What is the worst spell in the game?

[Giant2005]

This thread is just for fun to see what is the most mechanically inferior spell we can find.
My contender would be Mordenkainen's Sword. Its damage is absolutely shameful for a level 7 spell and mechanically, it just does the same thing as a slew of other spells such as Dust Devil and Flaming Sphere. The difference is that those low level spells cast from a level 7 slot deal almost double the damage of Mordenkainen's Sword, can move further in a turn, have the ability to damage a foe twice in a round (By that foe being too stupid to get out of its range at the end of his turn), can potentially inflict damage to multiple enemies each round, and have the flexibility of being cast for different level spell slots.

So what other lemons have you guys found in the spell lists? Anything out there that rivals the sheer suckiness of Mordenkainen's Sword?

[Altair_the_Vexed]

MAGIC AURA! ARCANE MARK! *drops mic*

[Giant2005]

MAGIC AURA! ARCANE MARK! *drops mic*

I really like Nystul's Magic Aura. Sure its uses aren't really that functional but every egomaniac likes to permanently alter the aura of themselves and possessions to make them seem like the uberest of all of uberville. You could also use it to con magic users into buying some absolute rubbish off you and who doesn't like fooling those egotistical mages every now and then?
Also, I have no idea wtf Arcane Mark is.

[Altair_the_Vexed]

Sorry, didn't realise I was in the 5e section - Arcane mark is a spell, from 1st Ed to 3.x, that puts your personal symbol on an object. Because you need a spell for that - no-one has heard of paint, or chalk, or ink...

[oxybe]

Because it's magic and if there is one thing magic does in traditional D&D it's the same thing as mundane methods, only faster and better.

Arcane Mark's signature schtick is basically a D&D version of an RFID tag. You cast your mark on your property and if it's ever lost and we can identify your mark, it can be returned to you. I would imagine larger cities likely have a registry of arcane marks the local wizards use to help locate lost things or critters. Or slaves, if you're into that kind of stuff.

Alternatively you can also use it to help you locate disguised enemies, as far as I know, if you've planted the mark invisibly on someone it doesn't leave even if they change shape or disguise themselves rather heavily. If you know that you've planted the mark on Bert the Backstabber before he's escaped and you suddenly see it glow on an old granny crossing the road when you're detect magic'ing for it as he's trying to leave town, well...

So yeah, Arcane Mark is a pretty niche spell, I'm not gonna lie. It has it's uses though limited as they are.

Nystul's also allows for really annoying Liches: "I make my phylactary into the shape of a carpet! I now Nystul's the magic aura away. Hooray!"

[Altair_the_Vexed]

Surely you could rule these sort of dull functions into Prestidigitation? We really need unique single function spells for such micromanagment stuff? Anyhow, I'm in the wrong place - not a 5e player.

[Shining Wrath]

Yeah, Mordenkain's Sword is pretty lame.
Daylight is another. Worst 3rd level spell going.

[oxybe]

Surely you could rule these sort of dull functions into Prestidigitation? We really need unique single function spells for such micromanagment stuff? Anyhow, I'm in the wrong place - not a 5e player.

Oh i'm not saying we should keep it as is, but the effect has it's place in the game and prestidigitation is definitely someplace where "magic tattoo" can fit into. I mean, if you can clean a surface, surely you can also leave a mark?

[Chronos]

Mordenkainen's Sword is bad largely by virtue of being such a high level. If it were the same level as Bigby's Hand (another spell that trumps it, in every way including damage type), it'd at least have niche use. But for low-level spells, I'll nominate Chromatic Orb. It's only slightly more damage than Burning Hands, but can only hit a single target, and it has a material component that, while not consumed, still costs a decent amount to acquire for a first-level caster. Alternately, if we're willing to look at other spell lists, it's slightly less damage than Guiding Bolt, at shorter range, and Guiding Bolt has a nice rider effect as well.

Alternately, another first-level contender is Witch Bolt. You can spend a first-level slot for the opportunity to... use your action to do one die of damage every turn. Because there's no other way you could possibly do that. Oh, wait, spellcasters have cantrips? And those cantrips don't even require a first-level slot, and don't need concentration, and let you do other things with your action some turns if you want, and let you choose who to target every turn, and don't end immediately if your one chosen target ever puts in the bare minimum of effort to get away with you? To make it even more insulting, one of the spell lists it's on is the warlock, where it's competing against not just any old cantrip, but the best damage cantrip in the game.

[Dhavaer]

Alternately, another first-level contender is Witch Bolt. You can spend a first-level slot for the opportunity to... use your action to do one die of damage every turn. Because there's no other way you could possibly do that. Oh, wait, spellcasters have cantrips? And those cantrips don't even require a first-level slot, and don't need concentration, and let you do other things with your action some turns if you want, and let you choose who to target every turn, and don't end immediately if your one chosen target ever puts in the bare minimum of effort to get away with you? To make it even more insulting, one of the spell lists it's on is the warlock, where it's competing against not just any old cantrip, but the best damage cantrip in the game.

Do you think it would be overpowered, or alternatively still underpowered, if Witch Bolt only required you to maintain concentration to deal the damage over time?

[Mandrake]

But for low-level spells, I'll nominate Chromatic Orb. It's only slightly more damage than Burning Hands, but can only hit a single target, and it has a material component that, while not consumed, still costs a decent amount to acquire for a first-level caster. Alternately, if we're willing to look at other spell lists, it's slightly less damage than Guiding Bolt, at shorter range, and Guiding Bolt has a nice rider effect as well.

I respectfully disagree about Chromatic Orb. Although it probably isn't the best spell of first level, I don't think it is that bad either. It can deal a lot of damage on farther range than Burning Hands and without risk of shooting up allies. Also, it can be useful in a "party nova round" where all try to dish out as much as they can against a single foe (Burning Hands cannot do that). In addition, you can choose the damage type. Not always necessary, but sometimes quite useful, and interesting. It is in that way a versatile damage spell.

So, decent range (you rarely need more than that), good single target damage, versatile damage type and those 50 gold are not an issue since level 2 for certain, after the first money arrives (if you follow DMG treasure tables).

EDIT:
Not to mention that Guiding Bolt is only on Cleric's spell list.

[treecko]

Blade ward. It is mechanically worse than just taking the dodge action.

[JAL_1138]

Side question, but what's the general forum consensus on Cure Wounds versus Healing Word?

[Mellack]

I think Chromatic Orb is not that bad of a spell. The damage is fair, but the best part is that you can choose the damage type. That really helps when you only have a few spells to choose from. If you have Burning Hands and come across a couple of Mephits, you are probably screwed. If you have Orb memorized, it still works.
As for worst spell, I want to throw out there Contagion. It is either too good or sucks depending on the interpretation.

[asorel]

Side question, but what's the general forum consensus on Cure Wounds versus Healing Word?

I'm not sure there is a dichotomy. Healing Word is used when you're in combat and don't have the movement to get into touch range. Cure Wounds is for lulls between encounters, or when you're able to reach a downed ally without putting yourself in unnecessary danger. That being said, CW does scale better than Healing Word.

[Dralnu]

Crown of Madness is pretty terrible.

[Vortling]

If cantrips are included in this I'd like to nominate Spare the Dying.

Compare if you will Spare the Dying to a Medicine check or using a Healer's Kit. They all take an action and they all require you to be right next to the target. The only benefit Spare the Dying has over a Medicine check is that it can't fail, but if you want to avoid failing you can obtain that from the Healer's Kit. While a Healer's Kit costs 5gp, that's hardly a significant investment considering it can be used 10 times. Also if the party is worried about the cost and has a cleric or druid the medicine check can be raised to a high chance of success simply by having them proficient. Comparatively, Spare the Dying takes up one of your highly limited cantrip slots which cannot be replaced barring DM intervention. Overall I see no reason to ever take this cantrip.

[weaseldust]

This isn't nearly enough justification for its spell level, but Mordenkainen's Sword does, in addition to dealing damage, also give you control of a great big, mobile, edged plane of force. You could use it to interact with very hot or very hard materials that might defeat physical tools. (Or like an upgraded version of Tenser's Floating Disc, but that's a bit cheeky.)

[Mandrake]

Blade ward. It is mechanically worse than just taking the dodge action.

(1) Not necessarily always. There has been some math around it, I think (sometimes the chance of getting hit is really, really high, so you, mathematically, on average, actually reduce the possible damage taken by blade ward more than by dodging).

(2) As a specific non-math example, imagine you have 7 HP, and you know a single crossbowman will fire a single shot at you as you try to run. In this example, it's a lot better to half the possible damage, which eliminates the risk you die (since there is no way he can deal 14 damage with that crossbow) than to add to the chance that you're not hit at all, because in the rare case you are, you could possibly get dropped.

(3) It is really good for Rogues or Fighters or any other multiclass gishes, since you could theoretically use Dodge as a bonus action and Blade Ward as your main action, for some nasty defensive stance.

EDIT:
(4) Also, if I'm not mistaken, when your attackers already have the disadvantage on their attacks the only thing that will increase your defensive capabilities is Blade Ward, since you cannot stack advantages/disadvantages. (So, for example, my attackers are shooting at me in the dark, I might as well do Blade Ward, since Dodge won't help me none, in case I can see them, of course.)

[Pex]

Side question, but what's the general forum consensus on Cure Wounds versus Healing Word?

When you absolutely need to prevent a party member or yourself from dropping or dying in the midst of combat you cast Healing Word as a bonus action so you can still do something else for your Action. When out of combat taking a short rest you can cast Cure Wounds to save a HD or two of healing to spend or have already used up some/all HD in a previous short rest.

I disagree with the majority in that healing in combat is a viable tactic in 3E/Pathfinder, especially Pathfinder. Not the only tactic, not every single combat forever, but viable enough as an effective option. In 5E it can't be done. Too many resources were taken away/nerfed to allow the tactic. Use Healing Word when you absolutely must. Cure Wounds is for when you can afford it.

[charlesk]

If cantrips are included in this I'd like to nominate Spare the Dying.
...Overall I see no reason to ever take this cantrip.

I almost took it via Magic Initiate on my bardlock... to allow my familiar to stabilize party members. (In the end I decided Healing Word was just a better solution.)

[Chronos]

Cure Wounds is sort of sandwiched between Healing Word and Prayer of Healing. In-combat, Healing Word is quicker, and action economy is king. Out of combat, Prayer of Healing does as much as Cure Wounds for any given slot, but it does it for your whole party. The only drawbacks of PoH are its long casting time (which doesn't matter much out of combat), the fact that its base level is 2 instead of 1, and that nobody but the cleric gets it.


Quoth weaseldust:

This isn't nearly enough justification for its spell level, but Mordenkainen's Sword does, in addition to dealing damage, also give you control of a great big, mobile, edged plane of force. You could use it to interact with very hot or very hard materials that might defeat physical tools. (Or like an upgraded version of Tenser's Floating Disc, but that's a bit cheeky.)
I suppose you might improvise using it that way, but you'd have a lot easier time manipulating objects with Bigby's Hand, which is lower level and also can be used exactly like MS for more damage.

Looking over my spell lists, a few more that really stand out:
* Bane-- A spell that has as one of its primary effects penalizing saves, and itself offers a save, is rather pointless. If you need to lower their saves, then you won't be able to. And everyone who gets Bane also gets Bless, which is a much better use of your concentration.

* Barkskin-- You can't raise your AC above 16 with it. You can probably get that even without the spell, or at least get very close. It's definitely not worth a 2nd-level slot and concentration to (probably) get +1 AC for an hour.

* Blight-- Comparable damage than Fireball, to a single target, at a higher spell level.

* Conjure Barrage-- Its only saving grace is its large area of effect. But how often will you get enemies in that big an area? And 3d8 damage is pretty small potatoes by level 9, when a ranger first gets access to it.

* Conjure Volley-- Again, large area of effect, and that's it. The damage is better, at 8d8, but now you have to wait all the way until 17th level to be able to cast it.

* Divine Word-- By that level, will there be anything with HP low enough to be effected?

* Feeblemind-- Most of the opponents it'd actually accomplish anything against are going to be precisely the ones who are probably going to save against it.

* Flame Strike-- Yeah, yeah, I get it that clerics aren't as good at this sort of thing as wizards are. But half the damage from a spell slot two levels higher?

* Glibness-- OK, yes, the 3rd edition of this spell was absolutely broken, and needed a nerf. But this much of one? It's an 8th-level spell that only does slightly more than the Friends cantrip.

* Magic Circle-- The only reason to ever use this spell is together with Planar Binding. Trying to use it for actual protection is made useless by it being stationary and the long casting time.

* Phantasmal Killer-- It allows not one but two saves, and even if both fail, all you're doing is a small amount of damage to a single target.

* Ray of Enfeeblement-- Absolutely useless against anyone who doesn't use Str for attacks. And against those who do, you have to get past their AC and repeated Con save (which are both probably high), and it lasts for a minute tops, and it uses your concentration, and it still leaves them at at least half effectiveness.

* Resurrection-- The subject still needs just as long to recover as with Raise Dead. There's no reason not to just use Raise Dead and then heal them up separately. Or just wait and let them heal with time.

* Rope Trick-- Just what is this supposed to accomplish with a 1-hour duration?

* Stoneskin-- OK, but not worth the expensive components and concentration, at a level when your enemies are likely to have access to magic anyways

* Telepathy-- Why in the Nine Hells is this level 8, when similar spells are so much lower?

* Weird-- Like Phantasmal Killer, but even more overpriced. If I'm casting a 9th-level spell and people are repeatedly failing saves versus it, I want to be doing a heck of a lot more than some piddly damage.

[JAL_1138]

I took Healing Word mostly as a "keep someone alive enough to run away" option since we're all low level, but I may ditch it later for CW when I have more spell slots and can actually have any spells left after a fight.

[SharkForce]

@ chronos:

barkskin is a druid spell. it is not nearly so easy for a moon druid to get 15 AC in animal form as it is for a typical PC in human form. when you take that into consideration, it becomes at least something to consider.

divine word should work on targets with HP reduced from damage, should it not? I'm afb so not certain, but if it does then it isn't a spell to use by itself, but rather a spell to use after a fireball. alternately, a spell to use after your enemies all turned into birds and were planning on flying away...

feeblemind is relatively unlikely to work on druids, and very unlikely to work on wizards... but probably does just fine against clerics, warlocks, sorcerers, and rangers.

rope trick lasts one hour. short rests last one hour. it can't be that hard to figure out.

[ad_hoc]

Divine Word also works on celestials, fey, fiends and elementals regardless of their hit points.

Plus its range is anything that can hear you. You can take out an army with it.

Resurrection works on someone who has been dead for up to 100 years. Raise Dead only works if they have been dead up for up to 10 days.

Magic Circle is also great to create a place to rest or retreat to if things go bad.

Yes, a few spells are just bad. I would have an open mind to most of the spells. They have their uses.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Yeah, Mordenkain's Sword is pretty lame.
Daylight is another. Worst 3rd level spell going.

Daylight is useful whenever you find yourself in the Underdark. In a game where not everyone has Darkvision, the ability to remove disadvantage on your party's attack rolls, as well as impose disadvantage on anyone you fight who has Light Sensitivity, is pretty valuable.

[Chronos]

Plus its range is anything that can hear you. You can take out an army with it.
If the army is within 30' of you, yes.

And do you know what else can take out a creature with 40 or 30 HP? 40 or 30 points of damage.


Magic Circle is also great to create a place to rest or retreat to if things go bad.
Yes, if you're in a place long enough to be able to cast it, and if that place is close enough that you'll be able to flee to it when needed (two requirements that will tend to work against each other), and if you don't have a wizard or ritual caster in your party who can just cast the far superior Leomud's Tiny Hut.

[ad_hoc]

If the army is within 30' of you, yes.

And do you know what else can take out a creature with 40 or 30 HP? 40 or 30 points of damage.

It is a multitargeted banish that only takes a bonus action.

I'm not saying it is the greatest spell. We are talking about whether it is the worst spell in the game though.



Yes, if you're in a place long enough to be able to cast it, and if that place is close enough that you'll be able to flee to it when needed (two requirements that will tend to work against each other), and if you don't have a wizard or ritual caster in your party who can just cast the far superior Leomud's Tiny Hut.

I don't think our games have much in common.

[Chronos]

OK, I hadn't noticed that Divine Word is only a bonus action to cast. It's still probably subpar for its level, but that probably does take it out of the running for worst.

Out of the spells I listed, my inclination is that the absolute worst is Weird, with Phantasmal Killer and Ray of Enfeeblement as runners-up. Any dispute on any of those three?

[ad_hoc]

OK, I hadn't noticed that Divine Word is only a bonus action to cast. It's still probably subpar for its level, but that probably does take it out of the running for worst.

Out of the spells I listed, my inclination is that the absolute worst is Weird, with Phantasmal Killer and Ray of Enfeeblement as runners-up. Any dispute on any of those three?

That's about right.

Many spells suck just because they are concentration. I love the concentration mechanic. I think it reins in some spells that would be too good without it. A lot of spells just seem to have it for no good reason.

Ray of Enfeeblement would be okay if it wasn't concentration. It wouldn't be great but it wouldn't be one of the worst spells. No follow up save would make it good. A little niche, but still good.

Phantasmal Killer might be the worst spell in the game. Mordenkainen's Sword is overpriced but at least it does something.

