All enchantment spells need very clear definitions. Can the creature or outside observer identify that you're casting a spell like suggestion or enthrall? Does a creature realize its behavior is affected by a spell during its duration? Does it realize it was under effect of a spell after it fades (some spells specify it, some don't)? I love screwing with NPCs' minds, but there's quite a lot of grey areas right now.
Also, saving throws. The spells lack a clear principle of which effect affects what saving throws. Currently, there's 14 spells with charisma saving throws, 8 spells with intelligence saving throws, and 48 spells with wisdom saving throws. And right now it seems that they're distributed arbitrarily. There needs to be a clear principle. For example, charisma is your willpower and resolve, it protects against fear, wisdom is your awareness and intuition, it protects against charm, and intelligence is your analytic ability, it helps you discern illusions, both internal and external.
Illusion spells of the variety that includes major image, mirage arcane, and the like arguably have it even worse because they're so open-ended in how you can use them that you're basically at the mercy of the DM in terms of how good they can be. And I've heard stories of DMs being antagonistic towards illusions, even in ways that don't make sense (such as creatures that have no way of immediately seeing through them automatically ignoring them).
Oh yeah - the Conjure spells do need to be written differently. The Summon spells work much better, but if we want the "summon group of random monsters" I think it should actually be kinda' random (like it was in older editions like 3e or 2e). But I'm a sucker for random.
While they work better I think the summon spells are too good. Look at summon fey one of the weaker options, at its base level its 1 attack that does 2d6+6 damage a round, up cast to 4 its 2 attacks and 1 more damage. If your fighter is not power attacking he may not be doing that. And in a sense its also adding 30 temp hit points for the party. Yeah area of effects it doesn't do that but 30 hit points AC 15 vs most attacks at those levels its going to usually soak 30 HP meant for someone else. Either one of those options would look good as a spell, the damage would look good for a even higher level spell. And then there are additional perks from the summon fey ability, charm, darkness or advantage not amazing but its icing on a already too big cake.
Summon Fey is a 3rd-level spell, in the same class of spells as fireball, hypnotic pattern, and conjure animals, all three of which it shares one or more spell lists with, and all of which can pretty much decide encounters on their own when you first get them.
And the only one of those that doesn't need to be toned down is fireball.
All I'm saying is that it makes sense these spells have the power levels they do as it currently stands, because they kinda have to compete with each other. Maybe in One D&D, these spells might be different in how powerful they are.
Maybe, but I think the difference is with summon X its plopping a mini fighter on the field and if they outclass the fighter that's a problem. Whether other powerful spells exist does not matter for that spell, it should still be balanced against what a 3rd level spell should do not what some of the best do, and for every hypnotic patter on the 3rd level list there are 3 melfs minute meteors.
I think you're looking about this the wrong way. The summon X spells don't "outclass the fighter". In a combat situation, it's basically just an extra party member to help in combat, and it's temporary so it's not like planar ally where it can potentially stick around for a long time. The fighter or other martial character is still participating, but now you have additional help.
In other words, I have never encountered a situation where the martials in the party feel "useless" just because one of these summons is on board. All that happens is the action economy gets turned further in the party's favour.
Yes its a extra party member for up to a hour, which is probably multiple encounters on a lot of days. A spell up cast to 4th level should not be providing a extra party member for that long. The design of one creature, requires concentration is better but it doesn't even require a bonus action to command it. For us in play while the martials have not felt useless, but they didn't feel like they contributed nearly as much as the spellcasters whenever this spell was used.
All enchantment spells need very clear definitions. Can the creature or outside observer identify that you're casting a spell like suggestion or enthrall? Does a creature realize its behavior is affected by a spell during its duration? Does it realize it was under effect of a spell after it fades (some spells specify it, some don't)? I love screwing with NPCs' minds, but there's quite a lot of grey areas right now.
