This is WAY better than the 2012 version

Great change.

A bit of a give-and-take, but ultimately much more useful here and now, when it acutally matters for most players. If you debuff their CON saves, it will be even harder to shake off the spell.
I love this.

idk the older version had a lot more flavor to it and depending on how it was interpreted by the DM could be really cool. I was looking forward to getting the older version of this spell when my cleric leveled up...

Seems neat with summon undead putrid spirit 

Changing from Attack to Save hurts a little.

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

This is a nuclear attack. I'd ask the bard, wizard or the warlock to make SURE they fail the con save.

Mind sliver, unsettling words, lucky feat, divination wizard portent etc. 

They still need to make the save a minimum of three times, because they need three successes to end the spell on themselves.

Quote from Naturius >>

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

The second paragraph doesn't mention the "poisoned target must repeat" like it did in the 2014 version, which suggests that even if they make the first save, they still need to keep making saves against the spell. The initial save doesn't say the spell ends on a success.

Additionally, the saving throw in the second paragraph says the target repeats "THE" saving throw, not "A" different Constitution saving throw like is mentioned in the third paragraph. And the only saving throw mentioned up to that point is the original saving throw, which deals the 11d8 Necrotic and inflicts Poisoned on a failed save.

This spell feels kind of sloppily written, because as it is the target can take the 11d8 damage up to 4 times, which would probably kill most creatures you'd cast this on. And that's just so much damage for a 5th level spell. Though this does make it pretty great for trying to burn through legendary resists for creatures with weak con saves that aren't immune to poison though that might be rare.

Quote from Naturius >>

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

The difference here is that the target makes a saving through, where as in 2014, the caster had to make a spell attack roll.  Previously, if you missed your spell, the same "And the spell is wasted" happened and you lost a slot.

Quote from HamFrozenSolid >>

Quote from Naturius >>

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

The second paragraph doesn't mention the "poisoned target must repeat" like it did in the 2014 version, which suggests that even if they make the first save, they still need to keep making saves against the spell. The initial save doesn't say the spell ends on a success.

Additionally, the saving throw in the second paragraph says the target repeats "THE" saving throw, not "A" different Constitution saving throw like is mentioned in the third paragraph. And the only saving throw mentioned up to that point is the original saving throw, which deals the 11d8 Necrotic and inflicts Poisoned on a failed save.

This spell feels kind of sloppily written, because as it is the target can take the 11d8 damage up to 4 times, which would probably kill most creatures you'd cast this on. And that's just so much damage for a 5th level spell. Though this does make it pretty great for trying to burn through legendary resists for creatures with weak con saves that aren't immune to poison though that might be rare.

It would be nice to think it works like this, but it doesn't. If they make the initial save, the wording indicates that they don't gain the Poisoned condition. The initial damage of this spell is great, but the more important thing is that it's a very difficult to remove Poisoned condition that imposes disadvantage on a type of save.

There is no further damage after the initial damage; the spell would say that explicitly. There is no half damage on a save, and if they save initially, they do not gain the condition on which the remaining effects rely.

So make sure they fail that first save.

I think this makes the spell basically unusable. The risk of this just being a wasted turn are too high. Sad, because the druid spell list is pretty small and they really only have a couple of good spells at each level.

Quote from catchTwentythree >>

Quote from HamFrozenSolid >>

Quote from Naturius >>

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

The second paragraph doesn't mention the "poisoned target must repeat" like it did in the 2014 version, which suggests that even if they make the first save, they still need to keep making saves against the spell. The initial save doesn't say the spell ends on a success.

Additionally, the saving throw in the second paragraph says the target repeats "THE" saving throw, not "A" different Constitution saving throw like is mentioned in the third paragraph. And the only saving throw mentioned up to that point is the original saving throw, which deals the 11d8 Necrotic and inflicts Poisoned on a failed save.

This spell feels kind of sloppily written, because as it is the target can take the 11d8 damage up to 4 times, which would probably kill most creatures you'd cast this on. And that's just so much damage for a 5th level spell. Though this does make it pretty great for trying to burn through legendary resists for creatures with weak con saves that aren't immune to poison though that might be rare.

 

It would be nice to think it works like this, but it doesn't. If they make the initial save, the wording indicates that they don't gain the Poisoned condition. The initial damage of this spell is great, but the more important thing is that it's a very difficult to remove Poisoned condition that imposes disadvantage on a type of save.

There is no further damage after the initial damage; the spell would say that explicitly. There is no half damage on a save, and if they save initially, they do not gain the condition on which the remaining effects rely.

So make sure they fail that first save.