[SharkForce]

phantasmal killer can imo be made not quite so bad with two modifications:

1) int save. few things have a good int save.
2) action and intelligence(investigate) check to get out of it instead of a free wisdom save.

or, in other words... treat it like an illusion. because, you know, it is one. it still wouldn't be great, but at least it would be an int-targeted soft CC effect that is very hard for most enemies to escape (note that the frightened condition gives disadvantage on ability checks, such as the ability check to get free) with a damage rider attached to persuade them to not fully ignore it. which would basically combine to make it something like a wizard version of heat metal.

but as it stands? yeah, it has an uncomfortably high chance of doing nothing (2 common saves before it even has a chance of harming them), and if it does something at all it probably isn't much.

then improve weird the same way, plus increase the damage (not to meteor swarm levels or anything, but it's a level 9 spell... you could cast a wish, or a true polymorph, or a year-long mass suggestion, etc with that).

[odigity]

Daylight is another. Worst 3rd level spell going.

There's only one way to see through magical darkness in 5e (Warlock's Devil's Sight), and Daylight will eliminated magical darkness. The only problem is, so will Dispel Magic, which is the same level and mechanically superior for that purpose. The only use of Daylight is if you really want need to illuminate a 240' diameter area (how else you gonna do that?). Very niche, but not 100% useless.


Alternately, another first-level contender is Witch Bolt. You can spend a first-level slot for the opportunity to... use your action to do one die of damage every turn. Because there's no other way you could possibly do that. Oh, wait, spellcasters have cantrips? And those cantrips don't even require a first-level slot, and don't need concentration, and let you do other things with your action some turns if you want, and let you choose who to target every turn, and don't end immediately if your one chosen target ever puts in the bare minimum of effort to get away with you? To make it even more insulting, one of the spell lists it's on is the warlock, where it's competing against not just any old cantrip, but the best damage cantrip in the game.

To be fair, you didn't mention it's one up-side -- you don't have to make attack rolls in subsequent rounds; the damage is automatic as long as you never let them get more than 30' away or lose concentration. Problem is, those things are hard to do, and only the initial first-round damage scales with slot level, not the subsequent damage. I love the idea of this spell, but after studying it real hard, I just can't find a way to apply it that makes sense.


Do you think it would be overpowered, or alternatively still underpowered, if Witch Bolt only required you to maintain concentration to deal the damage over time?

Considering no one uses it right now, it's worth trying if it rescues a currently dead spell.


Cure Wounds is for lulls between encounters, or when you're able to reach a downed ally without putting yourself in unnecessary danger. That being said, CW does scale better than Healing Word.

Even CW doesn't scale well enough to justify itself half the time. The best use of CW I've ever seen is a Warlock who dipped one level of Bard to pick it up. Every time we short rested, he'd blow his remaining slots on CW for the party, which is automatically cast at his highest spell slot level. Free extra healing. Value city!


Crown of Madness is pretty terrible.

That's another spell that I love in concept, but doesn't seem to hold up mechanically. Mostly because the target still controls their own movement, and if they realize they're being forced to attack their allies, will move away so they're out of range. I can only see it being used effectively as a distraction, not for damage value.


If cantrips are included in this I'd like to nominate Spare the Dying.

Compare if you will Spare the Dying to a Medicine check or using a Healer's Kit. They all take an action and they all require you to be right next to the target. The only benefit Spare the Dying has over a Medicine check is that it can't fail, but if you want to avoid failing you can obtain that from the Healer's Kit. While a Healer's Kit costs 5gp, that's hardly a significant investment considering it can be used 10 times. Also if the party is worried about the cost and has a cleric or druid the medicine check can be raised to a high chance of success simply by having them proficient. Comparatively, Spare the Dying takes up one of your highly limited cantrip slots which cannot be replaced barring DM intervention. Overall I see no reason to ever take this cantrip.

Agree completely. I recommend house-ruling the function of StD into Mending.

Side rant: In real life, Mending would be one of the most useful and popular cantrips ever. It seems unrealistic to me that we players so rarely choose it (because repairing mundane items seems so... mundane). If adding StD's function to it makes it a more popular choice, all the better.


* Bane-- A spell that has as one of its primary effects penalizing saves, and itself offers a save, is rather pointless. If you need to lower their saves, then you won't be able to. And everyone who gets Bane also gets Bless, which is a much better use of your concentration.

Say what? Bane is awesome! -1d4 on attacks *and* saves is a HUGE debuff, and it's only a first level spell! And it scales up to include additional targets! And facing creatures with great saves is an arguement *for* Bane, not against it. You're not guaranteed to land Bane, but you've got a shot, and if you do, you make the next attack easier, which is very valuable. And you can target many creatures with one casting, so you'll likely get some value out of it even if they all have good saves.


* Rope Trick-- Just what is this supposed to accomplish with a 1-hour duration?

Giving you a badly-needed opportunity to short rest under intensely hostile conditions?

And now for my personal gripe, as someone who recently played a Paladin: All the Smite spells. Pretty disappointing, especially with the Concentration requirement. Ugh.

[SharkForce]

Say what? Bane is awesome! -1d4 on attacks *and* saves is a HUGE debuff, and it's only a first level spell! And it scales up to include additional targets! And facing creatures with great saves is an arguement *for* Bane, not against it. You're not guaranteed to land Bane, but you've got a shot, and if you do, you make the next attack easier, which is very valuable. And you can target many creatures with one casting, so you'll likely get some value out of it even if they all have good saves.

but if you can beat their saves, you could have beat their saves with something more powerful rather than "oh, that's quite annoying". i'll agree it's probably not a contender for worst spell (it is a fairly unpleasant debuff that is likely to stick if you land it, at the very least, and there are some *really* useless spells out there), but it isn't exactly amazing either.

if it defaulted to 3 targets like bless, i'd say it was situationally worth it though.

[odigity]

but if you can beat their saves, you could have beat their saves with something more powerful

I don't understand why you're approaching this as if it was a simple yes/no situation (i.e., if you can land Bane you can land something). You *always* have a chance to land anything. It's a question of probability. Sure, you can go straight for the Hold Monster, but if it doesn't land, you burned a 5th lvl slot. If you open with Bane first, your chances aren't better of landing it compared to Hold Monster, but if you do, you make HM easier, and if you don't, you've only burned a 1st lvl slot. And even though, you haven't wasted it if even one of your 3+ targets landed.

[SharkForce]

ok, so let's suppose you land bane.

what do you cast on them now that you're already concentrating on your bane spell?

you may as well have took your chances with a command. losing your next action is generally speaking worse than having your next action be slightly less likely to succeed. spending your next action doing something that you're sure to regret later (and by later i mean before you even finish doing it) is even worse.

[ad_hoc]

I don't understand why you're approaching this as if it was a simple yes/no situation (i.e., if you can land Bane you can land something). You *always* have a chance to land anything. It's a question of probability. Sure, you can go straight for the Hold Monster, but if it doesn't land, you burned a 5th lvl slot. If you open with Bane first, your chances aren't better of landing it compared to Hold Monster, but if you do, you make HM easier, and if you don't, you've only burned a 1st lvl slot. And even though, you haven't wasted it if even one of your 3+ targets landed.

Only Hold Monster is a concentration spell so your Bane spell would end as soon as you cast Hold Monster. (I houserule that away because it's a terrible rule, but them's the default rules)

One cool thing about Bane is that it is a non-banishment related Charisma Save. Not a lot of those.

[odigity]

ok, so let's suppose you land bane.

what do you cast on them now that you're already concentrating on your bane spell?


Only Hold Monster is a concentration spell so your Bane spell would end as soon as you cast Hold Monster.

I'm confused. Do you guys not use teamwork in your games?

In my game, our Warlock opens with Bane if we really need the Bard to land a Faerie Fire or Hold Person/Monster or Hypnotic Pattern.

[ad_hoc]

I'm confused. Do you guys not use teamwork in your games?

In my game, our Warlock opens with Bane if we really need the Bard to land a Faerie Fire or Hold Person/Monster or Hypnotic Pattern.

It is how you worded your original post. Just being clear that 1 person can't do both and chiming in that I think that is dumb.

[Ralanr]

A buddy of mine ran a simulation of my barb and his wizard fighting a yuan-ti abomination while we were level 5.

Bane saved his ass. While I was feared for a few rounds, the bane helped him get away from the monster enough for me to come back in.

[Safety Sword]

It is how you worded your original post. Just being clear that 1 person can't do both and chiming in that I think that is dumb.

It's a team game. You're not supposed to destroy encounters all by yourself. That's 3.5E you're thinking of.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Maths on Bane for single target without advantage or disadvantage and obeying bounded accuracy:

Chance of passing CHA save: x
Chance of passing save against buddy's spell, probably WIS save: y

Chance of failing buddy's save given you twiddle your thumbs: 1-y
Chance of failing buddy's save given you first tried to Bane the enemy: (1-y)+(1-x)*0.125
Chance of failing at least one serious debuff save given you use Command instead: 1-(y^2) = 1-y+y(1-y)

Suppose x and y are 50% (enemy has the same WIS and CHA). Then the chance of the enemy failing at least one serious debuff is 56.25% if you use Bane and 75% if you use Command.

That said it's more "mediocre" than "worst spell in the game" due to the low level, targeting CHA, the minor attack debuff, and especially having multiple targets.

[Gwendol]

* Barkskin-- You can't raise your AC above 16 with it. You can probably get that even without the spell, or at least get very close. It's definitely not worth a 2nd-level slot and concentration to (probably) get +1 AC for an hour.

* Conjure Barrage-- Its only saving grace is its large area of effect. But how often will you get enemies in that big an area? And 3d8 damage is pretty small potatoes by level 9, when a ranger first gets access to it.

* Conjure Volley-- Again, large area of effect, and that's it. The damage is better, at 8d8, but now you have to wait all the way until 17th level to be able to cast it.

* Stoneskin-- OK, but not worth the expensive components and concentration, at a level when your enemies are likely to have access to magic anyways

* Weird-- Like Phantasmal Killer, but even more overpriced. If I'm casting a 9th-level spell and people are repeatedly failing saves versus it, I want to be doing a heck of a lot more than some piddly damage.

A few comments:

The concentration requirement of Barkskin makes it near useless, unless you cast it on a pet and stay out of the fight yourself. For rangers and druids it can be of use.

Barrage and Volley are Ranger spells. It's not like they have a lot more spells competing for damage and AoE, and as such they are not that bad. Barrage is a concentration spell so will likely not be used much (competing with Hunter's Mark, Hail of Thorns, and what not), while Conjure Volley can certainly be a good use of an action. The trouble lies more in the non-magical ammunition piece, and that the damage caused is of the same type (is it still non-magical? What happens if the bow is enchanted, does the damage then become magical?).

Totally agree on behalf of both Stoneskin and especially Weird. Stoneskin again appears to be a spell the caster does not use on himself, but rather an ally or pet (conjured or otherwise).

[RulesJD]

Maths on Bane for single target without advantage or disadvantage and obeying bounded accuracy:

Chance of passing CHA save: x
Chance of passing save against buddy's spell, probably WIS save: y

Chance of failing buddy's save given you twiddle your thumbs: 1-y
Chance of failing buddy's save given you first tried to Bane the enemy: (1-y)+(1-x)*0.125
Chance of failing at least one serious debuff save given you use Command instead: 1-(y^2) = 1-y+y(1-y)

Suppose x and y are 50% (enemy has the same WIS and CHA). Then the chance of the enemy failing at least one serious debuff is 56.25% if you use Bane and 75% if you use Command.

That said it's more "mediocre" than "worst spell in the game" due to the low level, targeting CHA, the minor attack debuff, and especially having multiple targets.

I'm curious, how is Command helping fail a save?

[ad_hoc]

It's a team game. You're not supposed to destroy encounters all by yourself. That's 3.5E you're thinking of.

I have no idea how this has anything to do with my post.

[Bubzors]

Barrage and Volley are Ranger spells. It's not like they have a lot more spells competing for damage and AoE, and as such they are not that bad. Barrage is a concentration spell so will likely not be used much (competing with Hunter's Mark, Hail of Thorns, and what not), while Conjure Volley can certainly be a good use of an action. The trouble lies more in the non-magical ammunition piece, and that the damage caused is of the same type (is it still non-magical? What happens if the bow is enchanted, does the damage then become magical?).


You are mistaken, Conjure Barrage is not a concentration spell. Also, the huge AOE is quite nice for this spell. Don't know about how long until the Ranger gets it, but the Bard in our party picked it up as his college of Lore ability at level six. Allows him some extra AOE damage he wouldn't have access to otherwise. And it is technically a houserule, but he also uses this spell to conjure a barrage of alchemist fire or acid flasks. I know the way the spell is worded it doesn't work that way, but it makes sense with the theme of the spell, has a greater gp cost, and basically just allows him to change the damage type.

[Chronos]

Quoth RulesJD:

I'm curious, how is Command helping fail a save?
By giving them another opportunity to fail one. When you cast Bane, you're setting them up to fail some other save, and then after they fail that one, something bad will happen to them. If you cast Command instead, then something bad is already happening to them, and you don't need to follow up with the other spell.


Quoth odigity:

To be fair, you didn't mention it's one up-side -- you don't have to make attack rolls in subsequent rounds; the damage is automatic as long as you never let them get more than 30' away or lose concentration.
Then again, you also don't have to make attack rolls in subsequent rounds if you instead use the (also sub-par) Chromatic Orb, because it's already done all of its damage and you can now move on to doing something else with your action. If your Witch Bolt lasts for two rounds (and even that isn't a given), it's still doing less damage than the first (and only) round of Chromatic Orb, and certainly less damage than Chromatic Orb plus a cantrip. If it lasts for three rounds, then it's probably doing less damage than Chromatic Orb plus two cantrips. And that's assuming that, in those three rounds, the target has neither walked up to you and smacked you off of your concentration, nor walked away from you, and most opponents are going to do one of those two things.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

On Phantasmal Killer and Weird: I agree that needing two failed saves before any damage is dealt is problematic. They should be dealing damage after the first failed save and continuing thereafter. That would put them in line with the bard spell Dissonant Whispers. Same save, same condition applied, same damage type. Only PK is repeating, and Weird is repeating and an AoE. Even then, Weird is probably a bit high as a lvl 9 spell.

[RulesJD]

By giving them another opportunity to fail one. When you cast Bane, you're setting them up to fail some other save, and then after they fail that one, something bad will happen to them. If you cast Command instead, then something bad is already happening to them, and you don't need to follow up with the other spell.


*snip*.

......that makes no sense. Bane helps you for an entire encounter and greatly helps out your teammates. Command is a great spell, but works for 1 round. You're literally comparing apples (concentration spells) to oranges (no concentration/duration).

[eastmabl]

Back on topic - color spray is a pretty mediocre spell now.

When you compare it to sleep, it affects more hit points. However, instead of putting the target to sleep, it blinds it (cool) for a single round (weak).

[SharkForce]

......that makes no sense. Bane helps you for an entire encounter and greatly helps out your teammates. Command is a great spell, but works for 1 round. You're literally comparing apples (concentration spells) to oranges (no concentration/duration).

taking a target out of the fight for 1 round (especially early on) is a pretty high impact action. taking them out of the fight offensively but leaving them as a completely vulnerable target for that round can very easily mean that you only *need* one round of CC (especially at level 1, when bane and command are both your stronger spell options and haven't been replaced by better options).

bane, in contrast, has a *chance* to be effective in any given round after they've failed the save. it isn't an absolutely awful spell. it certainly is not the worst spell in the game. but it really isn't a great spell either.

[Talderas]

That's another spell that I love in concept, but doesn't seem to hold up mechanically. Mostly because the target still controls their own movement, and if they realize they're being forced to attack their allies, will move away so they're out of range. I can only see it being used effectively as a distraction, not for damage value.

The target controls all of his actions unless he's in a position where you can dictate that the target will use his action to attack (next to a possible target in melee). Meanwhile you are required to use your action to maintain the spell on top of the concentration requirement. The best use case for the spell is to get t he target to attack its ally once, at which point it will probably leave melee, drawing OAs, and sit out of combat while you are essentially using your actions to keep the target out of melee. If the target has a ranged weapon or ranged attacks then the best case scenario is you're forcing the target to use ranged attacks instead of melee attacks while you're expending your action.

The opportunity cost on Crown of Madness is extreme.

[Spojaz]

Feign Death. Bounty of three internet points* for anyone who has actually used this spell.

Seriously. 3rd level spell (same as fireball) to make a willing creature seem like they are dead for an hour. I guess if you don't have any other way to temporarily slow disease or poison maybe? Anyway, making a bluff or perform check would work much better.

If you really need to make people think somebody is dead, Friar Laurence's potion works much better. It's Duration is two and fourty times longer. Just be careful to tell your lover first.


*Internet points are worthless, but you already know that.

[eastmabl]

Feign Death. Bounty of three internet points* for anyone who has actually used this spell.

Seriously. 3rd level spell (same as fireball) to make a willing creature seem like they are dead for an hour. I guess if you don't have any other way to temporarily slow disease or poison maybe? Anyway, making a bluff or perform check would work much better.

If you really need to make people think somebody is dead, Friar Laurence's potion works much better. It's Duration is two and fourty times longer. Just be careful to tell your lover first.


*Internet points are worthless, but you already know that.

Or maybe you need to make someone with a cleric believe that a character is actually dead so you can sneak them out of town. "We're going to bury him - yes, he died from his wounds in a tavern brawl."

As for Friar Laurence's potion, my guess for the 5e version of that would be a potion of feign death.

[Talderas]

Feign Death. Bounty of three internet points* for anyone who has actually used this spell.