Also, saving throws. The spells lack a clear principle of which effect affects what saving throws. Currently, there's 14 spells with charisma saving throws, 8 spells with intelligence saving throws, and 48 spells with wisdom saving throws. And right now it seems that they're distributed arbitrarily. There needs to be a clear principle. For example, charisma is your willpower and resolve, it protects against fear, wisdom is your awareness and intuition, it protects against charm, and intelligence is your analytic ability, it helps you discern illusions, both internal and external.
Illusion spells of the variety that includes major image, mirage arcane, and the like arguably have it even worse because they're so open-ended in how you can use them that you're basically at the mercy of the DM in terms of how good they can be. And I've heard stories of DMs being antagonistic towards illusions, even in ways that don't make sense (such as creatures that have no way of immediately seeing through them automatically ignoring them).
Both of these posts make good points. The game definitely needs clearer definitions and guidelines on this. It makes it much easier to run a game when you have them.
Oh yeah - the Conjure spells do need to be written differently. The Summon spells work much better, but if we want the "summon group of random monsters" I think it should actually be kinda' random (like it was in older editions like 3e or 2e). But I'm a sucker for random.
While they work better I think the summon spells are too good. Look at summon fey one of the weaker options, at its base level its 1 attack that does 2d6+6 damage a round, up cast to 4 its 2 attacks and 1 more damage. If your fighter is not power attacking he may not be doing that. And in a sense its also adding 30 temp hit points for the party. Yeah area of effects it doesn't do that but 30 hit points AC 15 vs most attacks at those levels its going to usually soak 30 HP meant for someone else. Either one of those options would look good as a spell, the damage would look good for a even higher level spell. And then there are additional perks from the summon fey ability, charm, darkness or advantage not amazing but its icing on a already too big cake.
Summon Fey is a 3rd-level spell, in the same class of spells as fireball, hypnotic pattern, and conjure animals, all three of which it shares one or more spell lists with, and all of which can pretty much decide encounters on their own when you first get them.
And the only one of those that doesn't need to be toned down is fireball.
All I'm saying is that it makes sense these spells have the power levels they do as it currently stands, because they kinda have to compete with each other. Maybe in One D&D, these spells might be different in how powerful they are.
Maybe, but I think the difference is with summon X its plopping a mini fighter on the field and if they outclass the fighter that's a problem. Whether other powerful spells exist does not matter for that spell, it should still be balanced against what a 3rd level spell should do not what some of the best do, and for every hypnotic patter on the 3rd level list there are 3 melfs minute meteors.
I think you're looking about this the wrong way. The summon X spells don't "outclass the fighter". In a combat situation, it's basically just an extra party member to help in combat, and it's temporary so it's not like planar ally where it can potentially stick around for a long time. The fighter or other martial character is still participating, but now you have additional help.
In other words, I have never encountered a situation where the martials in the party feel "useless" just because one of these summons is on board. All that happens is the action economy gets turned further in the party's favour.
Yes its a extra party member for up to a hour, which is probably multiple encounters on a lot of days. A spell up cast to 4th level should not be providing a extra party member for that long. The design of one creature, requires concentration is better but it doesn't even require a bonus action to command it. For us in play while the martials have not felt useless, but they didn't feel like they contributed nearly as much as the spellcasters whenever this spell was used.
Out of curiosity, since I mentioned the spell, how would you handle planar ally as a spell?
It's also really open-ended, and the DM can provide pretty much whatever they feel like. And there is no actual time limit on the spell itself; just whatever the time limit the DM wants the new supernatural party member to have. It does give suggestions about payment, but the DM doesn't have to actually follow them.
As such, this 6th-level spell can be one of the best spells you ever cast, or one of the worst, or somewhere in between. And that is entirely dependent on how generous the DM is.
Out of curiosity, since I mentioned the spell, how would you handle planar ally as a spell?
It's also really open-ended, and the DM can provide pretty much whatever they feel like. And there is no actual time limit on the spell itself; just whatever the time limit the DM wants the new supernatural party member to have. It does give suggestions about payment, but the DM doesn't have to actually follow them.
