Workign With a PC With Divine Intervention As A DM

[MarkVIIIMarc]

One of the players I DM for has hit Level 10 and now has Divine Intervention through his deity Frey.

Much like I would with my new power, he rolls that die every day. I let him summon a Planar Ally who physically transported the group a few days down the road figuring it could have been a teleport spell but if that seemed cooler so be it. Heck, it had an interesting effect of skipping some encounters and making the party HIGHLY visible to the big bad guy.

Two or three days of game time later the Cleric tried to banish an Ancient Dragon with Divine Intervention (too soon I see now that I looked it up). He rolled, was successful and asked Frey to Banish the dragon. I asked him to look up the Banish Spell, shrugged and rolled a save, it failed miserably but chose to save which I described as, "by the power of Tiamat this ancient creature which has been alive since before the dawn of recorded history decides to save"

I figure it burned a Legendary Resistance so it wasn't a wasted ability on the Cleric's part. It wasn't an instant win button though.

IF the Cleric wasn't using his Divine Intervention too often would that have been an acceptable ruling?

What else should I expect?

[darknite]

Isn't there a once per week limiter on that ability? Also, they have a what, 10% chance per attempt? This should't be happening much, in any case.

[Sparky McDibben]

I've seen people bust that out for so many things, man. I had a cleric invoke their deity over poor sanitation.

Ways to constrain its use without punishing the player include "Frey isn't here right now," having the summons be answered by an obnoxious servant (maybe an angel just wants to hug everyone, etc.), or, in cases where the player has invoked it frivolously (your call, but I generally go with "lives aren't on the line), maybe a silly curse from the Wild Magic Surge table.

Alternatively, what happens if you flip the odds? They have a 90% chance to have the deity intervene, but that intervention goes off the rails pretty fast.

These might be too close to Grod's Law, though.

[Demonslayer666]

I don't see a problem with them asking every day until it does something. It is a daily ability until it succeeds, then you need a week to use it again. How frequently they ask for help should have no impact on the efficacy.

I think you handled it fine. I probably would have had the divine intervention be more powerful, like by having dragon face a more powerful version of banishment where they struggle to stay on their plane, giving the party a free round against the dragon, or taken away all the legendary resistances, or something like that.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Personally I would have just banished the Dragon. It's already unlikely to succeed so you should make the effect godlike, seeing as it's literally a deity intervening. I'm assuming the Dragon was native to the plane you were present on, meaning that it would grant the players 1 minute to stabilize and prepare for the dragon's return.

While I don't think it's wrong to treat the Divine Intervention as a standard banishment spell, I do think it's a bit underwhelming to say that this Cleric's God isn't capable of overpowering a very mortal dragon. If a mortal spellcaster can banish that same dragon with only some degree of difficulty it should be just about effortless for a God who decides to step in.

[Keravath]

Divine intervention has a lot of role play elements. It is also governed by the DMs adjudication. Here is the text.

DIVINE INTERVENTION:
Beginning at 10th level, you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great. 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. If your deity intervenes, you can't use this feature again for 7 days. Otherwise, you can use it again after you finish a long rest. At 20th level, your call for intervention succeeds automatically, no roll required."

Some key phrases:
- when your need is great
- The DM chooses the nature of the intervention; the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate.

If the characters are traveling along on a quest and the cleric decides to burn their Divine Intervention every day in an attempt to hasten their travel along without meeting the requirement "when your need is great" then I'd have the diety or their representative express irritation with the cleric attempting to summon the aid of a diety without a good reason. Dieties can be fickle and could easily get irritated at a higher level cleric for abusing their power. Perhaps the diety responds and casts a Bestow Curse on the cleric for the next week to teach them not to summon the aid of the diety for trivial matters. The character describes the aid that is sought BUT the DM decides what actually happens and the Diety is an NPC not a spell dispenser.

On the other hand, the second example where the cleric requests the diety to intervene by banishing a dragon could very well be a good example of the use of divine intervention. If the party is fighting an ancient dragon then there might very well be great need for assistance. The spell DC would probably be very high (perhaps auto-failed) but the use of a legendary save means the dragon is unaffected. Seems like a reasonable resolution.

[ProsecutorGodot]

If the characters are traveling along on a quest and the cleric decides to burn their Divine Intervention every day in an attempt to hasten their travel along without meeting the requirement "when your need is great" then I'd have the diety or their representative express irritation with the cleric attempting to summon the aid of a diety without a good reason. Dieties can be fickle and could easily get irritated at a higher level cleric for abusing their power. Perhaps the diety responds and casts a Bestow Curse on the cleric for the next week to teach them not to summon the aid of the diety for trivial matters. The character describes the aid that is sought BUT the DM decides what actually happens and the Diety is an NPC not a spell dispenser.

