To be fair, the 'lower of the two' language on Silvery barbs is effectively equivalent to "must use the new roll" in this case, since the reaction trigger is specifically "when a creature succeeds on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw." There's precisely one exception wherein a reroll ability could make any of those worse (i.e. turning a successful attack into a successful crit), but in almost all cases Barbs is already acting under the assumption that whatever the new roll is cannot be worse than what the target already rolled. You cannot (by RAW) crit an ability check or a save, so there's no escalation of harm to you that Barbs can offer.
This scenario is precisely what makes Silvery Barbs better than Runic Shield (a 6th level subclass feature).
Its arguably also better than a Divination Wizard's Portent because you get to affect two different rolls for the price of one use of the spell. By level 3 a wizard could use this spell 4 times per day to affect up to 8 rolls. At the same level, you get 2 uses of portent. Yes, it costs a spell slot and portent doesnt, but as you level up this will be less and less of an issue due to having more spells slots and more slots recovered per day.
Portent is still better as it a guaranteed effect. Barbs is good, but it doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered in anyway.
But you have to declare Portent beforehand, so it also doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered -- you'll never know, because they don't roll. With Barbs, if they roll badly to begin with, you just keep your spell.
Still a guaranteed outcome is still better than a maybe any day of the week.
Silvery barbs, a 1st level spell available to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, anyone that takes magic initiate in those classes or anyone that takes the fey touched feat.
Portent, available to a 2nd level wizard.
The cost of getting and using Barbs is drastically lower than Portent. Portent does have uses and can be strong, yes, but is best when you roll really high or really low, and of those two you only want to be replacing enemy rolls with low ones. I think this is a very apples and oranges comparison.
Sure but those high level enemies, which often have high stats and can easily succeed even with a reroll, aren't going to be standing there doing nothing. most also get legendary actions too.
Mage casts spells Enemy resists Mage uses reaction for the Silvery barbs Enemy rerolls, fails and uses legendary resistance End of mage turn, enemy uses legendary action to bring some hurt to mage Enemy turn, they focus on the mage that made them use their LR Squishy mage be dead in no time. Silver barbs cant save that mage.
So again, Useful? Very. Broken? Nah.
Thanks to the range on this spell, the mage doesnt have to be anywhere near the enemy. At the very least, the enemy would have to spend two legendary actions (one or more to move to the mage and another to attack).
These two bolded steps also assume that the party doesnt have any means to control the enemy's movement/aggro them. Assuming no "flyby" or similar features, how many attacks of opportunity will moving to the wizard incur for this enemy?
Finally, even if the mage does aggro the enemy to them, they have a number of spells available to them to pop out of that scenario back to a safe distance in the event they survive at least one round of potential pummeling.
Sure, the mage may not fare well in a one-on-one with the big bad, but most party strategies will have at least some steps to ensure the mage isnt easily targeted.
Following your blueprint, 1 casting of a 1st level spell as a reaction will result in 1 loss of legendary resistance, the cost of 1 or more legendary actions, and the focus of the enemy for 1 turn on you instead of the rest of the party. Factor into that that some of your allies could get AoEs on the moving enemy and that one of these allies will have advantage thanks to the spell, and it seems to me like you are getting a TON out of the spell in this case.
Assuming favorable tactics on the part of the party and rank stupidity on the part of the enemy always makes something seem less of an issue than it is. If a creature allows itself to hauled around by the nose by the party's hardest-to-kill members while a mage heckles it from the back completely unmolested, doing exactly what the party expects it to do and complying with the party's most desired plan of action? Then yes, that creature will have tons of trouble.
Most things with legendary resistances will not be nearly so charitable, however. Or should not be, if the DM is running them at all appropriately.
Sure but those high level enemies, which often have high stats and can easily succeed even with a reroll, aren't going to be standing there doing nothing. most also get legendary actions too.
Mage casts spells Enemy resists Mage uses reaction for the Silvery barbs Enemy rerolls, fails and uses legendary resistance End of mage turn, enemy uses legendary action to bring some hurt to mage Enemy turn, they focus on the mage that made them use their LR Squishy mage be dead in no time. Silver barbs cant save that mage.