As such, this 6th-level spell can be one of the best spells you ever cast, or one of the worst, or somewhere in between. And that is entirely dependent on how generous the DM is.
I have lucked out and have not yet encountered it in play yet. I'm not a fan of the open ended spells as I think they put too much of the work load on the GM which is usually me. My best guess is I'd focus more on the limits of what they would do, and it obviously depends on what the player asks for, but I'd look at the wording and limit it from there not like a vindictive genie wish type thing but try to have them do very little if anything but come through in a clutch moment kind of like a contingency. Or the cost might be a quest that takes as much in resources/time for the party to complete as is gained from the "ally". And man don't get me started on planar binding and up casting that, which thankfully I also have yet to deal with, some of the things with that i have seen people suggest they can do I wonder on the how but even non absurd options for a year is just crazy. That is one area I kind of liked 4e, things like if they exist that would be a ritual which any player could learn.
Out of curiosity, since I mentioned the spell, how would you handle planar ally as a spell?
It's also really open-ended, and the DM can provide pretty much whatever they feel like. And there is no actual time limit on the spell itself; just whatever the time limit the DM wants the new supernatural party member to have. It does give suggestions about payment, but the DM doesn't have to actually follow them.
As such, this 6th-level spell can be one of the best spells you ever cast, or one of the worst, or somewhere in between. And that is entirely dependent on how generous the DM is.
I have lucked out and have not yet encountered it in play yet. I'm not a fan of the open ended spells as I think they put too much of the work load on the GM which is usually me. My best guess is I'd focus more on the limits of what they would do, and it obviously depends on what the player asks for, but I'd look at the wording and limit it from there not like a vindictive genie wish type thing but try to have them do very little if anything but come through in a clutch moment kind of like a contingency. Or the cost might be a quest that takes as much in resources/time for the party to complete as is gained from the "ally". And man don't get me started on planar binding and up casting that, which thankfully I also have yet to deal with, some of the things with that i have seen people suggest they can do I wonder on the how but even non absurd options for a year is just crazy. That is one area I kind of liked 4e, things like if they exist that would be a ritual which any player could learn.
To be fair, planar binding needs 1,000 gp per casting, so it isn't ridiculously cheap. And the most effective way to use it on your own is to put it in a glyph of warding and set the glyph to cast it on the creature as soon as it appears in the inverted magic circle you'll also cast for security reasons. And the reason you'd need to do this if you're the only one who can summon the creature and the only one who can cast this spell, is because planar binding takes 1 hour to cast and most summoning spells in 5e are concentration. And doing it this way prevents you from making the binding last a year because you can't cast a 9th level glyph of warding and also cast 9th level planar binding at the same time outside very rare circumstances.
That being said, if you're a wizard and can cast 9th level spells, you're probably better off just using wish to straight up duplicate planar binding. Or you use a simulacrum (made with the actual spell) to cast the spell at 9th level on your soon-to-be minion for you.
Clarify the spell description in terms of the exact shape of the hut (see next point) and what can and cannot pass through (ranged weapons? spells? dragon breath?)
Clarify the spell description in terms of the exact shape of the hut (see next point) and what can and cannot pass through (ranged weapons? spells? dragon breath?)
I'm fine with removing the ritual tag, maybe even the cost, but it should still have a floor and it does not need hitpoints and AC. Things should not be able to burrow their way into it and it should not by physically breakable; that defeats the purpose of the spell to ensure a safe rest. An easy counter to it already exists in surrounding them while they rest, and another counter exists in dispel magic.
Clarify the spell description in terms of the exact shape of the hut (see next point) and what can and cannot pass through (ranged weapons? spells? dragon breath?)
I'm fine with removing the ritual tag, maybe even the cost, but it should still have a floor and it does not need hitpoints and AC. Things should not be able to burrow their way into it and it should not by physically breakable; that defeats the purpose of the spell to ensure a safe rest. An easy counter to it already exists in surrounding them while they rest, and another counter exists in dispel magic.
