So, the new spell. I've got a player who wants to use it. I've got concerns about it and would very much like to hear people's thoughts on the spell.
The damage and range, those are fine. Thumbs up from me there. What worries me is the bit about, fail the Constitution save and the creature's Speed is set to zero until it or another creature spend an Action to break the ice. That is potentially a significant number of actions spent just to get the enemies moving again. If said enemies have no ranged attacks and the party does, then they have no choice but to pay that action tax.
There's ways around that. Weaker fodder who exist to break said ice. Ranged enemies, if available. Enemies with big Con saves. Coordinated and tactically minded enemies, if available. Flanking is a favorite, if possible. Counterspell, although I dislike shutting down players with that. Mass amounts of minions on the logic of, hey some of them will probably get through.
The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available. I'm trying to use early levels and random encounters to teach tactics, and while this is a useful spell, this may overshadow nearly everything else. Forcing enemies to give up their action just to get in melee range hurts. And using too many minions can mean the line between a tough fight and an overwhelming encounter is far too thin.
It seems like a good spell, but accounting for it becomes a campaign long concern that only gets more troublesome as you get to higher levels. I'm considering allowing the spell minus the freezing in place, but it does sorta defeat the purpose of the spell. I could nerf it to only halve the speed, but it's still a precedent I'm uncomfortable with.
What are your thoughts on the spell? GM and Player perspectives are both appreciated.
Do you see this as any more of an issue than the 1st level spell Entangle? At least with the ice an Action guarantees that the target can move again. Entangle requires a Strength check, which can fail.
Yes, because Entangle is Concentration and thus locks out other Concentration options, while also not doing damage.
Entangle is a pain, sure, but at least the caster has incentive to keep it up even when people start going free. And the caster may be attacked and possibly lose concentration, so they get prioritized by everyone else. I think that's a more fair trade-off, or at least merits some risk assessment, compared to running up to blast them in the face for sure and then possibly/probably keep them from attacking.
Probably the better comparison is web, since they're both 2nd level
Web is concentration and stays up, affecting anyone in a 20-foot cube who enters the area. No damage unless the web is set on fire, doing some damage to anyone trapped in it but then losing the restraining effect
Rime's is a one-shot (so no concentration but no ongoing effect) in a 30-foot cone. Does healthy damage for a 2nd-level spell
Rime's seems superior to me. I'm not sure it's enough superior to warrant nerfing, though
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Rime is definitely better, but I'd probably be more comfortable with Web being used.
Web could in theory lock enemies down more thoroughly, and then the caster runs well out of range so Concentration can't be lost, but I could at least take that as a sign that my players are getting clever and it's safe for me to start upping my game in kind. And if, say, the caster and a Monk are working together to yeet enemies into the Web, that's an excellent case of teamwork that should be rewarded. And then escalate accordingly. Or the party melee fighters feel they can't just go into the Web without being at risk themselves, and maybe the casters tailor their approach to account for this. Maybe have the baddies setting fire to the web themselves despite hurting each other can help paint a scene. Or maybe the enemies are especially clever, and start dragging PCs into the Web.
That's dynamic. That's exciting. I can build multiple encounters around the use of that, and keep that feeling of danger and risk. Because if that Web works then great, but if it doesn't then the player feels the loss. You have to weigh the payoff, to judge whether this works with your team.
Meanwhile one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down just means encounters need to specifically avoid that. On top of dealing very respectable damage, as early as level 3.
Is it effective? Yes. So effective that if you hit them and they fail their save, they probably won't get to deal damage before you finish them off. Will it continue to be so later? Unfortunately, yes, so you don't really need to learn more strategy. This one is very good. It'll keep working until it goes wrong, but engineering cases where it doesn't go wrong takes effort and circumstance. Efforts that could be saved by just going, okay let's not do that.
...Also in the campaign I'm running, good Dex saves are more common than good Con saves. So in this specific scenario, I'm more confident in my monster fodder beating a Dex save than a Con save.
Honestly I wouldn't mind this so much if it wouldn't trivializing the minions so completely. The combination of a solid hit and thorough lockdown on a fail seems very potent from my side of the table. Why choose between damage and Area Control when you can have both?
The other big difference between them I wasn't thinking about in my original post is that Web actually restrains targets (so advantage on attacks against them, and their attacks at disadvantage). Rime's just reduces their speed to 0. That's a significant difference.
I'm just not seeing why Rime's is such a game-breaker. "one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down" seems like a wild exaggeration.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The other big difference between them I wasn't thinking about in my original post is that Web actually restrains targets (so advantage on attacks against them, and their attacks at disadvantage). Rime's just reduces their speed to 0. That's a significant difference.
I'm just not seeing why Rime's is such a game-breaker. "one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down" seems like a wild exaggeration.
Okay, let me try and paint a scene. If it helps, I'm running Curse of Strahd. Let's say I have five enemies coming down one side, and there's reasonable expectation that they can reach the party to begin attacking in one turn.
Even if they're spaced out, a 30 foot cone probably gets them most or all of them. So that's a fair chunk of damage off the bat. Reasonable enough, it's not dissimilar to Shatter. Level 3/4 Wizard/Sorcerer who pumped up their spellcasting stat, DC13/14 for spell save. Unless those enemies are all excellent Constitution (mine aren't), that's about half the enemies stuck in place on top of taking 3d8 damage. Call it 14 damage each.
Each one who failed the save must spend their action to break free. So now instead of five attacking enemies, I have 2/3 attacking enemies. PCs are significantly less pressured, and they still have their full turns. Even if the enemies broke free, they've just gotten up close. They haven't attacked. Thus with one spell, two or three enemies have not been able to attack as expected and took a fair bit of damage. It's a fair bet that the rest of the PCs will knock off between one and three of the enemies. What's left they probably take some hits, but won't be in serious danger.
As the spell save DC goes up, this becomes more and more of a problem. For me anyway, because the monsters in this module aren't getting significant Con saves as they advance. So I can have a bunch of minions appear from one direction and advance, but as soon as they're one turn away from digging into the party, one spell takes both a bite out of them and effectively removes their action for the turn. It did not require concentration to do it, it only needed a 2nd level spell, it did a neat bit of damage in the process, and causes the monsters to be less of a threat. And then the rest of the party has their say.
Countering this in a way that feels fair and doesn't bog down gameplay seems tricky. It's damage and removing actions from the enemy. It can potentially hit a wide range of enemies before they reach the party. Tasha's Mind Whip does similar, but it only targets one enemy unless you upcast it, so I have no problems with it. This I worry will have me bringing out reinforcements (usually the same monsters you fought in greater number), only to have them damaged and locked down by the same spell as before, only more effective.
To be clear, I'm not against my PCs keeping the setting's up and down the street. I fully expect them to do that as they exit mid-game and enter end-game. I am less thrilled about the same 2nd level spell halting the advance, over and over, en masse. That does not engender fear and unease towards the opposition, which I'm trying to nurture.
TLDR: You can easily compare it against Blindness/Deafness or Stunning Strike. They all have spectacular debuff effects, but CON saves severely take out the effectiveness of those abilities, therefore bringing the necessary balance to the game.
This spell is surely great and could be devastating in the hands of a seasoned Evoker sculpting around the battlefield.
The main downside, and this is a big one in my experience, is the Constitution saves. Specially at higher levels where most creatures have not only really good CON scores but also magic/legendary resistance; this is the main reason Stunning Strike is so frustrating even being so powerful — it’s not reliable. Web is amazing, probably one of the best control spells in the game, because it’s effective. DEX saves tend to be low at most creatures, even lower than WIS in some cases. You can also easily guess creatures who will have more or less high DEX judging by their appearance, it’s hard to guess high WIS creatures, unless obvious things like you know you are fighting a villain Cleric or Druid, for instance.
The other big difference between them I wasn't thinking about in my original post is that Web actually restrains targets (so advantage on attacks against them, and their attacks at disadvantage). Rime's just reduces their speed to 0. That's a significant difference.
I'm just not seeing why Rime's is such a game-breaker. "one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down" seems like a wild exaggeration.
