1. The opportunities cost is extremely low. You can wait to cast this until after you see the success -- no chance of wasting it. You can even cast it on the same turn as another spell -- no loss in action economy. It's 1st level so it's easy to have enough spell slots for it. And it's broadly useful in nearly all combat scenarios, plus some social ones -- no loss in flexibility.
2. The effect is atypical and circumvents legendary resistances in what some people believe is an unintended way. Since LR causes a success, SB can then force a reroll after LR has been used. That's weird, and the uniqueness of it is a point in its favor -- even if all the other stuff I said wasn't true, you might take it just for this one use case, because nothing else can do it.
3. It's easy to get with dips and feats, and you arguably should always take it on every character. I say arguably, but I don't want to argue, so please don't take this as an invitation. Just compare it with Lucky or something. Even ignoring feats, all the casters who can take it should.
4. The flavor of it is pretty weak. This is no Fireball. The narrative here doesn't even imply magic at all, it just states that the effect is magical in order to justify it being a spell. Imagine if Green-Flame Blade dealt the same damage type as the weapon used to cast it, and was described like, "you magically hit someone with your weapon, and then hit someone else within 5ft also." Like, what??
Taken as a whole, it's just a dumb spell. Easy ban for me, but I don't think of it as banning, because I ban by default.
1.) This is the same as other defensive spells such as Shield or Absorb Elements that are only used when it's fer-sher that their use will have an impact. Barbs is more versatile than other first-level defensive spells, for sure - but it ain't gonna help you survive a red dragon's firebombing or withstand that same dragon's godawful melee multiattack.
2.) My table actually went over this and arrived at the same RAW that the developers have already stated was their RAI - legendary resistance always wins. Legendary resistance states "when you fail a saving throw, you can choose to succeed instead". Silvery Barbs doesn't force the creature to make a new saving throw, it modifies the original saving throw and could turn a potential natural success into a failure. That said? It's still a failed saving throw, and Legendary Resistance says the creature can treat that failure as a success no matter how that save was failed. Barbs can force a creature to use a legendary resistance, if it turns a natural success into a failure, but it cannot overcome a legendary resistance.
3.) Y'all posted in a discussion thread. Saying "please don't argue" doesn't fly :P It is indeed very good, but different builds like different spells. If you're burning a feat specifically to acquire Silvery Barbs (generally Fey-Touched, I would assume), then you're losing something else. Many characters simply don't have room - I'm building up a 12th-level bard, for instance, that currently does not have Barbs simply because I cannot afford to lose any of the other first-level spells I've already got for it. If I had room on that character for Fey-Touched I might take Barbs. Or I might take Hex, for the constant, ongoing ability check disadvantage that's generally more useful. I'd love to have Barbs, but it's not necessarily mandatory.
4.) The flavor on every spell is weak if you let it be weak. No, this isn't some big flashy Elemental Devastation Evocation spell, but if I could take it on that bard I mentioned earlier, I already know what the verbal component would be. Namely: "OBJECTION!" And frankly the flavor on Barbs is no less weaksauce-as-written than the flavor on Counterspell, or Dispel Magic, or many other "magically screw with somebody" spells. Charm Person doesn't give you a fancy visual effect, either. Hell, unless you invent one, Hold Person has no 'flavor' to it either, and the Hold spells are among the most devastating single-target debuffs in the whole-ass game.
I don't tell other DMs how to run their games - if ye want it banned, then by all means ban it. Heh, just wanted to start a discussion with folks to see if it was really so terrible as everyone keeps making it out to be.
1) Yes, it's more versatile. The fact that it's not PERFECTLY versatile doesn't change that. It's still MORE versatile than other options. It basically covers the bases of, like, three or four of the very best spells in the game. I think that's sufficient to call it problematic on its own, but wait, there's more.
2) Well, I'm glad you've found a way to fix this broken spell. But the fact that it requires this, is indicative of a lack of attention from the designers, in my opinion.
3) Luckily for me, there's like ten pages of just people debating how powerful it is, and I didn't have to contribute. This much is obvious though: it's powerful enough to argue about.
4) It doesn't have to be visual. But please, tell me what this spell is doing? Because it sounds to me like it's just the caster being good at talking. That's not magic.
Having Silvery Barbs makes save-or-suck spells SO MUCH better! Let's say you throw a Hold Person and they make their save. Well, now you can make them roll again and use the lower roll -AND- grant pseudo-advantage to your ally. Now, not only is that target paralyzed, but your allies who are attacking with advantage get a third d20 to really fish for that crit! All for the cost of your reaction (which, let's face it, most caster don't use much anyway) and a 1-level spell slot. Of all of the reaction spells, Silvery Barbs is easily the most versatile and universally useful.
Small correction there, if YOU cast Hold Person then YOU can't cast Silvery Barbs to affect it. Only one spell per turn. Gotta use it during another player's (or enemy's) turn. Usually a party has more than one spell caster though and Silvery Barbs is just a 1st level spell anyway so while important to pay attention to it's really just a small obstacle.
That ain't the rules, chief. There is no one spell per turn rule. The rule is that when you cast a bonus action spell, "You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action."
It's perfectly valid to cast a spell with your action, hell throw in an action surge if you have fighter levels too and cast another spell with another action, and then also use your reaction to cast Silvery Barbs.
Ah I stand corrected. As I said it would've been only a minor obstacle most of the time though, so nothing gained nothing lost.
Fair enough!
Yeah the reaction battle is there for sure and if fighting a spellcaster and you have the slots its likely better to keep Counterspell in the wings....but that is also a 3rd level spell and you have a lot fewer ways of casting that spell during the meat of most games (5-12th levels) than you do a 1st level spell that you can use higher slots for.
Also they are moving on monster/creature design is to move away from spells and instead have spell like effects.
As you can see it gains these abilities that are spell like in effect but are not spells....so you cannot counter them. Its a design choice they will be doing moving forward.
Because of this I would argue that Barbs is the better spell due to unmatched versatility.
I'd like to remind people that my argument has never been that Silvery Barbs is not a powerful spell. It absolutely is. It's a fantastic piece of kit, and frankly I could see some of the arguments for it being second level.