I think the problem is it trivializes a core story/risk point in the game the camping part. Yeah GMs can work around it, but for the most part it just guarantees a safe rest and a DM will fix it is rarely a good choice. Removing the ritual tag might be enough though, one they have to prep it and they actually have to have saved their 3rd level spell slot which at the lower levels where you just gained it is a rough choice many days.
well I'd also explain clearly how it works as it is pretty dang stupid as is where spells and physical object can't pass through, but effects do so a dragon breath blows right through it, i mean if its explicit sure I can shrug and say magic is weird but it requiring the level of rules mastery to know that is just bad design.
If one is planning to nerf a spell to the point where it no longer has any real use (such as making Tiny Hut fragile, when the whole point of it is to give the party a mini safe space for a short or long rest), then I'd argue that's just a softer version of banning it outright.
Goodberry trivializes survival scenarios. A simple solution would be to make it so that it takes a day for the goodberry to grow and ripen. That way, you can stay alive if you're stranded, but you won't be able to forgo foraging for food during travel.
Also to make it easier to show any lurkers in this thread what a spell does immediately while also providing a link for it, it helps to put the name of the spell between spell tags, as shown below.
Goodberry trivializes survival scenarios. A simple solution would be to make it so that it takes a day for the goodberry to grow and ripen. That way, you can stay alive if you're stranded, but you won't be able to forgo foraging for food during travel.
edit: thanks, Crawling_Chaos)
Just remove the food portion of it. The 1HP is why people usually take the spell, survival campaigns aren't the norm and the spell is considered good in campaigns where that isn't a theme even without power builds that buff it.
Goodberry trivializes survival scenarios. A simple solution would be to make it so that it takes a day for the goodberry to grow and ripen. That way, you can stay alive if you're stranded, but you won't be able to forgo foraging for food during travel.
edit: thanks, Crawling_Chaos)
Just remove the food portion of it. The 1HP is why people usually take the spell, survival campaigns aren't the norm and the spell is considered good in campaigns where that isn't a theme even without power builds that buff it.
What happens if you take the ten berries and make them into juice, and then drink the berry juice? Does it restore 10 hit points or fewer, or do the berries lose their magic upon being juiced?
Goodberry trivializes survival scenarios. A simple solution would be to make it so that it takes a day for the goodberry to grow and ripen. That way, you can stay alive if you're stranded, but you won't be able to forgo foraging for food during travel.
edit: thanks, Crawling_Chaos)
Just remove the food portion of it. The 1HP is why people usually take the spell, survival campaigns aren't the norm and the spell is considered good in campaigns where that isn't a theme even without power builds that buff it.
What happens if you take the ten berries and make them into juice, and then drink the berry juice? Does it restore 10 hit points or fewer, or do the berries lose their magic upon being juiced?
Things like that likely should be clarified, but as it takes a action to eat a berry I'd say you can only drink enough juice in a action to restore 1hp. These must be really big berries to not be able to toss a handful in your mouth and eat them all at once.
Clarify the spell description in terms of the exact shape of the hut (see next point) and what can and cannot pass through (ranged weapons? spells? dragon breath?)
I'm fine with removing the ritual tag, maybe even the cost, but it should still have a floor and it does not need hitpoints and AC. Things should not be able to burrow their way into it and it should not by physically breakable; that defeats the purpose of the spell to ensure a safe rest. An easy counter to it already exists in surrounding them while they rest, and another counter exists in dispel magic.
I think the problem is it trivializes a core story/risk point in the game the camping part. Yeah GMs can work around it, but for the most part it just guarantees a safe rest and a DM will fix it is rarely a good choice. Removing the ritual tag might be enough though, one they have to prep it and they actually have to have saved their 3rd level spell slot which at the lower levels where you just gained it is a rough choice many days.
well I'd also explain clearly how it works as it is pretty dang stupid as is where spells and physical object can't pass through, but effects do so a dragon breath blows right through it, i mean if its explicit sure I can shrug and say magic is weird but it requiring the level of rules mastery to know that is just bad design.