Okay, let me try and paint a scene. If it helps, I'm running Curse of Strahd. Let's say I have five enemies coming down one side, and there's reasonable expectation that they can reach the party to begin attacking in one turn.
Even if they're spaced out, a 30 foot cone probably gets them most or all of them. So that's a fair chunk of damage off the bat. Reasonable enough, it's not dissimilar to Shatter. Level 3/4 Wizard/Sorcerer who pumped up their spellcasting stat, DC13/14 for spell save. Unless those enemies are all excellent Constitution (mine aren't), that's about half the enemies stuck in place on top of taking 3d8 damage. Call it 14 damage each.
Each one who failed the save must spend their action to break free. So now instead of five attacking enemies, I have 2/3 attacking enemies. PCs are significantly less pressured, and they still have their full turns. Even if the enemies broke free, they've just gotten up close. They haven't attacked. Thus with one spell, two or three enemies have not been able to attack as expected and took a fair bit of damage. It's a fair bet that the rest of the PCs will knock off between one and three of the enemies. What's left they probably take some hits, but won't be in serious danger.
As the spell save DC goes up, this becomes more and more of a problem. For me anyway, because the monsters in this module aren't getting significant Con saves as they advance. So I can have a bunch of minions appear from one direction and advance, but as soon as they're one turn away from digging into the party, one spell takes both a bite out of them and effectively removes their action for the turn. It did not require concentration to do it, it only needed a 2nd level spell, it did a neat bit of damage in the process, and causes the monsters to be less of a threat. And then the rest of the party has their say.
Countering this in a way that feels fair and doesn't bog down gameplay seems tricky. It's damage and removing actions from the enemy. It can potentially hit a wide range of enemies before they reach the party. Tasha's Mind Whip does similar, but it only targets one enemy unless you upcast it, so I have no problems with it. This I worry will have me bringing out reinforcements (usually the same monsters you fought in greater number), only to have them damaged and locked down by the same spell as before, only more effective.
To be clear, I'm not against my PCs keeping the setting's up and down the street. I fully expect them to do that as they exit mid-game and enter end-game. I am less thrilled about the same 2nd level spell halting the advance, over and over, en masse. That does not engender fear and unease towards the opposition, which I'm trying to nurture.
Does that make sense?
Perfectly so.
All credit to you for wanting to give your players challenging and engaging encounters.
Options include to leave as is, bar the spell, call it level 3, nerf it, restrict the number of times it can be used, say, to only once per short/long rest, delay the possibility to learn/acquire the spell.
Do whatever works to give you and your players a great gaming experience. It's a Fizban's spell and can be justifiably banned/restricted.
Rime is definitely a control spell, and I as a DM would hesitate to try and "solve" it for your bad guys. I like to trouble myself with what resources the players bring to bear as little as possible as to leave solutions wide open to player creativity. If the player thinks shutting the enemy down for at least a turn is a good spell investment, great. If they're right? Even better for them. I also don't consider "spending your action to release a stuck creature" to be that hefty of a cost. There's lots of spells that can shut down the enemies for a turn on a failed saving throw. Especially since a failed CON save on most monsters is a big ask, as most monsters are hearty and have good constitution, so this is really going to be good against humanoids that also have bad con (and most of those will have access to ranged attacks).
If it helps, I'm running Curse of Strahd. Let's say I have five enemies coming down one side
I'm in a CoS campaign right now, closing in on level 6, and honestly, five enemies who would struggle against Rime's would be, like, a minor warm-up encounter for the day before the real horribleness starts...
In terms of your scenario -- one, you're assuming the caster is acting first, or at least early, in initiative. If they're further down the line, and enemies and party members have become intermixed, it obviously becomes less effective or more awkward to use
Two, if you have your enemies attacking all in a clump easily targetable by one AoE spell, there's a pretty easy solution to avoid that happening -- regardless of which AoE it is
Three, "they haven't attacked". Why not? Again, Rime's doesn't restrain, it simply reduces speed to 0. They still have the choice between attacking and mobility
Four, "as spell save DC goes up this becomes more of a problem". I don't think that's true, for the simple reason that as spell save DC goes up, so does the CR of the enemies. More dangerous creatures will be expected to survive longer, even if they lose a turn. Some may have multiple actions, so the cost to free themselves doesn't hamper them as much on that turn. They'll have spells and other ranged attacks that make the loss of speed less of a factor. Etc. etc.
Let me propose a counter-scenario based on an actual thing that's happened to my party in CoS (I'll avoid spoilers). We fought a small horde of scarecrows in a graveyard -- a wounded old man was in the cemetery to draw us into an ambush (which we expected), When the trap sprung, we were more or less surrounded, but there was already some intermixing of PCs and enemies
Now, if a caster in the party had Rime's, would it have been useful? Sure, it's an AoE doing decent damage with extra effects. But there weren't many directions the cone could have been pointed in that wouldn't have caught at least one party member, or even the old man NPC we were trying to save. The safest options available would only have hit a fraction of the scarecrows, and those likely wouldn't have taken any additional damage because we would have been busy with the rest while those hit with Rime's got a chance to free themselves. Or maybe they wouldn't have bothered right away and just fired off some Terrifying Glares first, potentially frightening and paralyzing members of the party -- which is worse than just having a speed of 0
The scenario you constructed is an ideal scenario for a spell like Rime's. I could come up with a similar scenario to show how "overpowered" plenty of other spells are. OMG, Web can restrain up to 16 creatures marching through the forest towards us and leave them extra vulnerable to our ranged attacks? Better nerf it!
If your campaign involves a lot of what are essentially pitched battles in open areas, with one side advancing politely on the other, sure, Rime's becomes more effective -- just as any AoE would. The problem there isn't the spell
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In practice the likelihood of the caster getting all of those enemies inside the single cast of the spell is highly unlikely. We can start here.
For 1. Initiative order is by itself almost guaranteed to split these guys up some will have closed in before the PC acts, others will still be hanging back waiting for their turn. For 2. If the spellcaster PC goes first, advances into the enemy NPC starting area to be able to cast on them, they'll not have sufficient movement left to reteat. This means any enemy NPC who makes their save now has a single glorious target. They all hate this guy, who just blasted them, and they're going to take their pound of flesh from the... spellcaster. Punish him for overextending into melee.
Now, if you're still genuinely concerned about PC AOEs at the start of combat, I've got one simple trick that makes Adventurers lose their minds: Split the enemy NPC starting positions up and spread them around. Have 3 come from the left and 2 from the right or whatever. Bam. Now it is impossible to hit them all.
Edit: PS web is infinitely better at locking enemies down. The only pro for rime is the lack of concentration. So its a decent backup for lockdown/control style if you do have your concentration on something else. But as this is start of combat, and they're low level, I'd wager he isn't concentrating on anything and in that case a web being cast at the enemies would be superior in any cast where he was going to have use rime.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Spells like this reinforce the need for a sense of party balance when it comes to foes, especially humanoids or those of humanoid level intelligence. This spell could in fact be quite stifling to a group of melee only foes, but it would be fairly inconsequential to any ranged attackers as they would rather not close the distance anyway. The spell will reduce your speed to 0, but it does not compel any action, you are free to take your full turn, sans movement attacking at range.
So, the new spell. I've got a player who wants to use it. I've got concerns about it and would very much like to hear people's thoughts on the spell.
The damage and range, those are fine. Thumbs up from me there. What worries me is the bit about, fail the Constitution save and the creature's Speed is set to zero until it or another creature spend an Action to break the ice. That is potentially a significant number of actions spent just to get the enemies moving again. If said enemies have no ranged attacks and the party does, then they have no choice but to pay that action tax.
There's ways around that. Weaker fodder who exist to break said ice. Ranged enemies, if available. Enemies with big Con saves. Coordinated and tactically minded enemies, if available. Flanking is a favorite, if possible. Counterspell, although I dislike shutting down players with that. Mass amounts of minions on the logic of, hey some of them will probably get through.
