Real buffs spells (not Faerie Fire) have a huge advantage over Debuffs because buffs do not get saves. Debuffs almost always get saves, making them potentially a wasted action. Usually this means a failed save debuff is much better for you than a buff spell, but is fairly unlikely.
Compare Haste Vs Slow. The effect is similar, but haste is one person with a penalty at the end while Slow is six people. All because Slow has a save every round to end it.
I agree with mog, a buff spell targets your friends, bless is a buff spell which I think of as the natural opposite of bane, haste is (usually) a buff spell (though you could cast it on an enemy and then immediately drop concentration), reduce enlarge can be either. Some damage spells also have a debuff, guiding bolt is one, shocking grasp and vicious mockery is another, depending in the circumstances sometimes the main purpose is damage sometimes the debuff.
Another way to look at it, is the rest of your spells and wich one compliments them better.
My Bard excels at charms, psychic damage and poison damage, wich in return makes him quite useless vs constructs and undead. To compensate for that I picked up Bane, a Charisma save, that Constructs and undead are specially vulnerable to.
For simplicity’s sake, I’d suggest considering anything that you cast on your teammates without needing an attack roll and they don’t save against a buff whereas anything you cast on enemies that entails them getting a saving throw to resist the effect or you needing an attack roll to land the spell a debuff.
in the general sense, it's almost always buff over debuff since your allies don't attempt saving throws against your spells. It's possible to completely waste a debuff if all your targets save.
Agree, a buff spell where the target is willing or a saving throw is not involved is almost always better than a spell where an unwilling target gets to make a saving throw (or where you have to make an attack roll).
It seems like Bane might get more useful at higher levels. I'm assuming that there would be a fair number of enemies/monsters that don't have high Charisma. So it seems like it might be good for making it more likely that an enemy fails an important save against a spells with like a DEX or WIS save. That's pretty situational and kind of expensive, in terms of resources, but perhaps worth considering. It seems like a lot of lower levels spells stop being useful, at some point, and it might make sense to choose different lower level spells, when you are at higher levels, than you did when you were lower level.
in the general sense, it's almost always buff over debuff since your allies don't attempt saving throws against your spells. It's possible to completely waste a debuff if all your targets save.
Agree, a buff spell where the target is willing or a saving throw is not involved is almost always better than a spell where an unwilling target gets to make a saving throw (or where you have to make an attack roll).
It seems like Bane might get more useful at higher levels. I'm assuming that there would be a fair number of enemies/monsters that don't have high Charisma. So it seems like it might be good for making it more likely that an enemy fails an important save against a spells with like a DEX or WIS save. That's pretty situational and kind of expensive, in terms of resources, but perhaps worth considering. It seems like a lot of lower levels spells stop being useful, at some point, and it might make sense to choose different lower level spells, when you are at higher levels, than you did when you were lower level.
Bane's issue at higher levels is that typically, a caster will have something better that they'd rather keep concentration on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Bane can be useful at lower levels when someone in the party can also hit them with mind sliver repeatedly to set the BB up for something else that someone in the party can lay on them that requires a save that you really want to go through. It takes some synergy and teamwork but it can be really effective.
Real buffs spells (not Faerie Fire) have a huge advantage over Debuffs because buffs do not get saves. Debuffs almost always get saves, making them potentially a wasted action. Usually this means a failed save debuff is much better for you than a buff spell, but is fairly unlikely.
Compare Haste Vs Slow. The effect is similar, but haste is one person with a penalty at the end while Slow is six people. All because Slow has a save every round to end it.
I agree with mog, a buff spell targets your friends, bless is a buff spell which I think of as the natural opposite of bane, haste is (usually) a buff spell (though you could cast it on an enemy and then immediately drop concentration), reduce enlarge can be either. Some damage spells also have a debuff, guiding bolt is one, shocking grasp and vicious mockery is another, depending in the circumstances sometimes the main purpose is damage sometimes the debuff.
Another way to look at it, is the rest of your spells and wich one compliments them better.
My Bard excels at charms, psychic damage and poison damage, wich in return makes him quite useless vs constructs and undead. To compensate for that I picked up Bane, a Charisma save, that Constructs and undead are specially vulnerable to.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]That feels right, thank you for that!
Agree, a buff spell where the target is willing or a saving throw is not involved is almost always better than a spell where an unwilling target gets to make a saving throw (or where you have to make an attack roll).
It seems like Bane might get more useful at higher levels. I'm assuming that there would be a fair number of enemies/monsters that don't have high Charisma. So it seems like it might be good for making it more likely that an enemy fails an important save against a spells with like a DEX or WIS save. That's pretty situational and kind of expensive, in terms of resources, but perhaps worth considering. It seems like a lot of lower levels spells stop being useful, at some point, and it might make sense to choose different lower level spells, when you are at higher levels, than you did when you were lower level.
Bless>Bane due to bane’s saving throws as stated above in earlier comments.
Bane's issue at higher levels is that typically, a caster will have something better that they'd rather keep concentration on.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Bane can be useful at lower levels when someone in the party can also hit them with mind sliver repeatedly to set the BB up for something else that someone in the party can lay on them that requires a save that you really want to go through. It takes some synergy and teamwork but it can be really effective.
Dips can be an exception I have a monk 19 cleric 1 that often concentrates on bless, * do tend to use bless ra5her than bane however.