Bumping the DC in response to a player having Guidance seems mean-spirited since it basically defeats the purpose. It's literally an average of +2 extra on their skill checks; it's not going to significantly alter their success rate, particularly against high DC checks. Do you bump DC when there's a Bard in the party too? Or whenever someone uses the Help Action?
Bumping the DC in response to a player having Guidance seems mean-spirited since it basically defeats the purpose. It's literally an average of +2 extra on their skill checks; it's not going to significantly alter their success rate, particularly against high DC checks. Do you bump DC when there's a Bard in the party too? Or whenever someone uses the Help Action?
Despite the myth of bounded accuracy, the reality is that DMs generally tune challenges to the capabilities of the PCs, so increasing the capabilities of the PCs results in harder challenges. Thus, the most relevant skill boosts are either ones that focus the character (characters will fail on occasion.. but they have some choice about what type of thing they fail at) or that improve relative to other PCs (challenges are on a per-party basis). Guidance is neither one.
Again, how is it different than the Help Action (will almost always give a larger improvement, potentially much larger), or Bardic Inspiration (limited uses, but once it starts refreshing on SR fairly low-cost to use outside of combat areas)? The entire reason to take the spell is to improve the group's skill checks; raising the DC in response means you've literally just made the spell a trap for the person who took it.
Again, how is it different than the Help Action (will almost always give a larger improvement, potentially much larger), or Bardic Inspiration (limited uses, but once it starts refreshing on SR fairly low-cost to use outside of combat areas)? The entire reason to take the spell is to improve the group's skill checks; raising the DC in response means you've literally just made the spell a trap for the person who took it.
Well, yes, that's the problem with the spell. Making the group universally better at skill checks pretty much forces the DM to increase the difficulty of skill checks. As such, it's just a bad spell to even have in the game, at least as a cantrip (it would be fine as, say, a spell, channel divinity, or limited use class feature).
Again, how is it different than the Help Action (will almost always give a larger improvement, potentially much larger), or Bardic Inspiration (limited uses, but once it starts refreshing on SR fairly low-cost to use outside of combat areas)? The entire reason to take the spell is to improve the group's skill checks; raising the DC in response means you've literally just made the spell a trap for the person who took it.
Well, yes, that's the problem with the spell. Making the group universally better at skill checks pretty much forces the DM to increase the difficulty of skill checks. As such, it's just a bad spell to even have in the game, at least as a cantrip (it would be fine as, say, a spell, channel divinity, or limited use class feature).
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action? More to the point, how is Help not generally stronger? It doesn't take up a slot that could be occupied by something else, isn't reliant on a single player, and it both gives a stronger boost on average and has a much stronger swing factor. You can't tell me the odds that you'll roll lower with Advantage are significantly higher than the odds that you'll roll a 1 with Guidance when you need a 4. Also, just enforce players needing to set it up ahead of time rather than slipping it in after and it becomes a collaborative part of players working a scene: "There's something over there I want to check out" "One sec, let me cast Guidance on you first". Unless the DM is maintaining a death grip on the narration, it's not hard for players to work it in on their own time during a session.
Well, yes, that's the problem with the spell. Making the group universally better at skill checks pretty much forces the DM to increase the difficulty of skill checks. As such, it's just a bad spell to even have in the game, at least as a cantrip (it would be fine as, say, a spell, channel divinity, or limited use class feature).
It's not just a blanket "the group is better at skill checks" that then needs to be compensated for, though. Even as a repeatable cantrip it has a cost - among others, needing concentration in the 2014 version, in-the-moment proximity in the 2024 version, and loud chanting for both. If you can't devise scenarios where those drawbacks matter to the spell's use, the problem lies with your ability to design challenges, not with the spell.
This conversation has been illuminating. I never really understood why people really thought Silvery Barbs was overpowered and needed to be banned. Now that these same people have also stated that Guidance and Shield are overpowered and that even Help needs to be reduced in effectiveness, I get it - we play fundamentally different games that share a name only.
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action?
Help is absolutely a problem, but it tends to just get handled by changing the rules to reduce its effectiveness.
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
This conversation has been illuminating. I never really understood why people really thought Silvery Barbs was overpowered and needed to be banned. Now that these same people have also stated that Guidance and Shield are overpowered and that even Help needs to be reduced in effectiveness, I get it - we play fundamentally different games that share a name only.
