If anyone has ever played 'Magic the Gathering' this D&D setting is based on you would familiarize Counterspell as the blue Magic wizard players signature spell; blue Magic players specialize in denying their opponent(s) the ability to cast spells against them.
Silvery Barbs is one such spell that accomplish exactly that within a D&D setting.
No, that would be Counterspell. A 3rd level spell that has existed in earlier versions of D&D as well.
However, the fact that you mistakened Silvery Barbs for Counterspell kind of demonstrates my point about how powerful Silvery Barbs is, and therefore should in no way be left as a 1st level spell if allowed at all. This is a poorly balanced spell that, while potentially fun at low levels in something like a Strixhaven campaign, becomes very troublesome in most other settings. In addition to the points I've earlier in this thread, it makes having a Wizard in the party almost mandatory in any power-gamer table just to be able to get this spell and then to Arcane Recovery those 1st level spell slots on a short rest.
It's far worse in the hands of either an Order Cleric or an Aberrant Mind Sorcerer.
Order Cleric makes it so giving advantage to an ally lets them immediately use a reaction to attack (now at advantage). OP if you have a rogue (or other crit fisher) in your crew.
Aberrant Mind Sorcerer can cast this spell a remarkable number of times a day. A truly silly number. Because their Psionic Spells feature can pick it up, meaning they can cast it directly from SP instead of slots with no components and for cheap.
It is a verbal only spell, so the only component being avoided is verbal, so given you have already said SP instead of slots, not sure what you mean by cheap?
Aberrant Mind Feature is:
When you cast any spell of 1st level or higher from your Psionic Spells feature, you can cast it by expending a spell slot as normal or by spending a number of sorcery points equal to the spell’s level. If you cast the spell using sorcery points, it requires no verbal or somatic components, and it requires no material components, unless they are consumed by the spell.
So they cast Silver Barbs for a single SP and when they fo it has no components. That includes the V component.
This is super cheap cost. Normally if a Sorcerer wants to cast spells from SP, a 1st level spell would take twice as many points. Font of Magic feature says it costs 2 SP to create a 1st level slot. Half cost is cheap.
And normally he'd still need to say his V components so it isn't as useful in everyday situations or social encounters. The Aberrant mind is not just cheaper but more useful.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If anyone has ever played 'Magic the Gathering' this D&D setting is based on you would familiarize Counterspell as the blue Magic wizard players signature spell; blue Magic players specialize in denying their opponent(s) the ability to cast spells against them.
Silvery Barbs is one such spell that accomplish exactly that within a D&D setting.
No, that would be Counterspell. A 3rd level spell that has existed in earlier versions of D&D as well.
However, the fact that you mistakened Silvery Barbs for Counterspell kind of demonstrates my point about how powerful Silvery Barbs is, and therefore should in no way be left as a 1st level spell if allowed at all. This is a poorly balanced spell that, while potentially fun at low levels in something like a Strixhaven campaign, becomes very troublesome in most other settings. In addition to the points I've earlier in this thread, it makes having a Wizard in the party almost mandatory in any power-gamer table just to be able to get this spell and then to Arcane Recovery those 1st level spell slots on a short rest.
Even with a power gamer group the wizard is more likely to be waiting to use shield or counter spell rather than silvery barbs. As a DM my players know to consider wasting a reaction on silvery barbs because I have things up my sleeves I might pull out that they really wish they had waited to react to.
I'll say this: Any spell that can spawn 36+ pages of relatively ... energitic debate has something going for it.
I'd say for optimized, high-level play, almost surely there are better options for a full arcane caster. But in my estimation, in all other situations it's a very nice thing to have in the arsenal. Does that make it OP? Nah, propably not. But if in doubt, have a couple of NPC's have it, and if the players find it too annoying - just remove it =D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I'll say this: Any spell that can spawn 36+ pages of relatively ... energitic debate has something going for it.
Well, something about it. It may be positive or negative.
