The text of the Arcana Domain cleric's Spell Breaker ability is
Starting at 6th level, when you restore hit points to an ally with a spell of 1st level or higher, you can also end one spell of your choice on that creature. The level of the spell you end must be equal to or lower than the level of the spell slot you use to cast the healing spell.
If you could pick up Goodberry through a feat or multiclassing, would the berries act to remove spells?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
I guess it would, per Sillvva, but you might have to decide on the spell you are ending at time of casting. I can't imagine that the caster could somehow choose what spell to end at time of consumption if the consumer were 100 miles away or on another plane of existence. I'd also think that each berry would have to end the same spell.
I guess it would, per Sillvva, but you might have to decide on the spell you are ending at time of casting. I can't imagine that the caster could somehow choose what spell to end at time of consumption if the consumer were 100 miles away or on another plane of existence. I'd also think that each berry would have to end the same spell.
You see I think it would work the opposite way because you only choose the spell that is ended when you restore hitpoints to the creature, not when you cast the spell
I agree its a little nonsensical in the scenario you pointed out, but its magic so Im willing to shrug and say "whatever"
In any case, the distinction shouldnt matter too often, because in my experience most creatures dont have more than one spell affecting them at a time anyway
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
I guess it would, per Sillvva, but you might have to decide on the spell you are ending at time of casting. I can't imagine that the caster could somehow choose what spell to end at time of consumption if the consumer were 100 miles away or on another plane of existence. I'd also think that each berry would have to end the same spell.
You see I think it would work the opposite way because you only choose the spell that is ended when you restore hitpoints to the creature, not when you cast the spell
I agree its a little nonsensical in the scenario you pointed out, but its magic so Im willing to shrug and say "whatever"
In any case, the distinction shouldnt matter too often, because in my experience most creatures dont have more than one spell affecting them at a time anyway
I think you have misunderstood Nicandor:
Arcana Cleric Clive casts goodberry at 6th level (or higher) and gives the berries to an adventuring party before he goes on a dangerous mission take down an evil wizard. The wizard casts mass suggestion and convices most of the party to go away and leave him to his work for (he will accomplish his plan and be safe from the party in 24 hours). One member of the party makes the save and tells all the others to eat a goodberry. As they do so Clive chooses to end the charm condition on each one of them dispite being several miles away and not knowing what is happening.
Personnally I do not believe as worded in the PHB Goodbery is a spell that resroes hit points, it is a spell that creates berries. This means the effect of eating the berries is fixed to restoring 1HP and provide enough nourishment for a day. With that interpretation the above doesn't occur. However the SAC states that goodberry is a spell that restores hit points and that disciple of life does work with goodberry and therefore by extension it must work with Spell Breaker.
I guess it would, per Sillvva, but you might have to decide on the spell you are ending at time of casting. I can't imagine that the caster could somehow choose what spell to end at time of consumption if the consumer were 100 miles away or on another plane of existence. I'd also think that each berry would have to end the same spell.
You see I think it would work the opposite way because you only choose the spell that is ended when you restore hitpoints to the creature, not when you cast the spell
I agree its a little nonsensical in the scenario you pointed out, but its magic so Im willing to shrug and say "whatever"
In any case, the distinction shouldnt matter too often, because in my experience most creatures dont have more than one spell affecting them at a time anyway
I think you have misunderstood Nicandor:
Arcana Cleric Clive casts goodberry at 6th level (or higher) and gives the berries to an adventuring party before he goes on a dangerous mission take down an evil wizard. The wizard casts mass suggestion and convices most of the party to go away and leave him to his work for (he will accomplish his plan and be safe from the party in 24 hours). One member of the party makes the save and tells all the others to eat a goodberry. As they do so Clive chooses to end the charm condition on each one of them dispite being several miles away and not knowing what is happening.
I get that, but it seems like a fringe example. Obviously these two things were not made with one another in mind, but even if its a little counterintuitive or nonsensical it should still work RAW. If the DM wanted to play into the seperation element, they could simply state "although the berry could nullify the spell, because your character does not know what spell is affecting them you are unable to choose it" which would still allow the ability not to function in your example while allowing it to still work while the cleric is around
Personnally I do not believe as worded in the PHB Goodbery is a spell that resroes hit points, it is a spell that creates berries. This means the effect of eating the berries is fixed to restoring 1HP and provide enough nourishment for a day. With that interpretation the above doesn't occur. However the SAC states that goodberry is a spell that restores hit points and that disciple of life does work with goodberry and therefore by extension it must work with Spell Breaker.
I get that interpretation, but imo thats also like saying "Chill Touch" isnt a spell that deals damage, its a spell that creates a spectral hand. But ultimately what that hand does is deal damage and that is still part of the spell's effect. The same goes for goodberry and healing being part of the spell effect. You cast a spell, and due to that spell you restored hitpoints to another creature.
It is definitely weird though. Like did I restore hitpoints or did the berry and from a game mechanics standpoint is there actually a distinction. Thankfully, as you pointed out already, the existence of the other SAC ruling does set a precedent for this sort of thing, but I wouldnt blame a DM who wanted to ignore it.