The thing is: the game has a default difficulty. Now, as a DM, I can certainly ignore those defaults and invent new challenges... but I would rather the game actually worked as designed, and that means challenges that are expected to be relevant actually are relevant. Also, I prefer clean mechanics -- most rolls really should just be simple rolls, not 'Let me find all the bonuses I can stack on this roll'.
This conversation has been illuminating. I never really understood why people really thought Silvery Barbs was overpowered and needed to be banned. Now that these same people have also stated that Guidance and Shield are overpowered and that even Help needs to be reduced in effectiveness, I get it - we play fundamentally different games that share a name only.
The thing is: the game has a default difficulty. Now, as a DM, I can certainly ignore those defaults and invent new challenges... but I would rather the game actually worked as designed, and that means challenges that are expected to be relevant actually are relevant.
And an average of +2 to skill checks destroys this "balance"? Imo you're vastly overestimating how fine-tuned any of the systems in this game are.
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
Which 5e rule are you citing that says a single Perception check always lets you thoroughly scan a 30x30 room in 6 seconds?
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action?
Help is absolutely a problem, but it tends to just get handled by changing the rules to reduce its effectiveness.
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
What for a perception check is that? Traditional means of detection are much more involved. These are purpose built secret doors, not merely 'slightly hidden but visible to anyone who simply pays attention' doors.
It's a strawman interpretation of what a Perception check is. Out of combat, time is fluid and so the exact timeframe you're looking at for such as check is up to how the DM and players play the scene. Even in combat those hypothetical "six seconds" are really just for tracking durations rather than a realistic interpretation of the timeframe it takes for someone to, say, run 30 ft and effectively swing a weapon in each hand. Having someone cast Guidance on you ahead of making a Perception check of a room is exactly the kind of scenario the spell is for.
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action?
Help is absolutely a problem, but it tends to just get handled by changing the rules to reduce its effectiveness.
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
What for a perception check is that? Traditional means of detection are much more involved. These are purpose built secret doors, not merely 'slightly hidden but visible to anyone who simply pays attention' doors.
It's a strawman interpretation of what a Perception check is. Out of combat, time is fluid and so the exact timeframe you're looking at for such as check is up to how the DM and players play the scene. Even in combat those hypothetical "six seconds" are really just for tracking durations rather than a realistic interpretation of the timeframe it takes for someone to, say, run 30 ft and effectively swing a weapon in each hand. Having someone cast Guidance on you ahead of making a Perception check of a room is exactly the kind of scenario the spell is for.
Except that would only help one person. And casting it could warn those in the room of your impending entry. Personally, I see it more intended for more conscious, less spontaneous things, like opening a tricky lock. Possibly for a sniper shot, but then you have the warning problem again. Seriously, how often would you say to someone before they simply go into a room "Let me improve your eyesight?"
I mean, I was thinking more when the party is searching an empty room.
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action?
Help is absolutely a problem, but it tends to just get handled by changing the rules to reduce its effectiveness.
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
What for a perception check is that? Traditional means of detection are much more involved. These are purpose built secret doors, not merely 'slightly hidden but visible to anyone who simply pays attention' doors.
It's a strawman interpretation of what a Perception check is. Out of combat, time is fluid and so the exact timeframe you're looking at for such as check is up to how the DM and players play the scene. Even in combat those hypothetical "six seconds" are really just for tracking durations rather than a realistic interpretation of the timeframe it takes for someone to, say, run 30 ft and effectively swing a weapon in each hand. Having someone cast Guidance on you ahead of making a Perception check of a room is exactly the kind of scenario the spell is for.
Hardly. I have seen this "one check for the room" as standard operating procedure at almost every 5e table I have sat at over the past 8 years. It should take at least in-game 20 minutes to investigate a room that size (DM Discretion on time, and the DM rolling for wandering monsters) , and should require at least one check every 10 linear feet of wall, let alone the floor. Now, is THAT in the rules? I don't think so. This is one of the areas that was not codified. The fact that a player can spam Guidance for each and every check is a major flaw in the game.
I don't see where it is OP, Broken or whatever adjective people are using now days. Which means it must be only Youtubers complaining, like they always do. And when it gets nerfed, they will complain that it was nerfed. Unfortunately they gather many NPC viewers who run around and echo whatever they say because they don't have an original though for themselves.
