Leomund's Tiny Hut

[SirVladamir]

My group has 3 DMs that we rotate around (3 different campaigns). This gives the DMs time to prepare the next adventure and lets us play as well, which we all like to do. Anyways, we agreed that we would keep rulings consistent between the 3 campaigns. In game the DM would make a ruling, but away from table the 3 DMs would agree upon a common ruling for anything that arises.

We ran across a creative use for Leomund's tiny hut. It works RAW wise but would be interested to know if anyone would not allow it.

First, the RAW question, the spell states that the hut is opaque from the outside and can be any color. One of our DMs thinks that means it must be a single monochromatic color, one thinks it can be comaflauge, rock color, tree colored, etc. the third is on the fence.

Anyways it seems that as long as the caster is inside the hut anyone inside the hut can shoot arrows out of the hut with advantage (can't see creatures inside the hut), can't have spells cast at them, affected by spell AoE and cannot be attacked physically. This seems insane for a non-concentration 3rd level spell. Yes, it takes 1 min to cast, so it won't be available for a random encounter, but our players are smart and will probably start using it and then lure their enemies back to the hut for near perfect invulnerability barring a dispel magic. This just seems wrong. It can also be used to block any tunnel 20' wide or smaller.

Abuse that needs to be stopped, or spell working as intended? thoughts?

[JoeJ]

I'd say it's fine. The idea of luring enemies to your tiny hut firing position is creative if you have a lot of stupid enemies. Smart ones are hard to lure, and will retreat the second the see the hut unless they have some way of dispelling it. And they'll most likely alert their superiors, if they have any.

Tiny hut shenanigans pretty much always assume that the other side can't dispel magic, even though you'd think it would be a standard spell for casters to learn.

[Asmotherion]

unless your game role plays NPCs Ai as Computer Game Ai there should be no problem.

if a logical person meets an uncrossable barrier and sees that the enemy can still shoot him from there what would he logically do?

A) Try to find (total) cover and get as far away as possible without being shot to death?
or
B) keep pushing the barrier in the hopes the shooter misses him and the barrier magically collapses?

A problem only arises if all NPCs in the world have an average 6 on their mental stats really.

[Derpy]

If you think it should Leomund's Tiny Bunker and not Leomund's Tiny Hut, then sure. Personlly, I'm in the camp that think it's there for resting not for combat (see https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/22/moving-through-leomunds-tiny-hut/ ); if players abuse it too much it might come around to bite them. It can be fairly easy to countered or avoided by enemies. But other tables and players love to use it like that, or at least theorize about it like that, and if they're having fun doing what they're doing that's great. "of any color you choose" (exact wording of the spell) to me this seems to indicate one color, as they left a plural out of the wording. Even if it was camouflage it's a 10' dome, it doesn't exactly blend in no matter how you paint it. I think it's more a privacy screen but it still does what it needs to to prevent people inside from being seen regardless. It doesn't need to be stopped, IMO; it is very situational for combat purposes.

[OverLordOcelot]

It doesn't work RAW - the spell says that creatures and objects can MOVE out, not that they can ATTACK out. Making a ranged attack is making an attack, not a move, so it's not actually allowed by RAW. Also, it's not exactly uncommon for more powerful and/or organized enemies to have access to dispel magic, and if the PCs are blocking a hall, enemies can collapse the ceiling onto them, leaving them buried once the hut wears off. Or they can just prepare an ambush knowing that until the dome disappears, the party (or at least the caster) will be inside.

[Keravath]

It doesn't work RAW - the spell says that creatures and objects can MOVE out, not that they can ATTACK out. Making a ranged attack is making an attack, not a move, so it's not actually allowed by RAW. Also, it's not exactly uncommon for more powerful and/or organized enemies to have access to dispel magic, and if the PCs are blocking a hall, enemies can collapse the ceiling onto them, leaving them buried once the hut wears off. Or they can just prepare an ambush knowing that until the dome disappears, the party (or at least the caster) will be inside.

Sorry. The spell says "Creatures and objects within the dome when you cast this spell can move through it freely." An arrow shot through the wall of the hut is just a moving object. D&D 5e rules are supposed to be read as natural English so allowing objects to move through the dome would include thrown or fired objects.

As for what the dome looks like .. again the spell says "The dome is opaque from the
outside, of any color you choose, but it is transparent from the inside." Although I would think camouflage would be cool, the spell description says "any color" not "colors" or pattern so I would tend to read it as monochromatic though you could choose a color that blends into the environment.

It probably has the single color constraint just to make it more difficult to set up an ambush.

