![\"Know](\"https:\/\/hill-kleerup.org\/blog\/heroes\/wp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Know-the-rules.webp\")
<\/a>Part of an ongoing series of 5e Rules notes.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\nAs a DM, I really dislike prophecy \/ fortune-telling \/ prognostication spells. Letting the players know something about what’s coming, when something\u00a0is<\/em> coming, feels like a horrible idea. And if I have to decided on the fly if something\u00a0is\u00a0<\/em>going to be coming … then it’s even worse.<\/p>\n In the case of my most recent campaign, it was about our druid and his Augury\u00a0<\/a><\/i>spell<\/a>\u00a0(PHB 215-16):<\/p>\n By casting […]\u00a0 you receive an omen from an otherworldly entity about the results of a specific course of action that you plan to take within the next 30 minutes. The DM chooses from the following possible omens:<\/p>\n The spell doesn\u2019t take into account any possible circumstances that might change the outcome, such as the casting of additional Spells or the loss or gain of a companion.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n We dithered a bit over whether this spell was focused on actions<\/i>\u00a0<\/strong>taken in the near term (or started in the near term?), the\u00a0results<\/i>\u00a0<\/strong>in the near term, or both. A lot of people also have this problem, because it’s, honestly, a poorly worded spell.<\/p>\n Other groups have had questions come up around, say, results for\u00a0whom<\/i><\/strong> (the caster? the party? an identified individual?). If going down this path is going to help the caster get their reward from the sheriff, but also lead to another party member’s arch-nemesis getting a shot at them, what should the results be?<\/p>\n Or results from\u00a0the perspective of whom<\/strong>\u00a0<\/i>(the caster? the spell’s otherworldly entity?). If the party is thinking of attacking the, oh, let’s say a lich, a goal a LG deity might wholly support, even if it’s certain death for the players … how should Augury<\/i>\u00a0turn out?<\/p>\n There’s a lot of\u00a0interesting meta discussion out there about <\/a>Augury<\/a>\u00a0<\/i>(for those who find such things interesting), but here’s where I fall:<\/p>\n The spell is about “the results of\u00a0a specific course of action<\/b>\u00a0that you plan to\u00a0take within the next 30 minutes<\/b>“.<\/p>\n While some interpret this as “only things you are doing and have results in the next 30 minutes,” I think there is room there for not just actions, but a\u00a0course\u00a0<\/i>of actions which is\u00a0initiated\u00a0<\/i>within that 30 minutes. The course may not be completed in 30 minutes. The results may not be achieved or clear in the next 30 minutes. But\u00a0Augury\u00a0<\/a><\/i>can, with increasing vagueness, deal with things beyond a half hour<\/a>.<\/p>\n Some folk note that\u00a0the 3.5 rules<\/a>\u00a0were a lot more clear on this:<\/p>\n The augury can see into the future only about half an hour, so anything that might happen after that does not affect the result. Thus, the result might not take into account the long-term consequences of a contemplated action.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The rules lawyers then argue whether (a) that should help inform how to treat the 5e rules, or (b) the lack of such language in 5e means this restriction is no longer true. I would probably lean into the latter interpretation, as the rules are evolutionary, not de novo<\/i>\u00a0each edition. I think it also makes better story sense.<\/p>\n For the otherworldly being (i.e., the DM), the more specific and bounded the course of action and timeframe are, the clearer the results. So, “Should we go through these doors and into the dungeon beyond?”<\/strong> is kind of open-ended … and the augury will be more approximate.<\/p>\n On consideration, the DM (the otherworldly entity) knows that<\/p>\n The Augury<\/i>\u00a0would probably show\u00a0Weal,<\/i>\u00a0for that treasure that lies at the foreseeable end of the course of action you are beginning in the next thirty minutes, even if the road may be bumpy to get there.<\/p>\n But<\/em> … if the dragon was knowably (by the otherworldly being) of a CR that would quite likely lead to a partial or total party kill, then even if the path to it was some hours long, an Augury\u00a0<\/i>should show\u00a0Woe<\/i>.<\/p>\n In other words, it’s not just a “am I safe for the next 30 minutes?”<\/em> spell, but “are my plans being initiated right now leading to significant benefit or harm going forward.”<\/em> The further forward, the more hazy. And it’s not open-ended: “Yes, if you set off on this quest in the next 30 minutes then, at the end of your life in fifty years, you will look back on this day in pride, and your deity will reward you in the afterlife” is beyond the spell’s scope.<\/p>\n So let me frame the generic question this way: “Will this specific course of action I am taking lead most proximately to my being benefited or harmed?”<\/strong> That proximity may be beyond the thirty minutes. And the coupling of the dragon and the treasure she sits on may lead to a Weal\u00a0and<\/u>\u00a0Woe<\/i>\u00a0answer. But it won’t be a “Yes, you will get through rooms 1-5 of the dungeon and find 50gp there, so definitely\u00a0Weal<\/i>, but, whoa, room 6 is gonna be a hot mess for you, but that’s more than 30 minutes out, so further deponent sayeth not!”<\/p>\n I’d have it say Woe,<\/i> even if the results aren’t within the next 30 minutes. On the other hand, if the idol was necessary to get into the Castle Arrgh, the next big step on the quest, then I’d give a Weal and Woe<\/i>\u00a0result; I might even do that if the curse drew attackers right now, because the proximate Woe is balanced by a greater later Weal. (I might also phrase it as “Woe and Weal,”<\/em> to give some sense of the sequence.)<\/p>\n In that case the DM should press to frame this into the specific questions, either (a) “We are going to sneak past the guards” \u2192 Woe<\/i>) or (b) “We are going to look for the plans in the leader’s tent” \u2192 Weal.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/a>Don’t make me Augury<\/em>. You wouldn’t like me when I’m Augury<\/em>.<\/h1>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Timing<\/h1>\n
An (ironic) look to the past<\/h2>\n
Some hypotheticals<\/h1>\n
<\/a>\n
<\/a>Another example: “Should I pick up this idol?”<\/strong> The idol is secretly cursed to draw attacking undead to you at the next New Moon, which is a week away. What should the Augury<\/em> say?<\/p>\n<\/a>What about results that depend on die rolls?<\/strong> That one gets (ha!) dicier. Some folk argue that\u00a0the spell assumes success<\/a> (“We are going to sneak past the guards and find the plans in the leader’s tent — Weal or Woe?”), but if the DM thinks that highly unlikely due to the factors unknown to the players (a guard with a really high Perception), what to do?<\/p>\n