NaibofTabr

Nobel Peace Prize material right there, folks.

A free action that grants a skill check to get +2 to hit on your next attack as a reward for missing is wildly disproportionate. There are feats worse than that. If this is a thing people can do why would literally everyone playing not be constantly chewing up the floor in every encounter?

Ok, yes I can see the potential problems but I think they're easy to handle by just carrying out the action to its logical outcome - which is that the player just ate a handful of gravel. Now if they're a dwarf maybe that's not an issue, but also a dwarf eating gravel might not be any more intimidating than a human eating popcorn. On the other hand if they're an elf or a human or something, well even if they pass a constitution save to not immediately start puking, they're getting broken teeth, a mouthful of rock dust, and future digestion problems.

Sure, they can take an action that is technically possible within the game world, but actions have consequences. The gravel didn't just disappear because they succeeded on the intimidation roll.

Broadly speaking objects that are worn or held are exempted from automatic manipulation by spells and effects, though this is usually called out in the description of the effect.

I agree this one's more of a stretch, I'd say specifically because Mage Hand Legerdemain has specific rules about worn/carried objects that can be manipulated, which implies that anything not defined there cannot be manipulated.

Only problem is that cost of living problems are world wide and not just NYC.

Literally: "the problem [with the proposed action] is that it only applies to a specific area and not the whole world"

I didn't twist anything. Your comment doesn't contain any more nuance than that.

"This attempt to help some people doesn't solve everyone's problems everywhere all at once, therefore it's not good enough!"

The fact that the DM presumably set a DC for the intimidate check is also not the part here that's in question.

OK, which part is?

Oh, yes that does change the meaning.

Just don't want it to be a consistent thing.

Easy, make the player deal with the consequences of eating a handful of gravel.

D&D is great because it allows for creative freedom and doesn't require that everything be explicitly permitted in the written rules. It is always the DM's prerogative to set a DC for any action and make the player roll for it, then roleplay the outcome, which is a lot more fun than just saying "no, you can't do that because it's not described in the rule book".

This isn't "homebrew", it's the right way to play.

Furthermore, DND specifically is kind of bad at creativity. It's very precariously balanced, with specific rules in odd places and no rules in others. Compare with, for example, Fate, which has "this thing in the scene works to my advantage" rules built in. DND is almost entirely in the hands of the DM.

It was never intended to be a complete, all-encompassing ruleset. It's a framework that you build on. It's intentionally open-ended because that allows greater freedom for both the DM and the players. If the rules are too strict then the gameplay is just mechanics with little room for roleplay.

When you think about it, the body of any living creature is an open container made of animal skin.

"I'm a personality prototype. You can tell, can't you?"

If you divert all the labor spent on useless shit towards actual things that people need then there is no need for a 996 work style.

But then who will make more money for the shareholders?