So again, Useful? Very. Broken? Nah.
Thanks to the range on this spell, the mage doesnt have to be anywhere near the enemy. At the very least, the enemy would have to spend two legendary actions (one or more to move to the mage and another to attack).
These two bolded steps also assume that the party doesnt have any means to control the enemy's movement/aggro them. Assuming no "flyby" or similar features, how many attacks of opportunity will moving to the wizard incur for this enemy?
Finally, even if the mage does aggro the enemy to them, they have a number of spells available to them to pop out of that scenario back to a safe distance in the event they survive at least one round of potential pummeling.
Sure, the mage may not fare well in a one-on-one with the big bad, but most party strategies will have at least some steps to ensure the mage isnt easily targeted.
Plus why would they target the mage again? What if the figther dropped 50+ points of damage on them? This is a white room of white rooms to assume they will get focused fired for a spell...
and if so...wouldn't that mean the spell is so dangerous that they wont want it cast again? Doesn't that make it more a problem for the caster to use just for the opposite reason?
So if you use it a lot with no drawbacks = bad because you big bad for the fight will always be polymorphed to a fish
If you get ******* hammered to death everytime you use it = bad.....why use a spell that will get you insta-targeted by every bad in the room?
So the scenario you present is terrible....but so is unfettered use. I do not see a win here with the spell....
To be fair, the 'lower of the two' language on Silvery barbs is effectively equivalent to "must use the new roll" in this case, since the reaction trigger is specifically "when a creature succeeds on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw." There's precisely one exception wherein a reroll ability could make any of those worse (i.e. turning a successful attack into a successful crit), but in almost all cases Barbs is already acting under the assumption that whatever the new roll is cannot be worse than what the target already rolled. You cannot (by RAW) crit an ability check or a save, so there's no escalation of harm to you that Barbs can offer.
This scenario is precisely what makes Silvery Barbs better than Runic Shield (a 6th level subclass feature).
Its arguably also better than a Divination Wizard's Portent because you get to affect two different rolls for the price of one use of the spell. By level 3 a wizard could use this spell 4 times per day to affect up to 8 rolls. At the same level, you get 2 uses of portent. Yes, it costs a spell slot and portent doesnt, but as you level up this will be less and less of an issue due to having more spells slots and more slots recovered per day.
Portent is still better as it a guaranteed effect. Barbs is good, but it doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered in anyway.
But you have to declare Portent beforehand, so it also doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered -- you'll never know, because they don't roll. With Barbs, if they roll badly to begin with, you just keep your spell.
Still a guaranteed outcome is still better than a maybe any day of the week.
Silvery barbs, a 1st level spell available to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, anyone that takes magic initiate in those classes or anyone that takes the fey touched feat.
Portent, available to a 2nd level wizard.
The cost of getting and using Barbs is drastically lower than Portent. Portent does have uses and can be strong, yes, but is best when you roll really high or really low, and of those two you only want to be replacing enemy rolls with low ones. I think this is a very apples and oranges comparison.
I didn't make the comparison, just responding to the ones that did.
To be fair, the 'lower of the two' language on Silvery barbs is effectively equivalent to "must use the new roll" in this case, since the reaction trigger is specifically "when a creature succeeds on an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw." There's precisely one exception wherein a reroll ability could make any of those worse (i.e. turning a successful attack into a successful crit), but in almost all cases Barbs is already acting under the assumption that whatever the new roll is cannot be worse than what the target already rolled. You cannot (by RAW) crit an ability check or a save, so there's no escalation of harm to you that Barbs can offer.
This scenario is precisely what makes Silvery Barbs better than Runic Shield (a 6th level subclass feature).
Its arguably also better than a Divination Wizard's Portent because you get to affect two different rolls for the price of one use of the spell. By level 3 a wizard could use this spell 4 times per day to affect up to 8 rolls. At the same level, you get 2 uses of portent. Yes, it costs a spell slot and portent doesnt, but as you level up this will be less and less of an issue due to having more spells slots and more slots recovered per day.