My argument is against the idea that Silvery Barbs is fundamentally broken and should be banned/excised from D&D completely. It is not. Many people's arguments against the spell's existence assume that Barbs will always, automatically, turn a success into a failure. It will not. The whole "it's like getting to cast your best single-target spell a second time for the cost of a first-level slot and a reaction!" thing is indeed telling. Sorcerers have been able to do the exact same thing with Heightened Spell Metamagic since 5e was introduced for the cost of zero spell slots and no action at all, and yet Heightened Spell is almost always glossed over or even deliberately called out as a poor choice of Metamgaic for most builds. I find the difference there hard to reconcile.
Silvery Barbs is good. It's disadvantage on any roll you feel like within sixty feet of you for a first-level slot and a reaction. That's good! It's very good! It's not a game-breaking, overwhelming, this-will-destroy-your-campaigns-forever effect.
I remember something J-Craw once said (or at least I believe it was him), that has stuck with me ever since. He said that if the barbarian class didn't exist and they tried to introduce a class right now, in mid-cycle, with the ability to gain resistance to mundane weapon damage without any sort of spells being cast at all, the playerbase would shriek and absolutely reject that class as being mind-blowingly overpowered. Let alone things like Reckless Attack, i.e. free advantage for every attack in a round at a negligible cost, or even just Danger Sense. Everything in the barbarian class is something they know would be seen as horrendously, game-breakingly Ohh Pee if it were introduced in any other place, but people don't even think about it when they exist on the barbarian. "Oh, that's just how the barbarian works. No big deal, barbs are cool!"
It got me to sit down and really think about the constant hue and outcry over every last little thing Wizards releases, and the constant kvetching about literally everything being Ohh Pee. Has me sitting here going "if this had been in 5e from launch, would anyone care about it, at all?"
In the case of Silvery Barbs? Maybe. I dunno. But I do know the kind of cataclysmic shits people would flip if Shield didn't exist and Wizards tried to introduce a new first-level reaction spell that gave spellcasters +5AC against every single attack for an entire round of combat "for the cost of one flippin' first-level slot and a reaction spellcasters never use anyways!" And that is quite telling indeed, methinks.
I'd like to remind people that my argument has never been that Silvery Barbs is not a powerful spell. It absolutely is. It's a fantastic piece of kit, and frankly I could see some of the arguments for it being second level.
My argument is against the idea that Silvery Barbs is fundamentally broken and should be banned/excised from D&D completely. It is not. Many people's arguments against the spell's existence assume that Barbs will always, automatically, turn a success into a failure. It will not. The whole "it's like getting to cast your best single-target spell a second time for the cost of a first-level slot and a reaction!" thing is indeed telling. Sorcerers have been able to do the exact same thing with Heightened Spell Metamagic since 5e was introduced for the cost of zero spell slots and no action at all, and yet Heightened Spell is almost always glossed over or even deliberately called out as a poor choice of Metamgaic for most builds. I find the difference there hard to reconcile.
Silvery Barbs is good. It's disadvantage on any roll you feel like within sixty feet of you for a first-level slot and a reaction. That's good! It's very good! It's not a game-breaking, overwhelming, this-will-destroy-your-campaigns-forever effect.
I remember something J-Craw once said (or at least I believe it was him), that has stuck with me ever since. He said that if the barbarian class didn't exist and they tried to introduce a class right now, in mid-cycle, with the ability to gain resistance to mundane weapon damage without any sort of spells being cast at all, the playerbase would shriek and absolutely reject that class as being mind-blowingly overpowered. Let alone things like Reckless Attack, i.e. free advantage for every attack in a round at a negligible cost, or even just Danger Sense. Everything in the barbarian class is something they know would be seen as horrendously, game-breakingly Ohh Pee if it were introduced in any other place, but people don't even think about it when they exist on the barbarian. "Oh, that's just how the barbarian works. No big deal, barbs are cool!"
It got me to sit down and really think about the constant hue and outcry over every last little thing Wizards releases, and the constant kvetching about literally everything being Ohh Pee. Has me sitting here going "if this had been in 5e from launch, would anyone care about it, at all?"
In the case of Silvery Barbs? Maybe. I dunno. But I do know the kind of cataclysmic shits people would flip if Shield didn't exist and Wizards tried to introduce a new first-level reaction spell that gave spellcasters +5AC against every single attack for an entire round of combat "for the cost of one flippin' first-level slot and a reaction spellcasters never use anyways!" And that is quite telling indeed, methinks.
On this we can agree... It just needs to be a 2nd level and I'm on board with it completely.
I'm somewhat late to this party, but not only do I find Silvery Barbs to be a perfectly reasonable spell for it's opportunity costs, it also entertains me that it's the spell that is getting people all riled up. Of the new spells, I pegged Wither and Bloom as the spell that would get all the hackles raised for subtly sneaking in some more 4e mechanics into the game (which I think is also just great).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I'd like to remind people that my argument has never been that Silvery Barbs is not a powerful spell. It absolutely is. It's a fantastic piece of kit, and frankly I could see some of the arguments for it being second level.
My argument is against the idea that Silvery Barbs is fundamentally broken and should be banned/excised from D&D completely. It is not. Many people's arguments against the spell's existence assume that Barbs will always, automatically, turn a success into a failure. It will not. The whole "it's like getting to cast your best single-target spell a second time for the cost of a first-level slot and a reaction!" thing is indeed telling. Sorcerers have been able to do the exact same thing with Heightened Spell Metamagic since 5e was introduced for the cost of zero spell slots and no action at all, and yet Heightened Spell is almost always glossed over or even deliberately called out as a poor choice of Metamgaic for most builds. I find the difference there hard to reconcile.
Silvery Barbs is good. It's disadvantage on any roll you feel like within sixty feet of you for a first-level slot and a reaction. That's good! It's very good! It's not a game-breaking, overwhelming, this-will-destroy-your-campaigns-forever effect.