 How do you know the spell would say that explicitly? Because it does. it specifically says THE save, as in the only save mentioned, which comes with all the caveats. 

If it was specifically while they had the Poisoned Condition, it would explicitly say that.

Quote from Tyler_John >>

Quote from catchTwentythree >>

Quote from HamFrozenSolid >>

Quote from Naturius >>

So if the target succeeds on the CON save, nothing happens and you've just wasted a 5th level spell slot, no half damage.

The second paragraph doesn't mention the "poisoned target must repeat" like it did in the 2014 version, which suggests that even if they make the first save, they still need to keep making saves against the spell. The initial save doesn't say the spell ends on a success.

Additionally, the saving throw in the second paragraph says the target repeats "THE" saving throw, not "A" different Constitution saving throw like is mentioned in the third paragraph. And the only saving throw mentioned up to that point is the original saving throw, which deals the 11d8 Necrotic and inflicts Poisoned on a failed save.

This spell feels kind of sloppily written, because as it is the target can take the 11d8 damage up to 4 times, which would probably kill most creatures you'd cast this on. And that's just so much damage for a 5th level spell. Though this does make it pretty great for trying to burn through legendary resists for creatures with weak con saves that aren't immune to poison though that might be rare.

 

It would be nice to think it works like this, but it doesn't. If they make the initial save, the wording indicates that they don't gain the Poisoned condition. The initial damage of this spell is great, but the more important thing is that it's a very difficult to remove Poisoned condition that imposes disadvantage on a type of save.

There is no further damage after the initial damage; the spell would say that explicitly. There is no half damage on a save, and if they save initially, they do not gain the condition on which the remaining effects rely.

So make sure they fail that first save.

 How do you know the spell would say that explicitly? Because it does. it specifically says THE save, as in the only save mentioned, which comes with all the caveats. 

If it was specifically while they had the Poisoned Condition, it would explicitly say that.

 The spell is poorly written but there is nothing here to indicate that the target takes additional damage on later turns. If the target fails the save they take one-time damage and are poisoned for the duration of the spell (which may end early if the conditions mentioned in the spell are met).

They should have kept this as an attack roll with some kind of saving throw to cause further poisoning. Making this a touch spell that requires a Constitution saving throw, while not giving half damage on a failed save, makes the spell far too high risk to use. Especially when its poison damage and may not work on stronger enemies.

If this spell gave its saving throw effect based on nearly any other condition and damage type, it would be good, but sadly poison damage and the poisoned condition are the most common immunities throughout the entire monster manual. Many constructs, undead, elementals, and much more will be immune to poison entirely, making this spell useless even in the rare case where it might otherwise actually be a good choice to cast.

Quote from Brickhammer04 >>

If this spell gave its saving throw effect based on nearly any other condition and damage type, it would be good, but sadly poison damage and the poisoned condition are the most common immunities throughout the entire monster manual. Many constructs, undead, elementals, and much more will be immune to poison entirely, making this spell useless even in the rare case where it might otherwise actually be a good choice to cast.

It deals necrotic damage, not poison damage.

Quote from Brickhammer04 >>

If this spell gave its saving throw effect based on nearly any other condition and damage type, it would be good, but sadly poison damage and the poisoned condition are the most common immunities throughout the entire monster manual. Many constructs, undead, elementals, and much more will be immune to poison entirely, making this spell useless even in the rare case where it might otherwise actually be a good choice to cast.

 It says it deals Necrotic damage IN THE SECOND SENTENCE man 😭

Text illiteracy of doom and despair, but also yea immunity to poisoned is something that kinda kneecaps this spell. Talk with your DM if you wanna use the old one.

Quote from Kailaidescope >>

Quote from Brickhammer04 >>

If this spell gave its saving throw effect based on nearly any other condition and damage type, it would be good, but sadly poison damage and the poisoned condition are the most common immunities throughout the entire monster manual. Many constructs, undead, elementals, and much more will be immune to poison entirely, making this spell useless even in the rare case where it might otherwise actually be a good choice to cast.

 It says it deals Necrotic damage IN THE SECOND SENTENCE man 😭

Text illiteracy of doom and despair, but also yea immunity to poisoned is something that kinda kneecaps this spell. Talk with your DM if you wanna use the old one.

The 2014 version also needed to inflict the Poisoned condition to get the disease in, and since it didn't do any damage at all if the creature was hit by it, the target having immunity to the Poisoned condition made this spell completely useless against it. The thing that version has over the new one is it used a melee attack rather than a CON save, and this doing nothing if the target succeeds on the save also hurts it.