The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available. I'm trying to use early levels and random encounters to teach tactics, and while this is a useful spell, this may overshadow nearly everything else. Forcing enemies to give up their action just to get in melee range hurts. And using too many minions can mean the line between a tough fight and an overwhelming encounter is far too thin.
It seems like a good spell, but accounting for it becomes a campaign long concern that only gets more troublesome as you get to higher levels. I'm considering allowing the spell minus the freezing in place, but it does sorta defeat the purpose of the spell. I could nerf it to only halve the speed, but it's still a precedent I'm uncomfortable with.
What are your thoughts on the spell? GM and Player perspectives are both appreciated.
The biggest problem with the speed lockdown is that it ignores standard immunities to having your speed locked down - that is, the spell will ignore immunity to grappled, restrained, and so on and so forth. The only way to be immune to this spell is to autopass the save via legendary resistance. That's bad design, fundamentally speaking.
I recommend one the following changes to the spell:
Plan A, have the ice grapple the targets, so anything that can break a grapple will break the ice - for example, RAW, if you teleport out of Rime's ice, your speed remains 0 since you didn't specifically address the ice. Having the ice grapple targets ensures that solutions to being grappled will work against the spell's identical-to-grapple effect.
I think the above is a better solution, but you could instead (don't do both) have the spell only reduce speed if the target takes damage from the spell, so cold immunity shuts down the speed reduction. That's not great because instead of having the spell do less to e.g. white dragons, now it does nothing.
I'm obviously in the "doesn't need to be changed" camp, but quindraco's first option there seems like a reasonable approach if you do
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I'm obviously in the "doesn't need to be changed" camp, but quindraco's first option there seems like a reasonable approach if you do
It is a very good workaround and allows the spell to interact with creature statblocks in a more standardized way, I like it too. Anything immune to being grappled probably should be immune to the binding effects of this spell anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I'm obviously in the "doesn't need to be changed" camp, but quindraco's first option there seems like a reasonable approach if you do
It is a very good workaround and allows the spell to interact with creature statblocks in a more standardized way, I like it too. Anything immune to being grappled probably should be immune to the binding effects of this spell anyway.
I'd let it work even on a grapple immune ooze/slime-like creature personally but yeah. Its a pretty good way to nerf it without actually nerfing it in 90% of cases.
TLDR: You can easily compare it against Blindness/Deafness or Stunning Strike. They all have spectacular debuff effects, but CON saves severely take out the effectiveness of those abilities, therefore bringing the necessary balance to the game.
This spell is surely great and could be devastating in the hands of a seasoned Evoker sculpting around the battlefield.
The main downside, and this is a big one in my experience, is the Constitution saves. Specially at higher levels where most creatures have not only really good CON scores but also magic/legendary resistance; this is the main reason Stunning Strike is so frustrating even being so powerful — it’s not reliable. Web is amazing, probably one of the best control spells in the game, because it’s effective. DEX saves tend to be low at most creatures, even lower than WIS in some cases. You can also easily guess creatures who will have more or less high DEX judging by their appearance, it’s hard to guess high WIS creatures, unless obvious things like you know you are fighting a villain Cleric or Druid, for instance.
Funny thing is, I've played a Monk and used Stunning Strike to great effect. I've got a monk in this party, and I'm perfectly ready and willing to account for that. Stunning Strike may be powerful, but it's a limited resource. Especially at low levels. Even when it works, it's only incapacitated one enemy. I find that pretty manageable. Unique bosses are fairly easy to patch if it looks problematic.
As people point out, high Con saves can mitigate this. Since this isn't the DM's topic, all I'll say is that in my particular case I am not as reassured as I would be if my campaign were taking place in, say, Avernus.
Rime is definitely a control spell, and I as a DM would hesitate to try and "solve" it for your bad guys. I like to trouble myself with what resources the players bring to bear as little as possible as to leave solutions wide open to player creativity. If the player thinks shutting the enemy down for at least a turn is a good spell investment, great. If they're right? Even better for them. I also don't consider "spending your action to release a stuck creature" to be that hefty of a cost. There's lots of spells that can shut down the enemies for a turn on a failed saving throw. Especially since a failed CON save on most monsters is a big ask, as most monsters are hearty and have good constitution, so this is really going to be good against humanoids that also have bad con (and most of those will have access to ranged attacks).
Rime is control and straight damage, on par with Shatter. Shatter's a circle, Rime's a 30 foot cone. Which ends up pretty substantial. All on top of inflicting a very potent control effect.
If it helps, I'm running Curse of Strahd. Let's say I have five enemies coming down one side
I'm in a CoS campaign right now, closing in on level 6, and honestly, five enemies who would struggle against Rime's would be, like, a minor warm-up encounter for the day before the real horribleness starts...
In terms of your scenario -- one, you're assuming the caster is acting first, or at least early, in initiative. If they're further down the line, and enemies and party members have become intermixed, it obviously becomes less effective or more awkward to use
Two, if you have your enemies attacking all in a clump easily targetable by one AoE spell, there's a pretty easy solution to avoid that happening -- regardless of which AoE it is
Three, "they haven't attacked". Why not? Again, Rime's doesn't restrain, it simply reduces speed to 0. They still have the choice between attacking and mobility
Four, "as spell save DC goes up this becomes more of a problem". I don't think that's true, for the simple reason that as spell save DC goes up, so does the CR of the enemies. More dangerous creatures will be expected to survive longer, even if they lose a turn. Some may have multiple actions, so the cost to free themselves doesn't hamper them as much on that turn. They'll have spells and other ranged attacks that make the loss of speed less of a factor. Etc. etc.
Let me propose a counter-scenario based on an actual thing that's happened to my party in CoS (I'll avoid spoilers). We fought a small horde of scarecrows in a graveyard -- a wounded old man was in the cemetery to draw us into an ambush (which we expected), When the trap sprung, we were more or less surrounded, but there was already some intermixing of PCs and enemies
Now, if a caster in the party had Rime's, would it have been useful? Sure, it's an AoE doing decent damage with extra effects. But there weren't many directions the cone could have been pointed in that wouldn't have caught at least one party member, or even the old man NPC we were trying to save. The safest options available would only have hit a fraction of the scarecrows, and those likely wouldn't have taken any additional damage because we would have been busy with the rest while those hit with Rime's got a chance to free themselves. Or maybe they wouldn't have bothered right away and just fired off some Terrifying Glares first, potentially frightening and paralyzing members of the party -- which is worse than just having a speed of 0
The scenario you constructed is an ideal scenario for a spell like Rime's. I could come up with a similar scenario to show how "overpowered" plenty of other spells are. OMG, Web can restrain up to 16 creatures marching through the forest towards us and leave them extra vulnerable to our ranged attacks? Better nerf it!
If your campaign involves a lot of what are essentially pitched battles in open areas, with one side advancing politely on the other, sure, Rime's becomes more effective -- just as any AoE would. The problem there isn't the spell
Thank you for letting me know you're in a CoS campaign, I'll make an effort to be discreet on details. Before I address your points I want to reiterate something I previously said: "The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available." Yes, if there the enemy is intelligent end experienced enough to coordinate an ambush or multi-pronged attack, that limits the spell's effectiveness. I can't always justify the enemy being that coordinated. Especially if it's a random encounter, where probably the most sophisticated the enemy will be is two fronts, if they set this up ahead of time. A number of undead and monsters aren't even smart enough for that level of sophistication.
Also, sometimes I'd just like to be able to throw together a relatively straightforward encounter to keep them on their toes, but not easy to the point where they have no fear.
In a more my-campaign-problem, the party rogue took Expertise in Perception and the Observant feat, so I have to get fairly clever to justify enemies ambushing on them. If for no other reason than a player feeling their build choice is invalidated or asking why their massive Passive Perception didn't catch this. I feel such is a fair point, and also it's not ground I want to have to retread every time I want them surrounded unexpectedly. My compromise tends to be, okay you can see what's coming at you when they're roughly a turn away from you. Or, while you were dealing with this flank, another has begun its charge on your position.