I once wished I had feign death. Does that count? My bard was infiltrating a government building occupied by the military. I got into one of the top lieutenant's rooms by fooling the guards into believing that I was a joke male exotic dancer for the LT. My problem was I was on the 3rd floor, but there was a prostitute already hidden in a closet in the LT's room. Had I had feign death I could have used it on her, feigned horror at the situation and escaped with my bounty of documents. Since I didn't have it, I instead used minor illusion to create an illusion of my bard... decapitated in a pile of his one blood and sneaked out wearing one of the LT's spare uniforms.

[Safety Sword]

Feign Death. Bounty of three internet points* for anyone who has actually used this spell.

Seriously. 3rd level spell (same as fireball) to make a willing creature seem like they are dead for an hour. I guess if you don't have any other way to temporarily slow disease or poison maybe? Anyway, making a bluff or perform check would work much better.

If you really need to make people think somebody is dead, Friar Laurence's potion works much better. It's Duration is two and fourty times longer. Just be careful to tell your lover first.


*Internet points are worthless, but you already know that.

It's not a very useful spell in combat. Outside of combat it's fantastic!

My players once used Feign Death to appear as part of the dead a necromancer raid caused. All of the "bodies" are taken away for animation. PCs wake up and they're in the necromancer's lair. They teleport out. They then scry his animation chamber; scry and die ensues. Not useless. Not at all.

[Chronos]

Feign Death is another spell I have rated as one star in my notes, but I didn't include all of those on my list. Its problem is that its niche is incredibly situational... but it does have a niche. There's no other spell that does what it does better. Spells like Phantasmal Killer, however, fit into the niche of "kill stuff", and there's a heck of a lot of competition in that niche, almost all of it better than PK.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

......that makes no sense. Bane helps you for an entire encounter and greatly helps out your teammates. Command is a great spell, but works for 1 round. You're literally comparing apples (concentration spells) to oranges (no concentration/duration).I'm literally comparing first level debuff spells which both compete for spells prepared and spell slots. Sorry you can't make sense of that.

[Falling Icicle]

Another really bad spell is power word kill. Killing one enemy with up to 100 hp is just not worthy of a 9th level spell slot. You could cast meteor swarm and do an average of 140 damage to an entire battlefield instead.

[Forum Explorer]

Another really bad spell is power word kill. Killing one enemy with up to 100 hp is just not worthy of a 9th level spell slot. You could cast meteor swarm and do an average of 140 damage to an entire battlefield instead.

The difference is two fold. One is that Meteor Swarm gives a save for half damage (and it is typed damage, so resistances and immunities can apply to it) and Power word kill is just flat out dead, no save, no roll, just choose a target with less then 100 hp.

Also a Sorcerer can use Twinned Spell to hit a second target with it.

I want to say Wall of Ice, when you compare it against Wall of Force. Yeah it can do some damage, but it's easy enough to destroy, and is a spell slot higher. Meanwhile anything stuck behind a Wall of Force is truly stuck unless it has disintegrate or teleportation abilities.

[asorel]

The difference is two fold. One is that Meteor Swarm gives a save for half damage (and it is typed damage, so resistances and immunities can apply to it) and Power word kill is just flat out dead, no save, no roll, just choose a target with less then 100 hp.

Power Word Kill's biggest disadvantage is the chance of failure. If the target has more than 100 HP, the spell fails, and you've wasted an Action and a 9th Level spell slot. Once you factor in that most players don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of Monster HP, and that very generous estimates would likely be made with regards to hit points remaining, the spell seems even less useful. The only niche I really see it filling is using the spell in conjunction with some variant of Polymorph, which is rather too situational for any character with a limited Spells Known to consider grabbing the spell.

[SharkForce]

so ask your DM if a medicine skill check would let you determine your enemy's remaining HP.

[MarkTriumphant]

Blade ward. It is mechanically worse than just taking the dodge action.

It does have a use when the caster has an active Armor of Agathys, as the temporary hit points last twice as long, so the armour does its damage for longer, too.

Otherwise, I completely agree with you.

[odigity]

The target controls all of his actions unless he's in a position where you can dictate that the target will use his action to attack (next to a possible target in melee). Meanwhile you are required to use your action to maintain the spell on top of the concentration requirement. The best use case for the spell is to get t he target to attack its ally once, at which point it will probably leave melee, drawing OAs, and sit out of combat while you are essentially using your actions to keep the target out of melee. If the target has a ranged weapon or ranged attacks then the best case scenario is you're forcing the target to use ranged attacks instead of melee attacks while you're expending your action.

The opportunity cost on Crown of Madness is extreme.

Agreed. As I said, I can only think of two cases where it *might* be useful:

1) Two guards outside a building, and you want to sneak in without them noticing you. Getting one to attack the other one time is a pretty good distraction.
2) When you're facing a pair of enemies that are each far more powerful than any of your party members, getting one to attack the other is going to be a more effective attack than simply attacking them yourselves. But again, you only get one attack in, and then it's questionable whether it's worth your action to prevent the target from staying in melee range. It might be... but meh.

[Flashy]

The really odd thing about phantasmal killer is how much it varies from the genuinely pretty reasonable phantasmal force. Phantasmal force targets int saves, only has a save on casting, requires that the target spend an action to disbelieve, and explicitly rationalizes away damaging effects of the spell.

[SharkForce]

The really odd thing about phantasmal killer is how much it varies from the genuinely pretty reasonable phantasmal force. Phantasmal force targets int saves, only has a save on casting, requires that the target spend an action to disbelieve, and explicitly rationalizes away damaging effects of the spell.

as i said, if you make phantasmal killer work like an illusion instead of working like... well, nothing else in the game, really... it isn't that bad.

[Talderas]

Agreed. As I said, I can only think of two cases where it *might* be useful:

1) Two guards outside a building, and you want to sneak in without them noticing you. Getting one to attack the other one time is a pretty good distraction.
2) When you're facing a pair of enemies that are each far more powerful than any of your party members, getting one to attack the other is going to be a more effective attack than simply attacking them yourselves. But again, you only get one attack in, and then it's questionable whether it's worth your action to prevent the target from staying in melee range. It might be... but meh.

#2 is the optimal general use situation. #1 is questionable, it's still a V,S spell and its range is only 120ft. Casting it without being noticed isn't going to necessarily be "easy".

The most effective way to use the spell is dependent on the Sentinel feat, which means you want to have an ally with it for all the problems concentration has.

The spell isn't so much a niche spell. It's not really that good at doing something that can't be done with other spells just as well or better. It's more that it requires specific scenarios for it's usage to be palatable.

[Mandrake]

Regarding Blade Ward, again:


It does have a use when the caster has an active Armor of Agathys, as the temporary hit points last twice as long, so the armour does its damage for longer, too.

Otherwise, I completely agree with you.

Read through comments a bit further (first page it is). I disagree with you (both) and I have stated why. I firmly believe Blade Ward is useful and should have its own space in list of certain (not all) spellcasters.

EDIT (no reason for you to search, I'll just copy it):
(1) Not necessarily always. There has been some math around it, I think (sometimes the chance of getting hit is really, really high, so you, mathematically, on average, actually reduce the possible damage taken by blade ward more than by dodging).

(2) As a specific non-math example, imagine you have 7 HP, and you know a single crossbowman will fire a single shot at you as you try to run. In this example, it's a lot better to half the possible damage, which eliminates the risk you die (since there is no way he can deal 14 damage with that crossbow) than to add to the chance that you're not hit at all, because in the rare case you are, you could possibly get dropped.

(3) It is really good for Rogues or Fighters or any other multiclass gishes, since you could theoretically use Dodge as a bonus action and Blade Ward as your main action, for some nasty defensive stance.

(4) Also, if I'm not mistaken, when your attackers already have the disadvantage on their attacks the only thing that will increase your defensive capabilities is Blade Ward, since you cannot stack advantages/disadvantages. (So, for example, my attackers are shooting at me in the dark, I might as well do Blade Ward, since Dodge won't help me none, in case I can see them, of course.)

[ChubbyRain]

Agreed. As I said, I can only think of two cases where it *might* be useful:

1) Two guards outside a building, and you want to sneak in without them noticing you. Getting one to attack the other one time is a pretty good distraction.
2) When you're facing a pair of enemies that are each far more powerful than any of your party members, getting one to attack the other is going to be a more effective attack than simply attacking them yourselves. But again, you only get one attack in, and then it's questionable whether it's worth your action to prevent the target from staying in melee range. It might be... but meh.

Subtle Spell Crown of Madness has been fun.

Rogue, Cleric and Warlock/Sorcerer walked up to the king who had guards next to him. We tell the king that we have uncovered a plot against the thrown and we would like to help him deal with the threat. The Warlock/Sorcerer casts Subtle Crown of Madness (wished it could be twinned) on one of the guards. We stop the attack and kill the guard. Now, with no real threat to the king, we are being paid to investigate this plot (which the criminal rogue forged documents) that doesn't actually exist while the king ups his defenses.

We took it far enough to have the king start a war...

Did I mention we weren't exactly good aligned? But in our defense the nation we had the king attack was full of "evil" gnomes (the rogue's home nation, the rogue was a gnome).

So while it may not be the best spell, it helped us start a war... :D

[Mellack]

Subtle Spell Crown of Madness has been fun.

Rogue, Cleric and Warlock/Sorcerer walked up to the king who had guards next to him. We tell the king that we have uncovered a plot against the thrown and we would like to help him deal with the threat. The Warlock/Sorcerer casts Subtle Crown of Madness (wished it could be twinned) on one of the guards. We stop the attack and kill the guard. Now, with no real threat to the king, we are being paid to investigate this plot (which the criminal rogue forged documents) that doesn't actually exist while the king ups his defenses.

We took it far enough to have the king start a war...

Did I mention we weren't exactly good aligned? But in our defense the nation we had the king attack was full of "evil" gnomes (the rogue's home nation, the rogue was a gnome).

So while it may not be the best spell, it helped us start a war... :D

Nobody noticed the iron crown suddenly appear and the look of madness in the guards eyes? The king has no advisor who can recognize a second level spell? Why did the guard even attack anyone as he could just move 5 feet away and act normally? I would say you were very lucky as Crown does not really work very well.

[Talderas]

Subtle Spell Crown of Madness has been fun.

Rogue, Cleric and Warlock/Sorcerer walked up to the king who had guards next to him. We tell the king that we have uncovered a plot against the thrown and we would like to help him deal with the threat. The Warlock/Sorcerer casts Subtle Crown of Madness (wished it could be twinned) on one of the guards. We stop the attack and kill the guard. Now, with no real threat to the king, we are being paid to investigate this plot (which the criminal rogue forged documents) that doesn't actually exist while the king ups his defenses.

We took it far enough to have the king start a war...

Did I mention we weren't exactly good aligned? But in our defense the nation we had the king attack was full of "evil" gnomes (the rogue's home nation, the rogue was a gnome).

So while it may not be the best spell, it helped us start a war... :D

Unless said guard was in melee range of someone you couldn't compel him to attack anyone.

[ChubbyRain]

Nobody noticed the iron crown suddenly appear and the look of madness in the guards eyes? The king has no advisor who can recognize a second level spell? Why did the guard even attack anyone as he could just move 5 feet away and act normally? I would say you were very lucky as Crown does not really work very well.

Nope, guard was behind the king, they were semi circle and paying attention to us making our case. Casting the spell on the guard was more spur of the moment due to how they were set up.


Unless said guard was in melee range of someone you couldn't compel him to attack anyone.

They had reach weapons, the king was within 5' even if they weren't.

So yeah, niche, but it helped us start a war and made it really really really easy to persuade the king there was a plot against him (and the crown).

[AvatarVecna]

Weird does exactly the same thing that Phantasmal Killer does, but does so in an area. By the time you're casting Weird, it has the exact same DC, the exact same damage, and more area, but more creatures are capable of making the saves (if they're not outright immune to fear). Honestly, I'd prefer just keeping Phantasmal Killer and casting it in a 9th level slot; at least then there's a decent chance the target will take a lot of damage before they manage to make the save (and if they're capable of failing enough Will saves in a row to make Weird's damage comparable to Meteor Swarm, Dominate Person/Monster would still be preferable).

[Talderas]

So yeah, niche, but it helped us start a war and made it really really really easy to persuade the king there was a plot against him (and the crown).

It's bad when the best ways to make a spell work in some niches is to expend a limited option like a feat or one of your metamagic options and made even worse when you have to consider that the sorcerer had to expend one of his precious spells known on a spell for a niche application.

[ChubbyRain]

It's bad when the best ways to make a spell work in some niches is to expend a limited option like a feat or one of your metamagic options and made even worse when you have to consider that the sorcerer had to expend one of his precious spells known on a spell for a niche application.

I just think there are worst spells than Crown of Madness. Even in a battle enemies will stand next to each other or you can partner up with another ally to move them into place if need be.

Is it the best spell? No. But it isn't nearly as bad as people think.

Wait, it is bad when a caster has to spend a spell to perform a niche action that caused an insanely awesome outcome? Using it for that niche isn't its only useful use. What plane of existence are you from? That's a huge plus for a spell. If you can use a spell that normally isn't used for that situation (social interaction) then that is a win in my book. Your logic is like saying that it is a penalty against Meteor Swarm because it can be used as a Subtle Spell in order to make a king think another country is attack their city/kingdom. That doesn't make Meteor Swarm any worse, the player just used it in combination with another class feature in order to boost the chances of a social interaction.

Crown of Madness is not a spell I would want to use while already in battle, well, unless I was an Arcane Trickster I guess... Disadvantage on the save would work nicely. It is more of a surprise spell that can actually be quite good. What it essentially does is allows you to replace your attack with theirs if you choose too. If you choose not to have it attack (due to not having a target) you can still use your other spells (non concentration) while your allies get into position. I like the spell as an opening "let's screw with people" kinda attack.

Actually... Get a paladin (w/martial adept Riposte), rogue/fighter (take the martial adept feat too), and warlock (or other caster with this spell). Have the paladin take the defending style (reaction grants disadvantage on the attack). Have the rogue have Riposte and uncanny dodge. The Warlock in the back uses Crown of Madness, have the target attack the rogue, the paladin uses his reaction to defend the rogue, then the rogue either uses uncanny dodge or Riposte to get a sneak attack in. On their turns the paladin could smite and the rogue could sneak attack. If the target tries to get away... The paladin and the rogue stick on it as best they can. This is concentration and you would want to target creatures with less than awesome Wis saves...

You could set up a nice combo with this spell. After you exhaust all the Riposte from the Rogue you can then have it attack the paladin... Hmmm I might want to make this a team build. Might want to save this strategy against the big solo monsters but still...

Fighter 3/Paladin X (Martial Adept Feat)
Fighter 3/Rogue X (Martial Adept Feat)
Warlock Y
Cleric Y

[Talderas]

What it essentially does is allows you to replace your attack with theirs if you choose too. If you choose not to have it attack (due to not having a target) you can still use your other spells (non concentration) while your allies get into position. I like the spell as an opening "let's screw with people" kinda attack.

You are seriously mistaken about how Crown of Madness works. You do not replace your attack with theirs. At the beginning of the target's turn you can force it to expend its action to attack an adjacent creature. It then gets to act for the rest of the turn as it sees fit. So it can move from where it was, and if you hadn't forced it to attack something it can then attack a target of its choice. You must then use your action on each other turn, in addition to expending your concentration on this, to maintain control of the target or the spell ends. So you do not get to use other spells while allies get into position unless said spells take a bonus action or reaction to cast. That is the primary downfall to Crown of Madness. It's not the fact that the enemy has to be adjacent, which doesn't help it, but the fact that maintaining it requires your concentration and action every turn, and the fact that making it worthwhile is dependent on taking suboptimal character options (Subtle Spell Metamagic) or reliant of allies with specific features and traits (Sentinel, Defender, etc).

Compare it directly against Hold Person, which is the same level, where it paralyzes the foe and prevents any action by him while still permitting you to perform actions.

[Totema]

It's maybe not the worst spell out there, but I think Astral Projection deserves special mention. It has a ghastly casting time, it uses a material component that varies on the number of targets, has a fairly significant cost AND is consumed, it eats up a valuable 9th level spell slot... all for what? A glorified Plane Shift, to one and only one destination, that can be ended involuntarily with little effort on the DM's part. And the weird instant death rider isn't doing it any favors either.

[Chadamantium]

.

Phantasmal Killer might be the worst spell in the game. Mordenkainen's Sword is overpriced but at least it does something.

I don't think it's that bad. The bard in my party uses it to lure people away or as a secondary summon that can't be killed.

I came up with a quest using the spell. Basically a caster is luring men with images of beautiful women near a cliff only to fall to their death cause the edge of the cliff the woman is on is also an illusion sp they fall before ever reaching them.

I was thinking Phantasmal Force. Yeah, killer is bad

[SharkForce]

I don't think it's that bad. The bard in my party uses it to lure people away or as a secondary summon that can't be killed.

I came up with a quest using the spell. Basically a caster is luring men with images of beautiful women near a cliff only to fall to their death cause the edge of the cliff the woman is on is also an illusion sp they fall before ever reaching them.

phantasmal killer makes an illusion of their worst fear. unless their worst fear is a beautiful woman, it doesn't do that.

in fact, since it inflicts the frightened status, it actually can only make people *unable* to move closer to it, though it isn't strictly speaking given a location.

