I'm biased, as a really enjoy this spell quite a bit, but I'd like to talk about it with a glass half full perspective, and how it can be played and enjoyed as much as possible for everyone at the table.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
Yes! Minion fights for sure. Big single target fights also, though. Most of the creatures you get 4 or 2 of are large or larger and have enough hp to absorb two or three hits so they can be great tactical blockers and soak attack. Many of them have knock down, grapple, or restrain conditions along with their attacks as well. And just dodging or using the help action while being present is very strong mechanically. And that’s all just for combat!
The few things about ranger concentration spells that I have found is:
1. Conjure Animals is THE go to spell once you get it and its rarely "better" (in the pure damage mechanical sense) to use anything else. Granted if you want different flavor/fun there is other options but from an optimist standpoint its pretty much just this spell.
2. Concentration spells are rough if you are a melee ranger. Since you do not have prof. saves in CON nor do you particularly want to max CON (you still want DEX/WIS) then you are left with a fairly poor save and can lose the spell fairly easily especially at the level you get it where enemies can be putting out 30-40 damage a turn forcing higher concentration saves.
Beyond that I find the spell to be fun for the variety you can summon (Flying stuff is a blast) and its obviously very important if damage is important to you past 11th level.
Yeah concentration and melee don’t work well together. As a ranger even war caster would help but for a melee ranger it’s way down the line after at least 1 stat ASI and dual wielding and alert for feats. That means maybe L16 you pick it up - just before you retire.
Yeah concentration and melee don’t work well together. As a ranger even war caster would help but for a melee ranger it’s way down the line after at least 1 stat ASI and dual wielding and alert for feats. That means maybe L16 you pick it up - just before you retire.
Ranged has been a mixed bag for me as well....I still get targeted even in the back by things so my concentration is generally hard to keep up regardless as I do not have a lot of defensive options to prevent attacks like some other casters (Shield, higher AC, etc...)
Yes. Any caster casting a good spell that requires concentration has this as a concern for sure. Melee ranger would be wise to use conjure animals to close big gaps and do some of the work while on getting to the fight with other martials.
What enemy deals 40 damage on a single hit?
Just for comparison's sake, assuming a 60% chance to hit (+5 modifier and +4 proficiency bonus) with a 5% critical hit chance: A level 11 paladin using a longsword, dueling, one level 1 smite and one level 3 smite, over three rounds of combat deals an average of 84.6, or 28.2 per round damage. A level 11 PHB beast master with a blood hawk companion, longbow, archery, one conjure animals spell (8 blood hawks with pack tactics) that only lasts two rounds, using the blood hawk to only dodge and make an AoO (I assume about one AoO every three rounds) deals an average of 79.5 damage. That's pretty good considering that can be done from 120' away.
Yes. Any caster casting a good spell that requires concentration has this as a concern for sure. Melee ranger would be wise to use conjure animals to close big gaps and do some of the work while on getting to the fight with other martials.
What enemy deals 40 damage on a single hit?
Just for comparison's sake, assuming a 60% chance to hit (+5 modifier and +4 proficiency bonus) with a 5% critical hit chance: A level 11 paladin using a longsword, dueling, one level 1 smite and one level 3 smite, over three rounds of combat deals an average of 84.6, or 28.2 per round damage. A level 11 PHB beast master with a blood hawk companion, longbow, archery, one conjure animals spell (8 blood hawks with pack tactics) that only lasts two rounds, using the blood hawk to only dodge and make an AoO (I assume about one AoO every three rounds) deals an average of 79.5 damage. That's pretty good considering that can be done from 120' away.
40 damage in a round which is generally split. However that will translate to about 2-3 CON checks which means you have a pretty good chance of failure with just a +2.
Yep! Any spellcaster relying on a big powerful concentration spell (cleric, druid, wizard, ranger) is very incentivized to do something for their concentration, in addition to having a decent ability score. Lucky, resilient, warcaster, or multiclass.
The spell is tactically excellent for entering and exiting a dangerous situation with enemies. You can cast it in between or on top of the enemies while closing the distance with the rest of your party. You can also cast it and place your animals in between you and your enemies while attempting to escape or fall back.
Yeah concentration and melee don’t work well together. As a ranger even war caster would help but for a melee ranger it’s way down the line after at least 1 stat ASI and dual wielding and alert for feats. That means maybe L16 you pick it up - just before you retire.