I remember something J-Craw once said (or at least I believe it was him), that has stuck with me ever since. He said that if the barbarian class didn't exist and they tried to introduce a class right now, in mid-cycle, with the ability to gain resistance to mundane weapon damage without any sort of spells being cast at all, the playerbase would shriek and absolutely reject that class as being mind-blowingly overpowered. Let alone things like Reckless Attack, i.e. free advantage for every attack in a round at a negligible cost, or even just Danger Sense. Everything in the barbarian class is something they know would be seen as horrendously, game-breakingly Ohh Pee if it were introduced in any other place, but people don't even think about it when they exist on the barbarian. "Oh, that's just how the barbarian works. No big deal, barbs are cool!"
It got me to sit down and really think about the constant hue and outcry over every last little thing Wizards releases, and the constant kvetching about literally everything being Ohh Pee. Has me sitting here going "if this had been in 5e from launch, would anyone care about it, at all?"
In the case of Silvery Barbs? Maybe. I dunno. But I do know the kind of cataclysmic shits people would flip if Shield didn't exist and Wizards tried to introduce a new first-level reaction spell that gave spellcasters +5AC against every single attack for an entire round of combat "for the cost of one flippin' first-level slot and a reaction spellcasters never use anyways!" And that is quite telling indeed, methinks.
Barbs is still way better than Heightened. Heightened needs to be declared at the time of casting, not after the saving throw is made, so Barbs is better in that regard because you don't have to use it until you have to use it. Heightened costs 3 sorcerery points, yet a sorcerer can instead spend 2 sorcerery points to create a 1st level spell slot as a bonus action to give more uses of Barbs, so Barbs can be used more often and is better in that regard. Heightened is also only a sorcerer thing, while Barbs is available to three classes and six feats, the latter of which anyone can take.The irony is that the introduction of Silvery Barbs means you will never want to spend your limited Metamagic options on Heightened, because it does everything Heightened does, but better.
I'd like to remind people that my argument has never been that Silvery Barbs is not a powerful spell. It absolutely is. It's a fantastic piece of kit, and frankly I could see some of the arguments for it being second level.
My argument is against the idea that Silvery Barbs is fundamentally broken and should be banned/excised from D&D completely. It is not. Many people's arguments against the spell's existence assume that Barbs will always, automatically, turn a success into a failure. It will not. The whole "it's like getting to cast your best single-target spell a second time for the cost of a first-level slot and a reaction!" thing is indeed telling. Sorcerers have been able to do the exact same thing with Heightened Spell Metamagic since 5e was introduced for the cost of zero spell slots and no action at all, and yet Heightened Spell is almost always glossed over or even deliberately called out as a poor choice of Metamgaic for most builds. I find the difference there hard to reconcile.
This is the problem I have with a lot of your comparisons, your trying to compare a reaction spell that is used only if the target passes a save, also happens to grant advantage, and is a lvl 1 spell that can just sit in your back pocket to heightened spell, 1 of 2 metamagics your going to know in the bulk of play, costing THREE sorcery points that needs to be used up front to force just disadvantage.
When you just look between those two, how can you say "yeah this is the same exact thing"? Nevermind tossing in all the other applications barbs can be used in that aren't just spell saves which is ALL heightened spell can do, and I do feel the need to point out that class features are supposed to be more powerful than things open to everyone.. yet here's barbs?
Know what makes it even funnier? abberant mind sorcerers at lvl 6 can barbs for 1 sorcery point, making it subtle as well and is just a flat out better heightened spell (edit: yes I know someone will point out but heightened doesn't use your reaction)
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
The things have existed, but they have not existed in an easy to use package like you say. Something does not need to set the universe on fire to be OP. Granting a better version of wish as a 6th level spell would be OP would it not? It does not matter than Wish has existed for all of DnDs life cycle.
I've seen people saying this spell is OP because it swings to many things for to little investment and your here saying no its not because this power could mimic only this aspect of barbs power for more cost.
If one we’re to divide Silvery Barbs into to spells, one for the first effect and another for the second effect, what would you have? You would have two spells that are better than cantrips, but not good enough to be 1st level spells. Right? So, like “0.75st-levelish spells” sounds about right? Yeah? Okay, then add them back together and what do you get? Silvery Barbs at, what, a “1.5st-levelish spell” sound appropriate? Yeah? Which way are we supposed to round in 5e as the default?
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
Yes, the things that are similar to Silver Barbs have been in the books for a long time, but Barbs brought a gun to a knife fight, and the gun has a bayonet.
When a feature that is introduced is comparable to Shield, a sorcerer class feature, a grave domain class feature, a mastermind rogue class feature, breaks the action economy and the resource economy, can be used by three classes, can be taken by anyone with magic initiate or anyone with fey touched all at once then maybe we need to protest if we find that to be a negative addition to the game, just like we should sing the praises of positive additions to the game.
Now, more than ever, WotC has been trying to understand their audience better with the surveys, interviews, sneak peaks and major announcements. But if the nature of this single spell is to be reproduced in other elements of the game then yes, it will drastically change 5E. Wether that change is for better or worse is up to personal opinion, but conflicting opinions shouldn't be avoided in a discussion.
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
If your argument is that it's not broken because it doesn't add new mechanics, that seems to be a poor argument. That's like saying having Wish be a 3rd level spell is not broken, because people have been able to cast that spell since forever.
What if you had a spell that combined the effects of Fireball and Prayer of Healing and it was cast as a bonus action? Would you not state that this spell is overpowered and had the ability to break encounters/campaigns?
If this was a 2nd level spell, I would still argue it was very strong, but this being available at 1st makes this overly accessible to dips or feats. And it makes this spell easily spammable.
The argument was that what the spell does is already doable, just in different, but importantly, somewhat comparable ways. Suggesting that they would be fine with Wish be a 3rd level spell or combining Fireball and Prayer of Healing together in the one spell is disingenuous to what they have stated.
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time.
Most of those other abilities/features require a larger investment from the player than this spell does, which is part of the problem. None of these are 1:1 comparable, but using a few abilities/spells that have already been mentioned:
1) Bane/Bless: Also a 1st level spell, but requires the use of your action and requires you to hold concentration, shutting off the ability to cast some other spells. Larger investment in action economy and spell choices
2) Portent: Requires you to specifically take 2 levels in wizard and choose specifically the divination school of magic. Larger investment in character creation
3) Runic Shield/Storm Rune: Requires you to have 7 levels in fighter, having chosen the Rune Knight subclass. Larger investment in character creation.