Portent is still better as it a guaranteed effect. Barbs is good, but it doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered in anyway.
But you have to declare Portent beforehand, so it also doesn't guarantee that the outcome will be altered -- you'll never know, because they don't roll. With Barbs, if they roll badly to begin with, you just keep your spell.
Still a guaranteed outcome is still better than a maybe any day of the week.
Silvery barbs, a 1st level spell available to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, anyone that takes magic initiate in those classes or anyone that takes the fey touched feat.
Portent, available to a 2nd level wizard.
The cost of getting and using Barbs is drastically lower than Portent. Portent does have uses and can be strong, yes, but is best when you roll really high or really low, and of those two you only want to be replacing enemy rolls with low ones. I think this is a very apples and oranges comparison.
Not to mention the backgrounds in the book give you magic initiate+ for free as a background and likely access to the spell with 0 ASI/Feat investment.
I feel like I am taking crazy pills when people talk about this!
The Strixhaven backgrounds, and the feats tied to them, are very specific to Strixhaven-the-setting and are not, at all, for general-purpose use across all games. Just like the Ravnica backgrounds that had people exploding are absolutely not okay for general use outside of a Ravnica game. They're honestly immaterial to discussions of the spells by themselves, because they're so irretrievably tied up in the setting.
Assuming favorable tactics on the part of the party and rank stupidity on the part of the enemy always makes something seem less of an issue than it is. If a creature allows itself to hauled around by the nose by the party's hardest-to-kill members while a mage heckles it from the back completely unmolested, doing exactly what the party expects it to do and complying with the party's most desired plan of action? Then yes, that creature will have tons of trouble.
Most things with legendary resistances will not be nearly so charitable, however. Or should not be, if the DM is running them at all appropriately.
I am more thinking literally any other fight at that level with a creature with no legendary resistances.
Think about the impact to the game at that point....literally every fight has to have multiple creatures with LR....and since its a first level spell that tipping point comes pretty darn fast.
Likely faster than you should be having LR creatures in every fight....
The Strixhaven backgrounds, and the feats tied to them, are very specific to Strixhaven-the-setting and are not, at all, for general-purpose use across all games. Just like the Ravnica backgrounds that had people exploding are absolutely not okay for general use outside of a Ravnica game. They're honestly immaterial to discussions of the spells by themselves, because they're so irretrievably tied up in the setting.
Thats fair I am just saying in a Strixhaven setting game then....literally everyone could start with this spell! Imagine as a DM having to reroll the same Polymorph save 5 times only to fail and the encounter end quickly.
The Strixhaven backgrounds, and the feats tied to them, are very specific to Strixhaven-the-setting and are not, at all, for general-purpose use across all games. Just like the Ravnica backgrounds that had people exploding are absolutely not okay for general use outside of a Ravnica game. They're honestly immaterial to discussions of the spells by themselves, because they're so irretrievably tied up in the setting.
Thats fair I am just saying in a Strixhaven setting game then....literally everyone could start with this spell! Imagine as a DM having to reroll the same Polymorph save 5 times only to fail and the encounter end quickly.
Imagine the players having to re roll all their saves because the enemy casters do the same thing. This not a player only spell.
I'm not reading two pages worth of discussion, but THANK YOU for stating the obvious about silvery barbs. It's merely because people look and go "Hey, that's a better shield!" (As you said, it's really not), or "Hey, that's a better bless!" (Now that it is definitely not, Bless is broken), or even "Hey, that's a better fortune's favor!" (Which it definitely is, as almost all existing advantage spells are bad) that they think barbs is broken. I merely see it as less broken than something like vicious mockery, which, as a cantrip, grants disadvantage and deals damage, just taking a bit longer to use and all that than Barbs. There is no problem with barbs to my knowledge except Misconception.
