“Ah! Let go of me!”
The halfling cleric shouted in pain and frustration as the necromancer’s gaunt, talon-like fingers tightened around her wrist. She struggled against his grip as he left her aloft, tears of rage welling up in her eyes as her blood began to dribble out from beneath his fetid fingernails. He smiled a wicked, gap-toothed smile as a sickly green glow began to surround his hand, casting his face in long, eerie shadows. The cleric’s face grew pale. Not from fear, though she was nearly paralyzed with it, but with a queasy, vomitous ache in the pit of her stomach.
Her senses began to stretch. The world went into soft focus, and sounds became muffled and quiet. She vaguely comprehended movement to her left, then a flash of steel in front of her. The necromancer’s bony face twisted into fear, and then into pain. A gout of hazy red shot up in front of her face, and she fell suddenly to the ground. The shock snapped everything suddenly back into focus.
“She said ‘let go,’ monster,” the fighter said. She flicked the necromancer’s blood from one of her scimitars and spat upon his corpse. The cleric caught her casting a tentative glance up at the undead horde her allies her fighting, then, assured that she was safe for a moment, turned towards the cleric and knelt down, putting a callused hand upon her chest. “Hey,” the fighter said, “Are you okay?”
The cleric gagged as another wave of queasiness traveled up her guts and into her throat. “Y-yeah,” she stammered, fumbling for the holy symbol around her neck. “I don’t know what’s happening,” she gasped, struggle to hold back her morning rations.
“Your wrist,” the fighter muttered, worry spreading across her face. “It won’t stop bleeding. Oh, gods. Your blood, it’s so thick. It’s like jelly!”
The cleric struggled to focus her hazy vision on her bleeding wrist as the fighter desperately searched for a cloth to staunch the bleeding. The halfling wracked her brain, thinking of what spell could possibly have caused something like this. Then it struck her.
“It’s a disease,” she muttered. “Slimy Doom.”
The fighter looked at her companion and stifled a giggle. “Come again?”
“It’s a magical contagion. It hasn’t taken root yet, though. There’s still time to… Ah!” The cleric muttered a quick prayer and pressed her glowing holy symbol to her wound, casting a lesser restorative charm to purge the magical poison from her body. She looked up at the fighter, warmth returning to her cheeks. “Good as new. Lathander keeps us safe from all ills, does he not?”
The fighter laughed and held the halfling close for a brief, joyous moment, then set her down. “Grab your mace,” she said, glancing at the necromancer’s plague-ridden undead creations. “This isn’t over yet.”
Contagion used to be one of D&D’s most polarized spells. A lengthy online debate raged around this spell since the release of the Player’s Handbook in summer 2014. The reason was that its rules, while interesting, weren’t clear. There were two valid readings of the spell’s text: one that made the spell wickedly powerful, and one that made it practically useless. A recent errata made a small but elegant and impactful change to the spell, transforming it from a spell that sparked furor across the internet to one that now fills a comfortable niche in any cleric or druid’s spell list.
The Woes of Old Contagion
Contagion is a 5th-level spell typically cast by clerics and druids. In short, it infects a single target with a magical disease that will really ruin your target’s week. When you cast the spell, you were presented with six diseases to choose from, corresponding to each of the six ability scores. It seems simple on paper, but there’s a wrinkle: the spell didn’t properly explain how it worked. Here’s the controversial part of the spell’s original text:
“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.”
It seems fairly innocuous, but there’s a big problem there. It doesn’t specify when the disease takes effect. One way to read it suggests that the spell instantly causes the target to suffer the effects of the disease, and it must make three successful Constitution saving throws to shake it off before it accumulates three failed saves, otherwise it is stuck with the disease for seven full days. When interpreted this way, contagion is a really potent spell, especially when paired with the Slimy Doom disease, which gives the target disadvantage on Constitution saving throws, making it harder for afflicted creatures to resist the encroaching disease.
The other reading of this spell, however, is less impressive. If one assumes that the disease doesn’t instantly take effect when the spell is cast, then contagion ultimately asks you to spend a 5th-level spell slot to do nothing for at least 3 rounds. Then, if the target fails three saving throws before making three successful ones, the disease takes effect for seven days. But, by that point, the battle is probably already over.
The real issue here is that if you interpret contagion charitably, its effects were ridiculously overpowered. If you appraised contagion less highly, the spell was essentially useless in combat. Most fights would be finished by the time the disease took root, and that’s assuming the target failed its saves at all! Its most effective use under this reading was as a slow-paced, out-of-combat spell, used for secretly infecting NPCs with a disease that would slowly ravage their bodies.
Fortunately, this all changed.