[Chadamantium]

phantasmal killer makes an illusion of their worst fear. unless their worst fear is a beautiful woman, it doesn't do that.

in fact, since it inflicts the frightened status, it actually can only make people *unable* to move closer to it, though it isn't strictly speaking given a location.

Just realised my mistake. Was thinking of Phantasmal force. Oops.

[Mellack]

Crown of Madness is usually worse than making your own attack because it has double failure chances. They have to both miss their save and make their to hit roll. That is in addition to all the other limitations. It may not be the absolute worst, but it is up there.

[asorel]

It's maybe not the worst spell out there, but I think Astral Projection deserves special mention. It has a ghastly casting time, it uses a material component that varies on the number of targets, has a fairly significant cost AND is consumed, it eats up a valuable 9th level spell slot... all for what? A glorified Plane Shift, to one and only one destination, that can be ended involuntarily with little effort on the DM's part. And the weird instant death rider isn't doing it any favors either.

The one thing it has going for it is that you don't die when you hit 0 HP. Which sounds nice, until you realize that 17+ level characters don't have to worry about death, one way or the other.

[Fralex]

The three worst spells in my opinion are:

1) Power Word: Sarcasm. It's decent, but everything it does can be accomplished with Power Word: Irony, at a lower material cost.

2) Tenser's Herniated Disc. Too situational. Might be usable if it weren't worded so as to be incompatible with most Metamagic.

3) Tasha's Hideous Sister. She's not even that hideous! Her haircut's just a little weird. And she knows how to make this really nice dip that she's always bringing to parties. She's not that useful in adventuring parties, but I've made a note to invite her to our next board game night.

[VoxRationis]

It's maybe not the worst spell out there, but I think Astral Projection deserves special mention. It has a ghastly casting time, it uses a material component that varies on the number of targets, has a fairly significant cost AND is consumed, it eats up a valuable 9th level spell slot... all for what? A glorified Plane Shift, to one and only one destination, that can be ended involuntarily with little effort on the DM's part. And the weird instant death rider isn't doing it any favors either.

Okay, I'm glad someone else has this problem with the spell. I could never figure out just what the point of it was when spells which could send you to any plane at all, for real, were lower level, and didn't leave your body in a position waiting for some schmuck with enough dispel magic to get through your wards to come by and slice open your carotid.

[ChubbyRain]

You are seriously mistaken about how Crown of Madness works. You do not replace your attack with theirs.

On each of your next turns while you have concentration you may, as an action, try to force the target to make the attack again.

You give up your action for them to take an action to attack a creature. You don't have to do that each round, you can decide not to force them to attack. After that round you may force them to attack someone if you still have concentration an/or they didn't save.

So I like to know how I don't understand the spell?

You are replacing your attack (because most attacks are actions) with the target taking the attack action. Thus you are giving up your attack o that the target will attack. If you attack with your action then you can't force the target to attack.

The spell may need to be fixed but it is in no way as terrible as people are making it out to be. Way to many ways to use it.

Need to start a bar fight without you taking part in it?

Need to distract a guard without them noticing you?

Need to implicate someone else having a plot to over throw the crown?

Need to get a good gauge how strong someone is, without risking a fight with the person yourself?

Most of the charm spells either makes targets hostile to you automatically or allows them to know they have been charmed by you. The target of Crown of Madness is neither auto hostile or auto know you tried to mess with them.

Charm Person has a clause "when the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you.". CoM has no clause like that.

I think as written CoM should be a level 1 spell, but it isn't terrible as a level 2. This spell does something no other ability will allow you to do.

[Talderas]

On each of your next turns while you have concentration you may, as an action, try to force the target to make the attack again.

"The charmed target must use its action before moving on each of its turns to make a melee attack against a creature other than itself that you mentally choose. The target can act normally on its turn if you choose no creature or if none are within its reach."

If the target of the spell is not adjacent to a valid target, or you elected to not force it to attack someone the spell's target is able to move and attack someone normally.

"On subsequent turns, you must use your action to maintain control over the target, or the spell ends."

You do not substitute your action with the target's action. Your action is spent each turn maintaining concentration and if you do not expend that action for one turn the spell will end. This happens regardless of if you forced the spell's target to attack or not. That means that this below quote is not something that you can do while concentrating on the spell.


If you choose not to have it attack (due to not having a target) you can still use your other spells (non concentration) while your allies get into position.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

You do not substitute your action with the target's action. Your action is spent each turn maintaining concentration and if you do not expend that action for one turn the spell will end. This happens regardless of if you forced the spell's target to attack or not. That means that this below quote is not something that you can do while concentrating on the spell.

Well you could, if you have a non-concentration bonus action spell available.

[Fwiffo86]

I think the worst spell is: Wish

[Dontdestroyme]

I think the worst spell is: Wish

I know! It doesn't even do anything another spell can't do in a lower level spell slot!

[Spojaz]

I think the worst spell is: Wish

From what I've seen, it works like DM poison, at best derailing, at worst killing the campaign. A D&D spell that makes everyone who casts it stop playing D&D? We have a winner! Worst spell in the game!

[KorvinStarmast]

If cantrips are included in this I'd like to nominate Spare the Dying. Agreed, it's utility is mostly at early levels when running out of heals happens a lot.

[ImSAMazing]

This thread is just for fun to see what is the most mechanically inferior spell we can find.
My contender would be Mordenkainen's Sword. Its damage is absolutely shameful for a level 7 spell and mechanically, it just does the same thing as a slew of other spells such as Dust Devil and Flaming Sphere. The difference is that those low level spells cast from a level 7 slot deal almost double the damage of Mordenkainen's Sword, can move further in a turn, have the ability to damage a foe twice in a round (By that foe being too stupid to get out of its range at the end of his turn), can potentially inflict damage to multiple enemies each round, and have the flexibility of being cast for different level spell slots.

So what other lemons have you guys found in the spell lists? Anything out there that rivals the sheer suckiness of Mordenkainen's Sword?

Druidcraft = prestidigation but worse
Bigby's hand = like mage hand, but lvl 5 but not 5 times as useful/strong especially when you could also go for conjure elemental/cone of cold/animate objects as lvl 5 spell
Fabricate(or creation) = basically a spell which makes something, but really usefull things(jewels, gold, etc) exist just for like 5 minutes? The lvl 2 feature of transmutation is better.

[Doug Lampert]

Power Word Kill's biggest disadvantage is the chance of failure. If the target has more than 100 HP, the spell fails, and you've wasted an Action and a 9th Level spell slot. Once you factor in that most players don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of Monster HP, and that very generous estimates would likely be made with regards to hit points remaining, the spell seems even less useful. The only niche I really see it filling is using the spell in conjunction with some variant of Polymorph, which is rather too situational for any character with a limited Spells Known to consider grabbing the spell.

What? The purpose of Power Word Kill is to be used in internet arguments over whether or not the Mood Druid capstone is overpowered!
Nothing else fills that niche as well, apparently games with level 20 moon druids are just chock full of foes with access to PWK but no other level 9 spells or spell-like abilities.

[Person_Man]

In general, I hate spells that "patch" some problem with the game that shouldn't exist in the first place. For example, Barkskin and Mage Armor. If you think a reasonable minimum AC for a player is 13+Dex or 16 or whatever, just make that the minimum AC, or make it a class ability. Don't make the player have to read through 200ish pages of spells to figure out what they're "supposed" to do, and then tax them by forcing them to do it or die horribly.

I also strongly dislike spells with a duration but no Concentration. Typically they fall into the "patch" category, and the ones that don't (Deathward, Foresight, etc) can lead to CoDzilla if abused. (Which will definitely occur once a few more supplements are printed.

Lastly, I distaste spells that are only moderately useful that have material component. If you want to require an expensive component for Imprisonment or Wish or whatever to make it truly rare, then so be it. But requiring it for things like Identify or Hero's Feast or whatever is just a huge annoyance, even when its not consumed.

So to summarize, I actually love magic, and its probably my favorite part of D&D as a game. I just hate having to sort through piles of garbage to get to the truly useful stuff.

[Ashrym]

but if you can beat their saves, you could have beat their saves with something more powerful rather than "oh, that's quite annoying". i'll agree it's probably not a contender for worst spell (it is a fairly unpleasant debuff that is likely to stick if you land it, at the very least, and there are some *really* useless spells out there), but it isn't exactly amazing either.

if it defaulted to 3 targets like bless, i'd say it was situationally worth it though.

Not true because bane is a CHA save to start with so could be easier than a WIS or CON save, and with 3 targets as the base that's 3 chances to fail as opposed to single target binary options of save/fail. There are also no repeat opportunities to save like many other spells so seems pretty decent as basically higher AC and longer term benefit for more spells as a set up to help land more difficult DC's.

If the penalty to hit creates even one or two misses during the encounter you have outdone hp protection better than healing word would recover.

I don't think it's even close to the worst spell because the attack penalty makes it worthwhile even before considering the save penalty.

Edit: @others -- crown of madness is not a preferred spell for me but...

It does have the advantage that the target is charmed and therefore cannot attack the caster, who still has advantage on social checks against the target so it's a step up from charm person. Barely.

It also has niche effectiveness with sorcerers who can use the action to maintain the spell and quicken to continue casting spells whether the target is directed to attack or not.

Another consideration is the spell creates incentive for the target to use his movement. This means he stays close and continues to lose actions (good) or chooses to move and suffers attacks of opportunity (good). As a tactical spell it combines some of the benefits of charm person and dissonant whispers.

The target also has incentive not to close back to the group who might be dealing with another opponent.

I would call it niche in it's applications but the lost action or opportunity attack choice makes it a tactical opportunity attacks gang pile if used appropriately and not the worst spell.

[SharkForce]

Druidcraft = prestidigation but worse
Bigby's hand = like mage hand, but lvl 5 but not 5 times as useful/strong especially when you could also go for conjure elemental/cone of cold/animate objects as lvl 5 spell
Fabricate(or creation) = basically a spell which makes something, but really usefull things(jewels, gold, etc) exist just for like 5 minutes? The lvl 2 feature of transmutation is better.

prestidigitation is a pretty decent cantrip. there is tons of room below it before you hit "worst spell in the game". i very much doubt druidcraft is that much below it to the point of being the worst in the game, or even close to it.

bigby's hand is amazing in the right situation. no-save, prevents any creature with less than a +9 strength modifier from coming closer to you. it can grapple, it can push people around quite a bit, it can act as a bonus action damaging spell, it can block an enemy from getting to you (and give cover at the same time), and it is tough enough and annoying enough to get rid of that it isn't trivial even for powerful enemies. it probably isn't a "use every fight" spell, but for perspective... here is a list of every dragon it can't hold at bay: ancient blue, ancient red, ancient bronze, ancient gold, ancient silver, and their shadow equivalents. now, dragons aren't exactly harmless when at range, but i'll gladly settle for a dragon that needs to spend 1-2 rounds dealing with a "useless" hand instead of meleeing myself. did i mention there's no save? i don't care how legendary the dragon is, it still can't come close to me, can't melee me, and possibly can't breathe on me. that is not the worst spell in the game. it is simply a spell that is not always useful in every situation.

fabricate is an excellent spell. it lets you turn otherwise useless iron objects (like the 50 short swords that tribe of goblins were using) and turn it into valuable ones (like a suit of full plate). it lets you craft the perfect object that you need at a moment's notice. it lets you turn that wall into a secret door with a locking mechanism to hold back the giants you just stole a plot device from. and so on.

these things are probably not the best spells in the game. but i would say they're not even close to being the worst in the game..

@ashrym: hence, if it hit 3 targets, i'd say it's probably a situationally worthwhile spell. as a single-target spell, it still isn't the worst spell in the game (it's unimpressive, but not by any means the worst). but as it stands, you're spending one action and your concentration slot to give a penalty to probably 3-6 rolls over the course of a fight, *if* they fail the save in the first place.

@ ashrym: charm person does at least help you for the hour that it works in. the charm effect is really not very useful. and situationally useful for a sorcerer is basically the same thing as not useful for a sorcerer. you don't have room for spells that you might someday consider using if the planets all line up perfectly. you need spells that are going to be consistently useful.

[Ashrym]

@ ashrym: charm person does at least help you for the hour that it works in. the charm effect is really not very useful. and situationally useful for a sorcerer is basically the same thing as not useful for a sorcerer. you don't have room for spells that you might someday consider using if the planets all line up perfectly. you need spells that are going to be consistently useful.

Crown of madness gives the exact same in combat benefit charm person does (cannot attack the caster) because of the charmed condition, except it's not made at disadvantage if fighting the creature. Anyone who ever thought charm person was good because of that combat perk should not consider crown of madness bad. It's an improvement in that regard. The advantage on social checks is a smaller benefit due to duration but exists.

It doesn't take anymore stars to align than dissonant whispers, generally considered to be a very good spell. It takes moving to the target in anticipation of the movement. That's easy.

If the target has to worry about the opportunity attacks he doesn't move and the action denial remains effective or the target moves and triggers multiple opportunity attacks. It doesn't matter which choice the target makes because either benefits the group. It's good or good for the same reason dissonant whispers is good. Anyone who thinks dissonant whispers is good because of the gangpile opportunity attacks should see that same potential as an alternative to the lost actions.

Once the target has moved there becomes a soft control element because the target doesn't want to approach on of it's allies. That may or may not be worthwhile but the target still cannot attack the caster. That's when the choice to drop the spell is made if it's unlikely to produce useful results going forward.

Letting it drop has cost the opponent an action, likely inflicted damage on the target's melee attack target, and blitz OA'd the target. If the target doesn't move it's worth maintaining because, unlike other low level control effects with repeat saves, the spell is a source of damage while preventing damage.

It's very easy to let it drop when the best uses end typically end after the 1st round of use anyway and move on to the next spell.

It's a tactical spell like dissonant whispers and compulsion. It's better than it first appears. It has the inherent issue all concentration spells has with competing with other concentration spells, but it's definitely not the worst spell.

This is typically how it plays out: caster casts crown of madness on higher damage foe (lore bards have weak damage options in those slots), spending concentration. Party sees crown and following a typical strategy with which they are familiar try to get within OA range. The target attacks and does more damage than the bard would have. The conundrum of the move or not starts. Target moves and OA's trigger for a good spike. Bard drops spell having effectively used the spell but it's not worth keeping. Alternately, the target doesn't move, the bard maintains the spell and continues to apply higher damage than he normally would, and only casts bonus action spells or gives out inspiration, the target continues to not attack the party.

I think it's a bit underrated as long as a person realizes how to work it and when to drop it.

[Chronos]

Anyone who ever thought charm person was good because of that combat perk should not consider crown of madness bad.
Wait, there's someone who thought Charm Person was good?

[SharkForce]

dissonant whispers doesn't give the enemy the choice, it makes them do what you want (ie provoke opportunity attacks). it deals damage. it is a level 1 spell slot as opposed to a level 2 spell slot. it doesn't break your concentration on another (more useful) spell. if you combine it with the right other spell (say, if someone hits the target with ray of frost after), that enemy may not be able to get back into range, thus preventing their damage.

but mostly, it's a level lower. honestly, there just aren't a lot of level 1 spells that remain relevant later on for damage *or* control. in contrast, level 2 has web, blindness/deafness, heat metal, phantasmal force, hold person (however much some people hate it, it's basically a death sentence on the target if it lands), silence, suggestion. for a bard, that is... other class lists may vary, but the pattern looks more or less similar.

i dunno if crown of madness is the absolute worst spell in the game. but it is definitely a contender.

(but seriously, why would you even argue the value of charm person in a fight? that isn't when you use it. actually, if you can avoid it, you don't use it at all, but if you do, you don't use it in a fight. it has a one hour duration for a reason, and the reason is not "just in case we get into an hour-long slugfest").

[Ashrym]

Wait, there's someone who thought Charm Person was good?

Oh sheesh but does that one pop up in a lot of overpowered because magic discussions. The combat effect is usually the first thing that comes up after pointing out that charmed is just a skill check with advantage and inferior to actual skill bonuses.

I don't think charm person is worth the slot, personally, because there are enough CHA casters and characters who might take appropriate proficiencies that the spell doesn't add much. But like I said, that's usually when someone points out that it can be cast to prevent attacks on the caster in combat.


dissonant whispers doesn't give the enemy the choice, it makes them do what you want (ie provoke opportunity attacks). it deals damage. it is a level 1 spell slot as opposed to a level 2 spell slot. it doesn't break your concentration on another (more useful) spell. if you combine it with the right other spell (say, if someone hits the target with ray of frost after), that enemy may not be able to get back into range, thus preventing their damage.

but mostly, it's a level lower. honestly, there just aren't a lot of level 1 spells that remain relevant later on for damage *or* control. in contrast, level 2 has web, blindness/deafness, heat metal, phantasmal force, hold person (however much some people hate it, it's basically a death sentence on the target if it lands), silence, suggestion. for a bard, that is... other class lists may vary, but the pattern looks more or less similar.

i dunno if crown of madness is the absolute worst spell in the game. but it is definitely a contender.

(but seriously, why would you even argue the value of charm person in a fight? that isn't when you use it. actually, if you can avoid it, you don't use it at all, but if you do, you don't use it in a fight. it has a one hour duration for a reason, and the reason is not "just in case we get into an hour-long slugfest").

Crown of madness doesn't matter if the enemies move or not. It either grants opportunity attacks or continues to do damage while denying actions. On a low damage lore bard it's often better damage than what the bard would do.