The Strixhaven backgrounds, and the feats tied to them, are very specific to Strixhaven-the-setting and are not, at all, for general-purpose use across all games. Just like the Ravnica backgrounds that had people exploding are absolutely not okay for general use outside of a Ravnica game. They're honestly immaterial to discussions of the spells by themselves, because they're so irretrievably tied up in the setting.
Thats fair I am just saying in a Strixhaven setting game then....literally everyone could start with this spell! Imagine as a DM having to reroll the same Polymorph save 5 times only to fail and the encounter end quickly.
Imagine the players having to re roll all their saves because the enemy casters do the same thing. This not a player only spell.
Then both sides hate it...again not seeing an upside but that's a good point none the less.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
Think of it like previously stated...its like getting to cast Polymorph on that creature 5 times for the cost of five 1st spell slots....but it happens in the first turn.
I think it should be a 2nd level spell then its perfect for me.
OR you put in a statement: "A creature targeted by this spell once per round" and its much better feel at first level to me...one time shot to force a re-roll then you gotta wait at least one more turn.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
Well, if we up it to second level then that comes with a few modifications to its utility
1) It cant be taken as part of a feat (Magic Initiate, Fey Touched, etc)
2) It requires investment into a spellcaster to at least 3rd level, which makes picking it up from multiclassing more difficult
3) It lowers the number of potential casts per encounter (as you no longer can cast it using your 1st level slots)
4) It is now competing with not only your 2nd level spells for slots, but also the possibility of upcasting a 1st level spell with those slots.
1 & 2 make the spell require a bigger investment by a player to obtain and 3 & 4 mean that the spell will be less appealing/impossible to cast as often as if it were 1st level.
So I think 2nd level would likely be a fair level for it.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
Well, if we up it to second level then that comes with a few benefits
1) It cant be taken as part of a feat (Magic Initiate, Fey Touched, etc)
2) It requires investment into a spellcaster to at least 3rd level, which makes picking it up from multiclassing more difficult
3) It lowers the number of potential number of casts per encounter (as you no longer can cast it using your 1st level slots)
4) It is now competing with not only your 2nd level spells for slots, but also the possibility of upcasting a 1st level spell.
1 & 2 make the spell require a bigger investment by a player to obtain and 3 & 4 mean that the spell will be less appealing/impossible to cast as often as if it were 1st level.
So I think 2nd level would likely be a fair level for it.
These are my thoughts as well....its too easy to access at 1st level is my main concern.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
I disagree with Optimus, as at third level we get fireball.
Does that make sense? Pray, let me explain.
ON FIREBALLS AND SILVERED BARBS
Our discussion here is about the spell silvery barbs, a new spell from the book Strixhaven: a Curriculum of Chaos. It offers one lot of advantage and disadvantage. Going by the rules suggested in the Player's Handbook, advantage counts as a +5 bonus to passive checks (Player's Handbook Chapter 7) , so we will examine silvery barbs at it's most potent passive. This effectively means a +5 bonus to one check, and a -5 penalty to another. Only the penalty's check can be chosen by the caster.
Comparing this first against the spell bless, a cleric staple from the Player's Handbook, generally considered powerful but not broken. This spell grants on average a +2 bonus, on all ability checks and saving throws, for a minute (assuming concentration), on up to three creatures. Assuming this spell only lasts one single round of combat, and assuming each creature makes only one ability check or saving throw in this entire round, that's effectively a +6 bonus, spread across more creatures. And this is significantly downplaying the spell's effects, as this can last multiple turns, with a maximum bonus (assuming each creature targeted only makes one check or save per round) of a whopping +120 spread across a single minute. Now, this maximum is unrealistic, at best, but so too is the spell only lasting a single round of combat, as clerics won't be getting in melee range unless they have specific feats (Player's Handbook Chapter 6).
This effectively means that, while silvery barbs is the faster spell, bless outclasses it in almost every single other way. Even more specifically, when not using passive bonuses, silvery barbs can do nothing to aid your allies at all, while bless is always guaranteed to grant at least a +3 bonus over one round of combat. What's more, bless works outside of combat too, while silvery barbs cannot, meaning bless is more potent, more effective, more predictable, and more versatile than silvery barbs ever will be.
