How to make Augury not suck

[Fax Celestis]

Not augury in general, the specific spell augury. Yeehaw, I get a max 90% chance of getting a one-word vaguery about a question I ask.

What can I do to it to not make it terrible?

[Telonius]

The spell basically simulates shaking a Divine-Magic 8-Ball. It's not going to give that terrific an answer. If you need a better divination, you'd need to cast a higher-level divination spell.

[Fax Celestis]

As it stands though it's not worth the 2nd level slot.

[Agincourt]

I like Augury as is. Its power is appropriate for a 2nd level spell, and its ambiguity is a positive thing. It is not so specific that DMs need to show their proverbial cards, but it has just enough information to potentially help PCs make an informed choice.

Also, this seems pretty much in line with the power of divinations in mythology. People who can see the future have a rare gift, but it's an imperfect gift. They see the future "through a glass, darkly."

[watchwood]

So don't take it? Most divine divinations are nothing more then a mechanical way to ask the DM for a hint.

[Fax Celestis]

So don't take it? Most divine divinations are nothing more then a mechanical way to ask the DM for a hint.

I want to like it. I want to like it so very badly, but I just...can't.

[Brookshw]

Personally I think its fine for the level and effect. That the cosmos deem to give you an answer alone, especially qr that level, strikes me as kinda remarkable.

[Segev]

It's useful for helping to make a decision about a situation on which you are blind. "Should I accept the Duke's invitation to a private dinner?" would return 'weal' or 'neutral' at worst if the Duke were on the up-and-up and nothing untoward would happen, so if you get 'woe' from your Augury, you know there's nothing good to come from doing it that way. At worst, then, you can prepare to be attacked, drugged, ambushed, or betrayed. And you know your preparations will be vindicated in some way.

Likewise, "Should I sneak arms in with me to the meeting with the Emperor?" would let many shugenja be more prepared than otherwise if a ninja ambush were to happen for which the Imperial Guards were not prepared. It would return "woe" if nothing bad was going to happen without sneaking it in (since all that could happen then is you getting in trouble if caught), and "weal" if there's a good chance that trouble you could only prevent by sneaking in that weapon were going to spring.

You basically have to establish with your DM that "ambiguous" is a bad thing to give unless the situation is well-known and the results are ambiguous as a matter of what one might normally expect from the situation.

That is, if it's "ambiguious" how the meeting with the Duke will go, the normal expectation is that you could make him mad or you could have things go well, but you'll generally come out of it intact and nothing sneaky is going on. If it's "weal," obviously the negotiations will and are expected to go well and there's little chance of bad stuff either unexpectedly or expectedly. If it's "woe," then something unusually untoward and outside the expected parameters of a private dinner is going to happen, or the dinner is expected to go particularly poorly.

Don't use "ambiguous" for every situation. Use it only when the situation is going to go more or less as expected and the ambiguity is in how the normal expected potential results are ambiguous. DO use "woe" for such things as ambushes or traps or the like that might not be standard to expect. And regardless of the social mores of the society, "private dinners" do not 'typically' expect betrayals. Betrayal is never "typically expected" for purposes of such divinations.

[Keld Denar]

I kinda agree with Fax. In all my years of playing, I've never seen or taken it. It is just too vague to be worth a spell slot, esp compared to some of the more combat oriented spells like Hold Person or Sound Burst. It's easy to think of situations where it might be useful, but it's hard to think of situations where it is more useful than having other spells and just acting without an answer that might just be plain wrong.

[Telonius]

Betrayal is never "typically expected" for purposes of such divinations.

Well ... Drow, maybe. But then you'd be asking about which method of betrayal you ought to be expecting.

[Fax Celestis]

It's useful for helping to make a decision about a situation on which you are blind. "Should I accept the Duke's invitation to a private dinner?" would return 'weal' or 'neutral' at worst if the Duke were on the up-and-up and nothing untoward would happen, so if you get 'woe' from your Augury, you know there's nothing good to come from doing it that way. At worst, then, you can prepare to be attacked, drugged, ambushed, or betrayed. And you know your preparations will be vindicated in some way.

Likewise, "Should I sneak arms in with me to the meeting with the Emperor?" would let many shugenja be more prepared than otherwise if a ninja ambush were to happen for which the Imperial Guards were not prepared. It would return "woe" if nothing bad was going to happen without sneaking it in (since all that could happen then is you getting in trouble if caught), and "weal" if there's a good chance that trouble you could only prevent by sneaking in that weapon were going to spring.What kind of duke invites you to dinner less than a half-hour in advance? Because augury can't see further than that.

[Segev]

Well ... Drow, maybe. But then you'd be asking about which method of betrayal you ought to be expecting.

Pretty much. For them it'd be, "Should I prepare for poison?" and "should I prepare for ambush?" and a few others. Obviously Augury will always require a few castings to get more complete pictures.