4) Lucky: This one is about the same investment required. Can be easily picked up at early level as a feat.
I will add to this last point that Silvery Barbs scales better, though. By the time you're in Tier 2 or higher of play, someone with silvery barbs can easily force rerolls 4+ times per day while the guy with lucky still only ever gets 3 luck points. Lucky is already considered a strong feat. From a personal experience, I have had DMs ban this feat at their tables so its a little worrisome that a 1st level spell has a comparable ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
The things have existed, but they have not existed in an easy to use package like you say. Something does not need to set the universe on fire to be OP. Granting a better version of wish as a 6th level spell would be OP would it not? It does not matter than Wish has existed for all of DnDs life cycle.
I've seen people saying this spell is OP because it swings to many things for to little investment and your here saying no its not because this power could mimic only this aspect of barbs power for more cost.
I guess I just don't value advantage/disadvantage as highly as other people do.
Barbs is only - ONLY - an issue because it mucks with saves. If it applied only to attacks and ability checks, literally no one would care about this spell, at all, period. Imposing disadvantage on an attack roll is, in virtually all circumstances, pointless. It's why Frostbite is one of the worst damage cantrips in D&D and why nobody really cares about the effects of vicious mockery, only the memes. So the target has disadvantage on one swing? Whoo. The following sixteen swings from its seventeen-hit multiattack will ensure that by the time it's done with you, that first disadvantage swing will be a forgotten memory because the 5e design philosophy behind making a creature an offensive threat is "ensure it attacks twice as often as an entire six-man party full of dual-wielding fighters".
The target has disadvantage on one ability check? Experiment: track your next five D&D games. Count the number of times a monster/NPC makes an ability check to do anything but initiate or escape a grapple. If that number is higher than zero I will physically mail you a cookie. NPCs just don't make ability checks, and monsters make them even less. That aspect of the spell is a nonstarter. Frankly the best use of it I've heard so far is the thing where you leech luck from one party member to another - disad the rogue so you can advantage the paladin on a stealth check.
One ally has advantage on the next d20 they throw? Great! Hope the next d20 they throw is actually impactful and not a random one-off attack, or a random low DC save from a lair effect or such. The target of the advantage boost can't control when they use it, they have to burn it right away whether they want to or not, and so it's more or less a nonstarter. The number of times it will be strongly impactful is far lower than the number of times the spell is cast. Giving a friendly target advantage on something is never going to be why someone casts Barbs.
My view of Barbs is that it's a modest overall effect that can be applied in a surprisingly broad range of situations. It's very good, but the "advantage to a friend" thing is almost entirely superfluous and the disadvantage to an enemy thing is only going to be impactful if you can turn around a successful save against a powerful control effect. the higher uyp you go in level, the less you can rely on control effects in general. Yes, Barbs makes them more reliable, but disadvantage on a save isn;'t going to stop that adult dragon from having a +47 to its Constitution saving throws.
The whole "you can replace half a dozen class features with this!" thing is also a disingenuous argument because 5e has so few things it allows players to monkey with that all class features are going to have varying degrees of overlap. 5e overuses advantage and disadvantage so much, I'm not sure there's a single class/subclass in the entire game that doesn't impose it or let you ignore it in some way or other. Any spell that imposes disadvantage on anything is going to step on the toes of at least half a dozen class/subclass features, and anything that grants you advantage is stepping on the toes of three times as many class/subclass features.
I can see the argument for second level. I'm not opposed to it. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see the point and I'm not entirely unswayed. The whole accessibility issue is kind of a nonstarter to me because the Stirxhaven feats/backgrounds are bad and should feel bad, and also exist solely for use in actual Strixhaven games. The only feats that grant the spell outside of Strixhaven are Magic Initiate and Fey-Touched. Magic Initiate gives you ONE use of Barbs per long rest, period, since MI's spell can't be cast using existing spell slots unless you take MI for a class you already have class levels in, which negates the whole 'too spammable' argument against Barbs.
Fey-Touched is the best source for the spell, and using Fey-Touched to obtain Barbs is indeed very powerful. Which is why many, many DMs restrict access to Fey-Touched and demand characters justify taking the feat - "how are you touched by the fey, and when did this happen"? Not everyone in a party is going to be Touched by the Fey unless the campaign is set in the Feywild or dealing with fey in a major way; a DM who allows players to take Fey-Touched willy-nilly is a DM who knows what they signed up for.
As for multiclass dips? Again - how many spellcasters do you know who're willing to sacrifice even a single level of caster progression to splash another class? Martials don't usually dip spellcaster classes, and when they do they're usually fishing for something beyond random spell utility and thus "accessibility" isn't going to bother them. Barbs isn't a warlock spell, so you can't do it with The Hexblade Dip, and if you're already playing a class that gets natural access to Barbs? Congratulations! Enjoy your cool new spell, and try not to be a dick with it!
Make the spell second level at your table, by all means. It's probably going to end up second level at mine, just because some of the other players are super worried about its power. But once you actually play with the spell for a while, I think y'all will find that it is not, in fact, all that and a kettle bell.
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
If your argument is that it's not broken because it doesn't add new mechanics, that seems to be a poor argument. That's like saying having Wish be a 3rd level spell is not broken, because people have been able to cast that spell since forever.
What if you had a spell that combined the effects of Fireball and Prayer of Healing and it was cast as a bonus action? Would you not state that this spell is overpowered and had the ability to break encounters/campaigns?
If this was a 2nd level spell, I would still argue it was very strong, but this being available at 1st makes this overly accessible to dips or feats. And it makes this spell easily spammable.
The argument was that what the spell does is already doable, just in different, but importantly, somewhat comparable ways. Suggesting that they would be fine with Wish be a 3rd level spell or combining Fireball and Prayer of Healing together in the one spell is disingenuous to what they have stated.