[Sigreid]

I'm with the others that say there's no problem. Even an animal would realize that it can't get to its attackers and retreat. More intelligent opponents would not only get out of the line of fire but spend the hut's duration preparing for the upcoming battle.

Something that could be handy is if the wizard is out of spell slots and the party believes they absolutely must press on for some reason, the wizard could cast it as a ritual and the wait with the cleric for the martials to strike and fall back for healing. It would still be risky for the martial characters, but somewhat safer for all concerned than dragging an unarmored man with only cantrips around if fall back ground is a viable option.

[OverLordOcelot]

Sorry. The spell says "Creatures and objects within the dome when you cast this spell can move through it freely." An arrow shot through the wall of the hut is just a moving object. D&D 5e rules are supposed to be read as natural English so allowing objects to move through the dome would include thrown or fired objects.

Firing an arrow is an attack, and only moves are allowed through the dome. D&D 5e rules are simply not meant to be read such that making at attack roll and doing damage with an attack is a 'move'. If you want to house rule attacks through the hut it's your game, but RAW and RAI you can just move through the hut, not attack. It fits the actual text of the rule and solves the problem the OP sees quite handily.

[Ganders]

1. I just plain *like* the interpretation that you can carry objects out of the hut, but not throw or shoot them out, whether it's RAW or not. Honestly, I suspect the only reason your friends and their stuff are free to pass through it at all is A) So it can't be used as a prison, trapping people inside it with you, B) So your friends don't have to get naked and leave their gear behind in order to leave.

2. It's not out of line to treat it as a normal wall, no stronger or weaker than an old log cabin, rather than a curved Wall of Force.

3. In order to avoid attracting predators from miles around, it needs to be white in the snow and not-white elsewhere. (Possibly green, yellow, brown, or grey in jungle, grassland, or desert, or rocks). That's about it. I'd keep it at that, but you can allow more if you wish. Perhaps you'll let them magically scrawl graffiti on the sides of it. Perhaps you'll let it change colors gradually like a lava lamp. Perhaps you'll let it be so animated that it actually plays movies -- you could run all 3 ghostbuster movies in under 8 hours, to entertain the orcs waiting outside to attack you.

[Laserlight]

First, the RAW question, the spell states that the hut is opaque from the outside and can be any color. One of our DMs thinks that means it must be a single monochromatic color, one thinks it can be comaflauge, rock color, tree colored, etc. the third is on the fence.

Anyways it seems that as long as the caster is inside the hut anyone inside the hut can shoot arrows out of the hut with advantage (can't see creatures inside the hut), can't have spells cast at them, affected by spell AoE and cannot be attacked physically. This seems insane for a non-concentration 3rd level spell. Yes, it takes 1 min to cast, so it won't be available for a random encounter, but our players are smart and will probably start using it and then lure their enemies back to the hut for near perfect invulnerability barring a dispel magic. This just seems wrong. It can also be used to block any tunnel 20' wide or smaller.

Abuse that needs to be stopped, or spell working as intended? thoughts?

"The dome is opaque from the outside, of any color you choose" -- I'd read that as "any single color".

Yes, it's a nice spell. If you have enemies who are stupid enough to stand around while you shoot arrows at them from inside, then yes, it's very nice. Of course, if you have enemies that stupid, you can probably lure them into a pit trap, or a fireball, just as easily. And remember, that third level slot can instead be used for Call Lightning, Fireball, Fly, etc -- L3 spells are supposed to have a significant effect. I'd say just follow RAW, it's working as intended.

Incidentally, note that everyone who wants to go inside the Hut has to be within the area at the time of casting. Not "I can designate any friends", not even "any friends I can see at the time of casting". The rogue goes out, lures a howling mob back, dives for the sanctuary of the Hut, and oopsie! You bounce off! They may not even realize that Rogue was outside the protected area, looting that chest on the other side of the room when the spell was cast. So as they frantically try to figure out what's going on, the Rogue is staring at 47 angry monsters who will certainly roll a couple of crits, and do we drop the Hut or not?

[Slipperychicken]

I'd be okay with having it block attacks coming out as well. Where else does D&D even have one-way force fields? It just doesn't fit the pattern of magical force-barriers.

[Laserlight]

Firing an arrow is an attack, and only moves are allowed through the dome. D&D 5e rules are simply not meant to be read such that making at attack roll and doing damage with an attack is a 'move'. If you want to house rule attacks through the hut it's your game, but RAW and RAI you can just move through the hut, not attack. It fits the actual text of the rule and solves the problem the OP sees quite handily.