The core problem with silvery barbs (as well as some similar level 1 spells, such as absorb elements and shield) is that its value scales with level, and its cost doesn't.
At first level, if you use silvery barbs on a critical hit from an orc, you're reducing a hit averaging 16 to an attack that does 9 on a hit and might miss -- on average it's about 12 damage prevented. That's... solidly useful for a first level spell, but not super powerful.
At fifteenth level, if you use silvery barbs on a critical hit from a frost giant, you're reducing a hit averaging 45 to an attack that does 25 on a hit and might miss -- on average it's something like 30-35 damage prevented, or several times as good.
You can see similar issues with my other examples: shield, as typically played (the player knows what the monster actually hit) is automatic prevent of a normal hit with a chance of preventing more, so it's worth 9+ at first level, 25+ at 15th level. Absorb elements is preventing 5 damage from a burning hands at level 1, 33 damage from an adult blue dragon at level 15.
Variants on these spells with actual level scaling would probably be a fixed quantity of absorbed damage, or a fixed roll/DC.
A very salient point. I will say that as a currently level 17 wizard, enemy modifiers to their rolls are so high that Barbs-ing to force a failure is not common at all. Even the dreaded usage of doubling up* on a high-level save or suck is very chancy unless you know you're targeting a weak save. If a creature can only miss/fail on, like...a 3 or lower, Barbs has an 85% chance of being a wasted spell.
Even then, Pantagruel has a point. Barbs has variable effects for a fixed cost; increasing the fixed cost just makes the spell worse without solving the issues the spell presents at all. Of you absolutely hate Barbs at first level, you'll hate it no matter what spell level you artificially inflate it to. Nothing can or will fix the spell for you because you can't tolerate its effect regardless of the cost. For anyone else, the spell works fine because it's such a gamble. Even more than Shield or Absorb Elements, Barbs has wildly variable impact for its cost. You can't account for that at any spell level.
I'd argue preventing 12 damage at level 1 is vastly more powerful than preventing 25 damage at level 15...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The spell captures some of the incoming energy, lessening its effect on you and storing it for your next melee attack. You prevent the the next 5 damage of the triggering damage type before the start of your next turn. Also, the first time you hit with a melee attack on your next turn, the target takes an extra 1d6 damage of the triggering type, and the spell ends.
At Higher Levels When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you prevent 5 damage per level of spell, and inflict 1d6 damage per level of spell.
That one is super easy. Going on
Shield
An invisible barrier of magical force appears and protects you. Until the start of your next turn, you a minimum of AC of 18, including against the triggering attack, and you take no damage from magic missile.
At Higher Levels When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, your AC becomes 17 plus the level of the spell.
That still does scale somewhat (because you still know when you cast it), but it's much less likely to actually be relevant at higher levels (and it's still useful at low levels). And for Silvery Barbs:
You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature. Roll 1d20+5; if the result is higher than the creature's check, the creature fails.
You can then choose a different creature you can see within range (you can choose yourself). The next time the chosen creatures makes an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw within the next minute, it may roll 1d20+5 and use that instead of its actual roll, if better. A creature can be empowered by only one use of this spell at a time.
At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, roll 1d20+4+level.
That one is a bit harder to evaluate, but is certainly potentially valuable at low levels, and drops off at higher levels, which is what we want.
I'd argue preventing 12 damage at level 1 is vastly more powerful than preventing 25 damage at level 15...
Not relative to the investment. At level 1, that's 50% of your daily spell slots. At level 15, it's somewhere between 2% and 5%, depending on how you value low level slots (2% using the spell points variant rule in the DMG).
If you're going to entirely redesign the spell you should fix the issue with it alerting the potential caster every time a creature within 60ft succeeds on a d20 test, too.
Probably also shouldn't eliminate it's current most popular use-case of crit protection.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I would like to note that none of the math you did included the potential benefits you can get + gift from the adventure from Silvery, regardless of whether or not the reroll hits or misses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
I'd argue preventing 12 damage at level 1 is vastly more powerful than preventing 25 damage at level 15...