It's not disingenuous because the argument being put forth is along the lines of, Barbs is not OP because granting advantage and disadvantage are things that already exist. An example given being heightened spell that effects spell saves, while having the cost of 1 of your metamagics, 3 sorcery points and having to be used at time of casting.
Which entirely ignores that barbs is a reaction, used after the die roll, also grants advantage, can be used on more than just spell saves, and only costs a 1st lvl spell slot and your reaction (also isn't a class feature like metamagic)
The argument about Barbs being OP is not that it gives advantage/(pseudo) disadvantage its that it does both at the same time, as a reaction for a 1st lvl spell slot to any dice rolls being made
So yes an apt counter would be would a fireball/prayer of healing with a BA cast time not be OP? It doesn't matter than we have fireball and prayer of healing already, or that we have wish as a 9th lvl spell if they put out a 6th level wish that you can't lose access to.
Yurei, if I may ask, what are you hoping to get out of this thread?
You posted this thread putting forward a poll with 3 options: 1) We think the spell is busted, 2) We think the spell is fine, 3) We think the spell has some other issue with it
That being said, the tone of the thread seems to be that you already think barbs is fine (the second option) and are trying to convince others to feel the same way. If your goal is to show everyone that there is nothing wrong with the spell, why pose the thread as a question in the first place? Why provide the poll? I assume its just out of general curiosity but it does give the impression that the subject is up for debate, whereas your point of view feels like you think it is not up for debate, you know what I'm saying? It feels like you have posed a question but have already answered it definitively for yourself.
I originally voted that it was busted, but after having alot of time to reflect on it, I would be willing to vote for "It would be fine IF it were 2nd level" rather than "busted" if the option was presented.
Yurei, if I may ask, what are you hoping to get out of this thread?
You posted this thread putting forward a poll with 3 options: 1) We think the spell is busted, 2) We think the spell is fine, 3) We think the spell has some other issue with it
That being said, the tone of the thread seems to be that you already think barbs is fine (the second option) and are trying to convince others to feel the same way. If your goal is to show everyone that there is nothing wrong with the spell, why pose the thread as a question in the first place? Why provide the poll? I assume its just out of general curiosity but it does give the impression that the subject is up for debate, whereas your point of view feels like you think it is not up for debate, you know what I'm saying? It feels like you have posed a question but have already answered it definitively for yourself.
I originally voted that it was busted, but after having alot of time to reflect on it, I would be willing to vote for "It would be fine IF it were 2nd level" rather than "busted" if the option was presented.
I agree.
It's not busted enough to be removed completely and ultimately 2nd level really doesn't Nerf it enough Imo to make it not an insta pick in any build that can get it.
Yurei, if I may ask, what are you hoping to get out of this thread?
You posted this thread putting forward a poll with 3 options: 1) We think the spell is busted, 2) We think the spell is fine, 3) We think the spell has some other issue with it
That being said, the tone of the thread seems to be that you already think barbs is fine (the second option) and are trying to convince others to feel the same way. If your goal is to show everyone that there is nothing wrong with the spell, why pose the thread as a question in the first place? Why provide the poll? I assume its just out of general curiosity but it does give the impression that the subject is up for debate, whereas your point of view feels like you think it is not up for debate, you know what I'm saying? It feels like you have posed a question but have already answered it definitively for yourself.
I originally voted that it was busted, but after having alot of time to reflect on it, I would be willing to vote for "It would be fine IF it were 2nd level" rather than "busted" if the option was presented.
Heh. I like to talk. I like to discuss. I like to get stuck into Internet fight goblin arguments and have it out with people.
I do think Barbs is fine, and I'm going to debate the point with people who think it's busted. The poll was there as kind of an afterthought when I wrote the thread, more to see what people thought since I was asking a mostly binary question anyways. What's fascinating to me about the poll is that it's mostly even, showing only a smallish lead towards 'busted', rather than the spell being nigh-universally considered completely, unplayably, game-ruiningly broken as so many claim it to be. It's certainly divisive, but many spells are.
I've talked to folks who think Faerie Fire has absolutely no business being a first-level spell and will argue till they're blue in the face that it merits at least third and possibly even fourth.
I am one of the folks who believes Counterspell is badly designed and harmful to the game in its current form and want it gone, to the point where I deliberately no longer take the spell on anything but my School of Abjuration wizard, for whom I treat it as more of a class feature than a typical spell. Since, y'know, it has a class feature that only works with exactly TWO spells, and Counterspell is one of them.
If all that bugs you, I apologize. Heh, but at this point I'd like to think people know what they're getting into when I start a thread. I don't do it to not then spend the day happily chattering in it and challenging people's notions.
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
If your argument is that it's not broken because it doesn't add new mechanics, that seems to be a poor argument. That's like saying having Wish be a 3rd level spell is not broken, because people have been able to cast that spell since forever.
What if you had a spell that combined the effects of Fireball and Prayer of Healing and it was cast as a bonus action? Would you not state that this spell is overpowered and had the ability to break encounters/campaigns?
If this was a 2nd level spell, I would still argue it was very strong, but this being available at 1st makes this overly accessible to dips or feats. And it makes this spell easily spammable.
The argument was that what the spell does is already doable, just in different, but importantly, somewhat comparable ways. Suggesting that they would be fine with Wish be a 3rd level spell or combining Fireball and Prayer of Healing together in the one spell is disingenuous to what they have stated.
It's not disingenuous because the argument being put forth is along the lines of, Barbs is not OP because granting advantage and disadvantage are things that already exist. An example given being heightened spell that effects spell saves, while having the cost of 1 of your metamagics, 3 sorcery points and having to be used at time of casting.
Which entirely ignores that barbs is a reaction, used after the die roll, also grants advantage, can be used on more than just spell saves, and only costs a 1st lvl spell slot and your reaction (also isn't a class feature like metamagic)
The argument about Barbs being OP is not that it gives advantage/(pseudo) disadvantage its that it does both at the same time, as a reaction for a 1st lvl spell slot to any dice rolls being made
So yes an apt counter would be would a fireball/prayer of healing with a BA cast time not be OP? It doesn't matter than we have fireball and prayer of healing already, or that we have wish as a 9th lvl spell if they put out a 6th level wish that you can't lose access to.