One, I suppose I'm assuming favorable initiative, but I'm more assuming that the enemies are roughly within 30' of the caster. Yes if the initiative order splits up getting them all at once is trickier, but considering how generous a 30' cone is I don't think that's much of a problem.
Two, I already make an effort to keep my enemies from in a neat clump. The problem is that spreading them too far out also often means some monsters are too far to converge within a turn, and again, 30' cone is a very generous AoE. You've gotta have enemies split pretty far apart, and then still need them to be close enough to converge on the party.
Three, they haven't attacked because they're too far out to attack, and many enemies don't have a ranged attack. As mentioned, part of this can be a my campaign problem because of the very perceptive rogue and trying to give a fair tactical advantage for that.
Four, I would really like to go in detail for why I think it's a problem, but do not think this is the appropriate venue, nor do I want to discuss possibilities you may not have encountered. I'll just say that I like to keep even lower CR monsters as threats, especially as sudden reinforcements that are dangerous but not so much that they overshadow the main event.
Concerning your counter-scenario, yes, ambushes are excellent equalizers, and a situation as you describe would level the playing field. That's not something that can be recreated constantly. For starters, you need an intelligent planner who sets it up in-universe. Sometimes you can't justify such being available, or using it repeatedly wears thin. And, as mentioned, an especially observant PC can make organizing an ambush a chore.
In addition, I'd like to propose a counter-scenario for you as well: any fight in confined quarters. Inside buildings, in the streets, or even across a bridge. A control spell like Entangle or Web can close off one end, but only one instance of that spell can be maintained, and if you lose concentration that's the end of it. Rime's deals both high end 2nd level spell damage on top of potent control. I'm not bringing this up as an ideal scenario for Rimes, though it is pretty great for such environment. I'm trying to emphasis that many situations can come up with Rimes is both the best solution for damage dealing and battlefield control, in such a way that balancing enemies becomes difficult.
I'd like to provide specific examples but don't think it's appropriate here. For the sake of argument, assume that the enemies available are not going to have Con scores or resistances that will laugh off Rime's effects. Supposing Rime's is going to be effective on the enemies, and the GM wants to deploy them in a way that will still challenge the party. Yes, there are ways to make it a happen. Coming up with those ways can be time-consuming on my part, especially when the rogue can see most hidden enemies coming.
It's just that after a certain point, after mentally running scenarios for how to set up and deploy enemies in a way that feels fair, and having to account for, "Well what if the sorcerer both blasts them for big damage and ices them in place," the simpler answer just feels like, don't allow the spell. Or adjust it so it's not as problematic.
In practice the likelihood of the caster getting all of those enemies inside the single cast of the spell is highly unlikely. We can start here.
For 1. Initiative order is by itself almost guaranteed to split these guys up some will have closed in before the PC acts, others will still be hanging back waiting for their turn. For 2. If the spellcaster PC goes first, advances into the enemy NPC starting area to be able to cast on them, they'll not have sufficient movement left to reteat. This means any enemy NPC who makes their save now has a single glorious target. They all hate this guy, who just blasted them, and they're going to take their pound of flesh from the... spellcaster. Punish him for overextending into melee.
Now, if you're still genuinely concerned about PC AOEs at the start of combat, I've got one simple trick that makes Adventurers lose their minds: Split the enemy NPC starting positions up and spread them around. Have 3 come from the left and 2 from the right or whatever. Bam. Now it is impossible to hit them all.
Edit: PS web is infinitely better at locking enemies down. The only pro for rime is the lack of concentration. So its a decent backup for lockdown/control style if you do have your concentration on something else. But as this is start of combat, and they're low level, I'd wager he isn't concentrating on anything and in that case a web being cast at the enemies would be superior in any cast where he was going to have use rime.
As mentioned, I don't think it's that unlikely to get most of the enemies when a 30' foot cone is that generous. I'd very much like to hit them from all sides, but getting that set-up regularly can be difficult, and if I do it often enough just to avoid AoEs my players will probably call shenanigans. As mentioned, very Observant rogue means it takes a fair bit of coincidence to sneak something past them. I'll certainly do it, it's just more of a every now and then vs all the time trick. Again, unless a intelligent, coordinated opposition can be justified.
Small point, but I'd dispute Web always being better to Rime, on grounds of Rime doing quite excellent damage for its level on top of being a powerful control effect. It might not last as long as Web, but I feel it lasts long enough to give a decisive advantage.
Basically, when I have foes waiting in the wings that my party will almost certainly see coming one way or another, I'd like them to feel genuinely worried instead of just tossing Rimes at the problem for both good damage and lockdown.
Spells like this reinforce the need for a sense of party balance when it comes to foes, especially humanoids or those of humanoid level intelligence. This spell could in fact be quite stifling to a group of melee only foes, but it would be fairly inconsequential to any ranged attackers as they would rather not close the distance anyway. The spell will reduce your speed to 0, but it does not compel any action, you are free to take your full turn, sans movement attacking at range.
That is kind of the catch, yeah. Against enemies with a solid ranged option, this is not much of a problem. Against enemies that are melee only, this can enable a simple divide and conquer while also socking them in the jaw real hard.
So, the new spell. I've got a player who wants to use it. I've got concerns about it and would very much like to hear people's thoughts on the spell.
The damage and range, those are fine. Thumbs up from me there. What worries me is the bit about, fail the Constitution save and the creature's Speed is set to zero until it or another creature spend an Action to break the ice. That is potentially a significant number of actions spent just to get the enemies moving again. If said enemies have no ranged attacks and the party does, then they have no choice but to pay that action tax.
There's ways around that. Weaker fodder who exist to break said ice. Ranged enemies, if available. Enemies with big Con saves. Coordinated and tactically minded enemies, if available. Flanking is a favorite, if possible. Counterspell, although I dislike shutting down players with that. Mass amounts of minions on the logic of, hey some of them will probably get through.
The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available. I'm trying to use early levels and random encounters to teach tactics, and while this is a useful spell, this may overshadow nearly everything else. Forcing enemies to give up their action just to get in melee range hurts. And using too many minions can mean the line between a tough fight and an overwhelming encounter is far too thin.
It seems like a good spell, but accounting for it becomes a campaign long concern that only gets more troublesome as you get to higher levels. I'm considering allowing the spell minus the freezing in place, but it does sorta defeat the purpose of the spell. I could nerf it to only halve the speed, but it's still a precedent I'm uncomfortable with.
What are your thoughts on the spell? GM and Player perspectives are both appreciated.
The biggest problem with the speed lockdown is that it ignores standard immunities to having your speed locked down - that is, the spell will ignore immunity to grappled, restrained, and so on and so forth. The only way to be immune to this spell is to autopass the save via legendary resistance. That's bad design, fundamentally speaking.
I recommend one the following changes to the spell:
Plan A, have the ice grapple the targets, so anything that can break a grapple will break the ice - for example, RAW, if you teleport out of Rime's ice, your speed remains 0 since you didn't specifically address the ice. Having the ice grapple targets ensures that solutions to being grappled will work against the spell's identical-to-grapple effect.
I think the above is a better solution, but you could instead (don't do both) have the spell only reduce speed if the target takes damage from the spell, so cold immunity shuts down the speed reduction. That's not great because instead of having the spell do less to e.g. white dragons, now it does nothing.
I do like the wording patch of grappled vs Speed to 0. I was already mentally thinking, okay anything that basically gets you out of the iced area has freed you, because like you say, teleporting out of the ice should really be working to free you. Grappled just puts a neat, easily parsed and referenced name to it and helps the players remember. Thanks for that.
As a note though, the other way to be immune to this is to have Freedom of Movement cast on a target. It explicitly states that spells cannot reduce the target's speed, which counters the control aspect of Rime's.
Funny thing is, I've played a Monk and used Stunning Strike to great effect. I've got a monk in this party, and I'm perfectly ready and willing to account for that. Stunning Strike may be powerful, but it's a limited resource. Especially at low levels. Even when it works, it's only incapacitated one enemy. I find that pretty manageable. Unique bosses are fairly easy to patch if it looks problematic.