You're definitely going to please the player by rewarding their success at divine intervention with the aid of a curse.

I'm pretty sure the need is decided to be great enough when the Cleric succeeds in getting their God to intervene, It'd be a real **** move for the DM to decide that your god only felt the need to intervene to slap their chosen one for being too demanding. What kind of deity is going to grant a mortal the privilege of being a conduit of their power and then be petty enough to treat that mortal like a dog when they're working to further that deities goals as promised? I guess Evil gods would probably find some joy in that.

"Oi, that Cleric down in Toril is asking for my help for the third time this year, I'm gonna go down there and take his eyes away for a week so he might think better of it."

[Snails]

"Need is great" basically means either you are in the middle of a combat the party looks like they are losing and can expect consequences like PC deaths in the near future, or the cleric is about to face some other insurmountable obstacle.

The first has the implied cost of throwing away a valuable Action in a tough combat ~90% of the time.
The second implies the party is pretty hosed and the cleric is probably running out of spells -- gods expect their faithful to at least try to fix their own problems with the tools on hand.

As others have pointed out, Banishment is not usually abusive, as most enemies reappear in 1 minute, basically giving the PCs extra buff time or escape. Provoking the use of a Legendary Resistance is a fair result.

[Hail Tempus]

Yeah, DMs shouldn't try and nerf this ability, or get cute with the decision on when the "need is great." Divine Intervention is basically a lesser form of Wish, that you can use once a week, at most, and you have, at best, a 20% chance of it working. It's not a reliable ability in combat, but there is something really cool about a desperate Cleric making the roll and saving the day. Don't take that away from them.

The question of whether the "need is great" in the respective god's opinion is answered by the dice, not a DM looking to be a jerk.

[Keravath]

Yeah, DMs shouldn't try and nerf this ability, or get cute with the decision on when the "need is great." Divine Intervention is basically a lesser form of Wish, that you can use once a week, at most, and you have, at best, a 20% chance of it working. It's not a reliable ability in combat, but there is something really cool about a desperate Cleric making the roll and saving the day. Don't take that away from them.

The question of whether the "need is great" in the respective god's opinion is answered by the dice, not a DM looking to be a jerk.

1) At level 20 you don't roll. Success is automatic.
2) The text of Divine Intervention specifically states "you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great."

It is up to the DM and the player to decide what would constitute grounds for "when your need is great" and make this clear to the player. If I was DMing I wouldn't let the cleric make a free roll everyday to get get a wish starting at level 10. I don't interpret the ability that way based on the text saying your need must be great to call on your diety.

However, the text does not specify any consequences for attempting to use it when your need is not great. This is another conversation for the player and the DM. My example of applying a curse for frivolous attempts to invoke Divine Intervention when there is no great need would be just one way to approach it and would only be needed if the character was aware that "great need" was required and chose to ignore that requirement.

However, this is entirely a discussion for the player and the DM. Other than the comment about great need in the text and the DM deciding what happens (not necessarily what the player asks for), there are no rules about what Divine Intervention could or should be capable of doing or when it should or should not work. Another option for a DM would be to have nothing happen at all if the cleric succeeds on a roll and in the judgement of the DM there is no great need.

This isn't a nerf to Divine Intervention ... the text specifically indicates the aid of the diety should be called upon when the cleric has "great need" ... so allowing the cleric to use it every day until it succeeds so that they can get a high level cleric spell cast is, in my opinion, not making use of the ability either as written or intended.

P.S. No one is suggesting taking away the ability of the cleric to save the day with a desperate roll ... since in that case, clearly, the need is great. The situation we are discussing is the cleric hanging around the inn asking his diety to provide some better food and drink than the fare available at the inn. Or the cleric's party traveling cross country asking the diety to send some help to move them along faster so he can rest his sore feet (the OPs first example).

[BloodSnake'sCha]

1) At level 20 you don't roll. Success is automatic.
2) The text of Divine Intervention specifically states "you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great."

It is up to the DM and the player to decide what would constitute grounds for "when your need is great" and make this clear to the player. If I was DMing I wouldn't let the cleric make a free roll everyday to get get a wish starting at level 10. I don't interpret the ability that way based on the text saying your need must be great to call on your diety.