Not relative to the investment. At level 1, that's 50% of your daily spell slots. At level 15, it's somewhere between 2% and 5%, depending on how you value low level slots (2% using the spell points variant rule in the DMG).
At level 1 thats being not instantly killed and having to reroll a new character. Ie Vastly more effective.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Then ban the spell from your table. I never argued that people should or should not use it, and if I ever did in this years old zombie corpse of a thread, my bad. My argument was that the spell was not worth the ridiculous hooplah people kept making over it when it released. It's. Not. That. Bad. But if you still hate it just junk it. People junk spells they hate all the time. When I next have to DM, any non-Tasha summoning spell is off the table because I absolutely hate how Old PHB summoning spells work.
It's not hard. Just get rid of it if you can't stand it. I simply ask that people not flip infinite shits on the forums over it anymore.
If you're going to entirely redesign the spell you should fix the issue with it alerting the potential caster every time a creature within 60ft succeeds on a d20 test, too.
Probably also shouldn't eliminate it's current most popular use-case of crit protection.
It should maybe be reworded as "You see a creature within 60 succeed", to make it clear that it only applies in situations where you actually know that the creature succeeded, but I see no RAW evidence for it working in situations where success is not obvious.
Eliminating the use case of crit protection is a feature, not a bug.
Then ban the spell from your table. I never argued that people should or should not use it, and if I ever did in this years old zombie corpse of a thread, my bad. My argument was that the spell was not worth the ridiculous hooplah people kept making over it when it released. It's. Not. That. Bad. But if you still hate it just junk it. People junk spells they hate all the time. When I next have to DM, any non-Tasha summoning spell is off the table because I absolutely hate how Old PHB summoning spells work.
It's not hard. Just get rid of it if you can't stand it. I simply ask that people not flip infinite shits on the forums over it anymore.
Ironically I'm going to do the opposite of both your requests. I'm not going to ban it, despite hating it. Because I don't really ban stuff.
But I am going to keep talking about how broken it is on these and other forums, because it is one of the go to examples of bad game design.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
When you say "ban as default" do you mean to imply that everything has to be cleared with you on an individual, case-by-case basis?
Yeah, more or less.
I'm not DMing at the moment, like I was back in '21 when I made the comment to which you're replying. But I'll respond as a DM anyway, because that's the only context in which it makes sense to respond.
1 - I don't trust Wizards. They've published enough bad 5e designs that I can't treat their trademark as a proof of quality. So everything needs to be looked at.
2 - I don't buy every book. Particularly now that I've opened my palette up to third party stuff, but even excluding that, there are way too many books. I'm not looking at everything. I'm not trying to keep all that information in my head. (Though, a lot of it is there anyway.)
Basically, the philosophy of "ban by default" is to include with intent. Including without intent means trusting the designers completely, and frankly, they don't deserve that, and I think they'd agree.
When you bring your concept in for review, I'm looking at two things. 1) Does this seem like it's going to play well in context (and often as the DM, I'm the only one who has this context); and 2) Are you happy with it, or are you just picking what you assume you "have" to pick to "keep up," at the cost of your own joy or someone else's? There may be an element of sleight of hand here. I may possibly ban something "for balance reasons," when really I'm doing it for another reason. Some have even theorized -- with no credible evidence, I remind you -- that I might encourage or invite such humorous jabs as "you banned X for balance, but *this* combo [which otherwise would never have happened] is balanced?!" I, of course, know my rights and will not be speaking without my lawyer present.
If anyone has ever played 'Magic the Gathering' this D&D setting is based on you would familiarize Counterspell as the blue Magic wizard players signature spell; blue Magic players specialize in denying their opponent(s) the ability to cast spells against them.
Silvery Barbs is one such spell that accomplish exactly that within a D&D setting.
No, that would be Counterspell. A 3rd level spell that has existed in earlier versions of D&D as well.