Rime's is also a limited ressource and "doubly" limited at that in your case. Why? Well, it is a 2nd level spell that uses your action and a spell slot for one. And two, in the case of your Sorcerer, it uses up one of their even more valuable spell known "slot".
Sorcerers tend to grab the spells that can fulfill the most roles as they can't switch them out. They can't prepare a set of out of combat spells when they know they'll be in town for awhile or prepare the perfect set of spells before ambushing the BBEG's lair if your party has done their due dilligence and gathered some info first.
If he grabs this, he's not grabbing something else that could also be useful and not just for combat. I don't think nerfing it is a very good idea personally even if quindraco's first suggestion is one I would personally suck up just fine as a player. Anything more though, and I'd probably just pick something different and be a bit bummed.
Since it uses a spell slot, nothing stops you from using the standard tactic of sending enemies in waves to reduce those number of slots. You can even use clumped enemies to your advantage, make 2 clumps of 3 enemies together to lure the spell out once or twice and then send in more enemies. This is yet another tactic you can employ against it. Or just having more encounters in a day between rests. You don't have to let them rest. Nothing will strike more fear in your players then not knowing when's the next time they'll get to rest. Interrupt it from time to time. If you're playing CoS as well, I recommend that you do it even more often to strengthen that feeling even more.
You speak as if the sorcerer has unlimited spell slots which is far from being the case. Sure, at level 9, he could cast it up to 10 times (more by using up SP with Font of Magic but that's usually counter productive) using up up all his 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level slots. Slots he could also use to cast Fireball, Cone of Cold, Polymorph, Synaptic Static, Cloudkill, Animate Objects and a ton of other much more powerful spells then Rime's and rip through almost anything.
The sorcerer is also very likely to want to keep some slots for Counterspell and/or Dispel Magic, Fly, Haste, Greater Invisibility, etc. etc. Is Rime a good spell? Sure it is! Is it OP when compared to every other spell in the game? Not a chance!
Sorry, got busy and took me a while to respond. Though and considering advice, one of the suggestions suddenly clicked and I've settled on something that I feel better about implementing. Gonna mull it over just to be safe, and if you guys have an input I'd love to hear it.
Funny thing is, I've played a Monk and used Stunning Strike to great effect. I've got a monk in this party, and I'm perfectly ready and willing to account for that. Stunning Strike may be powerful, but it's a limited resource. Especially at low levels. Even when it works, it's only incapacitated one enemy. I find that pretty manageable. Unique bosses are fairly easy to patch if it looks problematic.
Rime's is also a limited ressource and "doubly" limited at that in your case. Why? Well, it is a 2nd level spell that uses your action and a spell slot for one. And two, in the case of your Sorcerer, it uses up one of their even more valuable spell known "slot".
Sorcerers tend to grab the spells that can fulfill the most roles as they can't switch them out. They can't prepare a set of out of combat spells when they know they'll be in town for awhile or prepare the perfect set of spells before ambushing the BBEG's lair if your party has done their due dilligence and gathered some info first.
If he grabs this, he's not grabbing something else that could also be useful and not just for combat. I don't think nerfing it is a very good idea personally even if quindraco's first suggestion is one I would personally suck up just fine as a player. Anything more though, and I'd probably just pick something different and be a bit bummed.
Since it uses a spell slot, nothing stops you from using the standard tactic of sending enemies in waves to reduce those number of slots. You can even use clumped enemies to your advantage, make 2 clumps of 3 enemies together to lure the spell out once or twice and then send in more enemies. This is yet another tactic you can employ against it. Or just having more encounters in a day between rests. You don't have to let them rest. Nothing will strike more fear in your players then not knowing when's the next time they'll get to rest. Interrupt it from time to time. If you're playing CoS as well, I recommend that you do it even more often to strengthen that feeling even more.
You speak as if the sorcerer has unlimited spell slots which is far from being the case. Sure, at level 9, he could cast it up to 10 times (more by using up SP with Font of Magic but that's usually counter productive) using up up all his 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level slots. Slots he could also use to cast Fireball, Cone of Cold, Polymorph, Synaptic Static, Cloudkill, Animate Objects and a ton of other much more powerful spells then Rime's and rip through almost anything.
The sorcerer is also very likely to want to keep some slots for Counterspell and/or Dispel Magic, Fly, Haste, Greater Invisibility, etc. etc. Is Rime a good spell? Sure it is! Is it OP when compared to every other spell in the game? Not a chance!
You make a fair point on it being one of a sorcerer's limited spells known in this case, although while second level slots are limited I still consider it as written a too good, too much in one spell. Especially when Rime's can hit a lot of people. No it won't be always, but especially at low levels and lower saves, it can snag several targets. In comparison Stunning Strike is getting one target, and Tasha's Mind Whip 1+ depending on spell level. I consider both of those to scale in a way that's easier to account.
I actually already considered or implemented most of the tactics you suggested. Sending in more reserves is always viable, but I feel gets unstable because a lucky streak on the NPCs that I expected to lose can suddenly be throwing more enemies than I really wanted. So not something I like to rely on, never mind players finding pleasant and not-so-pleasant ways to surprise you. Limiting rests, yeah that was one of the first hurdles I implemented. I made it clear to them that they need to earn their rests, cause in their last campaign they were abundant, safe and plentiful.
And the sorcerer may not have unlimited slots, but when I'm planning an encounter to challenge the party, keep them on their toes, I am not so happy to always need to consider Rime's damage and control thrown at my mooks. And as they get stronger they can use it more, which is less fun to plan around. I keep setting up scenarios and accounting for it feels like a chore, and that's just in crunch, never mind in preserving campaign tone.
Or, well, the spell as written. As mentioned one of the comments struck me and I think I found a game balance I'm much, much happier with.
The biggest problem with the speed lockdown is that it ignores standard immunities to having your speed locked down - that is, the spell will ignore immunity to grappled, restrained, and so on and so forth. The only way to be immune to this spell is to autopass the save via legendary resistance. That's bad design, fundamentally speaking.
I recommend one the following changes to the spell:
Plan A, have the ice grapple the targets, so anything that can break a grapple will break the ice - for example, RAW, if you teleport out of Rime's ice, your speed remains 0 since you didn't specifically address the ice. Having the ice grapple targets ensures that solutions to being grappled will work against the spell's identical-to-grapple effect.
I mentioned before I do like the change in wording to grappling the enemy, because it's using a known condition. Better design as you say, and it helps reiterate the normal grappled rules so that they players are referencing and puzzling over a common condition, rather than a unique found only here status effect.
The other part I realized, is that a creature that's forcibly moved from where it's grappled, has its grapple broken. So while using a spell or ability that moves a creature, also releases the grapple. That has some greater applicability and teaches better habits in general.
There's also shoving a creature.
Shoving a Creature
Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them.
The target must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Instead of making an Attack roll, you make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). You succeed automatically if the target is Incapacitated. If you succeed, you either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you.
Technically, while a PC with Extra Attack can take the Attack option and then make multiple attacks with it, an NPC has the Attack and Multi-Attack actions. That means under RAW, an NPC can only shove once. I personally dislike that distinction and house-ruled that an NPC can shove as many times as they have attacks, because hey if the enemies or even allied NPCs have a clever idea reliant on positioning, go for it. Don't start blatantly cheating by have NPCs repeatedly shoving one NPC so they can effectively move much further than normal, but that's the same common sense that shuts down stuff like the peasant railgun.
In the case of Rime's, my houserule of swapping attacks for shoves would mean if an enemy had two attacks, they could shove two of their fellows out of the ice, thus breaking them free. If an NPC is adjacent to no one or has no friends willing to spend an action to free them or an attack to shove them out, they can still use their action to break free.
I like the dynamic this introduces better. Rime's would still be solid damage, still reducing punishment from the enemy, still a solid option in a spellcaster's arsenal. It focuses on a known condition, and the known ways to escape said condition. The shove houserule just gives melee enemies a way to break the ice in ways besides spending an action, but will generally mean some efforts not put towards harming the party.
Thoughts? I'd like to have this settled in my head before I go getting my player's hopes up.