Except that doesn't at all fit the actual text of the spell, which is "Creatures and objects within the dome when you cast this spell can move through it freely." It doesn't say "You can't attack through it". If you want to house rule that attacks don't go through the Hut, it's your game, but declaring that your ruling is RAW doesn't make it so.

[OverLordOcelot]

Except that doesn't at all fit the actual text of the spell, which is "Creatures and objects within the dome when you cast this spell can move through it freely." It doesn't say "You can't attack through it". If you want to house rule that attacks don't go through the Hut, it's your game, but declaring that your ruling is RAW doesn't make it so.

Look, if you want to consider 'Leomunds Tiny Hut' as 'Leomund's invulnerable one way bunker', nothing I say will stop you. But when there is a simple interpretation that cleanly fits both RAW and RAI and gets rid of the 'Leomund's Invulnerable One Way Bunker' issue and keeps the spell doing what it has traditionally done instead of adding a new major ability to it, I'll go with the simple interpretation. If you want to call it a house rule, I certainly can't stop you from doing so, but I will point out that everyone complaining about Leomund's Invulnerable One Way Bunker issues is creating the problem in the first place.

[BarneyBent]

Firing an arrow is an attack, and only moves are allowed through the dome. D&D 5e rules are simply not meant to be read such that making at attack roll and doing damage with an attack is a 'move'. If you want to house rule attacks through the hut it's your game, but RAW and RAI you can just move through the hut, not attack. It fits the actual text of the rule and solves the problem the OP sees quite handily.

If that was what was meant, they would have said “creatures and objects can use their movement to pass through the barrier”. There’s no such thing in 5e as “moves”. There’s the Dash action, and there’s using your allocated movement each turn, and there’s longer term matching and forced marches. But there’s nothing in the rules to indicate that this text is referring to movement except in the most general sense, or that excludes movement that is part of an attack.

[Cicciograna]

Wait, why is this still an issue? Didn't the Sage Advice posted by Derpy (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/22/moving-through-leomunds-tiny-hut/) solve the conundrum?




@JeremyECrawford @ChrisPerkinsDnD Leomunds Tiny Hut seems like the perfect siege spell:Ritual,fire arrows out of it,remain safe?
@BrailSays The intent is that objects can move (emphasis on "move") out of the dome—usually on a creature—not be shot out. @ChrisPerkinsDnD


Seems to me that this clears the problem of an arrow being fired from inside out: it's "moving", sure, but JC underlines that it's being shot out of it.
We could extend this to all kinds of attacks, but that would probably be a stretch.

[JNAProductions]

I'll echo those who say you're ruling right, in that you can attack out, but it's not an issue, because anyone with half a brain will just walk the other way and prepare their own defenses/evacuate/whatever.

I'll also echo those saying that it's a single color-any color you want, but only one.

[ChiefBigFeather]

If players start to powergame with tiny hut, just turn the tables. If it really is that powerful, many mercenary groups will want a hut wizard. Hut waylaying would be a thing. Hut ambushing in dungeons could be very deadly.

[Shuruke]

Well its an invulnerable dome..
Things from below can still get in XD

Giant badger or Ankheg here I came XD

[Sigreid]

Well its an invulnerable dome..
Things from below can still get in XD

Giant badger or Ankheg here I came XD

It actually has a floor, but there's nothing stopping something from digging a shaft under the dome to let the party fall when the spell comes down.Just leave enough earth to make everything appear ok but it'll collapse when some weight is put on it.

For a more humorous version, have something like an over-sized purple worm swallow the whole tiny hut. It finds itself stuck in place, they find themselves in a giant monster's belly.

[Darkstar952]

It actually has a floor, but there's nothing stopping something from digging a shaft under the dome to let the party fall when the spell comes down.Just leave enough earth to make everything appear ok but it'll collapse when some weight is put on it.

For a more humorous version, have something like an over-sized purple worm swallow the whole tiny hut. It finds itself stuck in place, they find themselves in a giant monster's belly.

The 'floor' of the hut would surely follow the same rules as the 'walls', those in the hut when cast move through them freely. So once the ground has been dug out then the occupants of the hut will fall through the 'floor' of the hut into the shaft below, causing the hut to end as soon as the mage falls out the bottom of the hut.

[Sigreid]

The 'floor' of the hut would surely follow the same rules as the 'walls', those in the hut when cast move through them freely. So once the ground has been dug out then the occupants of the hut will fall through the 'floor' of the hut into the shaft below, causing the hut to end as soon as the mage falls out the bottom of the hut.

True, I hadn't been thinking of that.