"I am okay with this spell, because what is does is similar to other kinda closely obtainable spells and features such as Shield and doesn't do anything new in particular."
"Well then you would be okay with taking the arguably most powerful spell in the game and making it 3rd level right? Because it won't be doing anything new, so you'd be fine with that yeah? You'd be okay with fusing Fireball and Prayer of Healing together into the one spell as a bonus action because we could already do those things before, yeah?"
I'd say that is rather disingenuous and ignoring the context of the discussion. By the power of Tiamat's left nipple, keep in mind the context.
For the record, every point you just brought up about the power of Silvery Barbs are ones that I have already made in this thread. I am against Barbs, I don't like it. But we can still be reasonable within the discussion without bring up a strawman collection.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1) Yes, it's more versatile. The fact that it's not PERFECTLY versatile doesn't change that. It's still MORE versatile than other options. It basically covers the bases of, like, three or four of the very best spells in the game. I think that's sufficient to call it problematic on its own, but wait, there's more.
2) Well, I'm glad you've found a way to fix this broken spell. But the fact that it requires this, is indicative of a lack of attention from the designers, in my opinion.
3) Luckily for me, there's like ten pages of just people debating how powerful it is, and I didn't have to contribute. This much is obvious though: it's powerful enough to argue about.
4) It doesn't have to be visual. But please, tell me what this spell is doing? Because it sounds to me like it's just the caster being good at talking. That's not magic.
Fair enough!
Yeah the reaction battle is there for sure and if fighting a spellcaster and you have the slots its likely better to keep Counterspell in the wings....but that is also a 3rd level spell and you have a lot fewer ways of casting that spell during the meat of most games (5-12th levels) than you do a 1st level spell that you can use higher slots for.
Also they are moving on monster/creature design is to move away from spells and instead have spell like effects.
Example the new war priest: https://twitter.com/thrawn589/status/1443601969151610882
As you can see it gains these abilities that are spell like in effect but are not spells....so you cannot counter them. Its a design choice they will be doing moving forward.
Because of this I would argue that Barbs is the better spell due to unmatched versatility.
I'd like to remind people that my argument has never been that Silvery Barbs is not a powerful spell. It absolutely is. It's a fantastic piece of kit, and frankly I could see some of the arguments for it being second level.
My argument is against the idea that Silvery Barbs is fundamentally broken and should be banned/excised from D&D completely. It is not. Many people's arguments against the spell's existence assume that Barbs will always, automatically, turn a success into a failure. It will not. The whole "it's like getting to cast your best single-target spell a second time for the cost of a first-level slot and a reaction!" thing is indeed telling. Sorcerers have been able to do the exact same thing with Heightened Spell Metamagic since 5e was introduced for the cost of zero spell slots and no action at all, and yet Heightened Spell is almost always glossed over or even deliberately called out as a poor choice of Metamgaic for most builds. I find the difference there hard to reconcile.
Silvery Barbs is good. It's disadvantage on any roll you feel like within sixty feet of you for a first-level slot and a reaction. That's good! It's very good! It's not a game-breaking, overwhelming, this-will-destroy-your-campaigns-forever effect.
I remember something J-Craw once said (or at least I believe it was him), that has stuck with me ever since. He said that if the barbarian class didn't exist and they tried to introduce a class right now, in mid-cycle, with the ability to gain resistance to mundane weapon damage without any sort of spells being cast at all, the playerbase would shriek and absolutely reject that class as being mind-blowingly overpowered. Let alone things like Reckless Attack, i.e. free advantage for every attack in a round at a negligible cost, or even just Danger Sense. Everything in the barbarian class is something they know would be seen as horrendously, game-breakingly Ohh Pee if it were introduced in any other place, but people don't even think about it when they exist on the barbarian. "Oh, that's just how the barbarian works. No big deal, barbs are cool!"
It got me to sit down and really think about the constant hue and outcry over every last little thing Wizards releases, and the constant kvetching about literally everything being Ohh Pee. Has me sitting here going "if this had been in 5e from launch, would anyone care about it, at all?"
In the case of Silvery Barbs? Maybe. I dunno. But I do know the kind of cataclysmic shits people would flip if Shield didn't exist and Wizards tried to introduce a new first-level reaction spell that gave spellcasters +5AC against every single attack for an entire round of combat "for the cost of one flippin' first-level slot and a reaction spellcasters never use anyways!" And that is quite telling indeed, methinks.
Please do not contact or message me.
On this we can agree... It just needs to be a 2nd level and I'm on board with it completely.
I'm somewhat late to this party, but not only do I find Silvery Barbs to be a perfectly reasonable spell for it's opportunity costs, it also entertains me that it's the spell that is getting people all riled up. Of the new spells, I pegged Wither and Bloom as the spell that would get all the hackles raised for subtly sneaking in some more 4e mechanics into the game (which I think is also just great).
Barbs is still way better than Heightened. Heightened needs to be declared at the time of casting, not after the saving throw is made, so Barbs is better in that regard because you don't have to use it until you have to use it. Heightened costs 3 sorcerery points, yet a sorcerer can instead spend 2 sorcerery points to create a 1st level spell slot as a bonus action to give more uses of Barbs, so Barbs can be used more often and is better in that regard. Heightened is also only a sorcerer thing, while Barbs is available to three classes and six feats, the latter of which anyone can take.The irony is that the introduction of Silvery Barbs means you will never want to spend your limited Metamagic options on Heightened, because it does everything Heightened does, but better.
This is the problem I have with a lot of your comparisons, your trying to compare a reaction spell that is used only if the target passes a save, also happens to grant advantage, and is a lvl 1 spell that can just sit in your back pocket to heightened spell, 1 of 2 metamagics your going to know in the bulk of play, costing THREE sorcery points that needs to be used up front to force just disadvantage.
When you just look between those two, how can you say "yeah this is the same exact thing"? Nevermind tossing in all the other applications barbs can be used in that aren't just spell saves which is ALL heightened spell can do, and I do feel the need to point out that class features are supposed to be more powerful than things open to everyone.. yet here's barbs?