[amalcon]

Augury is one of the best second-level spells already, I don't see a reason to buff it. The potential problems are:

- 10-30% chance of no result. Note that the spell is technically not allowed to give a wrong answer. How many other second-level spells are 70-90% reliable?
- Thirty minute look-ahead. Predicting 30 minutes into the future is hard enough for the DM as it is. The 30 minute limit actually makes the spell better, as it makes it easier for the DM to give an accurate answer.
- Only four possible answers. All this does is force you to be specific with the question. Commune, which is widely acknowledged to be extremely powerful, has a similar limitation. Contact Other Plane has a little looser restriction, but it can lie. Both of those are fifth-level spells, though they do allow more questions.
- 25gp material component cost. The only real effect of this is to keep mid level parties from using it for trivial matters; at high levels (~9+) this is a trivial expense.

It's a second-level spell that lets you predict the future. Don't expect it to be entirely without drawbacks.

[Segev]

While I agree with Amalcon's analysis, I would like to ask for others who've successfully used it (or had it used successfully in their games) to share examples. I think those might help the OP more than broad "it's useful because of reasons" explanations. (Not that they're bad, but for something as fiddly as Augury, examples provide guidelines and ideas of what to expect to work.)

[amalcon]

While I agree with Amalcon's analysis, I would like to ask for others who've successfully used it (or had it used successfully in their games) to share examples. I think those might help the OP more than broad "it's useful because of reasons" explanations. (Not that they're bad, but for something as fiddly as Augury, examples provide guidelines and ideas of what to expect to work.)

Augury is best for when you have a scenario that could go either of two ways, and the preparation required is very different in either case.

The most common scenario I've seen like this is the covert parley with an unknown party: it could be a trap, in which case you'd like backup (the party, city guards, whatever) to show up at just the right moment. It could also be a real negotiation, in which case doing that will ruin it. Augury: "What will my fortunes be should my allies arive at the meeting shortly after the other party?"

It's also useful in direction selection (i.e. Lesser Find the Path). You're hot on the trail of a group of kidnappers, when the group splits up. Which trail do you follow? Augury: "What will my fortunes be if I choose to follow the left group, rather than the right group, in search of the kidnap victim?"

You've received an item that you suspect may be cursed, but on the other hand it may be immediately useful. Identify cannot reveal cursed items. Augury: "What will my fortunes be if I attempt to use this magic item?"

You meet a man in who claims to be after the same objective as you. He might be honest, or he might be planning to stab you in the back at the first opportunity. Augury: "What will my fortunes be if we allow this man to accompany us?"

You have received a lead of uncertain validity. Following up on the lead might solve your current task, or it might be a waste of time. Augury: "What will my fortunes be if we follow up on this lead, as opposed to searching for other leads, in our attempts to solve this task?"

[Big Fau]

A Wand of Augury can be used to cheat a Deck of Many Things, but I'd rather not abuse that stupidity (since getting a DoMT usually signifies the end of the campaign anyway).

Realistically, this spell suffers from the bog-standard down side all future-prediction stuff has: It relies on your DM being prepared, and can easily cause problems for him even if he is prepared. While spells like this are vaunted for making prepared casters unbeatable (with the right questions), I don't feel the spell is worth the hassle and nuisance.

Making it not suck just means asking the right questions. It's great if you can remove the material component cost as you can use it to gather intel about the next room of a dungeon with remarkable accuracy.

[Miss Disaster]

It's important to compare & contrast the 2 very similar spells of Augury and Omen of Peril (the latter is also a Cleric spell - albeit a 1st level slot). The nuanced differences may make a huge difference in divinatory spell selection for a Cleric. Plus, if you can finesse the wording and timing, Omen of Peril is just as effective and cheaper to cast.

[Jeff the Green]

What kind of duke invites you to dinner less than a half-hour in advance? Because augury can't see further than that.

That's the problem there. Let it see farther into the future and it's worth a 2nd level slot.

[Segev]

You can always cast it before going to said dinner, and have an unexpected problem arise if you need to semi-politely avoid going to this one after all.

[Psyren]

Not augury in general, the specific spell augury. Yeehaw, I get a max 90% chance of getting a one-word vaguery about a question I ask.

What can I do to it to not make it terrible?

It's not.

No, really. It's one of the few divinations DMs won't be tempted to screw you over with, because the answer is simply "yes," "no," or "maybe." All the legalese that tends to go with divinations like Contact Other Plane, Speak With Dead, or... well, Divination, lead to either irritation or whimsy, and neither is especially helpful. Augury is simply "is this thing we're about to do a good idea?" - much easier for the DM to answer, and so they often will.

The only one honestly better I would say is Commune, which is also yes/no/maybe, but where the DM can give more of a hint to stave off a wild goose chase or TPK, or even slip in plot hooks on the sly.

[Agincourt]

Augury is one of the best second-level spells already, I don't see a reason to buff it. The potential problems are:

- 10-30% chance of no result. Note that the spell is technically not allowed to give a wrong answer. How many other second-level spells are 70-90% reliable?
- Thirty minute look-ahead. Predicting 30 minutes into the future is hard enough for the DM as it is. The 30 minute limit actually makes the spell better, as it makes it easier for the DM to give an accurate answer.
- Only four possible answers. All this does is force you to be specific with the question. Commune, which is widely acknowledged to be extremely powerful, has a similar limitation. Contact Other Plane has a little looser restriction, but it can lie. Both of those are fifth-level spells, though they do allow more questions.
- 25gp material component cost. The only real effect of this is to keep mid level parties from using it for trivial matters; at high levels (~9+) this is a trivial expense.