However, the fact that you mistakened Silvery Barbs for Counterspell kind of demonstrates my point about how powerful Silvery Barbs is, and therefore should in no way be left as a 1st level spell if allowed at all. This is a poorly balanced spell that, while potentially fun at low levels in something like a Strixhaven campaign, becomes very troublesome in most other settings. In addition to the points I've earlier in this thread, it makes having a Wizard in the party almost mandatory in any power-gamer table just to be able to get this spell and then to Arcane Recovery those 1st level spell slots on a short rest.
Even with a power gamer group the wizard is more likely to be waiting to use shield or counter spell rather than silvery barbs. As a DM my players know to consider wasting a reaction on silvery barbs because I have things up my sleeves I might pull out that they really wish they had waited to react to.
I don't disagree that Shield and Counterspell are solid spells, but they are certainly not necessary every round and are almost strictly used in combat situations. Silvery Barbs can be used in any situation involving ability check or saving throw. So you can use this when your party Bard is trying to making a Persuasion check or Deception check as well. Talk about never failing in social situations! Additionally, if the party Tanks are doing a good enough job at getting your foes to focus on them, Shield becomes a good deal more situational.
However, a corollary to my principal argument: If Silvery Barbs is in your game, not having a Wizard in a group of power gamers would then often be seen as making "weak" party since only Wizards can Arcane Recovery and access to what is an all around useful spell at both low levels an high levels. I would argue that this spell, at 1st or 2nd level slot, is a "must pick" for any power gamer group as it helps not just the caster but the entire party. If a spell is a "no-brainer" because of how useful it is for every situation, it deserves a second or third review before allowing it in your game.
You only need one PC to be the Wizard. Also, since 5e got rid of Vancian spell slots, a Wizard only needs Silvery Barbs memorized once. It's not like in 2e or 3e wherein they had to reserve one specific spell for each spell slot. Also, the very definition of power gaming is going after whatever advantage you can find that fits your role as X. This is not in direct conflict with having a well fleshed out character. (Though many power gamers care far less about playing to stay "in character" than they do about mechanical advantage.)
This isn't a "spell" per se, it's sole purpose is to attack the actual game mechanics of the dice throw , AFTER it happens. So any min/maxer will use it in CONJUNCTION with the attacks/feats/spells of the entire party to EFFECT the outcome of the dice throw, AFTER it happens, FOR ANY EVENT that the party wants to change.
And of course this "spell" is used at LEVEL 1. It's only as good as the min/maxer using it.
Anyhow, if an invincible Bard shows up at your table at level 1, don't complain, thanks........
This isn't a "spell" per se, it's sole purpose is to attack the actual game mechanics of the dice throw , AFTER it happens. So any min/maxer will use it in CONJUNCTION with the attacks/feats/spells of the entire party to EFFECT the outcome of the dice throw, AFTER it happens, FOR ANY EVENT that the party wants to change.
And of course this "spell" is used at LEVEL 1. It's only as good as the min/maxer using it.
Anyhow, if an invincible Bard shows up at your table at level 1, don't complain, thanks........
A 1st-level bard has two spell slots; if they're invincible, it ain't gonna be because of Silvery Barbs.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Aberrant Mind Feature is:
So they cast Silver Barbs for a single SP and when they fo it has no components. That includes the V component.
This is super cheap cost. Normally if a Sorcerer wants to cast spells from SP, a 1st level spell would take twice as many points. Font of Magic feature says it costs 2 SP to create a 1st level slot. Half cost is cheap.
And normally he'd still need to say his V components so it isn't as useful in everyday situations or social encounters. The Aberrant mind is not just cheaper but more useful.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Even with a power gamer group the wizard is more likely to be waiting to use shield or counter spell rather than silvery barbs. As a DM my players know to consider wasting a reaction on silvery barbs because I have things up my sleeves I might pull out that they really wish they had waited to react to.