At the end of the day, I dont think its too powerful of a combo to merit preventing. It still costs a spell slot to use the spell, and if you want to break higher level spells you have to upcast Goodberry, which usually doesnt come with any additional benefit. Plus, the creature still has to use its action to consume the berry since that is an item interaction.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
It isn't really like chill touch. Chill touch has a duration of 1 round and the spell is active during that time nless it is dispelled. The hand does the damage (and prevents hit points being regained) for that duration.
The duration if Goodberry is instantanious. The spell is over as soon as the goodberry is created. Dispel magic does not make it disappear. The healing is done long after the spell has ended and that is my logic that it isn't the spell that does the healing but the berry the spell creates.
A better analagy would be a summon spell as they are instantanious spells which create something that lasts longer. I would not expect a warhorse summoned using find speed to be disappear with dispel magic, nor would I expect if the warhorse kicks a creature it does not count as agical damage for the purposes of resistence but it seems odd that a spell does not do magical damage is you say the war horse dealing damage is damaged caused by the spell.
The text of the Arcana Domain cleric's Spell Breaker ability is
If you could pick up Goodberry through a feat or multiclassing, would the berries act to remove spells?
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
I think so. It's worded very similarly to Disciple of Life from the Life Domain. That feature affects Goodberry as well.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
I guess it would, per Sillvva, but you might have to decide on the spell you are ending at time of casting. I can't imagine that the caster could somehow choose what spell to end at time of consumption if the consumer were 100 miles away or on another plane of existence. I'd also think that each berry would have to end the same spell.
You see I think it would work the opposite way because you only choose the spell that is ended when you restore hitpoints to the creature, not when you cast the spell
I agree its a little nonsensical in the scenario you pointed out, but its magic so Im willing to shrug and say "whatever"
In any case, the distinction shouldnt matter too often, because in my experience most creatures dont have more than one spell affecting them at a time anyway
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
I think you have misunderstood Nicandor:
Arcana Cleric Clive casts goodberry at 6th level (or higher) and gives the berries to an adventuring party before he goes on a dangerous mission take down an evil wizard. The wizard casts mass suggestion and convices most of the party to go away and leave him to his work for (he will accomplish his plan and be safe from the party in 24 hours). One member of the party makes the save and tells all the others to eat a goodberry. As they do so Clive chooses to end the charm condition on each one of them dispite being several miles away and not knowing what is happening.
Personnally I do not believe as worded in the PHB Goodbery is a spell that resroes hit points, it is a spell that creates berries. This means the effect of eating the berries is fixed to restoring 1HP and provide enough nourishment for a day. With that interpretation the above doesn't occur. However the SAC states that goodberry is a spell that restores hit points and that disciple of life does work with goodberry and therefore by extension it must work with Spell Breaker.
I get that, but it seems like a fringe example. Obviously these two things were not made with one another in mind, but even if its a little counterintuitive or nonsensical it should still work RAW. If the DM wanted to play into the seperation element, they could simply state "although the berry could nullify the spell, because your character does not know what spell is affecting them you are unable to choose it" which would still allow the ability not to function in your example while allowing it to still work while the cleric is around
I get that interpretation, but imo thats also like saying "Chill Touch" isnt a spell that deals damage, its a spell that creates a spectral hand. But ultimately what that hand does is deal damage and that is still part of the spell's effect. The same goes for goodberry and healing being part of the spell effect. You cast a spell, and due to that spell you restored hitpoints to another creature.
It is definitely weird though. Like did I restore hitpoints or did the berry and from a game mechanics standpoint is there actually a distinction. Thankfully, as you pointed out already, the existence of the other SAC ruling does set a precedent for this sort of thing, but I wouldnt blame a DM who wanted to ignore it.
At the end of the day, I dont think its too powerful of a combo to merit preventing. It still costs a spell slot to use the spell, and if you want to break higher level spells you have to upcast Goodberry, which usually doesnt come with any additional benefit. Plus, the creature still has to use its action to consume the berry since that is an item interaction.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!
It isn't really like chill touch. Chill touch has a duration of 1 round and the spell is active during that time nless it is dispelled. The hand does the damage (and prevents hit points being regained) for that duration.
The duration if Goodberry is instantanious. The spell is over as soon as the goodberry is created. Dispel magic does not make it disappear. The healing is done long after the spell has ended and that is my logic that it isn't the spell that does the healing but the berry the spell creates.
A better analagy would be a summon spell as they are instantanious spells which create something that lasts longer. I would not expect a warhorse summoned using find speed to be disappear with dispel magic, nor would I expect if the warhorse kicks a creature it does not count as agical damage for the purposes of resistence but it seems odd that a spell does not do magical damage is you say the war horse dealing damage is damaged caused by the spell.
Thats fair, and like I said, I wouldnt blame any DM that wanted to rule it that way.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Re-imagining unpopular subclasses as part of FIFY WotC. Let us know what you think of our changes!