So, the new spell. I've got a player who wants to use it. I've got concerns about it and would very much like to hear people's thoughts on the spell.
The damage and range, those are fine. Thumbs up from me there. What worries me is the bit about, fail the Constitution save and the creature's Speed is set to zero until it or another creature spend an Action to break the ice. That is potentially a significant number of actions spent just to get the enemies moving again. If said enemies have no ranged attacks and the party does, then they have no choice but to pay that action tax.
There's ways around that. Weaker fodder who exist to break said ice. Ranged enemies, if available. Enemies with big Con saves. Coordinated and tactically minded enemies, if available. Flanking is a favorite, if possible. Counterspell, although I dislike shutting down players with that. Mass amounts of minions on the logic of, hey some of them will probably get through.
The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available. I'm trying to use early levels and random encounters to teach tactics, and while this is a useful spell, this may overshadow nearly everything else. Forcing enemies to give up their action just to get in melee range hurts. And using too many minions can mean the line between a tough fight and an overwhelming encounter is far too thin.
It seems like a good spell, but accounting for it becomes a campaign long concern that only gets more troublesome as you get to higher levels. I'm considering allowing the spell minus the freezing in place, but it does sorta defeat the purpose of the spell. I could nerf it to only halve the speed, but it's still a precedent I'm uncomfortable with.
What are your thoughts on the spell? GM and Player perspectives are both appreciated.
Do you see this as any more of an issue than the 1st level spell Entangle? At least with the ice an Action guarantees that the target can move again. Entangle requires a Strength check, which can fail.
Yes, because Entangle is Concentration and thus locks out other Concentration options, while also not doing damage.
Entangle is a pain, sure, but at least the caster has incentive to keep it up even when people start going free. And the caster may be attacked and possibly lose concentration, so they get prioritized by everyone else. I think that's a more fair trade-off, or at least merits some risk assessment, compared to running up to blast them in the face for sure and then possibly/probably keep them from attacking.
Probably the better comparison is web, since they're both 2nd level
Web is concentration and stays up, affecting anyone in a 20-foot cube who enters the area. No damage unless the web is set on fire, doing some damage to anyone trapped in it but then losing the restraining effect
Rime's is a one-shot (so no concentration but no ongoing effect) in a 30-foot cone. Does healthy damage for a 2nd-level spell
Rime's seems superior to me. I'm not sure it's enough superior to warrant nerfing, though
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Rime is definitely better, but I'd probably be more comfortable with Web being used.
Web could in theory lock enemies down more thoroughly, and then the caster runs well out of range so Concentration can't be lost, but I could at least take that as a sign that my players are getting clever and it's safe for me to start upping my game in kind. And if, say, the caster and a Monk are working together to yeet enemies into the Web, that's an excellent case of teamwork that should be rewarded. And then escalate accordingly. Or the party melee fighters feel they can't just go into the Web without being at risk themselves, and maybe the casters tailor their approach to account for this. Maybe have the baddies setting fire to the web themselves despite hurting each other can help paint a scene. Or maybe the enemies are especially clever, and start dragging PCs into the Web.
That's dynamic. That's exciting. I can build multiple encounters around the use of that, and keep that feeling of danger and risk. Because if that Web works then great, but if it doesn't then the player feels the loss. You have to weigh the payoff, to judge whether this works with your team.
Meanwhile one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down just means encounters need to specifically avoid that. On top of dealing very respectable damage, as early as level 3.
Is it effective? Yes. So effective that if you hit them and they fail their save, they probably won't get to deal damage before you finish them off. Will it continue to be so later? Unfortunately, yes, so you don't really need to learn more strategy. This one is very good. It'll keep working until it goes wrong, but engineering cases where it doesn't go wrong takes effort and circumstance. Efforts that could be saved by just going, okay let's not do that.
...Also in the campaign I'm running, good Dex saves are more common than good Con saves. So in this specific scenario, I'm more confident in my monster fodder beating a Dex save than a Con save.
Honestly I wouldn't mind this so much if it wouldn't trivializing the minions so completely. The combination of a solid hit and thorough lockdown on a fail seems very potent from my side of the table. Why choose between damage and Area Control when you can have both?
The other big difference between them I wasn't thinking about in my original post is that Web actually restrains targets (so advantage on attacks against them, and their attacks at disadvantage). Rime's just reduces their speed to 0. That's a significant difference.
I'm just not seeing why Rime's is such a game-breaker. "one PC with Rime single-handedly locking entire groups down" seems like a wild exaggeration.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Okay, let me try and paint a scene. If it helps, I'm running Curse of Strahd. Let's say I have five enemies coming down one side, and there's reasonable expectation that they can reach the party to begin attacking in one turn.
Even if they're spaced out, a 30 foot cone probably gets them most or all of them. So that's a fair chunk of damage off the bat. Reasonable enough, it's not dissimilar to Shatter. Level 3/4 Wizard/Sorcerer who pumped up their spellcasting stat, DC13/14 for spell save. Unless those enemies are all excellent Constitution (mine aren't), that's about half the enemies stuck in place on top of taking 3d8 damage. Call it 14 damage each.
Each one who failed the save must spend their action to break free. So now instead of five attacking enemies, I have 2/3 attacking enemies. PCs are significantly less pressured, and they still have their full turns. Even if the enemies broke free, they've just gotten up close. They haven't attacked. Thus with one spell, two or three enemies have not been able to attack as expected and took a fair bit of damage. It's a fair bet that the rest of the PCs will knock off between one and three of the enemies. What's left they probably take some hits, but won't be in serious danger.
As the spell save DC goes up, this becomes more and more of a problem. For me anyway, because the monsters in this module aren't getting significant Con saves as they advance. So I can have a bunch of minions appear from one direction and advance, but as soon as they're one turn away from digging into the party, one spell takes both a bite out of them and effectively removes their action for the turn. It did not require concentration to do it, it only needed a 2nd level spell, it did a neat bit of damage in the process, and causes the monsters to be less of a threat. And then the rest of the party has their say.
Countering this in a way that feels fair and doesn't bog down gameplay seems tricky. It's damage and removing actions from the enemy. It can potentially hit a wide range of enemies before they reach the party. Tasha's Mind Whip does similar, but it only targets one enemy unless you upcast it, so I have no problems with it. This I worry will have me bringing out reinforcements (usually the same monsters you fought in greater number), only to have them damaged and locked down by the same spell as before, only more effective.
To be clear, I'm not against my PCs keeping the setting's up and down the street. I fully expect them to do that as they exit mid-game and enter end-game. I am less thrilled about the same 2nd level spell halting the advance, over and over, en masse. That does not engender fear and unease towards the opposition, which I'm trying to nurture.
Does that make sense?
TLDR: You can easily compare it against Blindness/Deafness or Stunning Strike. They all have spectacular debuff effects, but CON saves severely take out the effectiveness of those abilities, therefore bringing the necessary balance to the game.
This spell is surely great and could be devastating in the hands of a seasoned Evoker sculpting around the battlefield.
The main downside, and this is a big one in my experience, is the Constitution saves. Specially at higher levels where most creatures have not only really good CON scores but also magic/legendary resistance; this is the main reason Stunning Strike is so frustrating even being so powerful — it’s not reliable. Web is amazing, probably one of the best control spells in the game, because it’s effective. DEX saves tend to be low at most creatures, even lower than WIS in some cases. You can also easily guess creatures who will have more or less high DEX judging by their appearance, it’s hard to guess high WIS creatures, unless obvious things like you know you are fighting a villain Cleric or Druid, for instance.
Perfectly so.
All credit to you for wanting to give your players challenging and engaging encounters.
Options include to leave as is, bar the spell, call it level 3, nerf it, restrict the number of times it can be used, say, to only once per short/long rest, delay the possibility to learn/acquire the spell.
Do whatever works to give you and your players a great gaming experience. It's a Fizban's spell and can be justifiably banned/restricted.