I'll say this: Any spell that can spawn 36+ pages of relatively ... energitic debate has something going for it.
I'd say for optimized, high-level play, almost surely there are better options for a full arcane caster. But in my estimation, in all other situations it's a very nice thing to have in the arsenal. Does that make it OP? Nah, propably not. But if in doubt, have a couple of NPC's have it, and if the players find it too annoying - just remove it =D
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Well, something about it. It may be positive or negative.
The core problem with silvery barbs (as well as some similar level 1 spells, such as absorb elements and shield) is that its value scales with level, and its cost doesn't.
At first level, if you use silvery barbs on a critical hit from an orc, you're reducing a hit averaging 16 to an attack that does 9 on a hit and might miss -- on average it's about 12 damage prevented. That's... solidly useful for a first level spell, but not super powerful.
At fifteenth level, if you use silvery barbs on a critical hit from a frost giant, you're reducing a hit averaging 45 to an attack that does 25 on a hit and might miss -- on average it's something like 30-35 damage prevented, or several times as good.
You can see similar issues with my other examples: shield, as typically played (the player knows what the monster actually hit) is automatic prevent of a normal hit with a chance of preventing more, so it's worth 9+ at first level, 25+ at 15th level. Absorb elements is preventing 5 damage from a burning hands at level 1, 33 damage from an adult blue dragon at level 15.
Variants on these spells with actual level scaling would probably be a fixed quantity of absorbed damage, or a fixed roll/DC.
A very salient point. I will say that as a currently level 17 wizard, enemy modifiers to their rolls are so high that Barbs-ing to force a failure is not common at all. Even the dreaded usage of doubling up* on a high-level save or suck is very chancy unless you know you're targeting a weak save. If a creature can only miss/fail on, like...a 3 or lower, Barbs has an 85% chance of being a wasted spell.
Even then, Pantagruel has a point. Barbs has variable effects for a fixed cost; increasing the fixed cost just makes the spell worse without solving the issues the spell presents at all. Of you absolutely hate Barbs at first level, you'll hate it no matter what spell level you artificially inflate it to. Nothing can or will fix the spell for you because you can't tolerate its effect regardless of the cost. For anyone else, the spell works fine because it's such a gamble. Even more than Shield or Absorb Elements, Barbs has wildly variable impact for its cost. You can't account for that at any spell level.
Please do not contact or message me.
I'd argue preventing 12 damage at level 1 is vastly more powerful than preventing 25 damage at level 15...
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Hm. How to do these with real level scaling:
That one is super easy. Going on
That still does scale somewhat (because you still know when you cast it), but it's much less likely to actually be relevant at higher levels (and it's still useful at low levels). And for Silvery Barbs:
That one is a bit harder to evaluate, but is certainly potentially valuable at low levels, and drops off at higher levels, which is what we want.
Not relative to the investment. At level 1, that's 50% of your daily spell slots. At level 15, it's somewhere between 2% and 5%, depending on how you value low level slots (2% using the spell points variant rule in the DMG).
If you're going to entirely redesign the spell you should fix the issue with it alerting the potential caster every time a creature within 60ft succeeds on a d20 test, too.
Probably also shouldn't eliminate it's current most popular use-case of crit protection.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I would like to note that none of the math you did included the potential benefits you can get + gift from the adventure from Silvery, regardless of whether or not the reroll hits or misses.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.At level 1 thats being not instantly killed and having to reroll a new character. Ie Vastly more effective.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Then ban the spell from your table. I never argued that people should or should not use it, and if I ever did in this years old zombie corpse of a thread, my bad. My argument was that the spell was not worth the ridiculous hooplah people kept making over it when it released. It's. Not. That. Bad. But if you still hate it just junk it. People junk spells they hate all the time. When I next have to DM, any non-Tasha summoning spell is off the table because I absolutely hate how Old PHB summoning spells work.
It's not hard. Just get rid of it if you can't stand it. I simply ask that people not flip infinite shits on the forums over it anymore.