The New, Shiny Contagion
Contagion got some special attention in a recent update to the rules released in November 2018. It’s not distinctly a buff or a nerf, since it makes one reading of the old rules better and one reading worse. What it does quite successfully, however, is clear up any confusion on how this spell works. Now, when the spell is cast, the target creature is poisoned. While poisoned in this way, the creature must make a Constitution saving throw at the end of each of its turns. If it gets three successes before three failures, it resists the disease and the poisoned condition ends. If it gets three failures first, however, the disease kicks in.
This errata solves contagion’s biggest problems by sucking out any ambiguity in the original rules. The “weaker” version of contagion in the old rules has been highlighted as the proper reading of the spell, and that version has been given a tidy buff in the process. But then, if you were playing with the more powerful version of contagion before, you might feel like your favorite spell was just knocked down a few pegs. Ultimately I think it’s for the best; contagion still has a clear niche that few other spells occupy, and now it won’t cause nearly as many arguments at the table.
But it’s not perfect.
Contagion’s Awkward Shortcomings
Contagion has always had a pretty serious weakness. Namely, it’s easy to cure diseases in D&D, especially by the time contagion, a 5th-level spell, is being used against you. A simple casting of lesser restoration is enough to scrub the sickness away. Trading a 2nd-level spell slot for a 5th-level one is a great trade for the heroes, but it’s a pretty raw deal for the villainous necromancer who cast it in the first place. And it’s not hard to become immune to disease, either. Paladin’s gain that power at 3rd level through their Divine Health feature, and the periapt of health grants disease immunity for only the cost of an uncommon magic item.
As a point in contagion’s favor, however, most characters won’t be ravenously hunting for a periapt of health, since diseases are generally not a major problem in D&D. Poisons are dangerous, traps are deadly, and monsters are an omnipresent challenge, but diseases don’t turn up too often. Overcoming a disease (typically) isn’t the stuff of heroic fantasy in the same way that monsters and poisoned daggers are. So many characters will be caught off-guard if this spell is used against them, and precious few Dungeon Masters will remember to give their important villains a periapt of health, just in case.
The new version of contagion, however, makes things a bit more difficult by introducing the poisoned condition into the mix. First of all, curing poison is no harder than curing disease; a simple lesser restoration will still do it. And if you can get rid of the poisoned condition, the afflicted creature doesn’t have to keep making saving throws against the encroaching disease, and the spell ends. So far, nothing has really changed.
The big problem is immunity to poison. By introducing the poisoned condition into its process, contagion has suddenly become a lot less useful for player characters, while remaining similarly effective for Dungeon Masters. While most player characters aren’t immune to poison (who’s buying a periapt of proof against poison, anyway?), a lot of monsters are. Undead, fiends, celestials, elementals, constructs—practically all creatures who fall under these categories are immune to the poisoned condition, along with a handful of aberrations and monstrosities, and a smattering of other random creatures.
Now, even though these creatures aren’t immune to diseases, their immunity to poison prevents contagion from ever taking root. Generally speaking, it makes sense that you can’t infect fiends, celestials, elementals, undead, or constructs with a disease anyway, so even though they could be infected by rules-as-written (RAW), a DM should be fully empowered to rule that they’re immune. But some of the edge case creatures, like the hardy dire troll is immune to being poisoned simply by virtue of its mutations and its strong stomach. A disease that causes blindness or that enflames the mind shouldn’t be edged out by this paltry immunity. The same goes for green dragons, who are immune to being poisoned by virtue of their poisonous breath. Surely that shouldn’t grant it immunity to disease.
This is a rules quirk that may stymie players who take RAW as gospel. I’ve seen many such players in the D&D Adventurers League. Ultimately, however, it is the role of the DM is to adjudicate the rules in a coherent manner. If a creature is immune to being poisoned because it lacks blood or living flesh, then it makes sense that it’s also immune to diseases and thus, the contagion spell. If it is immune to poison because it employs venom or poisonous gas in its attacks, then it should be affected by contagion’s “poisoned” effects as usual.
Even if you’re DMing an adventure in the D&D Adventurers League and feel bound to follow RAW, recall the first major piece of advice: You’re Empowered. You can bend the rules to suit the story, and to make the world make a bit more realistic. Don’t break the rules into tiny pieces, but don’t feel constricted by them, especially when they don’t make sense.
Have you used contagion in your D&D game? How do you like the update to this spell in the latest errata? Let us know in the comments!
James Haeck is the lead writer for D&D Beyond, the co-author of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Critical Role Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting, the DM of Worlds Apart, and a freelance writer for Wizards of the Coast, the D&D Adventurers League, and Kobold Press. He lives in Seattle, Washington with his partner Hannah and their sweet kitties Mei and Marzipan. You can usually find him wasting time on Twitter at @jamesjhaeck.
