Ok so the 9th level spell deals 40d6 damage a sizeable amount with its range of a mile it's suggested as a siege spell. However two walls of stone stuck together (two 5th level spells that are permanent I believe a city could swing this price) would give a wall 360 HP (12x30) even if I rolled maximum damage of 240 I couldn't breach the walls. Even if you were an evoker and got +5 on each damage set you won't breach it.
It feels kinda wrong that two 5th level spells (with permanent durations can beat the best blasting spell at 9th level rolling maximum damage.
It's essentially 40d6 damage to 20,000 square feet. If my maths doesn't fail me...that's potentially 800 targets if they're carpeting the area, each taking an average of 140 damage. Overall, that's dealing 112,000.
The purpose of the spell isn't to damage a single target by a lot, it's to wipe out armies. I'm not sure what 5th level spells you're specifically thinking of, but I doubt that they're going to kill that 800 Liches in one go. Spells have purposes, and they're generally not very good when you don't use them for those purposes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
compared to other 9th level spells that are totally unhinged in power, yes. Compared to the non unhinged ones, no. maybe it should have some siege damage effect where it does double damage to structures so it takes down stone walls and buildings, i do get that complaint that pretty basic barriers will stop it cold but i think a DM can adjudicate on that if like the entire length of a wall looses 1/2 it hit points in a single blow, the wall collapsing wouldn't be a bad call. But i don't know, how thick are most stone walls realistically, shaving a few inches of damage off a 6 foot thick wall is not the same as 1 foot thick wall. so maybe a buildings walls would topple, but the walls surrounding the keep wide enough for men to patrol on top of not so much. the thing is siege damage just isn't really a thing in 5e, its a afterthought they mention, they have no real plan around a level 20 fighter smashing through a stone wall. its about fighting monsters not walls. I'd like that depth, but i think most of the current audience would find it a waste, those who like that probably are still on older editions.
sure its massive and does 40d6 but when talking massive areas like targeting armies you usually don't need 40d6, 8d6 would be fine. so circle of death which is a bit more than 1/2 its size and 3 levels lower is probably the better option. But 40d6 is significant enough damage its more likely use case of a handful of powerful enemies will get rocked by it and it probably wont need the massive area, and the multiple meteors takes into account them being spread out which may be common at those levels. it does kind of emphasize how bad power work kill is though, even the 2024 version. 140 damage 70 on a save to a massive area vs max 100 no save if hit points low enough or 78 to one person.
Is any DM actually going to count out the health for each 10-foot panel of wall in the castle the wizard wants obliterated? I've always interpreted this spell as more of a narrative thing. You obliterate the walls you need to get past and then your army charges in. Also, a non-magical stone wall only has 27 hit points per 10-foor panel.
There are a lot of spells that will knock down walls more effectively than meteor swarm, because it's really not what meteor swarm is for. You aren't going to target the walls with a meteor swarm, you're going to drop eight gigantic balls of fire behind the walls, obliterate all normal buildings in the area, and start multiple large fires (if knocking down walls is the goal, earthquake is a much better bet).
Meteor swarm is by no means the most broken 9th level spell, but it's perfectly functional for what it's intended for.
Is any DM actually going to count out the health for each 10-foot panel of wall in the castle the wizard wants obliterated? I've always interpreted this spell as more of a narrative thing. You obliterate the walls you need to get past and then your army charges in. Also, a non-magical stone wall only has 27 hit points per 10-foor panel.
That is questionable, again they just don't really cover the health of objects much, they have a small table which does not really help for this imo. But given wall of stones health, it would likely be 27 hit points per inch of thickness. as by the table 10by10 1 inch wall is still large/resilient just like a 10by10 10 foot thick wall, and both would not be 27 hit points. so a foot thick wall would tank a meteor swarm fairly easily. don't get me wrong 27 hit point no matter how thick it is might be fun as then a barbarian might bull rush through 10 foot thick walls a couple times a round, and that would be pretty epic. Whether a DM actually looks at the hit points or goes narrative is pretty table dependent.
Meteor Storm isn't used to batter down a castle's walls (that's what Earthquake is for), it is used to wipe out an entire army in the field, or turn a large portion of a city's wooden structures to flaming rubble.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (original Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Ok so the 9th level spell deals 40d6 damage a sizeable amount with its range of a mile it's suggested as a siege spell. However two walls of stone stuck together (two 5th level spells that are permanent I believe a city could swing this price) would give a wall 360 HP (12x30) even if I rolled maximum damage of 240 I couldn't breach the walls. Even if you were an evoker and got +5 on each damage set you won't breach it.
It feels kinda wrong that two 5th level spells (with permanent durations can beat the best blasting spell at 9th level rolling maximum damage.
If I was a wizard at 9th level and I was sieging a city, Meteor swarm to clear the walls of town gaurds, and then use one of the many stone magic spells to make a door through the rock of the wall. Take the city save the infrustructure.