It's a second-level spell that lets you predict the future. Don't expect it to be entirely without drawbacks.
That's an excellent summary of the spell. I would like to point out that in spite of these very real drawbacks, we still see playgrounders post Schrödinger's Wizards wherein the wizard knows the best counter for every situation. Occasionally, you see Schrödinger's Cleric too. The stated reason for why the wizard knows is because of wizards have the power to cast (usually unspecified) divinations. Yet all divinations have some drawbacks.

Compared to Contact Other Plane, a 5th level wizard spell where the contacted power has an explicit chance of telling a lie or a "random answer" and there's an Intelligence check to avoid becoming unable to cast arcane spells for weeks, I'd say Augury is an excellent 2nd level spell.

As for an example for when Augury was used, I was DMing The Red Hand of Doom.
The party wanted to know if they could trust the Ghostlord, a Blighter Lich NPC. They asked "Can we safely return the phylactery to the Ghostlord or will he double cross us as soon as he has it in his possession?" (Answer given: weal) As a matter of roleplaying, I would not have begrudged my party for not trusting a lich, but it would have potentially resulted in a TPK had the party attacked, or it could have resulted in the Ghostlord helping the attack on Brindol anyway. As a DM I wanted the party to have this information because it complicated the plot if the PCs attacked this particular NPC. I had thought about how I would handle it, but it was still easier to not go that route.

[AugustNights]

Make it a 1st level spell, remove chance of failure, allow for longer duration.
Maintain that "the result might not take into account the long-term [complicated] consequences of a contemplated action" part of the text.

I usually keep it a 2nd-level spell in my games, but give it out like crazy to players with the other modifications.

The complicated long-term consequences part of the text is just to avoid butterfly-effect type logic games.
For example: Opening the chest will in fact grant the players a wand of fireball and the chest isn't trapped. That would be weal, because even if three game sessions later, the rogue uses said wand during an inopportune moment against a skeleton grappling with the wizard, killing both enemy and ally.

[watchwood]

I've seen it used successfully in a campaign before. My party was searching after a Macguffin, and we had the corpses of 2 people who were both long dead who could help us, and only had the resources to raise one of them. We used 2 castings of Augary to determine which person could be able to help us more.

[Madeiner]

Make it a 1st level spell, remove chance of failure, allow for longer duration.

100% chance for divinations can never work in a game. There HAVE to be times where you just dont know the answer to something, or the game can become REAL boring in no time, and it would be so bad that no investigative (or dare i say interesting) stories would be able to be told.

If you really wanted to make it stronger, change the text so that the divination has no set chance to be successful: rather it says something about fluctuations and unpredictability, giving the DM the choice whether it works or not each time. In case you asked something that would kill the plot right now, it just doesnt work.

[copycatcat]

Had to link this from AGC (http://agc.deskslave.org/files/ex802.html)

[Person_Man]

IIRC, it's a carry over from 2nd edition. I have a vague recollection of it being very important to me when I was 13 years old and played a Cleric (which mostly sucked back then, but was "required"), as it allowed you to ask "Is this woman really a human?" or "Is this chest trapped" or "Will walking through this magic portal harm me in any way?" Of course, that was back when the DM made 50%+ of NPCs a succubus or traitor of some kind, and traps and or walking though the wrong portal lead to instant character death.

Anywho, that's my old man rambling way of saying that if you want Augury to be important, you need to make choices very consequential.

[rmnimoc]

The real way to make augury awesome is to spend 14,500 gp on an item so you can use it for everything. It's also a funny way to help the DM by letting him use the answers to help steer you to everything. It's also an awesome way to avoid "rocks fall, everyone dies".

"Go left?" TPK, "Woe"
"Stab the duke?" TPK, "Woe"
"Attack this weird cloaked guy at level 5?" TPK, "Woe"
"Give this guy the Magical Staff of Magical Magic?" Safe, "Weal"

I love augury when I DM, since it means I can keep my players from doing idiotic things. I love augury when I don't DM, because it means I can be given a heads up before I do anything TPK-worthy.

[Jack_Simth]

Not augury in general, the specific spell augury. Yeehaw, I get a max 90% chance of getting a one-word vaguery about a question I ask.

What can I do to it to not make it terrible?

Reserves of Strength (feat, Dragonlance campaign setting) and caster level boosting shenanigans. You can get a 100% accurate reply ... for things happening in the next 30 minutes. Vaugely handy if you plan to do certain things, but by and large....

[Psyren]

I love augury when I DM, since it means I can keep my players from doing idiotic things. I love augury when I don't DM, because it means I can be given a heads up before I do anything TPK-worthy.

This is basically what I was getting at. It's one of those few divinations that is fun for both sides of the table and, most importantly, is fast. No bogging down the game with legalese to avoid Girard's buttcheeks.