It's clearly not a great spell, but if I were to compare it to something like truestrike it's suddenly looks amazing. Truestrike is a truly horrible spell. I can use blade ward on a monk who uses his bonus action to dodge and his action for blade ward blocking an entrance, or on a valor bard saving some damage while still getting his bonus action to attack as a rare use. Truestrike is just bad. Knock is just bad too but at least has some niche validity and more than blade ward.

Second level spells are a tough choice. There are a lot of good ones. I gotta say, I would take crown of madness over magic mouth any day. Crown of madness is situational but it can be better than several other options.

[ChubbyRain]

Crown of Madness has one halarious niche and it might be my favorite spell.

A dragon rider (caster) was attacking the party on a cliffside. To stay safe the dragon was flying about 15' away from the edge. The sorcerer on their turn started with "attack the dragon now, she is defenseless against you!" which kinda confused everyone (including me). The sorcerer then cast a subtle spell Crown of Madness on the rider. The rider attacked the dragon. The dragon, thinking she had been betrayed and just got a shocking grasp to the back of the head, decided to unbuckle the harness and fly upside down. Grapple check went in favor of the dragon. Caster fell 200' down having used their reaction for a counter spell already in that round (no feather fall).

Dragon flew away.

Even if it is a horse, unintelligent bird, or a dragon as a mount, Crown of Madness is the funniest anti-mount spell out there.

[SharkForce]

Oh sheesh but does that one pop up in a lot of overpowered because magic discussions. The combat effect is usually the first thing that comes up after pointing out that charmed is just a skill check with advantage and inferior to actual skill bonuses.

I don't think charm person is worth the slot, personally, because there are enough CHA casters and characters who might take appropriate proficiencies that the spell doesn't add much. But like I said, that's usually when someone points out that it can be cast to prevent attacks on the caster in combat.



Crown of madness doesn't matter if the enemies move or not. It either grants opportunity attacks or continues to do damage while denying actions. On a low damage lore bard it's often better damage than what the bard would do.

It's clearly not a great spell, but if I were to compare it to something like truestrike it's suddenly looks amazing. Truestrike is a truly horrible spell. I can use blade ward on a monk who uses his bonus action to dodge and his action for blade ward blocking an entrance, or on a valor bard saving some damage while still getting his bonus action to attack as a rare use. Truestrike is just bad. Knock is just bad too but at least has some niche validity and more than blade ward.

Second level spells are a tough choice. There are a lot of good ones. I gotta say, I would take crown of madness over magic mouth any day. Crown of madness is situational but it can be better than several other options.

true strike is a cantrip. it doesn't have to be a better effect than crown of madness to be a better spell, because it has no resource cost to cast it. obviously, neither are good, but crown of madness costs a level 2 spell slot to cast.

(also, at what it does, magic mouth does its job just fine. it may be a niche spell, but at least in its niche it does what it is supposed to do).

frankly, i find it hard to believe that the most impressive thing you can do with a spell is some random monster's basic attack routine. did you choose a class with limited resources so that you could do the same thing as the classes that don't have limited resources? because odds are good that the fighter, barbarian, ranger, paladin, rogue, monk, and warlock are all perfectly capable of doing similar damage, the main difference being that it doesn't take them a level 2 spell slot that you won't be seeing again to do it.

[Ashrym]

true strike is a cantrip. it doesn't have to be a better effect than crown of madness to be a better spell, because it has no resource cost to cast it. obviously, neither are good, but crown of madness costs a level 2 spell slot to cast.

(also, at what it does, magic mouth does its job just fine. it may be a niche spell, but at least in its niche it does what it is supposed to do).

frankly, i find it hard to believe that the most impressive thing you can do with a spell is some random monster's basic attack routine. did you choose a class with limited resources so that you could do the same thing as the classes that don't have limited resources? because odds are good that the fighter, barbarian, ranger, paladin, rogue, monk, and warlock are all perfectly capable of doing similar damage, the main difference being that it doesn't take them a level 2 spell slot that you won't be seeing again to do it.

Take a look at lore bard attack options. They suck. They suck badly. Then look at some of the damage higher level humanoids can do.

Action denial has been a big part of combat for some time and using it with an attack against the enemy is decent to go with it. Hold person is usually a better spell for action denial and a damage increase because it targets the same saving throw and creature types but if the idea is a person wants opponents to move then crown of madness has that soft control effect that spreads them apart. Crown of madness also has a situational benefit of using the target to damage something that's not a humanoid and couldn't be targeted by hold.

I kind of like the idea of the rider attacking his mount. I'm going to have wizards attacking their familiars if i can pull it off, now.

As far as spells go, I'm not going to say it's really good because it's not, but it's good under the right circumstances and promoting an opportunity attack dogpile with the added attack on another enemy certainly isn't the worst spell option in combat. It's basically a low level dominate ability that would be quickly replaced by dominate at higher levels. Dominate person and hold person only have half the range, however, for another bit of a perk.

[SharkForce]

the problem is that the majority of the time, you're going to get the worse of the two possible options (attack a target of your choice or move away). the one you want most is the one that is least likely to happen, unless the target is particularly dumb.

if there was a shortage of CC in the bard spell list, i might see your point. but there isn't.

and yes, i realize that it's probably the best of the default bard list for damage at that level (against groups, there is an argument to be made for shatter). but if your goal in life is to deal melee damage, you may wish to rethink the decision to be a lore bard.

spell slots are not for dealing damage comparable to a fighter. that's a losing proposition, because you're giving up a limited resource to do something that is not worth limited resources. the best use of it is to prevent an enemy from doing an action that is particularly nasty, but for that there are much better options that don't let the enemy make a choice about which of two options they prefer.

[Susano-wo]

In defense of Blade Ward, people seem to be acting like it lasts 1 turn, but it lasts until the end of your next turn. This is still pretty 'meh' unless you have the ability to cast it with a bonus action, or by using the EK ability to attack after using your action to cast a cantrip, etc. and then it becomes a much more attractive option, allowing you to cast Blade Ward using essentially 1/4 of their your actions (though it becomes a lot less attractive for the EK again after the 3rd attack at 11th level. :smallsigh:

Not a stellar spell, but with the right action setups it can be useful

and RE: patch spells. I would agree in principle, but disagree that armor spells are patches. The idea isn't that you ought to have X AC, its that you can chose to have X AC if you want to sacrifice the spell slots to do it.

[Ashrym]

the problem is that the majority of the time, you're going to get the worse of the two possible options (attack a target of your choice or move away). the one you want most is the one that is least likely to happen, unless the target is particularly dumb.

What is your basis for that assumption? There can't really be a worse when both options are help. The only difference is when to drop the spell and move on to the next spell.


if there was a shortage of CC in the bard spell list, i might see your point. but there isn't.

It's not just CC, although my point was it's not the worst spell there is so hopefully you do understand that.


and yes, i realize that it's probably the best of the default bard list for damage at that level (against groups, there is an argument to be made for shatter). but if your goal in life is to deal melee damage, you may wish to rethink the decision to be a lore bard.

It's not just damage. It's damage plus action denial plus decent range over many spells plus additional soft control plus the charmed condition plus the opportunity for additional damage from opportunity attacks. It's a lot of weaker abilities tied to one spell.


spell slots are not for dealing damage comparable to a fighter. that's a losing proposition, because you're giving up a limited resource to do something that is not worth limited resources. the best use of it is to prevent an enemy from doing an action that is particularly nasty, but for that there are much better options that don't let the enemy make a choice about which of two options they prefer.

Strawman. No one said it was to do damage comparable to a fighter. It's to prevent damage plus inflict damage plus possibly inflict more damage.

[ImSAMazing]

Another really bad spell is power word kill. Killing one enemy with up to 100 hp is just not worthy of a 9th level spell slot. You could cast meteor swarm and do an average of 140 damage to an entire battlefield instead.

It's useful when you power word kill a demilich ;)

[Steampunkette]

Transmute Stone to Rock.

[pwykersotz]

Crown of Madness has one halarious niche and it might be my favorite spell.

A dragon rider (caster) was attacking the party on a cliffside. To stay safe the dragon was flying about 15' away from the edge. The sorcerer on their turn started with "attack the dragon now, she is defenseless against you!" which kinda confused everyone (including me). The sorcerer then cast a subtle spell Crown of Madness on the rider. The rider attacked the dragon. The dragon, thinking she had been betrayed and just got a shocking grasp to the back of the head, decided to unbuckle the harness and fly upside down. Grapple check went in favor of the dragon. Caster fell 200' down having used their reaction for a counter spell already in that round (no feather fall).

Dragon flew away.

Even if it is a horse, unintelligent bird, or a dragon as a mount, Crown of Madness is the funniest anti-mount spell out there.

That is absolutely amazing. :smallbiggrin:

[SharkForce]

What is your basis for that assumption? There can't really be a worse when both options are help. The only difference is when to drop the spell and move on to the next spell.



It's not just CC, although my point was it's not the worst spell there is so hopefully you do understand that.



It's not just damage. It's damage plus action denial plus decent range over many spells plus additional soft control plus the charmed condition plus the opportunity for additional damage from opportunity attacks. It's a lot of weaker abilities tied to one spell.



Strawman. No one said it was to do damage comparable to a fighter. It's to prevent damage plus inflict damage plus possibly inflict more damage.

- the enemy has a choice between getting opportunity attacks on it or making an attack on its allies (or, alternately, its allies simply stepping to the side and continuing their attack if there is enough room). whichever of those two options you want most is likely the outcome the target wants least. more often than not, they will pick the option that is less beneficial to you. neither is a bad outcome, but you're typically not going to get the option you wanted most.

- i'm not entirely convinced the spell is not in the running for worst. it's hard to narrow it down to one spell that is the absolute worst in the game, but this spell, even if it is not the worst, is definitely a competitor.

- that just boils down to unimpressive damage with unimpressive control. i'm not interested in "meh" damage with "meh" control. in any given scenario, i likely want either damage, or control. in both cases, i'm probably looking for better than single-target as well, although on occasion single-target control is good enough. but seriously, i'm blowing a spell slot, i want results that are better than a fighter who can do the same thing repeatedly.

single-target control is just generally not worth it. when you're blowing spells, you're looking to swing the fight, not provide some minor benefit. in the situations where it is worth it (eg one powerful enemy with a bunch of trivial minions or similar), crown of madness is not particularly a great option because it targets a common save proficiency, broadcasts what is happening, can be avoided by good positioning, and costs you your future actions and concentration. it doesn't have reliability, and it isn't a powerful CC effect when it does work. if i'm gonna blow concentration on keeping a single enemy out of the fight, i'll do it with suggestion (and choose which of the available actions *i* would like to see happen, instead of the enemy making that decision) and get to use my future actions myself, thanks.

[KorvinStarmast]

In defense of Bane:
Party has
1 monk
1 barbarian
1 cleric
1 wizard

We are at 1st level as a party

We have a skirmish with seven goblins in a passage with a 10' frontage.

First round I cast Bane. The critters I cast this at
" ... makes an attack roll or saving throw before the spell ends, the target must roll a d4 and subtract the number rolled from the attack roll or saving throw. (PHB p. 216)"

I pick the closest three line goblins. If the third one is tossing javelins rather than in melee, he has a lower chance of hitting me or the mage in the second rank.

The one goblin my wizard friend tosses firebolt at has a -1d4 to his save so he's more likely to take full damage.

Second round I cast sacred flame and the goblin has a -1d4 to his save. Better chance that his dex save isn't successful and he takes all of the damage.

Now, is this spell as good as Bless?

Bless is a better buff for our melee front line, so that they hit the goblins more often, but Bane helps the whole party until those three goblins are dead.

Of course a goblin not Baned might disrupt my concentration if he tosses a jav at me and hits and I miss my save, true. He could equally disrupt Bless, and he doesn't get any negatives to his attack if I have Bless up. (Should I bless myself to improve my Con save? Well, I'd rather bless the mage, as he has lower armor and is likely to need the protection ... )

What I like about Bane is that for the attacks against me he has a lesser chance to hit me and do damage, and thus reduces the chance that concentration ends.

Bless doesn't help me as much, but it does help the front line hit more often so long as my concentration remains up. Or, I do include myself and risk the mage getting hit more often? I want to keep him alive for as long as the fight lasts, so reducing the chance that he gets hit by some of our foes helps to achieve that end.

[KorvinStarmast]

what do you cast on them now that you're already concentrating on your bane spell?
If a cleric, sacred flame on each successive round.
Not a concentration spell. His save is hurt so is more likely to take full damage.

Other non concentration damage spells as levels go up, of course, and other spell casters in the party also benefit from the reduced saves.

[SharkForce]

In defense of Bane:
Party has
1 monk
1 barbarian
1 cleric
1 wizard

We are at 1st level as a party

We have a skirmish with seven goblins in a passage with a 10' frontage.

First round I cast Bane. The critters I cast this at
" ... makes an attack roll or saving throw before the spell ends, the target must roll a d4 and subtract the number rolled from the attack roll or saving throw. (PHB p. 216)"

I pick the closest three line goblins. If the third one is tossing javelins rather than in melee, he has a lower chance of hitting me or the mage in the second rank.

The one goblin my wizard friend tosses firebolt at has a -1d4 to his save so he's more likely to take full damage.

Second round I cast sacred flame and the goblin has a -1d4 to his save. Better chance that his dex save isn't successful and he takes all of the damage.

Now, is this spell as good as Bless?

Bless is a better buff for our melee front line, so that they hit the goblins more often, but Bane helps the whole party until those three goblins are dead.

Of course a goblin not Baned might disrupt my concentration if he tosses a jav at me and hits and I miss my save, true. He could equally disrupt Bless, and he doesn't get any negatives to his attack if I have Bless up. (Should I bless myself to improve my Con save? Well, I'd rather bless the mage, as he has lower armor and is likely to need the protection ... )

What I like about Bane is that for the attacks against me he has a lesser chance to hit me and do damage, and thus reduces the chance that concentration ends.

Bless doesn't help me as much, but it does help the front line hit more often so long as my concentration remains up. Or, I do include myself and risk the mage getting hit more often? I want to keep him alive for as long as the fight lasts, so reducing the chance that he gets hit by some of our foes helps to achieve that end.

that would work... *if bane hit three targets by default* that is.

which it doesn't. so change your example to be reducing the attack roll of one of those goblins. not three.

edit: oh, and firebolt is an attack roll, not a save. it gets helped by bless, not bane.

[Ashrym]

It's useful when you power word kill a demilich ;)

Power word kill is the follow up to polymorph. Polymorph something into a frog or whatever, then power word kill it because it has no hit points. Or sleep it.

[Ashrym]

- the enemy has a choice between getting opportunity attacks on it or making an attack on its allies (or, alternately, its allies simply stepping to the side and continuing their attack if there is enough room). whichever of those two options you want most is likely the outcome the target wants least. more often than not, they will pick the option that is less beneficial to you. neither is a bad outcome, but you're typically not going to get the option you wanted most.

There is no "worse" when both are good. The result is good or good. It's only a 2nd-level spell that either accomplished the same benefit as dissonant whispers plus action denial then likely ends like dissonant whispers, or continuous action denial.

Worse implies a poor outcome that doesn't exist.


- i'm not entirely convinced the spell is not in the running for worst. it's hard to narrow it down to one spell that is the absolute worst in the game, but this spell, even if it is not the worst, is definitely a competitor.

You certainly haven't demonstrated such. I know people who want to rate it sky blue on the guides but I wouldn't personally go that high.

It's multifunctional using a lot of different effects into one spell where all a person really needs is to have a small group in melee.

I've also seen it used to control which party member gets attacked to help protect softer targets or a retributive effect.

Hold person is more useful more often but crown of madness has it's moments and twice the range. It's easy to eliminate this spell from the worst because the effects are good effects even considering other options but there are enough little things rolled in for tactical play and versatility that it's easily not the worst.


- that just boils down to unimpressive damage with unimpressive control. i'm not interested in "meh" damage with "meh" control. in any given scenario, i likely want either damage, or control. in both cases, i'm probably looking for better than single-target as well, although on occasion single-target control is good enough. but seriously, i'm blowing a spell slot, i want results that are better than a fighter who can do the same thing repeatedly.

You don't seem to understand the damage potential. It's the same damage potential that makes dissonant whispers good plus the initial action denial, and if the targets don't bite then it's still continuous damage plus action denial.


single-target control is just generally not worth it. when you're blowing spells, you're looking to swing the fight, not provide some minor benefit. in the situations where it is worth it (eg one powerful enemy with a bunch of trivial minions or similar), crown of madness is not particularly a great option because it targets a common save proficiency, broadcasts what is happening, can be avoided by good positioning, and costs you your future actions and concentration. it doesn't have reliability, and it isn't a powerful CC effect when it does work. if i'm gonna blow concentration on keeping a single enemy out of the fight, i'll do it with suggestion (and choose which of the available actions *i* would like to see happen, instead of the enemy making that decision) and get to use my future actions myself, thanks.

Single target control is what exists at those levels and can swing a fight, but it still goes beyond that.

This is the spell you can use to have a witch doctor kill it's familiar instead of fireballing your group, have your battlemaster move in to attack the wizard, and if the wizard is still alive mentally command the wizard to attack the fighter.

The witch doctor is likely to miss and take a riposte. His attacks on the fighter are negligible and the tactic opens up either riposte attacks or opportunity attacks and lost spells, and cost the familiar regardless of outcome and the witch doctor cannot attack the spell caster while it's active even when allowed to his own choices.

Now, your first thought is, "why not just use hold person?" Excellent question.

