoing) whatever damage caused the blindness. Same should then be true of the paralyzed condition.

If you rule it only restores temporary damage, then yes. It would be useless in Alanik's case.

Maybe I'm missing something...?

[Igor the Henchman]

Well, if you rule that lesser restoration can remove permanent blindness, then that means it restores sight by way of healing whatever damage caused the blindness. Same should then be true of the paralyzed condition.

It can be read that way, though I find it super ironic that by that logic Lesser Restoration can only heal people who miss both their eyes, but not those who only lost one.

[Five]

Well, if you rule that lesser restoration can remove permanent blindness, then that means it restores sight by way of healing whatever damage caused the blindness. Same should then be true of the paralyzed condition.

It makes sense, though I find it super ironic that by that logic Lesser Restoration can only heal people who miss both their eyes, but not those who only lost one.

Yeah, really.

Barring complete destruction (which would require regenerate etc to heal), they should both benefit from the spell.

[Jester of the FoS]

The paralyzed effect of a spinal injury feels like physical effect not healed by lesser restoration. Like you wouldn't regrow eyes that were removed just because it removes blindness.

Well, if you rule that lesser restoration can remove permanent blindness, then that means it restores sight by way of healing (or otherwise reversing/undoing) whatever damage caused the blindness. Same should then be true of the paralyzed condition.

If you rule it only restores temporary damage, then yes. It would be useless in Alanik's case.

Maybe I'm missing something...?

If you want to get all technical, lesser restoration removes conditions or diseases. If the condition is being applied by an outside factor that remains, and the condition instantly returns.

If you're inside a purple worm, lesser restoration doesn't teleport you out, grant you darkvision, or create a light allowing you to see. You can't cast lesser restoration to dispel a darkness that spell.

There's no reason to believe it would regenerate or restore damaged eyes. The blindness condition is removed but because the eyes are still gone you instantly gain it back again.

[Five]

Yeah, I was just going through different editions and physical injury isn't covered, but it is. 2E Cure Blindness no, 3E Remove Blindness yes. Either way, apples and oranges...

Obviously lesser restoration doesn't teleport a character out of a purple worm. That's a douchebag example you just dropped man. Haha

Regenerate, by most editions, and including and reading a bit into the Lingering Injuries table in 5E DMG seems to be the proper way to heal such injuries, as Drinnik already mentioned. Which brings us back several posts...lesser restoration is off the table.

[Jester of the FoS]

Obviously lesser restoration doesn't teleport a character out of a purple worm. That's a douchebag example you just dropped man. Haha

It's a stretch, which is why it's such a great example.

The bite of the purple worm says:

Code: Select all

A swallowed creature is blinded and restrained, it has total cover against attacks and other effects outside the worm, and it takes 21 (6d6) acid damage at the start of each of the worm's turns.

If lesser restoration removes ALL blindness, it should remove being blinded by being in a worm gullet. Which wouldn't make any logical sense. So, therefore, it doesn't remove ALL blindnesses.

[Five]

Obviously lesser restoration doesn't teleport a character out of a purple worm. That's a douchebag example you just dropped man. Haha

It's a stretch, which is why it's such a great example.

The bite of the purple worm says:

Code: Select all

A swallowed creature is blinded and restrained, it has total cover against attacks and other effects outside the worm, and it takes 21 (6d6) acid damage at the start of each of the worm's turns.

If lesser restoration removes ALL blindness, it should remove being blinded by being in a worm gullet. Which wouldn't make any logical sense. So, therefore, it doesn't remove ALL blindnesses.

It's all good man. I found it funny.

I do appreciate your insight into it though. I'm wrong about my interpretation of that spell is all.

[Five]

That's a 7th-level spell and requires a level 13 cleric. How many of them are in Ravenloft?

It's interesting that Madam Eva (according to Curse of Strahd) has it in her spell list.

Also Viktra Mordenheim is described as being able to heal or replace any body part, so she's another option

Very interesting. To what lengths will Alanik (or Sedgewick) go to be able to walk again?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HfUyVN90K6Q

[Mephisto of the FoS]

Very interesting. To what lengths will Alanik (or Sedgewick) go to be able to walk again?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HfUyVN90K6Q

Or not...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X_ViIPA-Gc
But I won't do that...

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

It's hardly the first time that D&D rules as written cause logical inconsistencies in story and worldbuilding. Bottom line is: does it make your world more or less interesting to have permanent disabilities be a thing? If more (which I think is the case) you can find a way to handwave the rules, though I think lack of access to high level casters is a good enough answer (particularly in a world without a Core). If that's not good enough for you, throw in a curse from a dying foe or the Dark Powers that thwarts healing magic on that injury. Or if your high-level healer PC breezes in and wants to heal Alanik, so be it. Good roleplay on their part.

[Rock of the Fraternity]

Drat. They pushed the delivery of my copy back to thursday...

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

There’s a post on Reddit saying that they’ve used fab stuff from this site in the book. They only mention place names in Mordent, but even then don’t they have to ask permission to use stuff by other people?

[Mephisto of the FoS]

does it make your world more or less interesting to have permanent disabilities be a thing?

I wanted to make a point not in the context on having permanent disabilities in my game, which I am all for it, but more on what happens when an adventurer who has a movement disability. Can such characters go freely around any landscape, be it urban or natural. Do people with this kind of disability move on their own in any terrain (making it high fantasy) or do they go around in a more in difficult terrain with the assistance of other PC's (more real world situation). Having permanent disabilities in my opinion makes the game interesting when this is played through. This makes the game more dangerous, both in the sense of the difficulties you face when you decide to adventure having one but also in a sense that anytime a powerful hit may damage your character in other ways than just dying, that evolve the character's story. Having disablities for your PC or NPC but playing them only as a superficial cosmetic characteristic for your character I believe is disrespectful.

[DustBunny]

There’s a post on Reddit saying that they’ve used fab stuff from this site in the book. They only mention place names in Mordent, but even then don’t they have to ask permission to use stuff by other people?

Part of the rules with fan material is that WotC own the IP and hence fan works derived from it.
The blurb on their website about it makes it sound nice and fluffy, but they still 'own' your work and thus can use it without permission. Still, it is generally considered 'bad form' if use someones work without giving them credit.

From Wizards of the Coast's Fan Content Policy

"Q: Does this mean that Wizards of the Coast can use and display my Fan Content?

A: Yes! This Policy is dedicated to removing barriers to sharing. By making Fan Content, you agreed to let everyone (including Wizards) share and use your stuff without asking your permission. This includes Wizards. We don’t want to get sued for spotlighting your awesome Fan Content on our media channels or making something that may resemble someone’s Fan Content."