Rime is definitely a control spell, and I as a DM would hesitate to try and "solve" it for your bad guys. I like to trouble myself with what resources the players bring to bear as little as possible as to leave solutions wide open to player creativity. If the player thinks shutting the enemy down for at least a turn is a good spell investment, great. If they're right? Even better for them. I also don't consider "spending your action to release a stuck creature" to be that hefty of a cost. There's lots of spells that can shut down the enemies for a turn on a failed saving throw. Especially since a failed CON save on most monsters is a big ask, as most monsters are hearty and have good constitution, so this is really going to be good against humanoids that also have bad con (and most of those will have access to ranged attacks).
I'm in a CoS campaign right now, closing in on level 6, and honestly, five enemies who would struggle against Rime's would be, like, a minor warm-up encounter for the day before the real horribleness starts...
In terms of your scenario -- one, you're assuming the caster is acting first, or at least early, in initiative. If they're further down the line, and enemies and party members have become intermixed, it obviously becomes less effective or more awkward to use
Two, if you have your enemies attacking all in a clump easily targetable by one AoE spell, there's a pretty easy solution to avoid that happening -- regardless of which AoE it is
Three, "they haven't attacked". Why not? Again, Rime's doesn't restrain, it simply reduces speed to 0. They still have the choice between attacking and mobility
Four, "as spell save DC goes up this becomes more of a problem". I don't think that's true, for the simple reason that as spell save DC goes up, so does the CR of the enemies. More dangerous creatures will be expected to survive longer, even if they lose a turn. Some may have multiple actions, so the cost to free themselves doesn't hamper them as much on that turn. They'll have spells and other ranged attacks that make the loss of speed less of a factor. Etc. etc.
Let me propose a counter-scenario based on an actual thing that's happened to my party in CoS (I'll avoid spoilers). We fought a small horde of scarecrows in a graveyard -- a wounded old man was in the cemetery to draw us into an ambush (which we expected), When the trap sprung, we were more or less surrounded, but there was already some intermixing of PCs and enemies
Now, if a caster in the party had Rime's, would it have been useful? Sure, it's an AoE doing decent damage with extra effects. But there weren't many directions the cone could have been pointed in that wouldn't have caught at least one party member, or even the old man NPC we were trying to save. The safest options available would only have hit a fraction of the scarecrows, and those likely wouldn't have taken any additional damage because we would have been busy with the rest while those hit with Rime's got a chance to free themselves. Or maybe they wouldn't have bothered right away and just fired off some Terrifying Glares first, potentially frightening and paralyzing members of the party -- which is worse than just having a speed of 0
The scenario you constructed is an ideal scenario for a spell like Rime's. I could come up with a similar scenario to show how "overpowered" plenty of other spells are. OMG, Web can restrain up to 16 creatures marching through the forest towards us and leave them extra vulnerable to our ranged attacks? Better nerf it!
If your campaign involves a lot of what are essentially pitched battles in open areas, with one side advancing politely on the other, sure, Rime's becomes more effective -- just as any AoE would. The problem there isn't the spell
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In practice the likelihood of the caster getting all of those enemies inside the single cast of the spell is highly unlikely. We can start here.
For 1. Initiative order is by itself almost guaranteed to split these guys up some will have closed in before the PC acts, others will still be hanging back waiting for their turn. For 2. If the spellcaster PC goes first, advances into the enemy NPC starting area to be able to cast on them, they'll not have sufficient movement left to reteat. This means any enemy NPC who makes their save now has a single glorious target. They all hate this guy, who just blasted them, and they're going to take their pound of flesh from the... spellcaster. Punish him for overextending into melee.
Now, if you're still genuinely concerned about PC AOEs at the start of combat, I've got one simple trick that makes Adventurers lose their minds: Split the enemy NPC starting positions up and spread them around. Have 3 come from the left and 2 from the right or whatever. Bam. Now it is impossible to hit them all.
Edit: PS web is infinitely better at locking enemies down. The only pro for rime is the lack of concentration. So its a decent backup for lockdown/control style if you do have your concentration on something else. But as this is start of combat, and they're low level, I'd wager he isn't concentrating on anything and in that case a web being cast at the enemies would be superior in any cast where he was going to have use rime.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Spells like this reinforce the need for a sense of party balance when it comes to foes, especially humanoids or those of humanoid level intelligence. This spell could in fact be quite stifling to a group of melee only foes, but it would be fairly inconsequential to any ranged attackers as they would rather not close the distance anyway. The spell will reduce your speed to 0, but it does not compel any action, you are free to take your full turn, sans movement attacking at range.
The biggest problem with the speed lockdown is that it ignores standard immunities to having your speed locked down - that is, the spell will ignore immunity to grappled, restrained, and so on and so forth. The only way to be immune to this spell is to autopass the save via legendary resistance. That's bad design, fundamentally speaking.
I recommend one the following changes to the spell:
I'm obviously in the "doesn't need to be changed" camp, but quindraco's first option there seems like a reasonable approach if you do
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It is a very good workaround and allows the spell to interact with creature statblocks in a more standardized way, I like it too. Anything immune to being grappled probably should be immune to the binding effects of this spell anyway.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I'd let it work even on a grapple immune ooze/slime-like creature personally but yeah. Its a pretty good way to nerf it without actually nerfing it in 90% of cases.
Thanks to everyone for your well thought out responses.
Funny thing is, I've played a Monk and used Stunning Strike to great effect. I've got a monk in this party, and I'm perfectly ready and willing to account for that. Stunning Strike may be powerful, but it's a limited resource. Especially at low levels. Even when it works, it's only incapacitated one enemy. I find that pretty manageable. Unique bosses are fairly easy to patch if it looks problematic.
As people point out, high Con saves can mitigate this. Since this isn't the DM's topic, all I'll say is that in my particular case I am not as reassured as I would be if my campaign were taking place in, say, Avernus.
Rime is control and straight damage, on par with Shatter. Shatter's a circle, Rime's a 30 foot cone. Which ends up pretty substantial. All on top of inflicting a very potent control effect.
Thank you for letting me know you're in a CoS campaign, I'll make an effort to be discreet on details. Before I address your points I want to reiterate something I previously said: "The problem is that most random encounters will not be that coordinated or have the needed resources available." Yes, if there the enemy is intelligent end experienced enough to coordinate an ambush or multi-pronged attack, that limits the spell's effectiveness. I can't always justify the enemy being that coordinated. Especially if it's a random encounter, where probably the most sophisticated the enemy will be is two fronts, if they set this up ahead of time. A number of undead and monsters aren't even smart enough for that level of sophistication.
Also, sometimes I'd just like to be able to throw together a relatively straightforward encounter to keep them on their toes, but not easy to the point where they have no fear.
In a more my-campaign-problem, the party rogue took Expertise in Perception and the Observant feat, so I have to get fairly clever to justify enemies ambushing on them. If for no other reason than a player feeling their build choice is invalidated or asking why their massive Passive Perception didn't catch this. I feel such is a fair point, and also it's not ground I want to have to retread every time I want them surrounded unexpectedly. My compromise tends to be, okay you can see what's coming at you when they're roughly a turn away from you. Or, while you were dealing with this flank, another has begun its charge on your position.
One, I suppose I'm assuming favorable initiative, but I'm more assuming that the enemies are roughly within 30' of the caster. Yes if the initiative order splits up getting them all at once is trickier, but considering how generous a 30' cone is I don't think that's much of a problem.
Two, I already make an effort to keep my enemies from in a neat clump. The problem is that spreading them too far out also often means some monsters are too far to converge within a turn, and again, 30' cone is a very generous AoE. You've gotta have enemies split pretty far apart, and then still need them to be close enough to converge on the party.
Three, they haven't attacked because they're too far out to attack, and many enemies don't have a ranged attack. As mentioned, part of this can be a my campaign problem because of the very perceptive rogue and trying to give a fair tactical advantage for that.
Four, I would really like to go in detail for why I think it's a problem, but do not think this is the appropriate venue, nor do I want to discuss possibilities you may not have encountered. I'll just say that I like to keep even lower CR monsters as threats, especially as sudden reinforcements that are dangerous but not so much that they overshadow the main event.