Everyone in the party is always excited when you cast Meteor Swarm. I think the last time I did this my sim cast it a second time, then followed it up with an Illusory Dragon. AOE blasting isn't always better than control spells, but boy you know what you're getting. Death is usually the best condition to inflict.
As others have pointed out somewhat meteor swarm isn’t artillery- it’s the equivalent of a thermobaric bomb. It’s not meant to take down walls. It is meant to take out the folks behind the wall ( and maybe any weaker buildings in its area).
It's essentially 40d6 damage to 20,000 square feet. If my maths doesn't fail me...
Are you calculating four points that have 40ft radius spheres?
Circles. I know technically they're spheres (let's not get into the rabbit hole of mathematical definitions), but the vast majority of the time, we're dealing with targets on the ground, so circles centred on those points are the best model. If there are additional targets in the air etc, then that just supports my point even further.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Honestly I wonder what metrics people are using to call Meteor Swarm "weak". Blade of Disaster is 8d12 (avg 52) damage per turn potentially split between two creatures, albeit with a higher crit spike and range. New and improved Power Word Kill is 12d12 (avg 78) to a single target. Psychic Scream is 14d6 to up to 10 creatures (avg 49). Storm of Vengeance is very slow to get rolling and nets out to something like 24d6 (avg 84). Weird is 10d10 (avg 55) with potentially 5d10 (avg 27) on subsequent turns. Within the scope of any core 9th level spell that's intended to be direct damage, the 40d6 (avg 140) immediate damage of Meteor Swarm is far and away the strongest effect, and it has the most AoE scope.
Also, there's significant issues with the initial concept of using Wall of Stone like this. As the spell is written, you cannot layer the walls into a sandwich stack to stack their HP- you get one wall with 30 HP per 5 square ft. of ground. Is this entirely realistic? No. Does it create walls with performance approximately in line with what walls in general are intended to have in the game? Yes. As written, a Meteor Swam objectively cannot fail to reduce any barriers created by Wall of Stone in the AoE to rubble.
Within the scope of any core 9th level spell that's intended to be direct damage, the 40d6 (avg 140) immediate damage of Meteor Swarm is far and away the strongest effect.
I might take psychic scream over meteor swarm, but that's because it's a mass stun effect against a save an awful lot of monsters (and characters) are bad at.
Within the scope of any core 9th level spell that's intended to be direct damage, the 40d6 (avg 140) immediate damage of Meteor Swarm is far and away the strongest effect.
I might take psychic scream over meteor swarm, but that's because it's a mass stun effect against a save an awful lot of monsters (and characters) are bad at.
Point. Situationally 2024 Weird, Psychic Scream, and Blade of Disaster could all be better picks on a character that can use Meteor Swarm. My point was just towards raw instantaneous damage output and AoE.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok so the 9th level spell deals 40d6 damage a sizeable amount with its range of a mile it's suggested as a siege spell. However two walls of stone stuck together (two 5th level spells that are permanent I believe a city could swing this price) would give a wall 360 HP (12x30) even if I rolled maximum damage of 240 I couldn't breach the walls. Even if you were an evoker and got +5 on each damage set you won't breach it.
It feels kinda wrong that two 5th level spells (with permanent durations can beat the best blasting spell at 9th level rolling maximum damage.
It's essentially 40d6 damage to 20,000 square feet. If my maths doesn't fail me...that's potentially 800 targets if they're carpeting the area, each taking an average of 140 damage. Overall, that's dealing 112,000.
The purpose of the spell isn't to damage a single target by a lot, it's to wipe out armies. I'm not sure what 5th level spells you're specifically thinking of, but I doubt that they're going to kill that 800 Liches in one go. Spells have purposes, and they're generally not very good when you don't use them for those purposes.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
my back and forth ramble on this.
compared to other 9th level spells that are totally unhinged in power, yes. Compared to the non unhinged ones, no. maybe it should have some siege damage effect where it does double damage to structures so it takes down stone walls and buildings, i do get that complaint that pretty basic barriers will stop it cold but i think a DM can adjudicate on that if like the entire length of a wall looses 1/2 it hit points in a single blow, the wall collapsing wouldn't be a bad call. But i don't know, how thick are most stone walls realistically, shaving a few inches of damage off a 6 foot thick wall is not the same as 1 foot thick wall. so maybe a buildings walls would topple, but the walls surrounding the keep wide enough for men to patrol on top of not so much. the thing is siege damage just isn't really a thing in 5e, its a afterthought they mention, they have no real plan around a level 20 fighter smashing through a stone wall. its about fighting monsters not walls. I'd like that depth, but i think most of the current audience would find it a waste, those who like that probably are still on older editions.
sure its massive and does 40d6 but when talking massive areas like targeting armies you usually don't need 40d6, 8d6 would be fine. so circle of death which is a bit more than 1/2 its size and 3 levels lower is probably the better option. But 40d6 is significant enough damage its more likely use case of a handful of powerful enemies will get rocked by it and it probably wont need the massive area, and the multiple meteors takes into account them being spread out which may be common at those levels. it does kind of emphasize how bad power work kill is though, even the 2024 version. 140 damage 70 on a save to a massive area vs max 100 no save if hit points low enough or 78 to one person.
