4
\$\begingroup\$

One of the limitations of Commune With Nature is that

The spell doesn't function where nature has been replaced by construction, such as in dungeons and towns.

I am uncertain what that entails given that one of the subjects one can divine is buildings.

\$\endgroup\$
5
\$\begingroup\$

If cast within a town or a dungeon, the spell doesn't do anything.

Your confusion seems to stem from the fact that the spell can discern the location of buildings and/or nearby towns.

One building does not equal a town, so it'll work if cast in a log cabin in a rainforest, for example.

And if it is cast in a forest, and there is a town nearby, you'll be able to find the town.

This might be a little confusing, but the spell clearly states that it can:

For example, you could determine the location of powerful undead in the area, the location of major sources of safe drinking water, and the location of any nearby towns.

So, while the spell cannot be cast within that town, the town's location can be discerned from the spell.

How much information can be gained?

You instantly gain knowledge of up to three facts of your choice about any of the following subjects as they relate to the area:

...

For example, you could determine the location of powerful undead in the area, the location of major sources of safe drinking water, and the location of any nearby towns.

So, the spell can gain facts, not insight, opinions, intrigue or current events. An easy way to stick to this is to dispense quantifiable information.

What would "Nature" know?

This is probably mostly up to DM interpretation.

Would trees, animals, and other nature-y things count exact numbers of enemy forces? Probably not.

Would they know how long they have been in the area? Probably.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ let me clarify. For example the number of undead in a town or a dungeon is quantifiable. Are you saying the spell could provide this information as long as it was cast in a setting within range where nature hadn't been replaced? \$\endgroup\$ – kent Oct 1 at 4:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think that is up to your interpretation of what “nature” would know. I used the quantifiable simplification to make it easier to justify what is or isn’t a fact. \$\endgroup\$ – Yvihs Oct 1 at 8:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ correct me if I'm wrong. Your interpretation seems to be commune with nature can provide facts about areas where it cannot function if the nature surrounding those areas could possibly see it. And the information on buildings refers to the exterior? \$\endgroup\$ – kent Oct 1 at 14:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ The spell does not designate any limits to the information given beyond that the information has the be a fact. It even states that the spell can discern the locations of nearby towns. So, I think it’s reasonable to state that the spell cast outside of a town can determine information within a town, but the specifics are up to you as a DM. \$\endgroup\$ – Yvihs Oct 1 at 19:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ So for the limit "the spell doesn't function where nature has been replaced by construction" your interpretation is "function" only means "can't be cast?" \$\endgroup\$ – kent Oct 1 at 21:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.