Let's compare to two other spells in a broadly similar vein to Silvery Barbs, spells which are widely accepted as also being Very Good, but which are perfectly fine to use and under no illusions of being 'busted' - Shield and Faerie Fire.
Shield is a go-to defensive spell for virtually any spellcaster that can take it, adding a potent +5 AC bonus for the entire round. It's overwhelmingly used against attacks that would hit but are turned into misses, which is exactly the same thing Silvery Barbs seeks to do against attacks.
I don't think it is broken, I think it is set at the wrong level. Its a valid spell if its level was very slightly higher.
Not a good comparison as Shield is far more limited, to only affect AC, so it is only going to be affecting attack rolls against that AC. Where Barbs can affect any d20. That's attacks, save, ability checks, DC checks, etc, etc. That's a big jump in what it can affect compared to Shield. That is a power jump. IMO that right there alone warrants a level increase.
And then the advantage roll has that same diversity in what it affects as well.
And all of that is without any save to negate.
In a game I'm running I'd move it to be a 2nd or 3rd level.
It's a single roll of the d20 that it imposed disadvantage on though, and a single roll that it grants advantage to. Statistically, that's worth about +/-3 each
Shield grants +5 to every attack against you for a round.
There is no way that Silvery Barbs is worth two extra spell slot levels more than Shield. It's more flexible and has more effects but is much shorter in duration. I'd say it's worth about level 1.5. Awkwardly, it's worth a bit more than a L1 slot, but not enough for a L2 slot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Frankly, until late tier 2 it’s a fairly limited value option- compared to other methods of interfering with an attack roll it’s resource inefficient, and while advantage on an attack is always nice it’s more likely to whiff or only marginally boost the recipient’s damage output for the round. It’s best for rerolling saves, but the saves you’re most interested in rerolling tend to be the ones most monsters are strong in- CON or WIS- so that -3 average is still fairly dicey. It’s an option, but until you’ve got enough slots in the 3-5 range to cover 2 or 3 encounters, you’re generally doubling down with your effective resources on a single action when you use it to attempt to make a save fail, which is the only time it represents a real net gain for combat.
Now, once you have the resources to spare it becomes easy to spam, particularly if you end up having a lot of days with only one or two encounters and nothing else to burn spell slots on, but that is largely a slightly more pointed case of what already needs to be done as you enter tier 3 if you want to push a party- draw out an adventuring day with several strong encounters so they can’t just nuke the boss at the end of things. Notably, the ‘24 update to the Wizard level 18 at will spells is that they need to be Action casts, so the current iteration prevents the worst potential abuse of SB.
I will say it was pretty funny watching Matt Mercer mishandle Silvery Barbs, both mechanically and strategically, in the most recent episode of CR's campaign 3. If you want a textbook example of how SB may not be all that great, that was it
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I will say it was pretty funny watching Matt Mercer mishandle Silvery Barbs, both mechanically and strategically, in the most recent episode of CR's campaign 3. If you want a textbook example of how SB may not be all that great, that was it
Would you mind summing up what happened?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I will say it was pretty funny watching Matt Mercer mishandle Silvery Barbs, both mechanically and strategically, in the most recent episode of CR's campaign 3. If you want a textbook example of how SB may not be all that great, that was it
Just my $.02 - I peeked in this thread to see what all the fuss was about. Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
As for some of the other spells mentioned - in my extended DM circle - L1-20 Every spell, every class, every race, background, feat, from any official WOTC content is allowed. Its exciting for the players and keeps the DM on their toes.
Some Tier 3 Spells from the Epic Legacy players Guide by 2CGaming are not allowed only as they don't really leave many options other than a deific counter and even at level 26+ that gets old fast. (edit for clarity players get a Tier 3 spell at level 26) Its not Tiers in the sense of AL. Players get a whole new set of spells per class starting at level 21 and moving on through l30.
There's too much content with much of it incoherent to not curate what's allowed and what's not. I'll be running Strahd next year - I won't be allowing Warforged in it. I'll be following it up with the Vecna campaign, and I will be allowing new characters to be Warforged, since it is a Planescape adventure.
That said, Silvery Barbs isn't really ban-worthy based on power.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Just my $.02 - I peeked in this thread to see what all the fuss was about. Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
Nah. Worldbuilding is part of the GM's job, and that includes constraining the options available. If you want to have an "everything goes" world, more power to you (but the Forgotten Realms already exists), but it's not the only way to fly. In particular, stuff tied to a specific setting, such as the Strixhaven backgrounds and feats, the Eberron dragonmark stuff, etc. should not be expected to exist in a different setting.
Even official settings, such as Dragonlance, restrict the pool of available character building choices.
