Unless that's their favorite spell, or their only spell that can actually dish out damage, or, or, or...
Being told "sorry, the (de)buffs don't stack" is a much easier - and far more reasonable - pill to swallow than "sorry, your spell won't do damage because someone else is already using it."
"The enemy is already debuffed" is very easy to understand and accept. "You can't hurt it" is not.
Unless that's their favorite spell, or their only spell that can actually dish out damage, or, or, or...
Being told "sorry, the (de)buffs don't stack" is a much easier - and far more reasonable - pill to swallow than "sorry, your spell won't do damage because someone else is already using it."
"The enemy is already debuffed" is very easy to understand and accept. "You can't hurt it" is not.
No, it defaults to the most recent casting. So it would only be, “Sorry, if you cast it after they did and stand next to them only your version would do damage. If you stand far enough apart that they don’t overlap then it should be no problem.”
So instead of the second caster being told "your spell can't hurt it," the first caster gets to be told "your spell no longer hurts it."
That's virtually the exact same thing - your players are being denied their damage - and that's not fun. No player wants to hear that, ever. Just my opinion, of course, but it would certainly upset me as a player, and I can't imagine there are many it wouldn't.
So instead of the second caster being told "your spell can't hurt it," the first caster gets to be told "your spell no longer hurts it."
That's virtually the exact same thing - your players are being denied their damage - and that's not fun. No player wants to hear that, ever. Just my opinion, of course, but it would certainly upset me as a player, and I can't imagine there are many it wouldn't.
They’re not being denied their damage, they’re being told that if they want it work they have to stand further apart. They can’t bottleneck the same area, they can cover different areas. They can hold one in reserve in case the first one falls, they can do all kinds of stuff, but they cannot stack effects just like they don’t grant double Advantage if they both cast Aura of Purity, and it won’t stack if they both cast Control Winds in the same area, and it won’t stack if they stand next to each other and both cast Crusader’s Mantle. They can certainly do it, it just won’t work if they stand next to each other.
Whatever. You do it your way and I’ll do it my way and it will only ever matter if you come to PA and join a game I DM.
And then, if you insist on it being your way you will find your PC surrounded by 12 priests all casting spirit guardians and when you’re begging me to make it stop because you’re taking 36d8 damage every turn I’ll just keep quoting your arguments as to why it won’t. 😁
That wouldn't be so bad.
12 wizards casting fireball would be 96d6
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
Whatever. You do it your way and I’ll do it my way and it will only ever matter if you come to PA and join a game I DM.
And then, if you insist on it being your way you will find your PC surrounded by 12 priests all casting spirit guardians and when you’re begging me to make it stop because you’re taking 36d8 damage every turn I’ll just keep quoting your arguments as to why it won’t. 😁
Yes, and again, I agree that that does seem to be RAW (though what Sigred pointed out about spells differentiating Damage/Effect in the header now makes me doubt that a bit,) but it's also not fun. Standing back to back in a field of spiritual warriors as enemies beset you? Sounds fun. Flanking a boss enemy with a hoard of spirits? Sounds fun.
In Acq. Inc, one player's Spiritual Guardians were giant chickens, and another players' were warriors in gleaming plates. They role-played that the warriors rode the chickens, slashing at enemies while mounted as the chickens pecked on them. It was awesome.
Being told your spell won't do damage because someone else is doing it too? No, thank you.
Damage from the same spell not stacking may be RAW, but I really can't imagine it's RAI, and it's definitely not RAF. Not in any situation I can imagine, anyway.
Sometimes (de)buffs not stacking isn't Fun, too, but as I said it's much easier for players to accept that something is already de-buffed than it is for them to accept that they can't do damage.
"You can't slow it down, it's already slowed down." Alright, that's maybe a bit of a bummer, but understandable. "You can't damage it with that, it's already taking damage from another person's." That's nonsense. (Yes yes, technically the first person's would stop dealing damage, but the sentiment is the same)
Now, I'm not trying to brow-beat you into agreeing with me ... at least not on purpose. You do seem to be correct, and if we're just trying to get to the bottom of RAW, we seem to have gotten there. I'm just vocalizing that I - and I imagine most players - would be against such a ruling, and trying to explain why I feel that way.
So instead of the second caster being told "your spell can't hurt it," the first caster gets to be told "your spell no longer hurts it."