Hardly. I have seen this "one check for the room" as standard operating procedure at almost every 5e table I have sat at over the past 8 years. It should take at least in-game 20 minutes to investigate a room that size (DM Discretion on time, and the DM rolling for wandering monsters) , and should require at least one check every 10 linear feet of wall, let alone the floor. Now, is THAT in the rules? I don't think so. This is one of the areas that was not codified. The fact that a player can spam Guidance for each and every check is a major flaw in the game.
The player could spam firebolt at 5' intervals to see if any wall section reacts differently and thus might be a secret door. Or at each and every object in every room just in case it might be a mimic.
So ban all cantrips?
Then what happens if they do the same with a long stick, instead? Ban long sticks?
Most players are sane and would get bored with / realize the futility of that after the first couple rooms, if they even make it that long. There is no idiot proof set of rules.
Huh? Fire Bolt detects traps and secret doors? Not in any universe. And a 10 foot pole should be standard equipment, to trigger traps, and sure, pound on wall sections/floor sections to see if a section is hollow. No one needs to have any spammable magic, of any kind, to perform basic game functions.
Hardly. I have seen this "one check for the room" as standard operating procedure at almost every 5e table I have sat at over the past 8 years. It should take at least in-game 20 minutes to investigate a room that size (DM Discretion on time, and the DM rolling for wandering monsters) , and should require at least one check every 10 linear feet of wall, let alone the floor. Now, is THAT in the rules? I don't think so. This is one of the areas that was not codified. The fact that a player can spam Guidance for each and every check is a major flaw in the game.
The player could spam firebolt at 5' intervals to see if any wall section reacts differently and thus might be a secret door. Or at each and every object in every room just in case it might be a mimic.
So ban all cantrips?
Then what happens if they do the same with a long stick, instead? Ban long sticks?
Most players are sane and would get bored with / realize the futility of that after the first couple rooms, if they even make it that long. There is no idiot proof set of rules.
Huh? Fire Bolt detects traps and secret doors? Not in any universe. And a 10 foot pole should be standard equipment, to trigger traps, and sure, pound on wall sections/floor sections to see if a section is hollow. No one needs to have any spammable magic, of any kind, to perform basic game functions.
You seem to be missing the fundamental point of cantrips; to be basic game functions.
Hardly. I have seen this "one check for the room" as standard operating procedure at almost every 5e table I have sat at over the past 8 years. It should take at least in-game 20 minutes to investigate a room that size (DM Discretion on time, and the DM rolling for wandering monsters) , and should require at least one check every 10 linear feet of wall, let alone the floor. Now, is THAT in the rules? I don't think so. This is one of the areas that was not codified. The fact that a player can spam Guidance for each and every check is a major flaw in the game.
The player could spam firebolt at 5' intervals to see if any wall section reacts differently and thus might be a secret door. Or at each and every object in every room just in case it might be a mimic.
So ban all cantrips?
Then what happens if they do the same with a long stick, instead? Ban long sticks?
Most players are sane and would get bored with / realize the futility of that after the first couple rooms, if they even make it that long. There is no idiot proof set of rules.
Huh? Fire Bolt detects traps and secret doors? Not in any universe. And a 10 foot pole should be standard equipment, to trigger traps, and sure, pound on wall sections/floor sections to see if a section is hollow. No one needs to have any spammable magic, of any kind, to perform basic game functions.
You seem to be missing the fundamental point of cantrips; to be basic game functions.
No, you miss the point. Fundamental game functions should in no way be handled by cantrips.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Bumping the DC in response to a player having Guidance seems mean-spirited since it basically defeats the purpose. It's literally an average of +2 extra on their skill checks; it's not going to significantly alter their success rate, particularly against high DC checks. Do you bump DC when there's a Bard in the party too? Or whenever someone uses the Help Action?
Despite the myth of bounded accuracy, the reality is that DMs generally tune challenges to the capabilities of the PCs, so increasing the capabilities of the PCs results in harder challenges. Thus, the most relevant skill boosts are either ones that focus the character (characters will fail on occasion.. but they have some choice about what type of thing they fail at) or that improve relative to other PCs (challenges are on a per-party basis). Guidance is neither one.
Again, how is it different than the Help Action (will almost always give a larger improvement, potentially much larger), or Bardic Inspiration (limited uses, but once it starts refreshing on SR fairly low-cost to use outside of combat areas)? The entire reason to take the spell is to improve the group's skill checks; raising the DC in response means you've literally just made the spell a trap for the person who took it.