Please do not contact or message me.
It should maybe be reworded as "You see a creature within 60 succeed", to make it clear that it only applies in situations where you actually know that the creature succeeded, but I see no RAW evidence for it working in situations where success is not obvious.
Eliminating the use case of crit protection is a feature, not a bug.
Ironically I'm going to do the opposite of both your requests. I'm not going to ban it, despite hating it. Because I don't really ban stuff.
But I am going to keep talking about how broken it is on these and other forums, because it is one of the go to examples of bad game design.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
When you say "ban as default" do you mean to imply that everything has to be cleared with you on an individual, case-by-case basis?
Yeah, more or less.
I'm not DMing at the moment, like I was back in '21 when I made the comment to which you're replying. But I'll respond as a DM anyway, because that's the only context in which it makes sense to respond.
1 - I don't trust Wizards. They've published enough bad 5e designs that I can't treat their trademark as a proof of quality. So everything needs to be looked at.
2 - I don't buy every book. Particularly now that I've opened my palette up to third party stuff, but even excluding that, there are way too many books. I'm not looking at everything. I'm not trying to keep all that information in my head. (Though, a lot of it is there anyway.)
Basically, the philosophy of "ban by default" is to include with intent. Including without intent means trusting the designers completely, and frankly, they don't deserve that, and I think they'd agree.
When you bring your concept in for review, I'm looking at two things. 1) Does this seem like it's going to play well in context (and often as the DM, I'm the only one who has this context); and 2) Are you happy with it, or are you just picking what you assume you "have" to pick to "keep up," at the cost of your own joy or someone else's? There may be an element of sleight of hand here. I may possibly ban something "for balance reasons," when really I'm doing it for another reason. Some have even theorized -- with no credible evidence, I remind you -- that I might encourage or invite such humorous jabs as "you banned X for balance, but *this* combo [which otherwise would never have happened] is balanced?!" I, of course, know my rights and will not be speaking without my lawyer present.
I don't disagree that Shield and Counterspell are solid spells, but they are certainly not necessary every round and are almost strictly used in combat situations. Silvery Barbs can be used in any situation involving ability check or saving throw. So you can use this when your party Bard is trying to making a Persuasion check or Deception check as well. Talk about never failing in social situations! Additionally, if the party Tanks are doing a good enough job at getting your foes to focus on them, Shield becomes a good deal more situational.
However, a corollary to my principal argument: If Silvery Barbs is in your game, not having a Wizard in a group of power gamers would then often be seen as making "weak" party since only Wizards can Arcane Recovery and access to what is an all around useful spell at both low levels an high levels. I would argue that this spell, at 1st or 2nd level slot, is a "must pick" for any power gamer group as it helps not just the caster but the entire party. If a spell is a "no-brainer" because of how useful it is for every situation, it deserves a second or third review before allowing it in your game.
You only need one PC to be the Wizard. Also, since 5e got rid of Vancian spell slots, a Wizard only needs Silvery Barbs memorized once. It's not like in 2e or 3e wherein they had to reserve one specific spell for each spell slot. Also, the very definition of power gaming is going after whatever advantage you can find that fits your role as X. This is not in direct conflict with having a well fleshed out character. (Though many power gamers care far less about playing to stay "in character" than they do about mechanical advantage.)
Agreed
This isn't a "spell" per se, it's sole purpose is to attack the actual game mechanics of the dice throw , AFTER it happens. So any min/maxer will use it in CONJUNCTION with the attacks/feats/spells of the entire party to EFFECT the outcome of the dice throw, AFTER it happens, FOR ANY EVENT that the party wants to change.
And of course this "spell" is used at LEVEL 1. It's only as good as the min/maxer using it.
Anyhow, if an invincible Bard shows up at your table at level 1, don't complain, thanks........
A 1st-level bard has two spell slots; if they're invincible, it ain't gonna be because of Silvery Barbs.