I personally allow Silvery Barbs, as I don't find it to be a big deal, but somebody who doesn't is well within their rights, whether because it's from Strixhaven, because they think it's unbalanced, or because they just don't like its aesthetic.
I think Silvery Barbs is great but people want to use it at bad times. Plus, a lot of people (imo) weren't considering how Shield is absolutely busted so when you have both it's a hard choice.
I will say it was pretty funny watching Matt Mercer mishandle Silvery Barbs, both mechanically and strategically, in the most recent episode of CR's campaign 3. If you want a textbook example of how SB may not be all that great, that was it
Would you mind summing up what happened?
Short version: the BBEG used it on a player who had attacked with advantage and hit (not even a crit), and Matt said the lowest of the three rolls would get used
With the BBEG's reaction burned, the next player then cast forcecage...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I think Silvery Barbs is great but people want to use it at bad times. Plus, a lot of people (imo) weren't considering how Shield is absolutely busted so when you have both it's a hard choice.
I personally prefer to take Shield over Silvery Barbs, and it's not really close. I like Silvery Barbs, but I love shield.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
Until recently, I was 100% onboard with this. But at some point, we need to start pushing back on bad game design. WoTC are not infallible. The 2014 to 2024 baseline versions of the game are already incredibly easy. The CR system is a joke. In the all the campaign books combined, there might be five total encounters - as written - that a competent party can't just walk through (mostly revolved around CoS and ToA).
Silvery Barbs is bad game design. Conjure Minor Elementals is absolutely busted. Numerous other examples exist throughout this thread.
I am stunned that some of these things make it through play testing.
Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
Until recently, I was 100% onboard with this. But at some point, we need to start pushing back on bad game design. WoTC are not infallible. The 2014 to 2024 baseline versions of the game are already incredibly easy. The CR system is a joke. In the all the campaign books combined, there might be five total encounters - as written - that a competent party can't just walk through (mostly revolved around CoS and ToA).
Silvery Barbs is bad game design. Conjure Minor Elementals is absolutely busted. Numerous other examples exist throughout this thread.
I am stunned that some of these things make it through play testing.
Please cite a rule anywhere that says a DM must use CR strictly. It is a joke but can also be ignored.
There's too much content with much of it incoherent to not curate what's allowed and what's not. I'll be running Strahd next year - I won't be allowing Warforged in it. I'll be following it up with the Vecna campaign, and I will be allowing new characters to be Warforged, since it is a Planescape adventure.
That said, Silvery Barbs isn't really ban-worthy based on power.
I deeply agree with this. I don't have any strong opinions on Silvery Barbs - but in a frankly human-centric world, it just strikes me as odd that the average party has zero humans (nor any elves or dwarves btw) but any number of elemental people, planar people, rabbits and undead and insects. I like exotic races. But I like them to be NPC's.
And some players disagree with that. And there are other games for those players.
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.
Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
Until recently, I was 100% onboard with this. But at some point, we need to start pushing back on bad game design. WoTC are not infallible. The 2014 to 2024 baseline versions of the game are already incredibly easy. The CR system is a joke. In the all the campaign books combined, there might be five total encounters - as written - that a competent party can't just walk through (mostly revolved around CoS and ToA).
Silvery Barbs is bad game design. Conjure Minor Elementals is absolutely busted. Numerous other examples exist throughout this thread.
I am stunned that some of these things make it through play testing.
Please cite a rule anywhere that says a DM must use CR strictly. It is a joke but can also be ignored.
Literally why I said CR -as written. I do my own encounters, even when doing published adventures.
Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
Until recently, I was 100% onboard with this. But at some point, we need to start pushing back on bad game design. WoTC are not infallible. The 2014 to 2024 baseline versions of the game are already incredibly easy. The CR system is a joke. In the all the campaign books combined, there might be five total encounters - as written - that a competent party can't just walk through (mostly revolved around CoS and ToA).
Silvery Barbs is bad game design. Conjure Minor Elementals is absolutely busted. Numerous other examples exist throughout this thread.
I am stunned that some of these things make it through play testing.
Please cite a rule anywhere that says a DM must use CR strictly. It is a joke but can also be ignored.
Literally why I said CR -as written. I do my own encounters, even when doing published adventures.
Just to add on to this thought
You can either de-power the party to make cr mostly work (I never take that option) - or you can empower the party with cool fun stuff and just adjust your encounters even in pre written modules. I think my players always have more fun when they have a bunch of cool stuff they can do or use - if the creature(s) has 200 or 300 , 400, 500 hp nobody cares -- if they are having a fun time killing it and maybe 1-2 of them get knocked out along the way if its a boss fight (and immediately picked back up by an aoe heal or whatever).