Simple solution to the new problem: Strike "poisoned" from this sentence in the new spell description
"At the end of each of the
poisonedtarget's turns, the target must make a Constitution saving throw."Now, the spell continues until the CON save contest has been resolved, regardless of whether poisoned has been removed.
Hey, James, I would love to know if you plan to write about the Fey, or the Feywild in general. It would really help for further exposition for a character I'm particularly proud if. He's a Firbolg Warlock of the Archfey, who's patron is the Lord of Faerie Dragons, and has one for a familiar.
I have no Feywild plans for the immediate future, sorry. Things are always in motion and always being developed, so you never know! In any case, I urge you to forge on ahead with your character concept on your own for now. If or when I have Feywild thoughts to share, you'll be able to compare and contrast our differing viewpoints. =)
What a perfect fix!
So they tried to make it less ambiguous and added another layer to it. The only bit that's a problem is "the poisoned target" though. There is nothing in that says "while the target remains poisoned". That said, your concern over even three turns possibly meaning the battle is over is the effect. Someone has to take a turn to use lesser restoration. And you can take advantage until they get to act too.
Blinding sickness, Wisdom saves aren't exactly rare for some nasty spells, and it's blinded, so you get a few advantage hits in. Filth fever, shove them prone, get advantage, or shove them off a cliff. Flesh rot, vulnerable to all damage? Use that on something that's immune or resistant and see the fun in it. Mindfire, confusion on it, who knows if the big bad can even lesser restoration themselves now, only a 2/10 chance. Seizure, seems the least useful, but if you're facing something dexterous then you can work on it like Filth fever, with the shoving and all. As for Slimy Doom. Still amazing since as long as it gets damaged then you can turn after turn prevent it from doing anything as it's stunned. This is why it's a fifth level spell. Because you can absolutely dominate once it goes off. The question is only what happens if you couldn't poison it in the first place.
I have put out a tweet asking for information on this: https://twitter.com/JerodLycett/status/1098776721694883840
I mean, the fact this article exists and people are agreeing with both interpretations suggests that it was not, in fact, clearly written. It just so happens that you and your player both agreed on the same interpretation.
I don't think the spell is easy to counter however, unless you mean that the disease effect isn't guaranteed.
Also, why do you use '...' so often, it makes your text very odd to read.
So you'd want to use this on BBEG, but nearly half of the monsters cr 9, you get 5th lvl spell at lvl 9, and up are immune to poison with most of the rest having legendary resistance or magic resistance and of the remaining your looking at maybe 10-15 without resist and a con save 6 or lower, to give you a 50/50 save chance. Basically it'll only be effective against high lvl humanoids without innate resistance.
You are lying to yourself if you actually think this spell "has it's uses" now that it has been so completely nerfed.
The spell was polarizing because it was a great spell and considered over powered because, well, it could be!
You should have left the spell alone and let each player and DM deal with it in their own games.
At BEST you should have simply raised the spell's level to 6th or 7th instead of fundamentally altering what the spell does.
As it stands now, it should be no higher than a 3rd level spell as the primary reason it is not worth a 5th level slot is it is far too easy to get rid of the effect (or whatever you are trying to affect with it will die in the rounds before the effect even begins to take hold anyway), thereby wasting the slot and the casting (and it was not that hard to get rid of or for certain creatures to be immune to before... )
Don't try and write an article that propagandizes your change of the spell from great to terrible by trying to justify how it is still useful. Just own that you wanted to change it because some DMs were crying and couldn't "figure out" how to deal with how powerful a spell it used to be, so you cowed to their whimpers and modified it to be worthless, so you would not have to listen to their complaints anymore.
Again im a very logical man. It is clearly written. But there is two schools of thought fighting here. Those who think 5th level spell should be abusive. And those who think they should be balanced. Those who think it is abusive. Ignore the fact that it last only 3 turns and want the spell to last forever on the spot and decide that power gaming while telling your dm how it is should be the way.
The others ignores the clearly written sentence and say it shouldnt be that strong and should take longer to be effective. But those people forget that a 5th level spell is required for something as trivial as a desease. They simply outrage without comprehending the rules.
If you count it that way you easily realise the argument is about rules lawyer versus casual gamers.
Basically... Rai versus Raw. This argument is clearly define by those who either ignore the first sentence and check the second versus those who only read the first sentence. None are actually taking it as a whole. But those who played both version right now. Have seen how weak this spell has become for a fifth level spell. The first version never really gone beyon second turn. And allowed the use of spell barely any people ever use... Lesser restoration ! While the newer version was never cared for and people just played through poisonned condition. Because disadvantage isnt as great a deal as people think it is. It is more then often a speed bump at best. The spell loses way to much and feel like a 2nd level spell.