Is any DM actually going to count out the health for each 10-foot panel of wall in the castle the wizard wants obliterated? I've always interpreted this spell as more of a narrative thing. You obliterate the walls you need to get past and then your army charges in. Also, a non-magical stone wall only has 27 hit points per 10-foor panel.
There are a lot of spells that will knock down walls more effectively than meteor swarm, because it's really not what meteor swarm is for. You aren't going to target the walls with a meteor swarm, you're going to drop eight gigantic balls of fire behind the walls, obliterate all normal buildings in the area, and start multiple large fires (if knocking down walls is the goal, earthquake is a much better bet).
Meteor swarm is by no means the most broken 9th level spell, but it's perfectly functional for what it's intended for.
That is questionable, again they just don't really cover the health of objects much, they have a small table which does not really help for this imo. But given wall of stones health, it would likely be 27 hit points per inch of thickness. as by the table 10by10 1 inch wall is still large/resilient just like a 10by10 10 foot thick wall, and both would not be 27 hit points. so a foot thick wall would tank a meteor swarm fairly easily. don't get me wrong 27 hit point no matter how thick it is might be fun as then a barbarian might bull rush through 10 foot thick walls a couple times a round, and that would be pretty epic. Whether a DM actually looks at the hit points or goes narrative is pretty table dependent.
Meteor Storm isn't used to batter down a castle's walls (that's what Earthquake is for), it is used to wipe out an entire army in the field, or turn a large portion of a city's wooden structures to flaming rubble.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (original Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
If I was a wizard at 9th level and I was sieging a city, Meteor swarm to clear the walls of town gaurds, and then use one of the many stone magic spells to make a door through the rock of the wall. Take the city save the infrustructure.
Everyone in the party is always excited when you cast Meteor Swarm. I think the last time I did this my sim cast it a second time, then followed it up with an Illusory Dragon. AOE blasting isn't always better than control spells, but boy you know what you're getting. Death is usually the best condition to inflict.
I stopped at 40d6.
No it is not weak.
For a 9th level spell, it is probably the weakest out of all of them
As others have pointed out somewhat meteor swarm isn’t artillery- it’s the equivalent of a thermobaric bomb. It’s not meant to take down walls. It is meant to take out the folks behind the wall ( and maybe any weaker buildings in its area).
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
For combat spells (thus we're leaving out mostly plot device spells such as imprisonment), the weakest is probably weird.
Are you calculating four points that have 40ft radius spheres?
Probably as circles. A circle has area of pi*r^2, and there are four of them, so the result is 40' * 40' * pi * 4, or 20,106 square feet.
Circles. I know technically they're spheres (let's not get into the rabbit hole of mathematical definitions), but the vast majority of the time, we're dealing with targets on the ground, so circles centred on those points are the best model. If there are additional targets in the air etc, then that just supports my point even further.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Honestly I wonder what metrics people are using to call Meteor Swarm "weak". Blade of Disaster is 8d12 (avg 52) damage per turn potentially split between two creatures, albeit with a higher crit spike and range. New and improved Power Word Kill is 12d12 (avg 78) to a single target. Psychic Scream is 14d6 to up to 10 creatures (avg 49). Storm of Vengeance is very slow to get rolling and nets out to something like 24d6 (avg 84). Weird is 10d10 (avg 55) with potentially 5d10 (avg 27) on subsequent turns. Within the scope of any core 9th level spell that's intended to be direct damage, the 40d6 (avg 140) immediate damage of Meteor Swarm is far and away the strongest effect, and it has the most AoE scope.
Also, there's significant issues with the initial concept of using Wall of Stone like this. As the spell is written, you cannot layer the walls into a sandwich stack to stack their HP- you get one wall with 30 HP per 5 square ft. of ground. Is this entirely realistic? No. Does it create walls with performance approximately in line with what walls in general are intended to have in the game? Yes. As written, a Meteor Swam objectively cannot fail to reduce any barriers created by Wall of Stone in the AoE to rubble.
This does beg the question:What is OP saying is better, raw damage-wise?
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
I might take psychic scream over meteor swarm, but that's because it's a mass stun effect against a save an awful lot of monsters (and characters) are bad at.
Point. Situationally 2024 Weird, Psychic Scream, and Blade of Disaster could all be better picks on a character that can use Meteor Swarm. My point was just towards raw instantaneous damage output and AoE.