Concerning your counter-scenario, yes, ambushes are excellent equalizers, and a situation as you describe would level the playing field. That's not something that can be recreated constantly. For starters, you need an intelligent planner who sets it up in-universe. Sometimes you can't justify such being available, or using it repeatedly wears thin. And, as mentioned, an especially observant PC can make organizing an ambush a chore.
In addition, I'd like to propose a counter-scenario for you as well: any fight in confined quarters. Inside buildings, in the streets, or even across a bridge. A control spell like Entangle or Web can close off one end, but only one instance of that spell can be maintained, and if you lose concentration that's the end of it. Rime's deals both high end 2nd level spell damage on top of potent control. I'm not bringing this up as an ideal scenario for Rimes, though it is pretty great for such environment. I'm trying to emphasis that many situations can come up with Rimes is both the best solution for damage dealing and battlefield control, in such a way that balancing enemies becomes difficult.
I'd like to provide specific examples but don't think it's appropriate here. For the sake of argument, assume that the enemies available are not going to have Con scores or resistances that will laugh off Rime's effects. Supposing Rime's is going to be effective on the enemies, and the GM wants to deploy them in a way that will still challenge the party. Yes, there are ways to make it a happen. Coming up with those ways can be time-consuming on my part, especially when the rogue can see most hidden enemies coming.
It's just that after a certain point, after mentally running scenarios for how to set up and deploy enemies in a way that feels fair, and having to account for, "Well what if the sorcerer both blasts them for big damage and ices them in place," the simpler answer just feels like, don't allow the spell. Or adjust it so it's not as problematic.
As mentioned, I don't think it's that unlikely to get most of the enemies when a 30' foot cone is that generous. I'd very much like to hit them from all sides, but getting that set-up regularly can be difficult, and if I do it often enough just to avoid AoEs my players will probably call shenanigans. As mentioned, very Observant rogue means it takes a fair bit of coincidence to sneak something past them. I'll certainly do it, it's just more of a every now and then vs all the time trick. Again, unless a intelligent, coordinated opposition can be justified.
Small point, but I'd dispute Web always being better to Rime, on grounds of Rime doing quite excellent damage for its level on top of being a powerful control effect. It might not last as long as Web, but I feel it lasts long enough to give a decisive advantage.
Basically, when I have foes waiting in the wings that my party will almost certainly see coming one way or another, I'd like them to feel genuinely worried instead of just tossing Rimes at the problem for both good damage and lockdown.
That is kind of the catch, yeah. Against enemies with a solid ranged option, this is not much of a problem. Against enemies that are melee only, this can enable a simple divide and conquer while also socking them in the jaw real hard.
I do like the wording patch of grappled vs Speed to 0. I was already mentally thinking, okay anything that basically gets you out of the iced area has freed you, because like you say, teleporting out of the ice should really be working to free you. Grappled just puts a neat, easily parsed and referenced name to it and helps the players remember. Thanks for that.
As a note though, the other way to be immune to this is to have Freedom of Movement cast on a target. It explicitly states that spells cannot reduce the target's speed, which counters the control aspect of Rime's.
Rime's is also a limited ressource and "doubly" limited at that in your case. Why? Well, it is a 2nd level spell that uses your action and a spell slot for one. And two, in the case of your Sorcerer, it uses up one of their even more valuable spell known "slot".
Sorcerers tend to grab the spells that can fulfill the most roles as they can't switch them out. They can't prepare a set of out of combat spells when they know they'll be in town for awhile or prepare the perfect set of spells before ambushing the BBEG's lair if your party has done their due dilligence and gathered some info first.
If he grabs this, he's not grabbing something else that could also be useful and not just for combat. I don't think nerfing it is a very good idea personally even if quindraco's first suggestion is one I would personally suck up just fine as a player. Anything more though, and I'd probably just pick something different and be a bit bummed.
Since it uses a spell slot, nothing stops you from using the standard tactic of sending enemies in waves to reduce those number of slots. You can even use clumped enemies to your advantage, make 2 clumps of 3 enemies together to lure the spell out once or twice and then send in more enemies. This is yet another tactic you can employ against it. Or just having more encounters in a day between rests. You don't have to let them rest. Nothing will strike more fear in your players then not knowing when's the next time they'll get to rest. Interrupt it from time to time. If you're playing CoS as well, I recommend that you do it even more often to strengthen that feeling even more.
You speak as if the sorcerer has unlimited spell slots which is far from being the case. Sure, at level 9, he could cast it up to 10 times (more by using up SP with Font of Magic but that's usually counter productive) using up up all his 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level slots. Slots he could also use to cast Fireball, Cone of Cold, Polymorph, Synaptic Static, Cloudkill, Animate Objects and a ton of other much more powerful spells then Rime's and rip through almost anything.
The sorcerer is also very likely to want to keep some slots for Counterspell and/or Dispel Magic, Fly, Haste, Greater Invisibility, etc. etc. Is Rime a good spell? Sure it is! Is it OP when compared to every other spell in the game? Not a chance!
Sorry, got busy and took me a while to respond. Though and considering advice, one of the suggestions suddenly clicked and I've settled on something that I feel better about implementing. Gonna mull it over just to be safe, and if you guys have an input I'd love to hear it.
You make a fair point on it being one of a sorcerer's limited spells known in this case, although while second level slots are limited I still consider it as written a too good, too much in one spell. Especially when Rime's can hit a lot of people. No it won't be always, but especially at low levels and lower saves, it can snag several targets. In comparison Stunning Strike is getting one target, and Tasha's Mind Whip 1+ depending on spell level. I consider both of those to scale in a way that's easier to account.
I actually already considered or implemented most of the tactics you suggested. Sending in more reserves is always viable, but I feel gets unstable because a lucky streak on the NPCs that I expected to lose can suddenly be throwing more enemies than I really wanted. So not something I like to rely on, never mind players finding pleasant and not-so-pleasant ways to surprise you. Limiting rests, yeah that was one of the first hurdles I implemented. I made it clear to them that they need to earn their rests, cause in their last campaign they were abundant, safe and plentiful.
And the sorcerer may not have unlimited slots, but when I'm planning an encounter to challenge the party, keep them on their toes, I am not so happy to always need to consider Rime's damage and control thrown at my mooks. And as they get stronger they can use it more, which is less fun to plan around. I keep setting up scenarios and accounting for it feels like a chore, and that's just in crunch, never mind in preserving campaign tone.
Or, well, the spell as written. As mentioned one of the comments struck me and I think I found a game balance I'm much, much happier with.
I mentioned before I do like the change in wording to grappling the enemy, because it's using a known condition. Better design as you say, and it helps reiterate the normal grappled rules so that they players are referencing and puzzling over a common condition, rather than a unique found only here status effect.
The other part I realized, is that a creature that's forcibly moved from where it's grappled, has its grapple broken. So while using a spell or ability that moves a creature, also releases the grapple. That has some greater applicability and teaches better habits in general.
There's also shoving a creature.
Technically, while a PC with Extra Attack can take the Attack option and then make multiple attacks with it, an NPC has the Attack and Multi-Attack actions. That means under RAW, an NPC can only shove once. I personally dislike that distinction and house-ruled that an NPC can shove as many times as they have attacks, because hey if the enemies or even allied NPCs have a clever idea reliant on positioning, go for it. Don't start blatantly cheating by have NPCs repeatedly shoving one NPC so they can effectively move much further than normal, but that's the same common sense that shuts down stuff like the peasant railgun.
In the case of Rime's, my houserule of swapping attacks for shoves would mean if an enemy had two attacks, they could shove two of their fellows out of the ice, thus breaking them free. If an NPC is adjacent to no one or has no friends willing to spend an action to free them or an attack to shove them out, they can still use their action to break free.
I like the dynamic this introduces better. Rime's would still be solid damage, still reducing punishment from the enemy, still a solid option in a spellcaster's arsenal. It focuses on a known condition, and the known ways to escape said condition. The shove houserule just gives melee enemies a way to break the ice in ways besides spending an action, but will generally mean some efforts not put towards harming the party.
Thoughts? I'd like to have this settled in my head before I go getting my player's hopes up.