I have been in so many games where this race or that race or this feat is not allowed - I ask why - "DM" well resistance to everything for 1 round breaks the game. Immediately I start laughing in my head I will play the session as a courtesy and never play with that group again that is just poor understanding of mechanic's and lazy DM'ing. Particularly at low levels you can punch through a Shadar-kai's teleport by just having a range dps creature focus them for 4-5 rounds BAM done and now they are out of teleports its not rocket science.
Fights in D&D are never meant to be a contest the DM can ALWAYS win - its about creating a fun challenging event in the context of the story for the table.
Fights in D&D are never meant to be a contest the DM can ALWAYS win - its about creating a fun challenging event in the context of the story for the table.
This is why I don't understand all the hand-wringing about anything being too easy for the players. Any DM can easily make things harder if that is the style their table prefers.
This is why I don't understand all the hand-wringing about anything being too easy for the players. Any DM can easily make things harder if that is the style their table prefers.
The problem isn't that it's impossible to make things hard for the PCs. The problem is that the advice the game gives on how to make things reasonably challenging are complete nonsense. In tier 1, the rules kind of work as long as you understand that you're supposed to use up your entire daily budget, in higher tiers they're hopeless.
This is why I don't understand all the hand-wringing about anything being too easy for the players. Any DM can easily make things harder if that is the style their table prefers.
The problem isn't that it's impossible to make things hard for the PCs. The problem is that the advice the game gives on how to make things reasonably challenging are complete nonsense. In tier 1, the rules kind of work as long as you understand that you're supposed to use up your entire daily budget, in higher tiers they're hopeless.
The easiest thing in the world is to modify creatures upwards: More AC if the party are always hitting, more HPs if the damage they are doing is bringing down creatures too fast, more accuracy and/or damage, if the party seem to feel unthreatened. Plus any sort of surprise ability you think makes sense for the creature and your story (again, adjusting for the party).
There is literally no rule in the books anywhere limiting the DM to the Monster Manual.
Now that advice on how to run could be better, sure, but I do not remember any prior edition having any such wisdom to offer. Silly us, back then we figured that kind of thing out for ourselves.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't think it is broken, I think it is set at the wrong level. Its a valid spell if its level was very slightly higher.
Not a good comparison as Shield is far more limited, to only affect AC, so it is only going to be affecting attack rolls against that AC.
Where Barbs can affect any d20. That's attacks, save, ability checks, DC checks, etc, etc. That's a big jump in what it can affect compared to Shield. That is a power jump. IMO that right there alone warrants a level increase.
And then the advantage roll has that same diversity in what it affects as well.
And all of that is without any save to negate.
In a game I'm running I'd move it to be a 2nd or 3rd level.
It's a single roll of the d20 that it imposed disadvantage on though, and a single roll that it grants advantage to. Statistically, that's worth about +/-3 each
Shield grants +5 to every attack against you for a round.
There is no way that Silvery Barbs is worth two extra spell slot levels more than Shield. It's more flexible and has more effects but is much shorter in duration. I'd say it's worth about level 1.5. Awkwardly, it's worth a bit more than a L1 slot, but not enough for a L2 slot.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Frankly, until late tier 2 it’s a fairly limited value option- compared to other methods of interfering with an attack roll it’s resource inefficient, and while advantage on an attack is always nice it’s more likely to whiff or only marginally boost the recipient’s damage output for the round. It’s best for rerolling saves, but the saves you’re most interested in rerolling tend to be the ones most monsters are strong in- CON or WIS- so that -3 average is still fairly dicey. It’s an option, but until you’ve got enough slots in the 3-5 range to cover 2 or 3 encounters, you’re generally doubling down with your effective resources on a single action when you use it to attempt to make a save fail, which is the only time it represents a real net gain for combat.
Now, once you have the resources to spare it becomes easy to spam, particularly if you end up having a lot of days with only one or two encounters and nothing else to burn spell slots on, but that is largely a slightly more pointed case of what already needs to be done as you enter tier 3 if you want to push a party- draw out an adventuring day with several strong encounters so they can’t just nuke the boss at the end of things. Notably, the ‘24 update to the Wizard level 18 at will spells is that they need to be Action casts, so the current iteration prevents the worst potential abuse of SB.
I will say it was pretty funny watching Matt Mercer mishandle Silvery Barbs, both mechanically and strategically, in the most recent episode of CR's campaign 3. If you want a textbook example of how SB may not be all that great, that was it
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Would you mind summing up what happened?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Which episode?
Just my $.02 - I peeked in this thread to see what all the fuss was about. Any DM that does not "allow" WOTC content at their tables is imho doing their tables a disservice and taking an easy out. Its that same reason I hate adventure league. If people are playing the game and its in the game they should be able to use it.
As for some of the other spells mentioned - in my extended DM circle - L1-20 Every spell, every class, every race, background, feat, from any official WOTC content is allowed. Its exciting for the players and keeps the DM on their toes.