Know what makes it even funnier? abberant mind sorcerers at lvl 6 can barbs for 1 sorcery point, making it subtle as well and is just a flat out better heightened spell (edit: yes I know someone will point out but heightened doesn't use your reaction)
What I'm trying to do with these comparisons is prove that the things Silvery Barbs can do have existed in D&D 5e for a long time. This spell is not a wild divergence from everything we've ever known that's radically changing the face of D&D as we know it, it's simply an assemblage of things other spells can do in an arguably too-convenient package. People are acting like this spell will blow up the entire edition, and that this is the first time in D&D history they've been able to hedge their bet on a save-or-suck control spell. That is simply not true. One can argue that the spell is not costly enough for what it provides, and there's reasonable arguments to be made there. But the pants-staining panic I've seen in a couple of plays is dismaying and unnecessary.
I do not and never have cared for "THE SKY IS FALLING!" protestations of eternal damnation. The spell is fine. All it can do is cause a die roll to flub, and if a DM isn't prepared for any given roll to go any given way they shouldn't be DMing. Might it have been a better choice to rate it second level, like all the other Strixhaven spells? Perhaps. Frankly I'm not opposed to the notion, and if a DM wants to houserule/homebrew Silvery Barbs as a second-level spell rather than a first, I would not give them the sass. But the overblown outcry is just frustrating.
Please do not contact or message me.
The things have existed, but they have not existed in an easy to use package like you say. Something does not need to set the universe on fire to be OP. Granting a better version of wish as a 6th level spell would be OP would it not? It does not matter than Wish has existed for all of DnDs life cycle.
I've seen people saying this spell is OP because it swings to many things for to little investment and your here saying no its not because this power could mimic only this aspect of barbs power for more cost.
Well, look at it this way:
If one we’re to divide Silvery Barbs into to spells, one for the first effect and another for the second effect, what would you have? You would have two spells that are better than cantrips, but not good enough to be 1st level spells. Right? So, like “0.75st-levelish spells” sounds about right? Yeah? Okay, then add them back together and what do you get? Silvery Barbs at, what, a “1.5st-levelish spell” sound appropriate? Yeah? Which way are we supposed to round in 5e as the default?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yes, the things that are similar to Silver Barbs have been in the books for a long time, but Barbs brought a gun to a knife fight, and the gun has a bayonet.
When a feature that is introduced is comparable to Shield, a sorcerer class feature, a grave domain class feature, a mastermind rogue class feature, breaks the action economy and the resource economy, can be used by three classes, can be taken by anyone with magic initiate or anyone with fey touched all at once then maybe we need to protest if we find that to be a negative addition to the game, just like we should sing the praises of positive additions to the game.
Now, more than ever, WotC has been trying to understand their audience better with the surveys, interviews, sneak peaks and major announcements. But if the nature of this single spell is to be reproduced in other elements of the game then yes, it will drastically change 5E. Wether that change is for better or worse is up to personal opinion, but conflicting opinions shouldn't be avoided in a discussion.
The argument was that what the spell does is already doable, just in different, but importantly, somewhat comparable ways. Suggesting that they would be fine with Wish be a 3rd level spell or combining Fireball and Prayer of Healing together in the one spell is disingenuous to what they have stated.
Most of those other abilities/features require a larger investment from the player than this spell does, which is part of the problem. None of these are 1:1 comparable, but using a few abilities/spells that have already been mentioned:
1) Bane/Bless: Also a 1st level spell, but requires the use of your action and requires you to hold concentration, shutting off the ability to cast some other spells. Larger investment in action economy and spell choices
2) Portent: Requires you to specifically take 2 levels in wizard and choose specifically the divination school of magic. Larger investment in character creation
3) Runic Shield/Storm Rune: Requires you to have 7 levels in fighter, having chosen the Rune Knight subclass. Larger investment in character creation.
4) Lucky: This one is about the same investment required. Can be easily picked up at early level as a feat.
I will add to this last point that Silvery Barbs scales better, though. By the time you're in Tier 2 or higher of play, someone with silvery barbs can easily force rerolls 4+ times per day while the guy with lucky still only ever gets 3 luck points. Lucky is already considered a strong feat. From a personal experience, I have had DMs ban this feat at their tables so its a little worrisome that a 1st level spell has a comparable ability.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I guess I just don't value advantage/disadvantage as highly as other people do.
Barbs is only - ONLY - an issue because it mucks with saves. If it applied only to attacks and ability checks, literally no one would care about this spell, at all, period. Imposing disadvantage on an attack roll is, in virtually all circumstances, pointless. It's why Frostbite is one of the worst damage cantrips in D&D and why nobody really cares about the effects of vicious mockery, only the memes. So the target has disadvantage on one swing? Whoo. The following sixteen swings from its seventeen-hit multiattack will ensure that by the time it's done with you, that first disadvantage swing will be a forgotten memory because the 5e design philosophy behind making a creature an offensive threat is "ensure it attacks twice as often as an entire six-man party full of dual-wielding fighters".
The target has disadvantage on one ability check? Experiment: track your next five D&D games. Count the number of times a monster/NPC makes an ability check to do anything but initiate or escape a grapple. If that number is higher than zero I will physically mail you a cookie. NPCs just don't make ability checks, and monsters make them even less. That aspect of the spell is a nonstarter. Frankly the best use of it I've heard so far is the thing where you leech luck from one party member to another - disad the rogue so you can advantage the paladin on a stealth check.
One ally has advantage on the next d20 they throw? Great! Hope the next d20 they throw is actually impactful and not a random one-off attack, or a random low DC save from a lair effect or such. The target of the advantage boost can't control when they use it, they have to burn it right away whether they want to or not, and so it's more or less a nonstarter. The number of times it will be strongly impactful is far lower than the number of times the spell is cast. Giving a friendly target advantage on something is never going to be why someone casts Barbs.
My view of Barbs is that it's a modest overall effect that can be applied in a surprisingly broad range of situations. It's very good, but the "advantage to a friend" thing is almost entirely superfluous and the disadvantage to an enemy thing is only going to be impactful if you can turn around a successful save against a powerful control effect. the higher uyp you go in level, the less you can rely on control effects in general. Yes, Barbs makes them more reliable, but disadvantage on a save isn;'t going to stop that adult dragon from having a +47 to its Constitution saving throws.