Turning to the second comparison, shield. This spell grants a +5 bonus to AC until the start of your next turn as a reaction. This means shield is roughly equivalent to our silvery barbs, both granting +5 bonuses when used in passive. Assuming that only one attack is made against the caster with shield, silvery barbs is by far the superior. However, a second attack makes both spells roughly equal in power level - no considerable difference. Again, this is using a gross passive version of silvery barbs, which provides a +5 bonus to a check - something that won't happen on a roll of 15 or higher, and more likely than not will not increase the initial roll at all. This just goes to show that silvery barbs and shield are not truly comparable as they both do widely different things.
Turning to the third, second to last comparison, fortune's favor. This spell stinks. Silvery barbs beats it, hands down.
Turning to our promised comparison, fireball. These two spells are nothing alike. One deals damage, and one provides a nerf and boon. How are they comparable?
Power, my dear Watson. According to the Dungeon Master's Guide(Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 9), a spell of fireball's level should deal 6d6 damage. This means fireball deals 2d6 damage greater than it should. In fact, it's the equivalent, according to the table, of adding in an extra spell slot of 1st level. It's cast one spell, get one free! However, with silvery barbs's closest comparisons, shield and bless, our spell deals very little extra benefits at the best of times - by no means an extra spell slot's worth of value. Hence, silvery barbs is less ban-worthy than fireball and bless, widely considered among the best spells in Dungeons and Dragons.
Will you remove fireball? Or will you accept silvery barbs is not your overpowered, potent enemy you seem to insist it is? I will let you decide.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
I disagree with Optimus, as at third level we get fireball.
Does that make sense? Pray, let me explain.
ON FIREBALLS AND SILVERED BARBS
Our discussion here is about the spell silvery barbs, a new spell from the book Strixhaven: a Curriculum of Chaos. It offers one lot of advantage and disadvantage. Going by the rules suggested in the Player's Handbook, advantage counts as a +5 bonus to passive checks (Player's Handbook Chapter 7) , so we will examine silvery barbs at it's most potent passive. This effectively means a +5 bonus to one check, and a -5 penalty to another. Only the penalty's check can be chosen by the caster.
Comparing this first against the spell bless, a cleric staple from the Player's Handbook, generally considered powerful but not broken. This spell grants on average a +2 bonus, on all ability checks and saving throws, for a minute (assuming concentration), on up to three creatures. Assuming this spell only lasts one single round of combat, and assuming each creature makes only one ability check or saving throw in this entire round, that's effectively a +6 bonus, spread across more creatures. And this is significantly downplaying the spell's effects, as this can last multiple turns, with a maximum bonus (assuming each creature targeted only makes one check or save per round) of a whopping +120 spread across a single minute. Now, this maximum is unrealistic, at best, but so too is the spell only lasting a single round of combat, as clerics won't be getting in melee range unless they have specific feats (Player's Handbook Chapter 6).
This effectively means that, while silvery barbs is the faster spell, bless outclasses it in almost every single other way. Even more specifically, when not using passive bonuses, silvery barbs can do nothing to aid your allies at all, while bless is always guaranteed to grant at least a +3 bonus over one round of combat. What's more, bless works outside of combat too, while silvery barbs cannot, meaning bless is more potent, more effective, more predictable, and more versatile than silvery barbs ever will be.
Turning to the second comparison, shield. This spell grants a +5 bonus to AC until the start of your next turn as a reaction. This means shield is roughly equivalent to our silvery barbs, both granting +5 bonuses when used in passive. Assuming that only one attack is made against the caster with shield, silvery barbs is by far the superior. However, a second attack makes both spells roughly equal in power level - no considerable difference. Again, this is using a gross passive version of silvery barbs, which provides a +5 bonus to a check - something that won't happen on a roll of 15 or higher, and more likely than not will not increase the initial roll at all. This just goes to show that silvery barbs and shield are not truly comparable as they both do widely different things.
Turning to the third, second to last comparison, fortune's favor. This spell stinks. Silvery barbs beats it, hands down.