Some Tier 3 Spells from the Epic Legacy players Guide by 2CGaming are not allowed only as they don't really leave many options other than a deific counter and even at level 26+ that gets old fast. (edit for clarity players get a Tier 3 spell at level 26) Its not Tiers in the sense of AL. Players get a whole new set of spells per class starting at level 21 and moving on through l30.
There's too much content with much of it incoherent to not curate what's allowed and what's not. I'll be running Strahd next year - I won't be allowing Warforged in it. I'll be following it up with the Vecna campaign, and I will be allowing new characters to be Warforged, since it is a Planescape adventure.
That said, Silvery Barbs isn't really ban-worthy based on power.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Nah. Worldbuilding is part of the GM's job, and that includes constraining the options available. If you want to have an "everything goes" world, more power to you (but the Forgotten Realms already exists), but it's not the only way to fly. In particular, stuff tied to a specific setting, such as the Strixhaven backgrounds and feats, the Eberron dragonmark stuff, etc. should not be expected to exist in a different setting.
Even official settings, such as Dragonlance, restrict the pool of available character building choices.
I personally allow Silvery Barbs, as I don't find it to be a big deal, but somebody who doesn't is well within their rights, whether because it's from Strixhaven, because they think it's unbalanced, or because they just don't like its aesthetic.
I think Silvery Barbs is great but people want to use it at bad times. Plus, a lot of people (imo) weren't considering how Shield is absolutely busted so when you have both it's a hard choice.
Short version: the BBEG used it on a player who had attacked with advantage and hit (not even a crit), and Matt said the lowest of the three rolls would get used
With the BBEG's reaction burned, the next player then cast forcecage...
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I personally prefer to take Shield over Silvery Barbs, and it's not really close. I like Silvery Barbs, but I love shield.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Until recently, I was 100% onboard with this. But at some point, we need to start pushing back on bad game design. WoTC are not infallible. The 2014 to 2024 baseline versions of the game are already incredibly easy. The CR system is a joke. In the all the campaign books combined, there might be five total encounters - as written - that a competent party can't just walk through (mostly revolved around CoS and ToA).
Silvery Barbs is bad game design. Conjure Minor Elementals is absolutely busted. Numerous other examples exist throughout this thread.
I am stunned that some of these things make it through play testing.
Please cite a rule anywhere that says a DM must use CR strictly. It is a joke but can also be ignored.
I deeply agree with this. I don't have any strong opinions on Silvery Barbs - but in a frankly human-centric world, it just strikes me as odd that the average party has zero humans (nor any elves or dwarves btw) but any number of elemental people, planar people, rabbits and undead and insects. I like exotic races. But I like them to be NPC's.
And some players disagree with that. And there are other games for those players.
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.
Literally why I said CR -as written. I do my own encounters, even when doing published adventures.
Just to add on to this thought
You can either de-power the party to make cr mostly work (I never take that option) - or you can empower the party with cool fun stuff and just adjust your encounters even in pre written modules. I think my players always have more fun when they have a bunch of cool stuff they can do or use - if the creature(s) has 200 or 300 , 400, 500 hp nobody cares -- if they are having a fun time killing it and maybe 1-2 of them get knocked out along the way if its a boss fight (and immediately picked back up by an aoe heal or whatever).
I have been in so many games where this race or that race or this feat is not allowed - I ask why - "DM" well resistance to everything for 1 round breaks the game. Immediately I start laughing in my head I will play the session as a courtesy and never play with that group again that is just poor understanding of mechanic's and lazy DM'ing. Particularly at low levels you can punch through a Shadar-kai's teleport by just having a range dps creature focus them for 4-5 rounds BAM done and now they are out of teleports its not rocket science.
Fights in D&D are never meant to be a contest the DM can ALWAYS win - its about creating a fun challenging event in the context of the story for the table.
This is why I don't understand all the hand-wringing about anything being too easy for the players. Any DM can easily make things harder if that is the style their table prefers.
The problem isn't that it's impossible to make things hard for the PCs. The problem is that the advice the game gives on how to make things reasonably challenging are complete nonsense. In tier 1, the rules kind of work as long as you understand that you're supposed to use up your entire daily budget, in higher tiers they're hopeless.
The easiest thing in the world is to modify creatures upwards: More AC if the party are always hitting, more HPs if the damage they are doing is bringing down creatures too fast, more accuracy and/or damage, if the party seem to feel unthreatened. Plus any sort of surprise ability you think makes sense for the creature and your story (again, adjusting for the party).
There is literally no rule in the books anywhere limiting the DM to the Monster Manual.
Now that advice on how to run could be better, sure, but I do not remember any prior edition having any such wisdom to offer. Silly us, back then we figured that kind of thing out for ourselves.