The whole "you can replace half a dozen class features with this!" thing is also a disingenuous argument because 5e has so few things it allows players to monkey with that all class features are going to have varying degrees of overlap. 5e overuses advantage and disadvantage so much, I'm not sure there's a single class/subclass in the entire game that doesn't impose it or let you ignore it in some way or other. Any spell that imposes disadvantage on anything is going to step on the toes of at least half a dozen class/subclass features, and anything that grants you advantage is stepping on the toes of three times as many class/subclass features.
I can see the argument for second level. I'm not opposed to it. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see the point and I'm not entirely unswayed. The whole accessibility issue is kind of a nonstarter to me because the Stirxhaven feats/backgrounds are bad and should feel bad, and also exist solely for use in actual Strixhaven games. The only feats that grant the spell outside of Strixhaven are Magic Initiate and Fey-Touched. Magic Initiate gives you ONE use of Barbs per long rest, period, since MI's spell can't be cast using existing spell slots unless you take MI for a class you already have class levels in, which negates the whole 'too spammable' argument against Barbs.
Fey-Touched is the best source for the spell, and using Fey-Touched to obtain Barbs is indeed very powerful. Which is why many, many DMs restrict access to Fey-Touched and demand characters justify taking the feat - "how are you touched by the fey, and when did this happen"? Not everyone in a party is going to be Touched by the Fey unless the campaign is set in the Feywild or dealing with fey in a major way; a DM who allows players to take Fey-Touched willy-nilly is a DM who knows what they signed up for.
As for multiclass dips? Again - how many spellcasters do you know who're willing to sacrifice even a single level of caster progression to splash another class? Martials don't usually dip spellcaster classes, and when they do they're usually fishing for something beyond random spell utility and thus "accessibility" isn't going to bother them. Barbs isn't a warlock spell, so you can't do it with The Hexblade Dip, and if you're already playing a class that gets natural access to Barbs? Congratulations! Enjoy your cool new spell, and try not to be a dick with it!
Make the spell second level at your table, by all means. It's probably going to end up second level at mine, just because some of the other players are super worried about its power. But once you actually play with the spell for a while, I think y'all will find that it is not, in fact, all that and a kettle bell.
Please do not contact or message me.
It's not disingenuous because the argument being put forth is along the lines of, Barbs is not OP because granting advantage and disadvantage are things that already exist. An example given being heightened spell that effects spell saves, while having the cost of 1 of your metamagics, 3 sorcery points and having to be used at time of casting.
Which entirely ignores that barbs is a reaction, used after the die roll, also grants advantage, can be used on more than just spell saves, and only costs a 1st lvl spell slot and your reaction (also isn't a class feature like metamagic)
The argument about Barbs being OP is not that it gives advantage/(pseudo) disadvantage its that it does both at the same time, as a reaction for a 1st lvl spell slot to any dice rolls being made
So yes an apt counter would be would a fireball/prayer of healing with a BA cast time not be OP? It doesn't matter than we have fireball and prayer of healing already, or that we have wish as a 9th lvl spell if they put out a 6th level wish that you can't lose access to.
Yurei, if I may ask, what are you hoping to get out of this thread?
You posted this thread putting forward a poll with 3 options: 1) We think the spell is busted, 2) We think the spell is fine, 3) We think the spell has some other issue with it
That being said, the tone of the thread seems to be that you already think barbs is fine (the second option) and are trying to convince others to feel the same way. If your goal is to show everyone that there is nothing wrong with the spell, why pose the thread as a question in the first place? Why provide the poll? I assume its just out of general curiosity but it does give the impression that the subject is up for debate, whereas your point of view feels like you think it is not up for debate, you know what I'm saying? It feels like you have posed a question but have already answered it definitively for yourself.
I originally voted that it was busted, but after having alot of time to reflect on it, I would be willing to vote for "It would be fine IF it were 2nd level" rather than "busted" if the option was presented.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I agree.
It's not busted enough to be removed completely and ultimately 2nd level really doesn't Nerf it enough Imo to make it not an insta pick in any build that can get it.
Heh. I like to talk. I like to discuss. I like to get stuck into Internet fight goblin arguments and have it out with people.
I do think Barbs is fine, and I'm going to debate the point with people who think it's busted. The poll was there as kind of an afterthought when I wrote the thread, more to see what people thought since I was asking a mostly binary question anyways. What's fascinating to me about the poll is that it's mostly even, showing only a smallish lead towards 'busted', rather than the spell being nigh-universally considered completely, unplayably, game-ruiningly broken as so many claim it to be. It's certainly divisive, but many spells are.
I've talked to folks who think Faerie Fire has absolutely no business being a first-level spell and will argue till they're blue in the face that it merits at least third and possibly even fourth.
I am one of the folks who believes Counterspell is badly designed and harmful to the game in its current form and want it gone, to the point where I deliberately no longer take the spell on anything but my School of Abjuration wizard, for whom I treat it as more of a class feature than a typical spell. Since, y'know, it has a class feature that only works with exactly TWO spells, and Counterspell is one of them.
If all that bugs you, I apologize. Heh, but at this point I'd like to think people know what they're getting into when I start a thread. I don't do it to not then spend the day happily chattering in it and challenging people's notions.
Please do not contact or message me.
"I am okay with this spell, because what is does is similar to other kinda closely obtainable spells and features such as Shield and doesn't do anything new in particular."
"Well then you would be okay with taking the arguably most powerful spell in the game and making it 3rd level right? Because it won't be doing anything new, so you'd be fine with that yeah? You'd be okay with fusing Fireball and Prayer of Healing together into the one spell as a bonus action because we could already do those things before, yeah?"
I'd say that is rather disingenuous and ignoring the context of the discussion. By the power of Tiamat's left nipple, keep in mind the context.
For the record, every point you just brought up about the power of Silvery Barbs are ones that I have already made in this thread. I am against Barbs, I don't like it. But we can still be reasonable within the discussion without bring up a strawman collection.