That's virtually the exact same thing - your players are being denied their damage - and that's not fun. No player wants to hear that, ever. Just my opinion, of course, but it would certainly upset me as a player, and I can't imagine there are many it wouldn't.
They’re not being denied their damage, they’re being told that if they want it work they have to stand further apart. They can’t bottleneck the same area, they can cover different areas. They can hold one in reserve in case the first one falls, they can do all kinds of stuff, but they cannot stack effects just like they don’t grant double Advantage if they both cast Aura of Purity, and it won’t stack if they both cast Control Winds in the same area, and it won’t stack if they stand next to each other and both cast Crusader’s Mantle. They can certainly do it, it just won’t work if they stand next to each other.
You continue to point at things which are clearly not damage as your supposed premise for damage not stacking. You are arguing from a false premise, and in effect displaying exactly why your position is not RAW.
Stop moving the goal post. The argument at hand here has been clearly answered that damage from a spell is not the spell's "effect", for the purposes of "what exactly does not 'stack'".
The only thing that is being discussed now is "but what about if the DM's bad?" Nobody cares. It's irrelevant.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I never moved any goalposts sport. My goal line has been the same since the beginning, they don’t stack. That’s my goal line.
Like I said before, you do it your way and I’ll do it my way.
I personally like having to overcome restrictions like that as a player. I feel it makes me have to think more tactically. For me, having it work that way when other spells don’t feels like it’s being handed to me, and I don’t find that fun. I’d rather have to think more tactically to figure out what will work. Having two hoards of spirit guardians chewing everything up like a meat grinder before it gets to me and without me having to do anything else feels boring to me.
I never moved any goalposts sport. My goal line has been the same since the beginning, they don’t stack. That’s my goal line.
Like I said before, you do it your way and I’ll do it my way.
I personally like having to overcome restrictions like that as a player. I feel it makes me have to think more tactically. For me, having it work that way when other spells don’t feels like it’s being handed to me, and I don’t find that fun. I’d rather have to think more tactically to figure out what will work. Having two hoards of spirit guardians chewing everything up like a meat grinder before it gets to me and without me having to do anything else feels boring to me.
And in a lot of situations it could be boring. It's up to the DM to know his players' characters and what they are capable of, and plan accordingly in order to both challenge them and make sure they have fun. If the players can do this strategy, work around it; work with it. Don't deny it.
Unless you want to, of course. Just tooting my own horn over here.
I never moved any goalposts sport. My goal line has been the same since the beginning, they don’t stack. That’s my goal line.
That's your end result, not the goal post (the content of the argument necessitating a specific result). You are moving the goal post by ignoring logical premises which do not advance your end result, and substituting invalid premises to discredit opposing argument, while simultaneously demanding more proof. That is "moving the goal post", bud. If nothing else arises from this thread, I sincerely hope you can recognize that.
You make many great arguments on these forums; I know you can do better, and I apologize if I've come across as overly-antagonistic today. It's certainly not my intent.
The application of RAW is consistent. Whether you use it at your own table or not is up to you, but it is what it is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
If you can point out one logical premise that I have ignored I will gladly address it.
I have substituted nothing. I have offered examples of other spells to which I apply the same interpretation of RAW.
I demand no proof.
My premise is that neither the damage, nor the speed reduction are the effects of the spell Spirit Guardians. The effects of the spell as that it brings those spirits into that area. Those spirits are the effect. Much like goodberry doesn’t heal, it creates berries. The effects of Spirit Guardians don’t stack because the spirits won’t both occupy the same AoE.
Whatever. You do it your way and I’ll do it my way and it will only ever matter if you come to PA and join a game I DM.
And then, if you insist on it being your way you will find your PC surrounded by 12 priests all casting spirit guardians and when you’re begging me to make it stop because you’re taking 36d8 damage every turn I’ll just keep quoting your arguments as to why it won’t. 😁
That wouldn't be so bad.
12 wizards casting fireball would be 96d6
36d8/turn for 10 turns= 360d8 damage.
You're being silly, nobody is going to stand still to take the full load of that.
12 fireballs will kill half the party on turn 1.
And SERIOUSLY the party would have to wantonly cooperate in order for 12 priests to get into range for that attack of yours.
If you can point out one logical premise that I have ignored I will gladly address it.
I have substituted nothing. I have offered examples of other spells to which I apply the same interpretation of RAW.
I demand no proof.