Turning to our promised comparison, fireball. These two spells are nothing alike. One deals damage, and one provides a nerf and boon. How are they comparable?
Power, my dear Watson. According to the Dungeon Master's Guide(Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 9), a spell of fireball's level should deal 6d6 damage. This means fireball deals 2d6 damage greater than it should. In fact, it's the equivalent, according to the table, of adding in an extra spell slot of 1st level. It's cast one spell, get one free! However, with silvery barbs's closest comparisons, shield and bless, our spell deals very little extra benefits at the best of times - by no means an extra spell slot's worth of value. Hence, silvery barbs is less ban-worthy than fireball and bless, widely considered among the best spells in Dungeons and Dragons.
Will you remove fireball? Or will you accept silvery barbs is not your overpowered, potent enemy you seem to insist it is? I will let you decide.
Yes...I do think fireball is overpowered and should not be an 8d6....its very much above their own standards for damage and was a mistake to make it more powerful for the sake of nostalgia.
A better comparison to this is Healing Spirit....as written originally it was a monster of a spell that allowed you to heal more than spells at 6th level. This wasn't because they purposefully made it powerful or above the curve like fireball....its because they didn't think about aspects of it that they didn't intend people to use it for.
The same applies here...they didn't think how this interacts in the game outside of the vacuum of this single reaction....The fact it chains, the fact that you can pick it up in so many ways for very little investment, and the fact that DIS scales wildly with how high the DC is....making the spell more and more effective the further you get into the game. It grows exponentially better the higher level spell you use it on. And the cost gets lower and lower with the more slots you get.
Using it on something like Disintegrate means you effectively get to cast the spell a second time...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Silvery barbs, a 1st level spell available to any bard, sorcerer or wizard, anyone that takes magic initiate in those classes or anyone that takes the fey touched feat.
Portent, available to a 2nd level wizard.
The cost of getting and using Barbs is drastically lower than Portent. Portent does have uses and can be strong, yes, but is best when you roll really high or really low, and of those two you only want to be replacing enemy rolls with low ones. I think this is a very apples and oranges comparison.
Thanks to the range on this spell, the mage doesnt have to be anywhere near the enemy. At the very least, the enemy would have to spend two legendary actions (one or more to move to the mage and another to attack).
These two bolded steps also assume that the party doesnt have any means to control the enemy's movement/aggro them. Assuming no "flyby" or similar features, how many attacks of opportunity will moving to the wizard incur for this enemy?
Finally, even if the mage does aggro the enemy to them, they have a number of spells available to them to pop out of that scenario back to a safe distance in the event they survive at least one round of potential pummeling.
Sure, the mage may not fare well in a one-on-one with the big bad, but most party strategies will have at least some steps to ensure the mage isnt easily targeted.
Following your blueprint, 1 casting of a 1st level spell as a reaction will result in 1 loss of legendary resistance, the cost of 1 or more legendary actions, and the focus of the enemy for 1 turn on you instead of the rest of the party. Factor into that that some of your allies could get AoEs on the moving enemy and that one of these allies will have advantage thanks to the spell, and it seems to me like you are getting a TON out of the spell in this case.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Assuming favorable tactics on the part of the party and rank stupidity on the part of the enemy always makes something seem less of an issue than it is. If a creature allows itself to hauled around by the nose by the party's hardest-to-kill members while a mage heckles it from the back completely unmolested, doing exactly what the party expects it to do and complying with the party's most desired plan of action? Then yes, that creature will have tons of trouble.
Most things with legendary resistances will not be nearly so charitable, however. Or should not be, if the DM is running them at all appropriately.
Please do not contact or message me.
Plus why would they target the mage again? What if the figther dropped 50+ points of damage on them? This is a white room of white rooms to assume they will get focused fired for a spell...
and if so...wouldn't that mean the spell is so dangerous that they wont want it cast again? Doesn't that make it more a problem for the caster to use just for the opposite reason?
So if you use it a lot with no drawbacks = bad because you big bad for the fight will always be polymorphed to a fish
If you get ******* hammered to death everytime you use it = bad.....why use a spell that will get you insta-targeted by every bad in the room?