However, the text does not specify any consequences for attempting to use it when your need is not great. This is another conversation for the player and the DM. My example of applying a curse for frivolous attempts to invoke Divine Intervention when there is no great need would be just one way to approach it and would only be needed if the character was aware that "great need" was required and chose to ignore that requirement.

However, this is entirely a discussion for the player and the DM. Other than the comment about great need in the text and the DM deciding what happens (not necessarily what the player asks for), there are no rules about what Divine Intervention could or should be capable of doing or when it should or should not work. Another option for a DM would be to have nothing happen at all if the cleric succeeds on a roll and in the judgement of the DM there is no great need.

This isn't a nerf to Divine Intervention ... the text specifically indicates the aid of the diety should be called upon when the cleric has "great need" ... so allowing the cleric to use it every day until it succeeds so that they can get a high level cleric spell cast is, in my opinion, not making use of the ability either as written or intended.

P.S. No one is suggesting taking away the ability of the cleric to save the day with a desperate roll ... since in that case, clearly, the need is great. The situation we are discussing is the cleric hanging around the inn asking his diety to provide some better food and drink than the fare available at the inn. Or the cleric's party traveling cross country asking the diety to send some help to move them along faster so he can rest his sore feet (the OPs first example).

"you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great."

If the need isn't great you don't meet the requirements for calling your deity.
If you don't meet the requirements you can't use it.

The definition of great need can be changed.

The god of song and wine can see an ine with no bard and drinks as something that his cleric need to fix it great. But I don't think the god of war and glory will agree.
(Sorry for my bad English, I am not a native speaker).

[Hypersmith]

Yeah, DMs shouldn't try and nerf this ability, or get cute with the decision on when the "need is great." Divine Intervention is basically a lesser form of Wish, that you can use once a week, at most, and you have, at best, a 20% chance of it working. It's not a reliable ability in combat, but there is something really cool about a desperate Cleric making the roll and saving the day. Don't take that away from them.

The question of whether the "need is great" in the respective god's opinion is answered by the dice, not a DM looking to be a jerk.
Yeah. Mostly look to replicate spells with it - but don't be afraid to let cool things happen. There will come a point where your cleric succeeds once, then really needs another chance but finds it's been less than a week - let experience teach them when to use it. I think MarkVIIMarc has handled this well overall, giving flavor, remembering the dragon had legendary resistance - allowing success, but not derailing things too hard.

Taking the first couple flavor words of an ability and using it as justification for nerfing players is a really mean move. To me, it's as dumb as looking at the level 20 barbarian feature
At 20th level. you embody the power of the wilds. Your Strength and Constitution scores increase by 4. Your maximum for those scores is now 24., and telling a warforged level 20 barbarian that since their power comes from the improvements they've made to their frame over the course of the game, they don't get the improved ability scores.

You're a level 10 cleric - the god clearly already likes you plenty.

[ProsecutorGodot]

1) At level 20 you don't roll. Success is automatic.
2) The text of Divine Intervention specifically states "you can call on your deity to intervene on your behalf when your need is great."
It is up to the DM and the player to decide what would constitute grounds for "when your need is great" and make this clear to the player. If I was DMing I wouldn't let the cleric make a free roll everyday to get get a wish starting at level 10. I don't interpret the ability that way based on the text saying your need must be great to call on your diety.
Frankly taking this as a limitation on use is ridiculous.

Let's form a short list of arbitrary limitations for a few class features using that same logic, it's all fair game.
-Barbarian's must fight with "primal ferocity" when they rage and if you aren't angry and ferocious enough, you aren't raging.
-Bard's must inspire their allies with "stirring words or music" so if you don't give a speech or sing a quick melody you haven't inspired anybody. Dancing isn't allowed and it would definitely suck to be a Swords Bard since you're blade tricks no longer qualify.
-Cleric's must be in great need for Divine Intervention. If that lost left arm isn't life threatening and you're right handed, do you really need Regenerate?
-Paladin's must detect evil through odor and good through heavenly music. If either of those sense are hampered your Divine Sense fails to detect any creatures.
-Ranger's must have significant experience studying, tracking, hunting, and even talking to a certain type of enemy. You can't choose favored enemy Dragons if you've never met a Dragon and had a chat with him about how much you hate his existence.

I think it's quite a stretch to use that text as a hard limitation, especially as an excuse to punish a player for trying to use their class feature for a benefit. The idea that you would even suggest having the player punished for succeeding on their roll for Divine Intervention is appalling to me. The idea that you might not even allow the player to roll for such intervention unless you think it's appropriate makes me sorry for any Cleric's rolled up at your table.