The range for crown of madness is 120 feet. The range on hold person is 60 feet. The range on counterspell is 60 feet.

I want to take the teeth out of that opponent before he takes the teeth out of me, if at all possible. Range becomes important.

You are giving up some control of your spell and I can see that. The way I see it, giving up some of that control for a bit of versatility and range can be worth it and not kill the the spell as bad.

Like I said earlier, it's a tactical spell and it's better than it first appears.

[Battlebooze]

that would work... *if bane hit three targets by default* that is.

which it doesn't. so change your example to be reducing the attack roll of one of those goblins. not three.

edit: oh, and firebolt is an attack roll, not a save. it gets helped by bless, not bane.

It is UP to three as a first level spell and scales up to more targets as you up cast it.

The -1d4 to saves is really nice for my Bard's party since we are all either full or partial casters.

On the other hand, now that we are around 8th level I don't cast it Bane that much. It could easily come in handy though.

[SharkForce]

There is no "worse" when both are good. The result is good or good. It's only a 2nd-level spell that either accomplished the same benefit as dissonant whispers plus action denial then likely ends like dissonant whispers, or continuous action denial.

Worse implies a poor outcome that doesn't exist.



You certainly haven't demonstrated such. I know people who want to rate it sky blue on the guides but I wouldn't personally go that high.

It's multifunctional using a lot of different effects into one spell where all a person really needs is to have a small group in melee.

I've also seen it used to control which party member gets attacked to help protect softer targets or a retributive effect.

Hold person is more useful more often but crown of madness has it's moments and twice the range. It's easy to eliminate this spell from the worst because the effects are good effects even considering other options but there are enough little things rolled in for tactical play and versatility that it's easily not the worst.



You don't seem to understand the damage potential. It's the same damage potential that makes dissonant whispers good plus the initial action denial, and if the targets don't bite then it's still continuous damage plus action denial.



Single target control is what exists at those levels and can swing a fight, but it still goes beyond that.

This is the spell you can use to have a witch doctor kill it's familiar instead of fireballing your group, have your battlemaster move in to attack the wizard, and if the wizard is still alive mentally command the wizard to attack the fighter.

The witch doctor is likely to miss and take a riposte. His attacks on the fighter are negligible and the tactic opens up either riposte attacks or opportunity attacks and lost spells, and cost the familiar regardless of outcome and the witch doctor cannot attack the spell caster while it's active even when allowed to his own choices.

Now, your first thought is, "why not just use hold person?" Excellent question.

The range for crown of madness is 120 feet. The range on hold person is 60 feet. The range on counterspell is 60 feet.

I want to take the teeth out of that opponent before he takes the teeth out of me, if at all possible. Range becomes important.

You are giving up some control of your spell and I can see that. The way I see it, giving up some of that control for a bit of versatility and range can be worth it and not kill the the spell as bad.

Like I said earlier, it's a tactical spell and it's better than it first appears.

if i want action denial, there are better spells. ones that don't require concentration, or force me to spend actions to maintain it. there are even AoE options (though not necessarily on the default bard list). likewise with damage. this is kinda like dissonant whispers, except it can be completely avoided.

and if the shaman is 120 feet away, then you bloody well aren't forcing him to hit anything, because he's making melee attacks. unless you mean, in 2-4 rounds (depending on how many dash actions the fighter is going to make) of you spending your action doing nothing while the shaman casts whatever spells he damn well pleases because if you don't choose a target (or can't choose a target) he acts normally, you can force the shaman to attack the fighter. unless the shaman's minions just form a line and are not in melee with the shaman, who likely can give them orders to stand in between him and you, but not next to him.

there's a whole lot of "if" in getting good results out of the spell, and most of those ifs are decided by your enemies, not you. there are a whole lot of drawbacks in the spell that are not optional.

dissonant whispers is level 1, doesn't cost concentration, and you choose which bad action someone takes. and no, just because both options are bad for the enemy doesn't mean they're good for you. opportunity costs are a thing; a dagger is a bad weapon for your raging barbarian, period. it is marginally better than bare hands, but not by much. the fact that it is better than bare hands does not, in any way, make it good. it just makes it slightly less bad.

crown of madness has several drawbacks, and costs a level 2 slot. it is generally speaking not worth the actions it takes to cast, the spell known slot, or the spell slot you had to expend to cast it. it just isn't good.

regarding bane: huh. this is really weird. i could've swore last i checked it was single-target only. fair enough, with three targets it is at least decent. i can't say i ever considered it to be the worst spell, and three targets makes it at least decent. i still don't think i'd generally cast it, but at least i could see some specific scenario where it would be a decent option.

i still don't think it is generally worth the action, but sometimes it could be.

[Ashrym]

if i want action denial, there are better spells. ones that don't require concentration, or force me to spend actions to maintain it. there are even AoE options (though not necessarily on the default bard list). likewise with damage. this is kinda like dissonant whispers, except it can be completely avoided.

Incorrect. This is like dissonant whispers plus an attack that scales up in damage with the target plus the denied action against the party plus the inability to attack the spellcaster who cast the spell. The best other spell for action denial is hold person at that level and it lacks range or the ability to use the same spell known as a social spell or the ability to use it to attack something not a humanoid. There is a clear benefit over hold person in that bit of versatility. You don't need 3 spells to do what 1 does in crown of madness.

If nothing else, it's replicating a good spell in dissonant whispers but in giving up the forced movement for soft control movement it's adding action denial and preventing the target from attacking you at the same time. Many smaller benefits over 1 benefit.


and if the shaman is 120 feet away, then you bloody well aren't forcing him to hit anything, because he's making melee attacks. unless you mean, in 2-4 rounds (depending on how many dash actions the fighter is going to make) of you spending your action doing nothing while the shaman casts whatever spells he damn well pleases because if you don't choose a target (or can't choose a target) he acts normally, you can force the shaman to attack the fighter. unless the shaman's minions just form a line and are not in melee with the shaman, who likely can give them orders to stand in between him and you, but not next to him.

If the enemy caster is more than 60 feet away (no one said maximum range) then I am forcing him to attack any adjacent target and not cast a spell, and in being more than 60 feet away he cannot counterspell it. Do you realize how easy it is for me to move back outside of counterspell range while the party is already close enough to close?


there's a whole lot of "if" in getting good results out of the spell, and most of those ifs are decided by your enemies, not you. there are a whole lot of drawbacks in the spell that are not optional.

There's a lot less 'if' on my side because the characters move as needed. The 'if' was on your side when you decided 'if' there are no adjacent enemies to the shaman, whom I would use a different spell on in such a case. I wouldn't cast a spell that wouldn't work over one that would based on circumstances. What you require for your assertion is that the circumstances are never good for crown of madness.


dissonant whispers is level 1, doesn't cost concentration, and you choose which bad action someone takes. and no, just because both options are bad for the enemy doesn't mean they're good for you. opportunity costs are a thing; a dagger is a bad weapon for your raging barbarian, period. it is marginally better than bare hands, but not by much. the fact that it is better than bare hands does not, in any way, make it good. it just makes it slightly less bad.

crown of madness has several drawbacks, and costs a level 2 slot. it is generally speaking not worth the actions it takes to cast, the spell known slot, or the spell slot you had to expend to cast it. it just isn't good.

Dissonant whispers is level 1, half the range so within counterspell range, still requires the party to move into position just like the attempt on crown, doesn't scale with the target damage or provide the action denial or keep the target from attacking the caster and is a one shot deal. That's a lot being added for a single spell level up.

Like I said, lot's of smaller benefits over a big benefit, often not the best spell, but never the worst spell and circumstantially very effective.


regarding bane: huh. this is really weird. i could've swore last i checked it was single-target only. fair enough, with three targets it is at least decent. i can't say i ever considered it to be the worst spell, and three targets makes it at least decent. i still don't think i'd generally cast it, but at least i could see some specific scenario where it would be a decent option.

i still don't think it is generally worth the action, but sometimes it could be.

Bane is pretty decent. I didn't realized you missed the 3 targets in a first level slot. Like many low level spells (crown of madness included), it's got too much competition for better concentration spells at higher levels so becomes a tough sell as those spells become available.

[SharkForce]

but it isn't a straight upgrade to dissonant whispers. it takes up concentration. it takes up future actions. it takes up a level 2 spell slot. it requires someone to target be standing next to it.

as far as action denial at level 2, depending on spell list:

web (denies movement, which can also deny attacks)
phantasmal force (very rare int save, also does some damage, enemy can't just walk out of it, int check - not save - plus spent action required to escape, plus can be used to enhance offence against the target)
calm emotions (aoe, drawback of basically requiring that no enemy make their save at all - terrible at level 3 because you don't have the DC for it, good vs the right enemy at level 20)
heat metal (armoured targets only, but can force them to take their armour off instead of fighting, while taking damage, and even if it doesn't work it still destroys their usefulness).
silence (denies casting to many targets)
suggestion (ridiculous duration, and as noted *you* get to choose the action they do instead of attacking you)
command (scaled to level 2 is two targets)
entangle (denies action and potentially attacks, and is only level 1)
gust of wind (another movement alteration spell)
sleep (scaled to level 2 it is 7d8 hit points of creatures)

not all of those are bard spells (some are), but they are all perfectly good examples of level 2 (or lower) spells that deny actions just fine, in most cases with something to recommend them over the crown.

didn't go through the EE spells, there's probably one or two decent options there also.

like i said, once you start scraping the bottom of the barrel, it's hard to conclusively point to something and say "this one is the worst of the lot". there's a lot of competition to be the worst spell in the game. i don't know that the crown is that one. but it isn't far off.

honestly, even if i'm looking for "shut down single enemy target plus do a bit of damage", it isn't my top choice. phantasmal force can persuade the target they're bound, gagged, blindfolded, and helpless, and the thing that's holding them in place is a carnivorous thorny vine that is sucking their blood out slowly, and is on a much rarer save. yeah, the damage isn't great, but i'll take the int save and the ability to leave them completely vulnerable to attacks any day of the week, thanks. or, if you're concerned about it wearing off first, just use suggestion. they won't attack their allies, but they're not just going to walk 5 feet away from their allies and wait for the spell to end either.

[Ashrym]

Your list of spells confirms this:


often not the best spell

and doesn't refute this:


but never the worst spell and circumstantially very effective.

A spell that's hard to make effective use of is Enthrall. All it does is create a penalty while the caster creates a distraction instead of simply creating a distraction.


but it isn't a straight upgrade to dissonant whispers. it takes up concentration. it takes up future actions. it takes up a level 2 spell slot. it requires someone to target be standing next to it.

No, it's better because it has twice the range of dissonant whispers and guarantees the target cannot attack the caster on that failed save. Ongoing concentration and actions are optional based on best circumstances and not required; they generally only occur if the movement does not. If the movement does not occur then it's continuous action denial and more damage inflicted based on the forced attacks. The damage is there either as fast damage from movement or damage over time from attacks but it's there.

web (denies movement, which can also deny attacks) -- same concentration cost, also limited to 60 ft range, stiff requirement on placement due to opposing surfaces, different saving throw is nice but 2 edged, easily burned away. It's also non-selective so will impact party members in the area.

phantasmal force (very rare int save, also does some damage, enemy can't just walk out of it, int check - not save - plus spent action required to escape, plus can be used to enhance offence against the target) --This is a spell that doesn't force the target to interact with the illusion so doesn't necessarily deny any actions (treating the phantasm as real doesn't force interaction) and does less damage than crown of madness. It also doesn't apply the charmed condition. It still requires concentration and it's also still only half the range at 60 feet. A person is almost always better to cast hold person than phantasmal force. The only real benefits are it can affect more creature types and lacks repeat saves, and INT save is nice. It doesn't specifically deny actions against the party, however, and damage from it is low.

calm emotions (aoe, drawback of basically requiring that no enemy make their save at all - terrible at level 3 because you don't have the DC for it, good vs the right enemy at level 20) -- The same concentration requirement, as you stated it's terrible with low DC's, and it's still limited to 60 ft range. It does absolutely no damage and is completely useless if the party needs to kill any of the creatures in the effect. It's a niche spell.

heat metal (armoured targets only, but can force them to take their armour off instead of fighting, while taking damage, and even if it doesn't work it still destroys their usefulness). -- This is still concentration, still only 60 ft range, still doesn't create any action denial, and is very limited in target types. Damage is nice, but the CON save tends to be harder to target than WIS.

silence (denies casting to many targets) -- This one has good range although it still requires concentration. It's also extremely limited in target choice because it's selectively used against spell casters. The spell casters can usually just move out of the area of effect so you might get some opportunity attacks on them but it's still missing action denial or other ongoing damage. It's only effective against spell casters if there is a way to keep them in the area. Crown of madness at least has some situational use if the target has moved in the charmed condition and did deny an action. Spell casters just move before taking the action.

suggestion (ridiculous duration, and as noted *you* get to choose the action they do instead of attacking you) -- Suggestion is an awesome spell. Too bad it's only 30 ft range and still takes up concentration, requires the target to hear you (not a biggie), and understand you (might be bigger), and automatically fails if obviously harmful (like attacking someone). Action denial is likely and easy enough, damage less so.

command (scaled to level 2 is two targets) -- I like command. No concentration and even though the list of commands is limited they can also provoke opportunity attacks. It doesn't deny an action and inflict damage and promote opportunity attacks, however. It's limited one one of based on the one word command. The range is still limited to 60 feet, there is no opportunity for ongoing action denial and damage, no charmed condition. Command is versatile but it's not as capable of multiple benefits at once like crown of madness is.

entangle (denies action and potentially attacks, and is only level 1) -- This is another spell I like. It does AoE, can create movement blocking and actual action denial if actions are spent breaking free. The range is better at 90 feet than many listed spells. It doesn't actually force action denial because the targets can still attack back, likely via range or spells, and it won't prevent attacking the caster in attempts to break concentration. It's also not selective an will impact party members in the area. It will up damage on DEX spells and a pretty good spell, for sure.

gust of wind (another movement alteration spell) -- This is another spell where enemies simply move outside of the area. It's 60 ft long and 10 ft wide so moving 5 ft to the right or left then advancing has cost the initial push back and some movement but it doesn't do any damage and any movement the targets were going to make towards you were going to trigger opportunity attacks anyway. It still costs concentration, doesn't create damage, doesn't deny actions, and is only really effective in tight spaces where it can impact your own party. It's non-selective.

sleep (scaled to level 2 it is 7d8 hit points of creatures) -- Another solid spell. No save, no concentration, 90 ft range, definitely creates action denial and extra damage vs sleeping enemies. The only issue with this is it's still non-selective. It targets enemies and allies alike, and the hit point distribution is just as likely to allies as enemies, or enemies that were sooner to drop due to lower hit points. The real issue is it doesn't scale well at higher levels. Sleep can be cast in a higher level slot trying to keep up to hit points, but crown scales based on enemy damage and improves with levels as the DC and that enemy damage goes up, using the same 2nd level slot.


not all of those are bard spells (some are), but they are all perfectly good examples of level 2 (or lower) spells that deny actions just fine, in most cases with something to recommend them over the crown.

There are reasons to recommend the crown over them in every case as well. Many of them don't deny actions as well as the crown does.


like i said, once you start scraping the bottom of the barrel, it's hard to conclusively point to something and say "this one is the worst of the lot". there's a lot of competition to be the worst spell in the game. i don't know that the crown is that one. but it isn't far off.

Still disagree. If anything, you seem to be demonstrating that the crown is a go-to spell for range as long as there are 2 enemies together, and then drop it unless there's a benefit to keeping it.


honestly, even if i'm looking for "shut down single enemy target plus do a bit of damage", it isn't my top choice. phantasmal force can persuade the target they're bound, gagged, blindfolded, and helpless, and the thing that's holding them in place is a carnivorous thorny vine that is sucking their blood out slowly, and is on a much rarer save. yeah, the damage isn't great, but i'll take the int save and the ability to leave them completely vulnerable to attacks any day of the week, thanks. or, if you're concerned about it wearing off first, just use suggestion. they won't attack their allies, but they're not just going to walk 5 feet away from their allies and wait for the spell to end either.

Phantasmal force wouldn't keep that target bound and helpless. That target would think he's bound and helpless but when he struggles to escape will easily move and then his perception will adapt to explain why he can still move, he'll take low damage, and then he'll still be able to attack while taking low damage having rationalized why he's not really helpless. The spell can't really bind and gag him and when it doesn't he'll already have a reason why.

Suggestion is a great spell.

The crown doesn't end by walking away from an ally either. It ends if the caster chooses not to maintain it after the allies moved and having already inflicted damage and lost an action plus just moved and risked more damage from opportunity attacks. The opportunity attacks are still easy so long as the target was already near party members or they moved to an enabling position when they saw the crown. That's enough effectiveness in itself to validate the spell over some of the other options you listed. Other spells have their own advantages but that just gets back to my earlier comment that it's often not the best choice. It's just seldom the worst either given the effects it produces.

You'll also find movement isn't always an option. In a dungeon room, party members and hem the target in because he can't move through them and can't shove them having already spent his action. Entangling the enemies means the crown target cannot spend actions to escape while an ally is nearby because he's already spent his action to attack that target, and in order to correct that the other enemies are forced to spend their actions to break free or the crown target always has someone to hit; there's good synergy in those 2 spells as long as there are 2 spell casters to work together and hold person isn't the better choice in a case like that. With entangle plus crown there's more action denial than either produces alone or hold will accomplish.