So the scenario you present is terrible....but so is unfettered use. I do not see a win here with the spell....
I didn't make the comparison, just responding to the ones that did.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Not to mention the backgrounds in the book give you magic initiate+ for free as a background and likely access to the spell with 0 ASI/Feat investment.
I feel like I am taking crazy pills when people talk about this!
The Strixhaven backgrounds, and the feats tied to them, are very specific to Strixhaven-the-setting and are not, at all, for general-purpose use across all games. Just like the Ravnica backgrounds that had people exploding are absolutely not okay for general use outside of a Ravnica game. They're honestly immaterial to discussions of the spells by themselves, because they're so irretrievably tied up in the setting.
Please do not contact or message me.
I am more thinking literally any other fight at that level with a creature with no legendary resistances.
Think about the impact to the game at that point....literally every fight has to have multiple creatures with LR....and since its a first level spell that tipping point comes pretty darn fast.
Likely faster than you should be having LR creatures in every fight....
Thats fair I am just saying in a Strixhaven setting game then....literally everyone could start with this spell! Imagine as a DM having to reroll the same Polymorph save 5 times only to fail and the encounter end quickly.
Imagine the players having to re roll all their saves because the enemy casters do the same thing. This not a player only spell.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Hi Yurei,
I'm not reading two pages worth of discussion, but THANK YOU for stating the obvious about silvery barbs. It's merely because people look and go "Hey, that's a better shield!" (As you said, it's really not), or "Hey, that's a better bless!" (Now that it is definitely not, Bless is broken), or even "Hey, that's a better fortune's favor!" (Which it definitely is, as almost all existing advantage spells are bad) that they think barbs is broken. I merely see it as less broken than something like vicious mockery, which, as a cantrip, grants disadvantage and deals damage, just taking a bit longer to use and all that than Barbs. There is no problem with barbs to my knowledge except Misconception.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Then both sides hate it...again not seeing an upside but that's a good point none the less.
Or the critter could fail the first Polymorph save and arrive at the same point, with nobody complaining about it. Or the critter could, indeed, nail five different attempts to muck with its save against Polymorph, and man - what a table tale that would be.
I suppose that's the thing - I'm seeing a lot of people venting spleen about how Silvery Barbs is an automatic win switch that guarantees somebody will change the course of history forever when it's just...not that powerful? Excellent yes, but not so earthshaking as to merit the hooplah. Everyone's hollering that it's way too good for first level. So, okay - what level should it be? Legit curious - what level do folks think would be More Fair for Silvery Barbs, if first is too low a cost?
Please do not contact or message me.
Personally, I would have made it a 2nd level spell if I am being completely honest.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Think of it like previously stated...its like getting to cast Polymorph on that creature 5 times for the cost of five 1st spell slots....but it happens in the first turn.
I think it should be a 2nd level spell then its perfect for me.
OR you put in a statement: "A creature targeted by this spell once per round" and its much better feel at first level to me...one time shot to force a re-roll then you gotta wait at least one more turn.
Well, if we up it to second level then that comes with a few modifications to its utility
1) It cant be taken as part of a feat (Magic Initiate, Fey Touched, etc)
2) It requires investment into a spellcaster to at least 3rd level, which makes picking it up from multiclassing more difficult
3) It lowers the number of potential casts per encounter (as you no longer can cast it using your 1st level slots)
4) It is now competing with not only your 2nd level spells for slots, but also the possibility of upcasting a 1st level spell with those slots.
1 & 2 make the spell require a bigger investment by a player to obtain and 3 & 4 mean that the spell will be less appealing/impossible to cast as often as if it were 1st level.
So I think 2nd level would likely be a fair level for it.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Yeah as a 2nd level it feels right TBH...I know its not a huge change but overall it does have an impact during the meat of most campaigns (1-10).
These are my thoughts as well....its too easy to access at 1st level is my main concern.
I disagree with Optimus, as at third level we get fireball.
Does that make sense? Pray, let me explain.