Exemple... Suggestion: walk out of the country. Is literally taking your villain out of the combat on the spot. At that for 8 hours. And thats a second level spell.
All these should tell you something about how nerfed the spell is now. For my part ive played both version and none are overpowered. But only the first version allow for the spell to actually be used. Im a dm who advocate the use of less used spell and i see even the good in spells. Including the fact witchbolt makes you able to see invible creature location if it hits. But this one... It has no upside anymore. Poisonned is not a very good condition. Even more against lucky players who just ignore disadvantage and proceed to roll above 10 on each dice.
Yea sorry but I'm inclined to agree with the posters here - I'm not going to play with the revised rule. The unrelated addition of poison is just a bad idea IMO. Disease resist/immunity needs to be added to the game if you want it to be there, period.
Suggested simpler revision:
"When the spell is cast, the target creature CONTRACTS a disease. At the end of each of the target's turns, it must make a Constitution saving throw. AFTER FAILING ITS FIRST SAVING THROW THE TARGET SUFFERS THE EFFECTS OF THE DISEASE (BUT IS NOT INFECTED). After failing three of these saving throws THE TARGET IS INFECTED, 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.”
You could also push it to the second failed save if you think it's still too strong. That way you can at least get 2 (or 1) full rounds of debuff on a mob even if they pull through. I'm only going to prevent this on mobs that couldn't conceivably be affected by ANY possible disease. Ghosts for instance but not cadaverous undead like zombies.
I hate spells that seem to only have the intended purpose of griefing the players while being useless to them; I feel like this spell has ended up in that category.
I think I would rule it that they are affected by the disease round one with the touch spell and than each round when they roll there save a success resists the disease and a failure suffers the affects of the disease but only for that one round until either 3 saves or 3 fails as written. that way you can get a few good rounds out of it but it doesn't always work each round. much more variable in its affect. I would also remove the poisoned condition from it all together.
That is an excellent suggestion as well sadomsa. Mine is maybe teensy-er realistic but yours is simpler - I generally go with simpler.
The modification I've been toying around with is having it so the creature has to make another saving throw when it is subjected to an effect that either deal poison damage, or would inflict it with the poisoned condition.
Im si glad that spell spotlight still exist. That was one of my favourite articles.
Can't agree more. This would make it feel more like a decent 5th level spell.
I agree. Lesser Restoration should function more like Counterspell, but for physical conditions. Rather than Lesser Restoration being automatically effective every time, the caster should maybe have to make a roll against the Spell Save DC of whoever or whatever caused the impairing condition. Or maybe just make a straight contested Spell Attack Roll against the other caster.
Also, Contagion is a fine spell, and the new wording clears up any ambiguity. I just don't feel that it deserves a 5th level spell slot. I would think rather that Contagion should be maybe a 3rd or 4th level spell, and casting it at higher levels allows you to effect one addition creature per spell level.
imho.
But... he didn't (and couldn't) make the change. Only Jeremy Crawford could.
I run this spell in the old, "overpowered" way. Given that you have to get your caster into the line of fire to actually cast it, the risk is very high. By level 9, having a caster get into the thick of things enough to cast contagion is pretty unlikely, and I think an adequate reward is in order. If they're fighting a large group of enemies, Contagion isn't particularly useful. If they're fighting an epic monster, then they have legendary actions (and generally high stats anyways.) I'll admit, I've never seen a druid cast contagion, though it definitely is a powerful spell for Clerics. Sorta like Fireball, but you can also use it for roleplaying.
Suppose that a character needs to roll z on a d20 to succeed on one saving throw against the spell.
Assuming that he has neither advantage nor disadvantage on the save, the probability of him failing the saving throw equals (z-1)/20 and succeeding on it equals (21-z)/20.
Here we have the probability of n successes before m failures: http://www-stat.wharton.upenn.edu/~jpiette/stat430-su10/lecture7.pdf
Substituting this we have that
Probability of failing three saves before succeeding on three saves equals (z-1)^3*(2153+3z(z-52))/1600000.
The plot is attached
But remember: you must land a hit. Assuming that you need to roll y or higher to land a hit, the probability of that equals (21-y)/20.
Therefore the probability that contagion ever takes effect equals
f(y,z)=(21-y)/20*((z-1)^3*(2153+3z(z-52))/1600000).
So here we have a 3D graph which shows the probability with which the spell takes hold.
I think a fair solution for poison immune creatures is that they simply don't get poisoned; but the spell still takes effect and they roll their saves as per usual. They would simply not get hindered until it does. I see it as them having an extremely potent immune system, haha. One that's divine, cursed or other. But if the spell does take effect, magic overcomes them, like any other spell could, and they suffer from the magical properties of the Contagion spell's disease. To me, at least, it would be as simple as that.