My premise is that neither the damage, nor the speed reduction are the effects of the spell Spirit Guardians. The effects of the spell as that it brings those spirits into that area. Those spirits are the effect. Much like goodberry doesn’t heal, it creates berries. The effects of Spirit Guardians don’t stack because the spirits won’t both occupy the same AoE.
The sage advice compendium has an interesting bit on spells like Spirit Guardians. It doesn't address the topic per se, but it does give some more information to consider and I'll therefore add that bit here. You can find it by skipping to the Monsters section on here and then scrolling up (faster than spellcasting and scrolling down). Sorry, that I don't have it formatted the same. I'll try to edit it later.
Does moonbeam deal damage when you cast it? What about when its effect moves onto a creature?
The answer to both questions is no. Here’s some elaboration on that answer. Some spells and other game features create an area of effect that does something when a creature enters that area for the first time on a turn or when a creature starts its turn in that area. On the turn when you cast such a spell, you’re primarily setting up hurt for your foes on later turns. Moonbeam, for example, creates a beam of light that can damage a creature who enters the beam or who starts its turn in the beam.
Here are some spells with the same timing as moonbeam for their areas of effect: blade barrier cloudkill cloud of daggers Evard’s black tentacles forbiddance moonbeam sleet storm spirit guardians
Reading the description of any of those spells, you might wonder whether a creature is considered to be entering the spell’s area of effect if the area is created on the creature’s space. And if the area of effect can be moved — as the beam of moonbeam can — does moving it into a creature’s space count as the creature entering the area? Our design intent for such spells is this: a creature enters the area of effect when the creature passes into it. Creating the area of effect on the creature or moving it onto the creature doesn’t count. If the creature is still in the area at the start of its turn, it is subjected to the area’s effect. Entering such an area of effect needn’t be voluntary, unless a spell says otherwise. You can, therefore, hurl a creature into the area with a spell like thunderwave. We consider that clever play, not an imbalance, so hurl away! Keep in mind, however, that a creature is subjected to such an area of effect only the first time it enters the area on a turn. You can’t move a creature in and out of it to damage it over and over again on the same turn. In summary, a spell like moonbeam affects a creature when the creature passes into the spell’s area of effect and when the creature starts its turn there. You’re essentially creating a hazard on the battlefield.
Well, that I don't agree with. If you look at my post #60, you will see that I do concede that this appears to be the RAW, but I simply can't believe it's the RAI. Both players and NPCs should be able to do this.
Surrounding a single player with 12 priests all casting Spirit Guardians to shred them to death is just mean, but pitting a party against 2 or 3 of them all casting it could make for a very interesting encounter.
Depends on party size, level, and composition. Plus, don’t forget that those priests will most likely be backed up by several acolytes, cultists and fanatics. Even 3 priests with a wall of meatshields between them and the party would be dishing out 9d8 damage/turn to every PC. That’s on top of all of the hold person and spiritual weapon spells they would be slinging. There is no way that should ever have been RAI.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m normally all in favor of short bloody combats. The more everyone gets their assess kicked, the more badassed they feel when they win. But stacking damage from multiple castings of what is already an OP spell is just too much.
This is incredibly irrelevant. Three Priests could be casting a different AoE each and be nuking the party as well. Everyone sees that as OK, right? So, triple Spirit Guardians isn't total amazeballs ridiculous anyway.
I can tell you from personal experience on my Cleric, when I do some kind of power play, something usually tries to make me stop. I get exactly one cast of Inflict Wounds before an NPC decides I'm the dangerous target. If you are an AoE monster, that's just cause to focus fire you and break your concentration(or kill you).
I love it how everyone’s answer is “Let the PCs do it so they feel cool and then have the bad guys nuke the crap out of them next round to break their concentration or kill them.”
I suppose that is one way to solve the problem, but I don’t see how that will make the players feel like their PCs are badasses. 🤷♂️
It just seems simpler to point to the RAW that says things like that don’t stack and let them know that their PCs would be aware of it so they can think of something different to do. That way, they actually get to use their spells for at least a few turns before the bad guys decide they have to deal with threat X.
Trying to get spellcasters to drop concentration is a very common thing, for both the PCs and NPCs to do. The concept isn't new to this discussion.
It's literally half the reason concentration is a thing; spells with concentration are powerful, with the drawback that they can - and probably will - be ended prematurely.
Unless that's their favorite spell, or their only spell that can actually dish out damage, or, or, or...