Every spell has pro's, con's and situations that work in it's favor. That's why no spell caster is going to cast the crown as the default attack every encounter. It's got enough benefits and tactical uses that it's no where near trash.

[Chronos]

If you're considering denying actions to be a significant point in favor of Crown of Madness, then you have to consider costing actions to be an equally significant point against it.

And Phantasmal Force can in fact force the target to interact with it, depending on the nature of the illusion. What if, for instance, it's a cage of some sort around the target?

[KorvinStarmast]

that would work... *if bane hit three targets by default* that is.

which it doesn't. so change your example to be reducing the attack roll of one of those goblins. not three.

edit: oh, and firebolt is an attack roll, not a save. it gets helped by bless, not bane.
I'll review the spell description and get back to you.
Follow up:

I read Bane to apply to three of those goblins.

Your point on firebolt is taken, thank you.

FWIW, my party prefers "Bless" since the melee guys take the position that (I have +3 con bonus) I'll usually keep concentration and they'll be able to tear through more enemies with the boosted attacks in ten rounds. They believe that the best defense is a good offense, and they scoff at my Sacred Flame. :p We serve our fellow adventurers, we clerics, so I more often prepare Bless than not.

[Talderas]

It's not just damage. It's damage plus action denial plus decent range over many spells plus additional soft control plus the charmed condition plus the opportunity for additional damage from opportunity attacks. It's a lot of weaker abilities tied to one spell.

Action denial requires that you gain an action advantage over your opinion or that it can be reasonably said that your lost actions have a smaller effect than the actions that you are causing to be lost. Crown of Madness does not reach that threshold and in fact can grant the opponent an action advantage. The range is inconsequential since 60ft and under is the typical range a caster will need to engage at anyway. The charmed condition is inconsequential since any benefit from it would necessitate you to be in melee range of the target. If you're not in melee range and the target is able to attack you then the target has ranged attacks anyway and the spell only denies the target attacking you rather than an ally. The damage benefit against opponents is not something you'll get when getting the benefit of the charmed condition since this likely means you're also in range of the target the charmed target is attacking (stupid caster). While it has a number of minor benefits and the spell is good if all those minor benefits can be utilized the simply fact is that those minor benefits way to often occur in contradictory situations. All of this on top of the fact that you no longer have actions while maintaining the spell.

Blindness and Hold Person are also 2nd level spells and basically outshine Crown of Madness in every category. Both spells have the same end conditions as Crown of Madness without denying you actions and have far more potent effects.

The major factor that makes true strike a terrible spell is that it requires concentration. The classes that could see the most benefit from it are also classes that are likely to be using spells with concentration. That is a flaw mostly in how the spell is written rather than a flaw in the effect.

[SharkForce]

edit: there was a misquote here. pay it no mind.


the thing with crown of madness being concentration is that, whether or not you sustain it, it *still* prevents and/or ends other concentration effects. i can dissonant whispers while i'm in a hallway with gust of wind running. i cannot cast crown of madness while doing that. i can maintain my own entangle or web and dissonant whispers a target to run into that area.

and yes, many of those other spells are also concentration. but they don't also take up actions to keep running, and they all have hefty advantages over crown of madness.

also, so long as there is a surface available, web does not need opposing points any more (in fact, in some situations it may be more beneficial to layer it 5 feet thick on the ceiling... so much for those annoying flying enemies, and it sure doesn't pay to be tall any more for that ogre). heck, even if i just lob it into the air, i still get one round of it... which is about as much as you're expecting from your crown of madness, actually. it also isn't all that vulnerable to fire. you can burn *one* 5 ft cube that is exposed to fire... and it doesn't finish burning until 1 round has passed. that's certainly more vulnerable than some things, but if you're thinking of just burning your way through a web with something other than a large AOE spell, it won't get done any time soon.

i am generally speaking not looking for a spell that does a few things badly. i would much rather have spells that do a good job of covering those areas. if, for some reason, i actually care about the charmed condition, i'm not going to be picking crown of madness to cause it. if i care about making the target move somewhere, i'll pick a spell that lets me choose where, not them. if i care about dealing damage, i'll pick a spell that is designed to do that. even for a sorcerer, where you have limited spell selection, and it might seem like a spell that can do a variety of things would be appealing... the spells you do cast need to pack a real punch, not be moderately annoying unless combined with someone else.

[D.U.P.A.]

I do not think that Barkskin is useless. Along with druid, evel Ancients paladin can find use in it if the party is surprised in the sleep (so there is no time to wear armor) or other cases where armor cannot be worn. But yes, concentration makes it notably worse.

[KorvinStarmast]

the thing with crown of madness being concentration is that, As I was not championing Crown of Madness, I am not sure why you replied to me. Enjoyed the post anyway. :smallbiggrin:

[Ashrym]

If you're considering denying actions to be a significant point in favor of Crown of Madness, then you have to consider costing actions to be an equally significant point against it.

And Phantasmal Force can in fact force the target to interact with it, depending on the nature of the illusion. What if, for instance, it's a cage of some sort around the target?

The cage looks like a real cage and when the target tests it to see how sturdy it is walks right through and decides the bars are wider than they look or bent easily or whatever.

The spell can't actually restrain anyone or make it helpless or even make them think they are helpless.

There's no control over how the target reacts to or interacts with the illusion. It does treat the illusion as real but that can do a lot of things, and a cage, like in your example, doesn't inflict damage in the attempt to deny actions. Hold person is very likely to be the superior choice over phantasmal force unless the target is invalid for hold person. You may as well have used Tasha's in a lower level slot.

The action cost for crown is an upgrade in the action choice for 2 possible reasons: 1) the spell caster spending the same action on an attack would do less damage than the target of the spell does, and 2) the spell caster is making a melee attack while being removed from melee.

The action isn't lost. The spell caster has one action that he spends regardless. Spending an action on maintaining the spell versus spending the action on another spell versus spending the action on an attack leaves the caster having used 1 action and is left with 1 action. There's a possibility of opportunity cost but not action cost when the action was spent on using the target for a melee attack.

As soon as crown isn't worth maintaining no action is spent maintaining it. It's cast when it's advantageous to be cast, used, maintained when it's advantageous to maintain, and dropped when it's no longer worth it. Circumstances ate never against the spell because the spell caster would use a different spell in that case and crown would always be cast when circumstances favor it.

Circumstances favor it when range is a factor, when there is a group of melee engaged with the party, when the group has a reason not to attack the target (ally charmed or confused, for example; rare use), in concert with other effects that restrict movement but not actions (entangle example above), or you need the charmed condition but don't want to give the save up to advantage.

I used to think the spell was trash until I experimented with it and it plays deceptively better than it first appears. Concentration is a drawback like every other concentration spell, but the biggest issue with crown is it's limited to humanoids. Spells limited by target type are useless in the wrong encounters so need alternatives.

That makes it like web, which is a good spell, where I had pointed out the limiting factor above. It's not like the goblins in the dwarf king's 60x80' throne room with vaulted ceilings are going to wait for the PC's to build some walls. The ogres aren't going to don metal armor and throw away wooden clubs so the spell caster can cast heat metal, for another example. These are just different restrictions on otherwise good spells. Aside, I would never take heat metal on a bard because it's too restricted but it's great on a druid who can swap it in on appropriate adventures.

I think phantasmal force is useful for several reasons, with more target creature types than hold or crown and without repeat saves high on that list. It still lacks some advantages crown or hold have.

[SharkForce]

once again, you can just web on the floor. or a wall. or the ceiling. you can cast it between 2 opposing points, or you can just layer it on the surface. both are options.

and unless you were hoping for a 20 foot tall web specifically, there is no particular disadvantage to just casting it on a surface.

and in the specific example, 20 foot tall web is likely enough to stretch from floor to ceiling, vaulted or not.

[Talderas]

I used to think the spell was trash until I experimented with it and it plays deceptively better than it first appears. Concentration is a drawback like every other concentration spell, but the biggest issue with crown is it's limited to humanoids. Spells limited by target type are useless in the wrong encounters so need alternatives.

My increased impression of Crown was entirely based on the fact that I believed that its target was creature not humanoid. I retract my opinion of the spell. It's worthless. You're talking about a stupid number of edge cases where you get a subset of the possible benefits of the spell that are on par with or only slightly better than effects achieved from 1st level spells for the cost of a 2nd level spell slot. The use of the action is entirely dependent on being able to make the attack. It's denying you use of other non concentration spells, like Dissonant Whispers, Blindness, cantrips, etc etc. All of those spells have far great effects. There is not a single point where I have had the thought, "Gee, I wish I had Crown of Madness instead of Hold Person." The benefits of paralysis far exceeds the one benefit of charmed, you enhance your allies attacking the target, and you don't deny yourself using other actions.

Scale up to 3rd level spells where hypnotic pattern removes the remaining few advantages Crown of Madness has, has a far more pronounced action denial effect (incapacitated), affects multiple targets which are creatures, and occurs at a 120ft range. I could also use Slow, another 120ft range, that affects 6 creatures eliminates their ability to user reactions, restricts their ability to use actions and bonus actions, and otherwise screws with the creature.

It's not worth expending a spell known for that piece of trash and while a wizard could learn it I don't know if it's even worth the cost of preparing it over other spells.

[Ashrym]

Action denial requires that you gain an action advantage over your opinion or that it can be reasonably said that your lost actions have a smaller effect than the actions that you are causing to be lost. Crown of Madness does not reach that threshold and in fact can grant the opponent an action advantage. The range is inconsequential since 60ft and under is the typical range a caster will need to engage at anyway. The charmed condition is inconsequential since any benefit from it would necessitate you to be in melee range of the target. If you're not in melee range and the target is able to attack you then the target has ranged attacks anyway and the spell only denies the target attacking you rather than an ally. The damage benefit against opponents is not something you'll get when getting the benefit of the charmed condition since this likely means you're also in range of the target the charmed target is attacking (stupid caster). While it has a number of minor benefits and the spell is good if all those minor benefits can be utilized the simply fact is that those minor benefits way to often occur in contradictory situations. All of this on top of the fact that you no longer have actions while maintaining the spell.

Blindness and Hold Person are also 2nd level spells and basically outshine Crown of Madness in every category. Both spells have the same end conditions as Crown of Madness without denying you actions and have far more potent effects.

The major factor that makes true strike a terrible spell is that it requires concentration. The classes that could see the most benefit from it are also classes that are likely to be using spells with concentration. That is a flaw mostly in how the spell is written rather than a flaw in the effect.

The range matters because it's outside counterspell range and can target flyers on mounts better than other spells. When action A is spent doing 1d8+2 damage or 2d4 damage while the party takes 2d6+4 damage and action B is spent doing 2d6+4 damage while the party takes nothing action B was the better spent action. The action denial portion denies the enemy action but still gives the caster that attack.

Charmed condition has nothing to do with being in melee range. Reread the description of charmed.

I gave several examples of when hold is not better, and agree it usually is. Blindness is a good spell. That doesn't make Crown a bad spell.


the thing with crown of madness being concentration is that, whether or not you sustain it, it *still* prevents and/or ends other concentration effects. i can dissonant whispers while i'm in a hallway with gust of wind running. i cannot cast crown of madness while doing that. i can maintain my own entangle or web and dissonant whispers a target to run into that area.

and yes, many of those other spells are also concentration. but they don't also take up actions to keep running, and they all have hefty advantages over crown of madness.

also, so long as there is a surface available, web does not need opposing points any more (in fact, in some situations it may be more beneficial to layer it 5 feet thick on the ceiling... so much for those annoying flying enemies, and it sure doesn't pay to be tall any more for that ogre). heck, even if i just lob it into the air, i still get one round of it... which is about as much as you're expecting from your crown of madness, actually. it also isn't all that vulnerable to fire. you can burn *one* 5 ft cube that is exposed to fire... and it doesn't finish burning until 1 round has passed. that's certainly more vulnerable than some things, but if you're thinking of just burning your way through a web with something other than a large AOE spell, it won't get done any time soon.

i am generally speaking not looking for a spell that does a few things badly. i would much rather have spells that do a good job of covering those areas. if, for some reason, i actually care about the charmed condition, i'm not going to be picking crown of madness to cause it. if i care about making the target move somewhere, i'll pick a spell that lets me choose where, not them. if i care about dealing damage, i'll pick a spell that is designed to do that. even for a sorcerer, where you have limited spell selection, and it might seem like a spell that can do a variety of things would be appealing... the spells you do cast need to pack a real punch, not be moderately annoying unless combined with someone else.

Good call on web. I missed that layered aspect. It's more useful than I had thought but still smaller volume (likely minor) without the opposing anchors and easily burned away. It still also still has the disadvantage of affecting your own allies (bigger disadvantage).

The charmed condition is important because it means the target cannot attack the caster. That can provide a level of safety from damage after having used that damage and the target triggered OA's. It also allows pinch hitting the friends cantrip or charm person spell for a short term benefit without having to learn those spells on a class that uses spells known instead of spell preparation. These are minor benefits but still allow extra benefits from only one spell known.

Concentration is concentration and losing it varies from guidance to smite spells to using a ritual to any spell with a casting time longer than 1 action. Crown is trading the caster's action for damage prevention plus a better damaging attack repeatedly or triggering the opportunity attacks for better damage in one shot. That has value. It's situational and still often not the best choice (hold person tends to trump most spells more often) but it is the better spell in a variety of circumstances (listed previously).


once again, you can just web on the floor. or a wall. or the ceiling. you can cast it between 2 opposing points, or you can just layer it on the surface. both are options.

and unless you were hoping for a 20 foot tall web specifically, there is no particular disadvantage to just casting it on a surface.

and in the specific example, 20 foot tall web is likely enough to stretch from floor to ceiling, vaulted or not.

Yep, got it. I had started responding before I saw your post, and watched a cartoon with my daughter, at some breakfast, continued my response. I appreciate the correction on web because had thought it was too restrictive prior to that. We'll call it even after you missed the 3 targets on bane. ;)

You stated you like high impact spells. I like versatile spells because they are not useless as often. I wouldn't consider picking up crown unless I had something that was more useful more often first and my primary spell for the same reason (target restriction). Range isn't alwasy a factor but it can be, and it's useless to hold person someone already in a web when the party won't go in to kill that someone, but another enemy is next to that target. Web is similar to entangle in that manner. Try it sometime. Have one spellcaster use web or entange and another use crown and then compare that to phantasmal force or hold person. Crown works with entangle or web instead of overlaps functionality by continuing to deny actions and gain attacks if that is the goal.

I want you to understand that I'm not saying crown of madness is the best spell to use and everyone should be using it and blah blah blah. I'm saying it has useful effects and is a good choice often enough that it clearly isn't trash even if it's not the best spell for all occasions. It's a good spell to combine with tactics and not a good spell on it's own in a vacuum. I used to think it was trash until I played with it more and I would definitely use it before many other spells just like there are other spells I would use before crown of madness. I started using dissonant whispers as the back up to crown of madness in the event the targets weren't humanoid because, in my experience, the oneshot damage from dissonant whispers wasn't any better but didn't deny an attack and certainly didn't have the option to continue in use. It's just that much better than dissonant whispers, in my experience, and still a back up to hold person as the first choice.

You can also twin crown of madness on a sorcerer, and use quickened spells to continue casting for some interesting mayhem.

[SharkForce]

it doesn't have to be worse than nothing to be the worst spell. it just has to be worse than every other option.

there are tons of level 2 (or lower) spells that do what crown of madness does, but better. I would never use it in a situation where I was looking for the charm person effect. it has too short of a duration, and makes it abundantly obvious that something screwy is going on. it has limited target options, costs your actions to keep it running, has one of the more common good saves, and lets your enemy choose which of the drawbacks it inflicts for them to take. it is easily negated without needing to make a saving throw, and none of the status effects it causes are worse than other spells which do allow repeated saving throws.

about the only thing I agree that it has that most of those other options don't have is range. I'm not sold on that being a major advantage (there aren't a ton of casters walking around with counterspell waiting to blow it on a spell like crown of madness).

as to throwing it in to a web or entangle, I could compare it to that. alternately, I could compare it to not casting anything on the webbed or entangled enemies. because, generally speaking, once you've webbed or entangled a whole bunch of creatures in the area, you've pretty much done your job. there is no more need to spend more resources controlling them. they're stuck in what is likely a less optimal form of combat for them (if they can even fight at all), unable to move and act as one, have disadvantage on any attacks they can make, grant advantage on any attacks against them, can't take cover, can't hide... if you need more of an advantage than that after picking off whatever few didn't get controlled and came out to die one or two at a time, it is unlikely that crown of madness is going to be the best spell to provide that additional oomph; you're going to need more than one of the enemies bashing whatever is around (at disadvantage) to win that fight.

and as I've already said, with a sorcerer you don't get a lot of spells. the ones you do get had better count. crown of madness is not multi-function, it really just does one function, badly. so the fact that it is slightly less bad with twin is irrelevant. I'd rather know another spell and save my SP for something better.

[Talderas]

The range matters because it's outside counterspell range and can target flyers on mounts better than other spells. When action A is spent doing 1d8+2 damage or 2d4 damage while the party takes 2d6+4 damage and action B is spent doing 2d6+4 damage while the party takes nothing action B was the better spent action. The action denial portion denies the enemy action but still gives the caster that attack.

Crown doesn't even match the range of the long bow and unlike 3rd edition there's no restriction on using a longbow on a mount.