Divine Intervention is Cleric's coolest feature. Let the player use it.

[Grey Watcher]

Just be strict about the Week-Long Cooldown on Success. To reiterate a point already made, if they find themselves unable to use Divine Intervention at a critical moment because they used it as a glorified taxi cab two days prior, well, that's a lesson to maybe put a bit more thought into it.

At most, I'd give them a few ominous signs and portents, maybe as a hint that they should be wiser about using their powers. But really, using Divine Intervention to guarantee favorable winds while sailing so you can get to doing your god's work all the sooner seems as valid to me as asking for a tactical nuke bolt of divine fury to one-hit KO a boss monster. Less showy, but no less valid.

It might even be more a sign that your pacing could use some tweaking to optimally suit your players. If they're button-mashing their powers like this, maybe they threats coming at them more than once a week.

[Tawmis]

I figure it burned a Legendary Resistance so it wasn't a wasted ability on the Cleric's part. It wasn't an instant win button though.
IF the Cleric wasn't using his Divine Intervention too often would that have been an acceptable ruling?
What else should I expect?

I would go with your ruling, myself.
Because what the Dragon did wasn't the DM making up a new rule on the spot.
The Dragon was using something already printed - the Legendary Action to save instead of failing.

But a good thing to do (as stated before, since it has such a low chance of succeeding - 10% for example) - is read the party. Does the Cleric look like they might be upset if it fails? Is the party already beat up?

The reason I ask - if the party isn't beaten up and the Cleric does this - I'd use the Legendary Action for sure to say, "Tiamat intercepts your god's divination and the Dragon uses a Legendary Action to succeed!"

This way the rest of the party isn't robbed of a potential good fight.

If the party IS banged up - then, I might just let it succeed - but as the dragon becomes banished - it swears vengeance.

Now you have an enemy for the party to encounter later. Much more furious than it was before. And that Cleric is going to make it to the top of the hatred list!

Just things to consider. :)

[Bubzors]

For what it's worth, I'm in the "great need" camp. I would grant this ability anytime they are in stressful situations (including any combat). Or if they needed something they cannot do themselves quickly.

In the OP about getting transport further down the road, normally I would say no. But if they are racing to the next kingdom to stop the BBEG from killing orphans or whatever, then yes of course then can spam the ability every day. That is a situation of great need

It is a very fluid thing and should be discussed between the DM and the players. As usual as long as the expectation is spelled out ahead of time there usually aren't problems.

I feel half of these problems I see on theses boards can be solved by being reasonable adults who can talk things out. But then again I dont have players that try to abuse abilities purposely. They come to the table to hang out and enjoy time with friends, so who knows

[ProsecutorGodot]

For what it's worth, I'm in the "great need" camp. I would grant this ability anytime they are in stressful situations (including any combat). Or if they needed something they cannot do themselves quickly.

In the OP about getting transport further down the road, normally I would say no. But if they are racing to the next kingdom to stop the BBEG from killing orphans or whatever, then yes of course then can spam the ability every day. That is a situation of great need

It is a very fluid thing and should be discussed between the DM and the players. As usual as long as the expectation is spelled out ahead of time there usually aren't problems.

I feel half of these problems I see on theses boards can be solved by being reasonable adults who can talk things out. But then again I dont have players that try to abuse abilities purposely. They come to the table to hang out and enjoy time with friends, so who knows

If you think that a player is abusing their once a week success for little effect, their punishment is a week off of asking for their god's aid when it might have been more useful. I'm not against giving them only a small amount of help but they should never be punished for a successful roll for intervention. This isn't an ability that is easily abused, there's already a low chance of success and you as the DM already get the whole say on what it does in the slim chance that it succeeds.

So why in the nine hells do you want to punish a player for using their fun toy? It's got a week cooldown, let the player have fun with it because in many campaigns a week cooldown can be seen as several sessions.

We can take the "transport further down the road" example. Why not, instead of flatout saying no, allow the roll. On a success, instead of the extravagant "take us their instantly oh great Lathander" they get a celestial wagon with attached warhorse that will take them to their destination at twice the speed of a mortal mount and disappear when they arrive.

Player got what they wanted and the DM doesn't have to worry about the players now running around the world with a celestial chariot because it is explicitly on loan. There's also the nice bonus that if the DM did have plans for that trip they're not completely circumvented, just made a bit easier for the players to bypass.

If you're not deemed to be in "great need" that is reflected with a failed roll. If your god decides to intervene that means they've already deemed this a worthy request.