Being told "sorry, the (de)buffs don't stack" is a much easier - and far more reasonable - pill to swallow than "sorry, your spell won't do damage because someone else is already using it."
"The enemy is already debuffed" is very easy to understand and accept. "You can't hurt it" is not.
No, it defaults to the most recent casting. So it would only be, “Sorry, if you cast it after they did and stand next to them only your version would do damage. If you stand far enough apart that they don’t overlap then it should be no problem.”
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
So instead of the second caster being told "your spell can't hurt it," the first caster gets to be told "your spell no longer hurts it."
That's virtually the exact same thing - your players are being denied their damage - and that's not fun. No player wants to hear that, ever. Just my opinion, of course, but it would certainly upset me as a player, and I can't imagine there are many it wouldn't.
They’re not being denied their damage, they’re being told that if they want it work they have to stand further apart. They can’t bottleneck the same area, they can cover different areas. They can hold one in reserve in case the first one falls, they can do all kinds of stuff, but they cannot stack effects just like they don’t grant double Advantage if they both cast Aura of Purity, and it won’t stack if they both cast Control Winds in the same area, and it won’t stack if they stand next to each other and both cast Crusader’s Mantle. They can certainly do it, it just won’t work if they stand next to each other.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
That wouldn't be so bad.
12 wizards casting fireball would be 96d6
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
36d8/turn for 10 turns= 360d8 damage.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Yes, and again, I agree that that does seem to be RAW (though what Sigred pointed out about spells differentiating Damage/Effect in the header now makes me doubt that a bit,) but it's also not fun. Standing back to back in a field of spiritual warriors as enemies beset you? Sounds fun. Flanking a boss enemy with a hoard of spirits? Sounds fun.
In Acq. Inc, one player's Spiritual Guardians were giant chickens, and another players' were warriors in gleaming plates. They role-played that the warriors rode the chickens, slashing at enemies while mounted as the chickens pecked on them. It was awesome.
Being told your spell won't do damage because someone else is doing it too? No, thank you.
Damage from the same spell not stacking may be RAW, but I really can't imagine it's RAI, and it's definitely not RAF. Not in any situation I can imagine, anyway.
Sometimes (de)buffs not stacking isn't Fun, too, but as I said it's much easier for players to accept that something is already de-buffed than it is for them to accept that they can't do damage.
"You can't slow it down, it's already slowed down." Alright, that's maybe a bit of a bummer, but understandable.
"You can't damage it with that, it's already taking damage from another person's." That's nonsense. (Yes yes, technically the first person's would stop dealing damage, but the sentiment is the same)
Now, I'm not trying to brow-beat you into agreeing with me ... at least not on purpose. You do seem to be correct, and if we're just trying to get to the bottom of RAW, we seem to have gotten there. I'm just vocalizing that I - and I imagine most players - would be against such a ruling, and trying to explain why I feel that way.
You continue to point at things which are clearly not damage as your supposed premise for damage not stacking. You are arguing from a false premise, and in effect displaying exactly why your position is not RAW.
Stop moving the goal post. The argument at hand here has been clearly answered that damage from a spell is not the spell's "effect", for the purposes of "what exactly does not 'stack'".
The only thing that is being discussed now is "but what about if the DM's bad?" Nobody cares. It's irrelevant.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I never moved any goalposts sport. My goal line has been the same since the beginning, they don’t stack. That’s my goal line.
Like I said before, you do it your way and I’ll do it my way.
I personally like having to overcome restrictions like that as a player. I feel it makes me have to think more tactically. For me, having it work that way when other spells don’t feels like it’s being handed to me, and I don’t find that fun. I’d rather have to think more tactically to figure out what will work. Having two hoards of spirit guardians chewing everything up like a meat grinder before it gets to me and without me having to do anything else feels boring to me.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
And in a lot of situations it could be boring. It's up to the DM to know his players' characters and what they are capable of, and plan accordingly in order to both challenge them and make sure they have fun. If the players can do this strategy, work around it; work with it. Don't deny it.
Unless you want to, of course. Just tooting my own horn over here.
That's your end result, not the goal post (the content of the argument necessitating a specific result). You are moving the goal post by ignoring logical premises which do not advance your end result, and substituting invalid premises to discredit opposing argument, while simultaneously demanding more proof. That is "moving the goal post", bud. If nothing else arises from this thread, I sincerely hope you can recognize that.
You make many great arguments on these forums; I know you can do better, and I apologize if I've come across as overly-antagonistic today. It's certainly not my intent.