It's a third level spell, it should be able to trivialize the camping part as in T2 a third level spell slot is a pretty significant resource. The only issue with it right now is being able to cast it as a ritual which removes the resource cost; however it is quite balanced if it requires you to use/save a third level spell slot for it.
Clarify the spell description in terms of the exact shape of the hut (see next point) and what can and cannot pass through (ranged weapons? spells? dragon breath?)
I'm fine with removing the ritual tag, maybe even the cost, but it should still have a floor and it does not need hitpoints and AC. Things should not be able to burrow their way into it and it should not by physically breakable; that defeats the purpose of the spell to ensure a safe rest. An easy counter to it already exists in surrounding them while they rest, and another counter exists in dispel magic.
Well, I did say possibly regarding the AC and hit points!
I definitely think it needs to have the ritual tag removed and have a recurring (i.e., not one time) cost. If we're going to retain the relative invulnerability (i.e., a floor, not having AC or hit points), I would make it clear nothing can pass into or out of the hut; right now, as worded, if arrows or other ammunition are in the dome when it's created, then they can pass through it. This IS overpowered for a third level spell, as currently written.
Spell components need streamlining IMO. The game's been out for years, and people are still asking whether they need a free hand, or they can do the somatic component with a focus. Meanwhile, who even cares about components like wings of a dragonfly and frozen frog eyelids? I believe it would be better if spells would clearly indicate whether they need a free hand (hand icon), arcane/divine/primal focus (wand icon), or a verbal component (music note icon), next to icons of concentration and rituals. These things should be clearly visible right in the spell list next to the spell's name to avoid confusion, so that it's clear that, for example, war caster feat essentially removes hand icon from all your spells.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Illusion spells of the variety that includes major image, mirage arcane, and the like arguably have it even worse because they're so open-ended in how you can use them that you're basically at the mercy of the DM in terms of how good they can be. And I've heard stories of DMs being antagonistic towards illusions, even in ways that don't make sense (such as creatures that have no way of immediately seeing through them automatically ignoring them).
Yes its a extra party member for up to a hour, which is probably multiple encounters on a lot of days. A spell up cast to 4th level should not be providing a extra party member for that long. The design of one creature, requires concentration is better but it doesn't even require a bonus action to command it. For us in play while the martials have not felt useless, but they didn't feel like they contributed nearly as much as the spellcasters whenever this spell was used.
Both of these posts make good points. The game definitely needs clearer definitions and guidelines on this. It makes it much easier to run a game when you have them.
Out of curiosity, since I mentioned the spell, how would you handle planar ally as a spell?
It's also really open-ended, and the DM can provide pretty much whatever they feel like. And there is no actual time limit on the spell itself; just whatever the time limit the DM wants the new supernatural party member to have. It does give suggestions about payment, but the DM doesn't have to actually follow them.
As such, this 6th-level spell can be one of the best spells you ever cast, or one of the worst, or somewhere in between. And that is entirely dependent on how generous the DM is.
I have lucked out and have not yet encountered it in play yet. I'm not a fan of the open ended spells as I think they put too much of the work load on the GM which is usually me. My best guess is I'd focus more on the limits of what they would do, and it obviously depends on what the player asks for, but I'd look at the wording and limit it from there not like a vindictive genie wish type thing but try to have them do very little if anything but come through in a clutch moment kind of like a contingency. Or the cost might be a quest that takes as much in resources/time for the party to complete as is gained from the "ally". And man don't get me started on planar binding and up casting that, which thankfully I also have yet to deal with, some of the things with that i have seen people suggest they can do I wonder on the how but even non absurd options for a year is just crazy. That is one area I kind of liked 4e, things like if they exist that would be a ritual which any player could learn.
To be fair, planar binding needs 1,000 gp per casting, so it isn't ridiculously cheap. And the most effective way to use it on your own is to put it in a glyph of warding and set the glyph to cast it on the creature as soon as it appears in the inverted magic circle you'll also cast for security reasons. And the reason you'd need to do this if you're the only one who can summon the creature and the only one who can cast this spell, is because planar binding takes 1 hour to cast and most summoning spells in 5e are concentration. And doing it this way prevents you from making the binding last a year because you can't cast a 9th level glyph of warding and also cast 9th level planar binding at the same time outside very rare circumstances.