Ranged has been a mixed bag for me as well....I still get targeted even in the back by things so my concentration is generally hard to keep up regardless as I do not have a lot of defensive options to prevent attacks like some other casters (Shield, higher AC, etc...)
every class has access to some quite powerful defensive options and almost every spellcasting class has to solve the concentration issue. Dodge and hide. Not to mention rangers get access to alot of equipment options for a reason. They should be switching quite frequently (out of combat mostly but sometimes in combat.) armor, shields and weapons can and should be switched out based on the situation at hand.
Some times using your whole action to dodge or hide is the better route to go on a turn. It can preserve concentration and allow a ranger maintain the combat advantage. Good rangers are the best at "wars of attrition."
In one low level campain, I took a whole action to drop a shield and most of the party survived because it allowed me to switch to a longbow (2 attacks) instead of a crossbow(3 attack with CBE). At first it sounds ridiculous that with lower ac and lower damage the extra range allowed me to survive but it did. It allowed affect the whole battlefield and continue maintaining the advantage through smart and careful target/turn planning.
How dose this relate to conjure animals? there is more than one way to solve problems when you have lots of tools at your belt. conjure animals allows damage and damage mitigation and tactical control of the field. When a PC only focuses on one, the tunnel vison gets them blind sided.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
If you're willing to homebrew, I've long thought it made sense to rebalance the spell using the DMG's guidelines for experience budgets - the spell's implied CR equivalencies don't match the DMG's, for no apparent reason.
Here are Conjure Animals's recommended options, in terms of experience budget:
8x1/4: 1000
4x1/2: 800
2x1: 600
1x2: 450
You could summon a single CR 3 beast and only be at 700 for budget; a single CR 4 beast would be 1100, which is slightly over 1000, but not by a lot. Either option would encourage a single beast more than multiple weaker ones, and especially if you go with the CR 3 beast, the DMG asserts you haven't made the spell any more powerful.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
If you're willing to homebrew, I've long thought it made sense to rebalance the spell using the DMG's guidelines for experience budgets - the spell's implied CR equivalencies don't match the DMG's, for no apparent reason.
Here are Conjure Animals's recommended options, in terms of experience budget:
8x1/4: 1000
4x1/2: 800
2x1: 600
1x2: 450
You could summon a single CR 3 beast and only be at 700 for budget; a single CR 4 beast would be 1100, which is slightly over 1000, but not by a lot. Either option would encourage a single beast more than multiple weaker ones, and especially if you go with the CR 3 beast, the DMG asserts you haven't made the spell any more powerful.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
If you're willing to homebrew, I've long thought it made sense to rebalance the spell using the DMG's guidelines for experience budgets - the spell's implied CR equivalencies don't match the DMG's, for no apparent reason.
Here are Conjure Animals's recommended options, in terms of experience budget:
8x1/4: 1000
4x1/2: 800
2x1: 600
1x2: 450
You could summon a single CR 3 beast and only be at 700 for budget; a single CR 4 beast would be 1100, which is slightly over 1000, but not by a lot. Either option would encourage a single beast more than multiple weaker ones, and especially if you go with the CR 3 beast, the DMG asserts you haven't made the spell any more powerful.
Don't forget about the group multiplier(s).
I didn't, which is how I got those numbers. That's why 8x1/4 is 1000, not 400.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
If you're willing to homebrew, I've long thought it made sense to rebalance the spell using the DMG's guidelines for experience budgets - the spell's implied CR equivalencies don't match the DMG's, for no apparent reason.
Here are Conjure Animals's recommended options, in terms of experience budget:
8x1/4: 1000
4x1/2: 800
2x1: 600
1x2: 450
You could summon a single CR 3 beast and only be at 700 for budget; a single CR 4 beast would be 1100, which is slightly over 1000, but not by a lot. Either option would encourage a single beast more than multiple weaker ones, and especially if you go with the CR 3 beast, the DMG asserts you haven't made the spell any more powerful.
Don't forget about the group multiplier(s).
I didn't, which is how I got those numbers. That's why 8x1/4 is 1000, not 400.
Another of my favorite features of this spell is it only requires V and S spell components. So you can be sleeping naked in the woods, or lock in a prison cell, and unleash this spell to fight, defend, protect, distract, or whatever you need in the moment.