Well, yes, that's the problem with the spell. Making the group universally better at skill checks pretty much forces the DM to increase the difficulty of skill checks. As such, it's just a bad spell to even have in the game, at least as a cantrip (it would be fine as, say, a spell, channel divinity, or limited use class feature).
For the umpteenth time, how is Guidance different than using the Help Action? More to the point, how is Help not generally stronger? It doesn't take up a slot that could be occupied by something else, isn't reliant on a single player, and it both gives a stronger boost on average and has a much stronger swing factor. You can't tell me the odds that you'll roll lower with Advantage are significantly higher than the odds that you'll roll a 1 with Guidance when you need a 4. Also, just enforce players needing to set it up ahead of time rather than slipping it in after and it becomes a collaborative part of players working a scene: "There's something over there I want to check out" "One sec, let me cast Guidance on you first". Unless the DM is maintaining a death grip on the narration, it's not hard for players to work it in on their own time during a session.
It's not just a blanket "the group is better at skill checks" that then needs to be compensated for, though. Even as a repeatable cantrip it has a cost - among others, needing concentration in the 2014 version, in-the-moment proximity in the 2024 version, and loud chanting for both. If you can't devise scenarios where those drawbacks matter to the spell's use, the problem lies with your ability to design challenges, not with the spell.
Help is absolutely a problem, but it tends to just get handled by changing the rules to reduce its effectiveness.
This conversation has been illuminating. I never really understood why people really thought Silvery Barbs was overpowered and needed to be banned. Now that these same people have also stated that Guidance and Shield are overpowered and that even Help needs to be reduced in effectiveness, I get it - we play fundamentally different games that share a name only.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I want to "Help" someone with a singe Perception check, with Guidance of course, to examine a 30 x 30 room for secret doors or traps in 6 seconds. That in a nutshell is part of what is wrong with 5e.
The thing is: the game has a default difficulty. Now, as a DM, I can certainly ignore those defaults and invent new challenges... but I would rather the game actually worked as designed, and that means challenges that are expected to be relevant actually are relevant. Also, I prefer clean mechanics -- most rolls really should just be simple rolls, not 'Let me find all the bonuses I can stack on this roll'.
And an average of +2 to skill checks destroys this "balance"? Imo you're vastly overestimating how fine-tuned any of the systems in this game are.
Which 5e rule are you citing that says a single Perception check always lets you thoroughly scan a 30x30 room in 6 seconds?
It's a strawman interpretation of what a Perception check is. Out of combat, time is fluid and so the exact timeframe you're looking at for such as check is up to how the DM and players play the scene. Even in combat those hypothetical "six seconds" are really just for tracking durations rather than a realistic interpretation of the timeframe it takes for someone to, say, run 30 ft and effectively swing a weapon in each hand. Having someone cast Guidance on you ahead of making a Perception check of a room is exactly the kind of scenario the spell is for.
I mean, I was thinking more when the party is searching an empty room.
Just think of it as asking your god's assistance in the completion of a task. Cast it when that would be appropriate.
Know the villian entered this room but don't see any exit doors/windows and wanna pray for Guidance to help follow him? Makes sense.
Just walking past a random empty room and are praying for Guidance to spot random details? Heresy.
I got quotes!
Hardly. I have seen this "one check for the room" as standard operating procedure at almost every 5e table I have sat at over the past 8 years. It should take at least in-game 20 minutes to investigate a room that size (DM Discretion on time, and the DM rolling for wandering monsters) , and should require at least one check every 10 linear feet of wall, let alone the floor. Now, is THAT in the rules? I don't think so. This is one of the areas that was not codified. The fact that a player can spam Guidance for each and every check is a major flaw in the game.
I don't see where it is OP, Broken or whatever adjective people are using now days. Which means it must be only Youtubers complaining, like they always do. And when it gets nerfed, they will complain that it was nerfed. Unfortunately they gather many NPC viewers who run around and echo whatever they say because they don't have an original though for themselves.
Just like the Ranger and Monk "suck" videos. smh.
Huh? Fire Bolt detects traps and secret doors? Not in any universe. And a 10 foot pole should be standard equipment, to trigger traps, and sure, pound on wall sections/floor sections to see if a section is hollow. No one needs to have any spammable magic, of any kind, to perform basic game functions.
You seem to be missing the fundamental point of cantrips; to be basic game functions.
No, you miss the point. Fundamental game functions should in no way be handled by cantrips.