That being said, if you're a wizard and can cast 9th level spells, you're probably better off just using wish to straight up duplicate planar binding. Or you use a simulacrum (made with the actual spell) to cast the spell at 9th level on your soon-to-be minion for you.
leomund's tiny hut:
It's a minor thing, but it bugs me that leomund's tiny hut is evocation instead of conjuration.
I'm fine with removing the ritual tag, maybe even the cost, but it should still have a floor and it does not need hitpoints and AC. Things should not be able to burrow their way into it and it should not by physically breakable; that defeats the purpose of the spell to ensure a safe rest. An easy counter to it already exists in surrounding them while they rest, and another counter exists in dispel magic.
I think the problem is it trivializes a core story/risk point in the game the camping part. Yeah GMs can work around it, but for the most part it just guarantees a safe rest and a DM will fix it is rarely a good choice. Removing the ritual tag might be enough though, one they have to prep it and they actually have to have saved their 3rd level spell slot which at the lower levels where you just gained it is a rough choice many days.
well I'd also explain clearly how it works as it is pretty dang stupid as is where spells and physical object can't pass through, but effects do so a dragon breath blows right through it, i mean if its explicit sure I can shrug and say magic is weird but it requiring the level of rules mastery to know that is just bad design.
If one is planning to nerf a spell to the point where it no longer has any real use (such as making Tiny Hut fragile, when the whole point of it is to give the party a mini safe space for a short or long rest), then I'd argue that's just a softer version of banning it outright.
Goodberry trivializes survival scenarios. A simple solution would be to make it so that it takes a day for the goodberry to grow and ripen. That way, you can stay alive if you're stranded, but you won't be able to forgo foraging for food during travel.
edit: thanks, Crawling_Chaos)
Also to make it easier to show any lurkers in this thread what a spell does immediately while also providing a link for it, it helps to put the name of the spell between spell tags, as shown below.
[spell]
[/spell]
Just remove the food portion of it. The 1HP is why people usually take the spell, survival campaigns aren't the norm and the spell is considered good in campaigns where that isn't a theme even without power builds that buff it.
What happens if you take the ten berries and make them into juice, and then drink the berry juice? Does it restore 10 hit points or fewer, or do the berries lose their magic upon being juiced?
Things like that likely should be clarified, but as it takes a action to eat a berry I'd say you can only drink enough juice in a action to restore 1hp. These must be really big berries to not be able to toss a handful in your mouth and eat them all at once.
It's a third level spell, it should be able to trivialize the camping part as in T2 a third level spell slot is a pretty significant resource. The only issue with it right now is being able to cast it as a ritual which removes the resource cost; however it is quite balanced if it requires you to use/save a third level spell slot for it.
Well, I did say possibly regarding the AC and hit points!
I definitely think it needs to have the ritual tag removed and have a recurring (i.e., not one time) cost. If we're going to retain the relative invulnerability (i.e., a floor, not having AC or hit points), I would make it clear nothing can pass into or out of the hut; right now, as worded, if arrows or other ammunition are in the dome when it's created, then they can pass through it. This IS overpowered for a third level spell, as currently written.
What are the odds that wish would stay exactly the same in One D&D?
Spell components need streamlining IMO. The game's been out for years, and people are still asking whether they need a free hand, or they can do the somatic component with a focus. Meanwhile, who even cares about components like wings of a dragonfly and frozen frog eyelids? I believe it would be better if spells would clearly indicate whether they need a free hand (hand icon), arcane/divine/primal focus (wand icon), or a verbal component (music note icon), next to icons of concentration and rituals. These things should be clearly visible right in the spell list next to the spell's name to avoid confusion, so that it's clear that, for example, war caster feat essentially removes hand icon from all your spells.