If you're up against a legendary creature, it's 1 action to inflict at least 3 rounds' worth of debuffs.
Note that the debuff applies immediately, the save each round is just to see when the debuffs expire early, or if they last for the full week.
It's also a nifty spell to give to enemy NPC spellcasters because even if they only last a round or two, you can make a PC feel bad for a week or until they get a lesser restoration cast on them. Good for filler encounters before the big bad of a dungeon to wear down PC resources a bit more.
Jeremy Crawford has stated that the effects of Contagion aren't supposed to kick in until after three failed saving throws. I personally think that makes no sense. You cast a 5th level spell and might end up waiting 5 rounds only for it to end up doing nothing. Using his RAI, Contagion is a garbage spell and I can't imagine anyone ever wasting a 5th level spell slot on it.
Jeremy Crawford has stated that the effects of Contagion aren't supposed to kick in until after three failed saving throws. I personally think that makes no sense. You cast a 5th level spell and might end up waiting 5 rounds only for it to end up doing nothing. Using his RAI, Contagion is a garbage spell and I can't imagine anyone ever wasting a 5th level spell slot on it.
That's... unfortunate. And really underpowered for a level 5 spell. Still could be useful for a DM to sic on a PC, but I don't see PCs getting any good use out of it.
That's... unfortunate. And really underpowered for a level 5 spell. Still could be useful for a DM to sic on a PC, but I don't see PCs getting any good use out of it.
Jeremy Crawford has stated that the effects of Contagion aren't supposed to kick in until after three failed saving throws. I personally think that makes no sense. You cast a 5th level spell and might end up waiting 5 rounds only for it to end up doing nothing. Using his RAI, Contagion is a garbage spell and I can't imagine anyone ever wasting a 5th level spell slot on it.
Reading the spell entry does give the idea the effects start only after three failed saves. The point of the spell may be to not sue in combat but for other reasons.
Beyond that, probably shouldn't use the spell. However it may be very usefull depending on what you are fighting.
I've always felt that Contagion was more of a spell that monsters & bad guys would use on PCs, rather than something that's actually useful for PCs to cast on their opponents.
The wording is consistent though, the target needs to fail 3 saves before the effects occur.
I've always felt that Contagion was more of a spell that monsters & bad guys would use on PCs, rather than something that's actually useful for PCs to cast on their opponents.
The wording is consistent though, the target needs to fail 3 saves before the effects occur.
Yes use it for the big boss, Although, you need a solid plan beforehand.
I've always felt that Contagion was more of a spell that monsters & bad guys would use on PCs, rather than something that's actually useful for PCs to cast on their opponents.
The wording is consistent though, the target needs to fail 3 saves before the effects occur.
I'm really not seeing how the wording is consistent at all with the intent. The RAI might be that (and is that, according to the Sage Advice column linked), but the wording of the spell itself (RAW) indicates otherwise.
"Your touch inflicts disease. Make a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach. On a hit, you afflict the creature with a disease of your choice from any of the ones described below.
At the end of each of the target's turns, it must make a Constitution saving throw. After failing three of these saving throws, the disease's effects last for the duration, and the creature stops making these saves. After succeeding on three of these saving throws, the creature recovers from the disease, and the spell ends."
The spell's wording strongly suggests that the initial touch is what gives the disease, and the creature "recovers" after three saves. To recover, you'd need to have been suffering from it in the first place. Without knowing designer intent, I would rule it as afflicting the disease on initial touch due to that wording (as I did in my initial reply). Can you explain how you get your interpretation from the wording? I'm really curious because I'm not seeing it, and I like to know both sides of a story.
My guess is that the saving throw are a kind of incubation period. During this time no effect applies to the target. If you fail then the effects apply. This is how the official version spell is supposed to work.
The text says "On a hit, you afflict the creature with a disease..." and "After failing the of these saving throws, the disease's effects last for the duration..." Their intent apparently was for the effects not to start until three failed saving throws, but the text doesn't explicitly state that. Also, that intent is stupid, as it makes it a worthless garbage pit of a spell.
I'd argue that as written, the effects should start immediately. It says you afflict them with a disease. If you're afflicted with a disease, you should have symptoms. This seems like a DM discretion situation. So, before prepping the spell, I'd check how my DM rules this.
The text says "On a hit, you afflict the creature with a disease..." and "After failing the of these saving throws, the disease's effects last for the duration..." Their intent apparently was for the effects not to start until three failed saving throws, but the text doesn't explicitly state that. Also, that intent is stupid, as it makes it a worthless garbage pit of a spell.
I'd argue that as written, the effects should start immediately. It says you afflict them with a disease. If you're afflicted with a disease, you should have symptoms. This seems like a DM discretion situation. So, before prepping the spell, I'd check how my DM rules this.
Most diseases don't cause symptoms upon first being affected, its only after it incubates that you feel the effects which is what the spell is going for.
Now that I think about it, if the effects were to start immediately after the casting, the spell would be broken. I mean think about putting Mind Fire or Flesh rot on the target, even for only 3 rounds: the target is dead in 2 or 3 rounds maximum. The fact that the effects shows up only after the failed saving throws adds fairness to the spell.