How about the whole bit about player choosing the creatures that show up or not? What have been each of your experience as a player or DM with letting the player choose?
I have never not been able to choose as a player (several reason for this possibly) and I always let the player choose as a DM (other than pixie).
How about the whole bit about player choosing the creatures that show up or not? What have been each of your experience as a player or DM with letting the player choose?
I have never not been able to choose as a player (several reason for this possibly) and I always let the player choose as a DM (other than pixie).
Even if the DM is choosing, there are options at each level that provide some means of one of the best benefits of the spell, party support.
Everyone knows that single target damage calculations are sexy as hell, but rangers are great as a support character in a party ( I won't even bring up the beast masters here). 8 wolves or elk are great in a spreadsheet, but look at the beast choices that add the restrained condition. THOSE are the little animals that would be great to conjure. Most of these don't do the most damage themselves directly, but they do offer your fellow party members the chance to go hog wild on one or likely more baddies. Frogs, toads, spiders, snakes, octopi, and crocodiles all apply the restrained condition WHILE dealing damage!
There is also knockdown effects, which are good for the same reason as restrained, just a shorter duration and easier to overcome. Also look for the animals with the pack tactics feature, conditional or otherwise. Those will be the heavy hitters for direct damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd like to talk about the spell Conjure Animals.
I'm biased, as a really enjoy this spell quite a bit, but I'd like to talk about it with a glass half full perspective, and how it can be played and enjoyed as much as possible for everyone at the table.
A point I’d like to share about the spell is that it’s “effectiveness“ can be achieved very easily my only conjuring 4 or 2 animals, snd sometimes even just 1. I realize that 8 animals is the option that mathematically superior for damage output, but that is way more than is necessary to make the spell worthwhile from a damage perspective. Also, 4 or 2 large or larger animals placed on the battlefield also easily supplies all of the spells other benefits, including providing cover, soaking enemy attacks, using the help action, grappling enemies, knocking down enemies, etc.
One common criticism of the spell this how it slows down the game so much. (Which is why Tasha’s is so entertaining to me as now every spellcasting class you can add more actions, and extra time, to the battlefield via additional creatures.) In my experience the slowing down the game has almost 100% to do with the player using the spell, and not the spell itself. But, using a few less the beasts would help no matter what the cost. Also, try using average damage for the beasts. Rolling multiple d20s are infinitely much easier and quicker than rolling multiple instances of damage dice. The damage dice are small numbers anyway, with a little variation.
I’ve never actually used it but I can see the utility, especially if fighting larger groups of minions.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Yes! Minion fights for sure. Big single target fights also, though. Most of the creatures you get 4 or 2 of are large or larger and have enough hp to absorb two or three hits so they can be great tactical blockers and soak attack. Many of them have knock down, grapple, or restrain conditions along with their attacks as well. And just dodging or using the help action while being present is very strong mechanically. And that’s all just for combat!
The few things about ranger concentration spells that I have found is:
1. Conjure Animals is THE go to spell once you get it and its rarely "better" (in the pure damage mechanical sense) to use anything else. Granted if you want different flavor/fun there is other options but from an optimist standpoint its pretty much just this spell.
2. Concentration spells are rough if you are a melee ranger. Since you do not have prof. saves in CON nor do you particularly want to max CON (you still want DEX/WIS) then you are left with a fairly poor save and can lose the spell fairly easily especially at the level you get it where enemies can be putting out 30-40 damage a turn forcing higher concentration saves.
Beyond that I find the spell to be fun for the variety you can summon (Flying stuff is a blast) and its obviously very important if damage is important to you past 11th level.
Yeah concentration and melee don’t work well together. As a ranger even war caster would help but for a melee ranger it’s way down the line after at least 1 stat ASI and dual wielding and alert for feats. That means maybe L16 you pick it up - just before you retire.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Ranged has been a mixed bag for me as well....I still get targeted even in the back by things so my concentration is generally hard to keep up regardless as I do not have a lot of defensive options to prevent attacks like some other casters (Shield, higher AC, etc...)
Yes. Any caster casting a good spell that requires concentration has this as a concern for sure. Melee ranger would be wise to use conjure animals to close big gaps and do some of the work while on getting to the fight with other martials.