The application of RAW is consistent. Whether you use it at your own table or not is up to you, but it is what it is.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
If you can point out one logical premise that I have ignored I will gladly address it.
I have substituted nothing. I have offered examples of other spells to which I apply the same interpretation of RAW.
I demand no proof.
My premise is that neither the damage, nor the speed reduction are the effects of the spell Spirit Guardians. The effects of the spell as that it brings those spirits into that area. Those spirits are the effect. Much like goodberry doesn’t heal, it creates berries. The effects of Spirit Guardians don’t stack because the spirits won’t both occupy the same AoE.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
You're being silly, nobody is going to stand still to take the full load of that.
12 fireballs will kill half the party on turn 1.
And SERIOUSLY the party would have to wantonly cooperate in order for 12 priests to get into range for that attack of yours.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
The sage advice compendium has an interesting bit on spells like Spirit Guardians. It doesn't address the topic per se, but it does give some more information to consider and I'll therefore add that bit here. You can find it by skipping to the Monsters section on here and then scrolling up (faster than spellcasting and scrolling down). Sorry, that I don't have it formatted the same. I'll try to edit it later.
Does moonbeam deal damage when you cast it? What about when its effect moves onto a creature?
The answer to both questions is no. Here’s some elaboration on that answer. Some spells and other game features create an area of effect that does something when a creature enters that area for the first time on a turn or when a creature starts its turn in that area. On the turn when you cast such a spell, you’re primarily setting up hurt for your foes on later turns. Moonbeam, for example, creates a beam of light that can damage a creature who enters the beam or who starts its turn in the beam.
Here are some spells with the same timing as moonbeam for their areas of effect: blade barrier cloudkill cloud of daggers Evard’s black tentacles forbiddance moonbeam sleet storm spirit guardians
Reading the description of any of those spells, you might wonder whether a creature is considered to be entering the spell’s area of effect if the area is created on the creature’s space. And if the area of effect can be moved — as the beam of moonbeam can — does moving it into a creature’s space count as the creature entering the area? Our design intent for such spells is this: a creature enters the area of effect when the creature passes into it. Creating the area of effect on the creature or moving it onto the creature doesn’t count. If the creature is still in the area at the start of its turn, it is subjected to the area’s effect. Entering such an area of effect needn’t be voluntary, unless a spell says otherwise. You can, therefore, hurl a creature into the area with a spell like thunderwave. We consider that clever play, not an imbalance, so hurl away! Keep in mind, however, that a creature is subjected to such an area of effect only the first time it enters the area on a turn. You can’t move a creature in and out of it to damage it over and over again on the same turn. In summary, a spell like moonbeam affects a creature when the creature passes into the spell’s area of effect and when the creature starts its turn there. You’re essentially creating a hazard on the battlefield.
I'm just going to do a general reminder (rather than editing/deleting half of the thread) - play nice. That goes for EVERYBODY.
If you can't speak to one another without arguing and being rude, we will need to shut this down.
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
This is incredibly irrelevant. Three Priests could be casting a different AoE each and be nuking the party as well. Everyone sees that as OK, right? So, triple Spirit Guardians isn't total amazeballs ridiculous anyway.
I can tell you from personal experience on my Cleric, when I do some kind of power play, something usually tries to make me stop. I get exactly one cast of Inflict Wounds before an NPC decides I'm the dangerous target. If you are an AoE monster, that's just cause to focus fire you and break your concentration(or kill you).
I love it how everyone’s answer is “Let the PCs do it so they feel cool and then have the bad guys nuke the crap out of them next round to break their concentration or kill them.”
I suppose that is one way to solve the problem, but I don’t see how that will make the players feel like their PCs are badasses. 🤷♂️
It just seems simpler to point to the RAW that says things like that don’t stack and let them know that their PCs would be aware of it so they can think of something different to do. That way, they actually get to use their spells for at least a few turns before the bad guys decide they have to deal with threat X.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Trying to get spellcasters to drop concentration is a very common thing, for both the PCs and NPCs to do. The concept isn't new to this discussion.
It's literally half the reason concentration is a thing; spells with concentration are powerful, with the drawback that they can - and probably will - be ended prematurely.
You said yourself, if PCs can do, NPCs can do it. My PCs always focus fire when a threat is overwhelmingly obvious. Guess what? So do the NPC's.
I feel like a badass because I took Warcaster.