ON FIREBALLS AND SILVERED BARBS
Our discussion here is about the spell silvery barbs, a new spell from the book Strixhaven: a Curriculum of Chaos. It offers one lot of advantage and disadvantage. Going by the rules suggested in the Player's Handbook, advantage counts as a +5 bonus to passive checks (Player's Handbook Chapter 7) , so we will examine silvery barbs at it's most potent passive. This effectively means a +5 bonus to one check, and a -5 penalty to another. Only the penalty's check can be chosen by the caster.
Comparing this first against the spell bless, a cleric staple from the Player's Handbook, generally considered powerful but not broken. This spell grants on average a +2 bonus, on all ability checks and saving throws, for a minute (assuming concentration), on up to three creatures. Assuming this spell only lasts one single round of combat, and assuming each creature makes only one ability check or saving throw in this entire round, that's effectively a +6 bonus, spread across more creatures. And this is significantly downplaying the spell's effects, as this can last multiple turns, with a maximum bonus (assuming each creature targeted only makes one check or save per round) of a whopping +120 spread across a single minute. Now, this maximum is unrealistic, at best, but so too is the spell only lasting a single round of combat, as clerics won't be getting in melee range unless they have specific feats (Player's Handbook Chapter 6).
This effectively means that, while silvery barbs is the faster spell, bless outclasses it in almost every single other way. Even more specifically, when not using passive bonuses, silvery barbs can do nothing to aid your allies at all, while bless is always guaranteed to grant at least a +3 bonus over one round of combat. What's more, bless works outside of combat too, while silvery barbs cannot, meaning bless is more potent, more effective, more predictable, and more versatile than silvery barbs ever will be.
Turning to the second comparison, shield. This spell grants a +5 bonus to AC until the start of your next turn as a reaction. This means shield is roughly equivalent to our silvery barbs, both granting +5 bonuses when used in passive. Assuming that only one attack is made against the caster with shield, silvery barbs is by far the superior. However, a second attack makes both spells roughly equal in power level - no considerable difference. Again, this is using a gross passive version of silvery barbs, which provides a +5 bonus to a check - something that won't happen on a roll of 15 or higher, and more likely than not will not increase the initial roll at all. This just goes to show that silvery barbs and shield are not truly comparable as they both do widely different things.
Turning to the third, second to last comparison, fortune's favor. This spell stinks. Silvery barbs beats it, hands down.
Turning to our promised comparison, fireball. These two spells are nothing alike. One deals damage, and one provides a nerf and boon. How are they comparable?
Power, my dear Watson. According to the Dungeon Master's Guide (Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 9), a spell of fireball's level should deal 6d6 damage. This means fireball deals 2d6 damage greater than it should. In fact, it's the equivalent, according to the table, of adding in an extra spell slot of 1st level. It's cast one spell, get one free! However, with silvery barbs's closest comparisons, shield and bless, our spell deals very little extra benefits at the best of times - by no means an extra spell slot's worth of value. Hence, silvery barbs is less ban-worthy than fireball and bless, widely considered among the best spells in Dungeons and Dragons.
Will you remove fireball? Or will you accept silvery barbs is not your overpowered, potent enemy you seem to insist it is? I will let you decide.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
Yes...I do think fireball is overpowered and should not be an 8d6....its very much above their own standards for damage and was a mistake to make it more powerful for the sake of nostalgia.
A better comparison to this is Healing Spirit....as written originally it was a monster of a spell that allowed you to heal more than spells at 6th level. This wasn't because they purposefully made it powerful or above the curve like fireball....its because they didn't think about aspects of it that they didn't intend people to use it for.
The same applies here...they didn't think how this interacts in the game outside of the vacuum of this single reaction....The fact it chains, the fact that you can pick it up in so many ways for very little investment, and the fact that DIS scales wildly with how high the DC is....making the spell more and more effective the further you get into the game. It grows exponentially better the higher level spell you use it on. And the cost gets lower and lower with the more slots you get.
Using it on something like Disintegrate means you effectively get to cast the spell a second time...