And I must say, I like this way: the spell work differently from others, requires a bit more strategy.
But the spell would be the best spell ever if the effect would take effect immedialy. Especially the debuff that gives disadvantage on con sves and stuns you everytime you receive damage. That makes you dead without having a chance. Even a legendary creature is dead in the first 3 rounds because it can't even fight back. Also you need to remember that hitting at that level is usally easy against most targets. Usually you look at +9 to hit. +5 from stat, +4 proficiency bonus. Add advantage and its game over.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have not much experience with the Contagion spell.
To me, it is not worth using it in combat with easy or medium difficulty. But in even difficult encounters, it still takes three turns to work.
Which are the situations in which this spell is really effective, in your experience?
If you're up against a legendary creature, it's 1 action to inflict at least 3 rounds' worth of debuffs.
Note that the debuff applies immediately, the save each round is just to see when the debuffs expire early, or if they last for the full week.
It's also a nifty spell to give to enemy NPC spellcasters because even if they only last a round or two, you can make a PC feel bad for a week or until they get a lesser restoration cast on them. Good for filler encounters before the big bad of a dungeon to wear down PC resources a bit more.
Wow, I always thought that the effects applied after the failed saves (read better next time...). This means two things:
This thread is completely useless.
Contagion is the best spell ever.
Thanks @skizzerz
Closing useless thread...
Just kidding. ;p
Site Rules & Guidelines --- Focused Feedback Mega Threads --- Staff Quotes --- Homebrew Tutorial --- Pricing FAQ
Please feel free to message either Sorce or another moderator if you have any concerns.
Jeremy Crawford has stated that the effects of Contagion aren't supposed to kick in until after three failed saving throws. I personally think that makes no sense. You cast a 5th level spell and might end up waiting 5 rounds only for it to end up doing nothing. Using his RAI, Contagion is a garbage spell and I can't imagine anyone ever wasting a 5th level spell slot on it.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/13/contagion-effects/
Pair it with Bane to give disadvantage on those saves...but yeah still have to wait 3 turns....
"I was led to believe there would be punch and pie?"
That's... unfortunate. And really underpowered for a level 5 spell. Still could be useful for a DM to sic on a PC, but I don't see PCs getting any good use out of it.
But I'd think casting it on someone would lead to combat. In D&D, if someone chanted mystic words and then touched me, there'd be some trouble.
I've always felt that Contagion was more of a spell that monsters & bad guys would use on PCs, rather than something that's actually useful for PCs to cast on their opponents.
The wording is consistent though, the target needs to fail 3 saves before the effects occur.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
"Your touch inflicts disease. Make a melee spell attack against a creature within your reach. On a hit, you afflict the creature with a disease of your choice from any of the ones described below.
At the end of each of the target's turns, it must make a Constitution saving throw. After failing three of these saving throws, the disease's effects last for the duration, and the creature stops making these saves. After succeeding on three of these saving throws, the creature recovers from the disease, and the spell ends."
The spell's wording strongly suggests that the initial touch is what gives the disease, and the creature "recovers" after three saves. To recover, you'd need to have been suffering from it in the first place. Without knowing designer intent, I would rule it as afflicting the disease on initial touch due to that wording (as I did in my initial reply). Can you explain how you get your interpretation from the wording? I'm really curious because I'm not seeing it, and I like to know both sides of a story.
The wording is quite explicit.
Think of the 3-5 turns after the touch attack as "incubation" before it's determined if the disease takes hold or not.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The intended interpretation comes from Jeremy Crawford:
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/06/13/contagion-effects/
My guess is that the saving throw are a kind of incubation period. During this time no effect applies to the target. If you fail then the effects apply. This is how the official version spell is supposed to work.
The text says "On a hit, you afflict the creature with a disease..." and "After failing the of these saving throws, the disease's effects last for the duration..." Their intent apparently was for the effects not to start until three failed saving throws, but the text doesn't explicitly state that. Also, that intent is stupid, as it makes it a worthless garbage pit of a spell.
I'd argue that as written, the effects should start immediately. It says you afflict them with a disease. If you're afflicted with a disease, you should have symptoms. This seems like a DM discretion situation. So, before prepping the spell, I'd check how my DM rules this.
Now that I think about it, if the effects were to start immediately after the casting, the spell would be broken. I mean think about putting Mind Fire or Flesh rot on the target, even for only 3 rounds: the target is dead in 2 or 3 rounds maximum. The fact that the effects shows up only after the failed saving throws adds fairness to the spell.
And I must say, I like this way: the spell work differently from others, requires a bit more strategy.
The wording is badly chosen.
But the spell would be the best spell ever if the effect would take effect immedialy. Especially the debuff that gives disadvantage on con sves and stuns you everytime you receive damage. That makes you dead without having a chance. Even a legendary creature is dead in the first 3 rounds because it can't even fight back. Also you need to remember that hitting at that level is usally easy against most targets. Usually you look at +9 to hit. +5 from stat, +4 proficiency bonus. Add advantage and its game over.