What enemy deals 40 damage on a single hit?
Just for comparison's sake, assuming a 60% chance to hit (+5 modifier and +4 proficiency bonus) with a 5% critical hit chance: A level 11 paladin using a longsword, dueling, one level 1 smite and one level 3 smite, over three rounds of combat deals an average of 84.6, or 28.2 per round damage. A level 11 PHB beast master with a blood hawk companion, longbow, archery, one conjure animals spell (8 blood hawks with pack tactics) that only lasts two rounds, using the blood hawk to only dodge and make an AoO (I assume about one AoO every three rounds) deals an average of 79.5 damage. That's pretty good considering that can be done from 120' away.
40 damage in a round which is generally split. However that will translate to about 2-3 CON checks which means you have a pretty good chance of failure with just a +2.
I see what you’re saying now.
Yep! Any spellcaster relying on a big powerful concentration spell (cleric, druid, wizard, ranger) is very incentivized to do something for their concentration, in addition to having a decent ability score. Lucky, resilient, warcaster, or multiclass.
The spell is tactically excellent for entering and exiting a dangerous situation with enemies. You can cast it in between or on top of the enemies while closing the distance with the rest of your party. You can also cast it and place your animals in between you and your enemies while attempting to escape or fall back.
every class has access to some quite powerful defensive options and almost every spellcasting class has to solve the concentration issue. Dodge and hide. Not to mention rangers get access to alot of equipment options for a reason. They should be switching quite frequently (out of combat mostly but sometimes in combat.) armor, shields and weapons can and should be switched out based on the situation at hand.
Some times using your whole action to dodge or hide is the better route to go on a turn. It can preserve concentration and allow a ranger maintain the combat advantage. Good rangers are the best at "wars of attrition."
In one low level campain, I took a whole action to drop a shield and most of the party survived because it allowed me to switch to a longbow (2 attacks) instead of a crossbow(3 attack with CBE). At first it sounds ridiculous that with lower ac and lower damage the extra range allowed me to survive but it did. It allowed affect the whole battlefield and continue maintaining the advantage through smart and careful target/turn planning.
How dose this relate to conjure animals? there is more than one way to solve problems when you have lots of tools at your belt. conjure animals allows damage and damage mitigation and tactical control of the field. When a PC only focuses on one, the tunnel vison gets them blind sided.
If you're willing to homebrew, I've long thought it made sense to rebalance the spell using the DMG's guidelines for experience budgets - the spell's implied CR equivalencies don't match the DMG's, for no apparent reason.
Here are Conjure Animals's recommended options, in terms of experience budget:
You could summon a single CR 3 beast and only be at 700 for budget; a single CR 4 beast would be 1100, which is slightly over 1000, but not by a lot. Either option would encourage a single beast more than multiple weaker ones, and especially if you go with the CR 3 beast, the DMG asserts you haven't made the spell any more powerful.
Don't forget about the group multiplier(s).
I didn't, which is how I got those numbers. That's why 8x1/4 is 1000, not 400.
Nice. Well done.
Another of my favorite features of this spell is it only requires V and S spell components. So you can be sleeping naked in the woods, or lock in a prison cell, and unleash this spell to fight, defend, protect, distract, or whatever you need in the moment.
As someone who recently started an adventure in a cell that is a very important adder.
How about the whole bit about player choosing the creatures that show up or not? What have been each of your experience as a player or DM with letting the player choose?
I have never not been able to choose as a player (several reason for this possibly) and I always let the player choose as a DM (other than pixie).
Even if the DM is choosing, there are options at each level that provide some means of one of the best benefits of the spell, party support.
Everyone knows that single target damage calculations are sexy as hell, but rangers are great as a support character in a party ( I won't even bring up the beast masters here). 8 wolves or elk are great in a spreadsheet, but look at the beast choices that add the restrained condition. THOSE are the little animals that would be great to conjure. Most of these don't do the most damage themselves directly, but they do offer your fellow party members the chance to go hog wild on one or likely more baddies. Frogs, toads, spiders, snakes, octopi, and crocodiles all apply the restrained condition WHILE dealing damage!
There is also knockdown effects, which are good for the same reason as restrained, just a shorter duration and easier to overcome. Also look for the animals with the pack tactics feature, conditional or otherwise. Those will be the heavy hitters for direct damage.