The charmed condition is important because it means the target cannot attack the caster. That can provide a level of safety from damage after having used that damage and the target triggered OA's. It also allows pinch hitting the friends cantrip or charm person spell for a short term benefit without having to learn those spells on a class that uses spells known instead of spell preparation. These are minor benefits but still allow extra benefits from only one spell known.

It only prevents the caster from being attacked so for that to be a benefit the target must be at range and have another target in melee reach, otherwise the target can just attack one of your allies, or the caster must be in melee range of the target in which case it's a wash if it's just the two of them, useless if the caster has an ally within melee range, or dangerous of the target has an ally within range since that ally is quite capable of attacking you. Thus the charm aspect is entirely useless from a combat perspective. It's a non-factor and shouldn't be brought up as an advantage because it does not provide an advantage.


You stated you like high impact spells. I like versatile spells because they are not useless as often. I wouldn't consider picking up crown unless I had something that was more useful more often first and my primary spell for the same reason (target restriction). Range isn't alwasy a factor but it can be, and it's useless to hold person someone already in a web when the party won't go in to kill that someone, but another enemy is next to that target. Web is similar to entangle in that manner. Try it sometime. Have one spellcaster use web or entange and another use crown and then compare that to phantasmal force or hold person. Crown works with entangle or web instead of overlaps functionality by continuing to deny actions and gain attacks if that is the goal.

Hold person and web do work together. Every turn a paralyzed target is paralyzed is a turn they do not get to spend an action breaking free of the web. A restrained creature is still able to attack, albeit at disadvantage, and take actions.

Crown of Madness is not at all versatile, that would be comparable to saying Confusion is versatile because it could cause a creature to walk off a cliff or it could cause a creature to do absolutely nothing. It can do multiple things!

Counterspell really isn't even a good answer to respond with. Counterspell is a 3rd level spell which means that caster could also have Hypnotic Pattern... which is far worse for a mounted flier than crown of madness since it gives two opportunities for that flier to get screwed and it has the same range as crown.

[Ashrym]

it doesn't have to be worse than nothing to be the worst spell. it just has to be worse than every other option.

This is true but listing some options better in most situations doesn't make the equivalent of worse than every other option. It does damage while denying attacks against the group and has potential for more damage, better range than most similar spells, has the potential to do more damage than the caster would, and additional minor situational perks.

If you want to convince me that it's a bad spell then you need to demonstrate that potential opportunity attacks is bad after the target lost his action on the forced attack, which is unlikely because that's still the very reason dissonant whispers is considered good and 1 round of the crown did that plus prevented damage, possibly a lot depending on the target; or you need to demonstrate that the alternative of repeatedly losing actions plus repeatedly inflicting damage to the enemies is bad, which is also well above the worst spells in the game.


there are tons of level 2 (or lower) spells that do what crown of madness does, but better.

I already refuted you list with advantages and disadvantages. You did not prove this is true with most of the spells listed due to unfriendly party spells, spells that don't do what crown does, and in the case of similar effects the situational advantages crown of madness has. Like better synergy with entangle.


I would never use it in a situation where I was looking for the charm person effect. it has too short of a duration, and makes it abundantly obvious that something screwy is going on. it has limited target options, costs your actions to keep it running, has one of the more common good saves, and lets your enemy choose which of the drawbacks it inflicts for them to take. it is easily negated without needing to make a saving throw, and none of the status effects it causes are worse than other spells which do allow repeated saving throws.

The charm effect is to keep the spell caster from being attacked and it doesn't break when attacking the target. Usually not important, but the spell can be used to stop an existing fight when the caster is alone and might want to cut his losses.

A minute is enough time for a quick negotiation or interrogation with advantage and then get a head start on leaving.

Hold person would be better if fleeing is the option but doesn't provide the interrogation or negotiation options first. That is a clear advantage in one spell as an additional application.

If the target is free to act but the spell is maintained, it keeps the target from attacking the caster to try and break the spell.

It doesn't cost you an action to keep going. It trades your action in keeping it going for the target's action and thus not attacking your party while still having an attack on the enemy. This is an improvement if the damage is similar or better for the same action cost, unless you are about to tell me more damage plus damage prevention is bad. This is one on the applications where hold is usually better outside of oddball circumstances or in conjunction with other effects.

Those oddball circumstances exist, however, such as the target is being shielded in an enclosed area by numbers of other opponents and the PC's simply cannot reach the back row target(s).

It's also not a commonly good save. WIS us typically a good save to target because it's not as common, nor is the proficiency in the save, as CON or STR in strong melee opponents. DEX saves usually only do damage in a game where hp increases rapidly with CR and status effects are among the best options.

It's not easily negated without needing a saving throw. The initial saving throw did it's job just like other spell with an initial save and the ongoing attacks may be negated by moving. If the move is made then the spell just accomplished everything dissonant whispers does plus cost the target an action and the spell caster can drop the spell having been effective. We've circled back to a good outcome or a good outcome. Simply moving to nullify the effect means no longer giving up concentration or spending actions maintaining the spell while accomplishing more than dissonant whispers does.

The ability to move is way off base in actual play because it removes what stated were drawbacks and adds the effects of a spell considered good. Moving is good then normally the spell is dropped. Not moving is good and the spell is normally maintained. There is no bad option here. It's either spike damage and move on or continuous action denial plus damage. It cannot both be easily removed and require actions plus concentration.

It doesn't matter that the target chooses because the caster's choice in when he cast the spell makes the target's choice of response a difficult choice. I might have a preferred response I might not see nut that's more like coming in second in a race than anything negative because either is still good.


about the only thing I agree that it has that most of those other options don't have is range. I'm not sold on that being a major advantage (there aren't a ton of casters walking around with counterspell waiting to blow it on a spell like crown of madness).

It also keeps you out of charge and dash range, and some thrown weapons.

I agree range isn't always a consideration but I also agree crown of madness often isn't the right spell to cast. Having crown of madness as on of multiple options doesn't mean it needs to be the primary choice and would be cast only when it is advantageous.

OTOH, range can be critical when it does matter.


as to throwing it in to a web or entangle, I could compare it to that. alternately, I could compare it to not casting anything on the webbed or entangled enemies. because, generally speaking, once you've webbed or entangled a whole bunch of creatures in the area, you've pretty much done your job. there is no more need to spend more resources controlling them. they're stuck in what is likely a less optimal form of combat for them (if they can even fight at all), unable to move and act as one, have disadvantage on any attacks they can make, grant advantage on any attacks against them, can't take cover, can't hide... if you need more of an advantage than that after picking off whatever few didn't get controlled and came out to die one or two at a time, it is unlikely that crown of madness is going to be the best spell to provide that additional oomph; you're going to need more than one of the enemies bashing whatever is around (at disadvantage) to win that fight.

On the contrary, what else is the spell caster to do with his actions other than participate in subpar combat tactics?

The group isn't entering the area to participate in combat because of the same issues the enemies face. It's not like a weak ranged attack or 2d4 damage cantrip with nonstacking disadvantage is going to be better than creating additional action denial and higher damage at the cost of one 2nd level spell.


and as I've already said, with a sorcerer you don't get a lot of spells. the ones you do get had better count. crown of madness is not multi-function, it really just does one function, badly. so the fact that it is slightly less bad with twin is irrelevant. I'd rather know another spell and save my SP for something better.

I've demonstrated it is multifunctional. Your response was you wouldn't use that additional functionality.

You still haven't demonstrated the "badly" part.


Crown doesn't even match the range of the long bow and unlike 3rd edition there's no restriction on using a longbow on a mount.

No, but a mount doesn't last long if the rider is attacking it, and it's easy to take cover from ranged attacks. Or use crown when it's relevant instead of when it's not.




It only prevents the caster from being attacked so for that to be a benefit the target must be at range and have another target in melee reach, otherwise the target can just attack one of your allies, or the caster must be in melee range of the target in which case it's a wash if it's just the two of them, useless if the caster has an ally within melee range, or dangerous of the target has an ally within range since that ally is quite capable of attacking you. Thus the charm aspect is entirely useless from a combat perspective. It's a non-factor and shouldn't be brought up as an advantage because it does not provide an advantage.

It prevents the attacker from attacking the spell caster to break the spell in the event the spell is maintained after the target moved from other enemies. Or one on one to end an encounter to start a negotiation or interrogation. The caster casts it when it's advantageous instead of when it's not and makes use of the additional benefit appropriately.




Hold person and web do work together. Every turn a paralyzed target is paralyzed is a turn they do not get to spend an action breaking free of the web. A restrained creature is still able to attack, albeit at disadvantage, and take actions.

The advantage of hold person is attacking a paralyzed opponent. The action denial ends up being the same. The group doesn't enter the area to attack the paralyzed foe and the restrained enemies have no reason not to spend actions back on range. The crown target adds damage back in and creates incentive for other enemies to spending actions in order to move.


Crown of Madness is not at all versatile, that would be comparable to saying Confusion is versatile because it could cause a creature to walk off a cliff or it could cause a creature to do absolutely nothing. It can do multiple things!

Disagree.

It's versatile in it's compatibility with other mechanics, greater range, multiple possible good outcomes, target selection for the crown target, and charm component.

The difference is in when and why it's being cast, and then when and why it's being maintained or dropped.


Counterspell really isn't even a good answer to respond with. Counterspell is a 3rd level spell which means that caster could also have Hypnotic Pattern... which is far worse for a mounted flier than crown of madness since it gives two opportunities for that flier to get screwed and it has the same range as crown.

Hypnotic pattern costs a higher level slot too. Resouce management and opportunity costs. But if hypnotic pattern is the optimal spell then cast it.

Players cast spells that make sense when being cast. They don't select a spell to cast that doesn't make sense based on circumstances in an interactive environment. For example, those 3rd-level slots can be saved for a different spell.

[SharkForce]

but a spell that is almost never the right spell is a spell you don't want to prepare unless you have some specific knowledge that it is about to be the right spell.

crown of madness is single target and doesn't scale to be better than single target. that alone means it needs to do something pretty impressive or unique to be worth *anything*.

and if you are the only person left alive in your party (such that the charm is actually meaningful), odds are good that they aren't the only person left alive in their group and you're still getting your head kicked in.

as far as getting out of it without costing too much... your allies can move aside (unless they leave a threatened area entirely, they don't provoke opportunity attacks). your allies can shove people away (thus leaving you not adjacent and letting you move away on your turn). you can drop your weapon and just stand there (there is a strong tendency for PCs to be outnumbered heavily, so a single enemy's action being traded for a single PC's action is typically a really bad deal, and once they're no longer doing anything significant on their turn it loses a lot). if you drop the spell, they just pick up their weapon and keep fighting.

in the situation that you're a lore bard and every single enemy is stuck in a web, then yes, i recommend you just either cantrip it or lob something at it. it is not your job to deal damage, and it especially is not your job to blow resources on enemies that are already quite effectively rendered insignificant. that isn't what lore bards do. but, if for some reason you want damage to be your job, i recommend that you splash a class that will help you with that. 3 levels of sorcerer will give you metamagic and some much better damaging cantrips. 2-3 levels of warlock will give you the best damaging cantrip in the game and the invocations to use it plus some other goodies. either of those will greatly increase your damage-dealing options, and come with other perks as well (but also trade-offs).

it is not a good control spell. it is not a good damage spell. it is a mediocre version of both, and i don't care if it is better than having no options at all. it is worse than having good options, and it is easy to have good options, so this spell may as well not exist.

all the functions of it are either extremely niche, or not really all that great in the first place (you can cast it on a mounted target, but is it really better than just throwing a control spell that hits both targets, and forcing them to make 2 saves to avoid it?).

the things it does, it does poorly.

[Ashrym]

but a spell that is almost never the right spell is a spell you don't want to prepare unless you have some specific knowledge that it is about to be the right spell.

Statement without demonstration. It's not almost never the right spell for the reasons already mentioned.


crown of madness is single target and doesn't scale to be better than single target. that alone means it needs to do something pretty impressive or unique to be worth *anything*.

It does. It does more than dissonant whispers when the subject moves and it does more than phantasmal force when the subject doesn't move. Both are considered good benefits and there are additional minor benefits.

The fact it scales with DC and enemy damage without requiring a higher slot is an advantage. Spells that only scale with higher slots (like sleep) are at a disadvantage in that regard.


and if you are the only person left alive in your party (such that the charm is actually meaningful), odds are good that they aren't the only person left alive in their group and you're still getting your head kicked in.

Strawman. No one said the one person left in the party. That could be the case or it might not. It could be that the player was scouting ahead and ran into a solitary target instead, or killed other opponents first and went for an interrogation on the last.

It's a clear option available and a benefit.


as far as getting out of it without costing too much... your allies can move aside (unless they leave a threatened area entirely, they don't provoke opportunity attacks). your allies can shove people away (thus leaving you not adjacent and letting you move away on your turn). you can drop your weapon and just stand there (there is a strong tendency for PCs to be outnumbered heavily, so a single enemy's action being traded for a single PC's action is typically a really bad deal, and once they're no longer doing anything significant on their turn it loses a lot). if you drop the spell, they just pick up their weapon and keep fighting.

Triggering opportunity attacks for the enemy and giving up team attacks for shoving is doing to our group what the spell would be doing to enemies if used appropriately. That's a backwards approach.

If the PC's are outnumbered heavily I have higher level spells or I don't. It's irrelevant, however; the number of enemies has nothing to do with the fact that if my action spent dies X damage would be better off spent if the opponent cannot attack the party I am in AND does X+Y damage. If there are 3 or 5 or 8 opponents the action is still better spent denying an incoming attack and doing X+Y damage than just X damage.

Your argument is 12 isn't better than 6 because of high concentration of enemies when it becomes more likely a person should maintain the spell if the target moves due to the high concentration of enemies.


in the situation that you're a lore bard and every single enemy is stuck in a web, then yes, i recommend you just either cantrip it or lob something at it. it is not your job to deal damage, and it especially is not your job to blow resources on enemies that are already quite effectively rendered insignificant. that isn't what lore bards do. but, if for some reason you want damage to be your job, i recommend that you splash a class that will help you with that. 3 levels of sorcerer will give you metamagic and some much better damaging cantrips. 2-3 levels of warlock will give you the best damaging cantrip in the game and the invocations to use it plus some other goodies. either of those will greatly increase your damage-dealing options, and come with other perks as well (but also trade-offs).

So your argument has become it's not an advantage because lore bards shouldn't make choices that improve damage and action denial based on the unfounded assumption the encounter has been won before all the opponents are dead.

It's not that it's not an advantage; it's that I am not supposed to do damage. That doesn't refute the advantage.


it is not a good control spell. it is not a good damage spell. it is a mediocre version of both, and i don't care if it is better than having no options at all. it is worse than having good options, and it is easy to have good options, so this spell may as well not exist.

You are wrong about it not being a good damage spell. It still spikes opportunity attacks well and when it doesn't the alternative is better damage than most similar spells in the same level.

Heat metal is more restricted and only averages 9 damage each round in the same slot, completely lacks the spike potential, might create attack penalties but never costs that target an action, and it's also considered a good spell by many when it sucks compared to crown of madness. That only benefits from lack of save and potential higher level slots. In the same slot crown of madness is better.

No one said it's better than nothing. It's better than several spells. The only similar spell really better is hold person, and crown of madness has situational benefits over that spell.


all the functions of it are either extremely niche, or not really all that great in the first place (you can cast it on a mounted target, but is it really better than just throwing a control spell that hits both targets, and forcing them to make 2 saves to avoid it?).

the things it does, it does poorly.

Doing damage and denying attacks against the party is hardly niche. Only the competition from hold person moves it that way when there are enough niche benefits list consider crown.

I am done the debate and on to agree to disagree. In my experience the spell is solid and expect that experience will continue despite your disagreement.

[SharkForce]

lore bards that don't spend their magical secrets on damage spells have *already* made the decision to not be damage-oriented.

and yes, a spell with as many drawbacks as crown of madness is very niche.

looking closer, it probably isn't the worst spell in the game. there are, after all, level 7 spells that are not worth casting. heck, there's a level 9 spell that isn't worth casting (weird). that's probably the worst spell in the game, purely because of the cost. crown of madness may not be worth casting, but at least it doesn't blow what could otherwise be an incredibly powerful world-altering resource to use it.

[Talderas]

lore bards that don't spend their magical secrets on damage spells have *already* made the decision to not be damage-oriented.

I elected for Slow and Counterspell on my lore bard. I want to be able to cause as much misery and grief as I can. Crown of Madness simply does not give me the level of direct influence I desire when inflicting it.

[MaxWilson]

Divine Word also works on celestials, fey, fiends and elementals regardless of their hit points.

Plus its range is anything that can hear you. You can take out an army with it.

No, its range is 30 feet.

[MaxWilson]

Agreed. As I said, I can only think of two cases where it *might* be useful:

1) Two guards outside a building, and you want to sneak in without them noticing you. Getting one to attack the other one time is a pretty good distraction.
2) When you're facing a pair of enemies that are each far more powerful than any of your party members, getting one to attack the other is going to be a more effective attack than simply attacking them yourselves. But again, you only get one attack in, and then it's questionable whether it's worth your action to prevent the target from staying in melee range. It might be... but meh.

Remember that Crown of Madness has two effects:

1.) Enemy is charmed: cannot attack you, you have advantage on social skills against it.
2.) You can make enemy attack adjacent creatures.

It's still not a great spell, but it's about as good in combat as Charm Person, with no disadvantage for being in combat and no humanoid-only target restriction.

[Ashrym]

Remember that Crown of Madness has two effects:

1.) Enemy is charmed: cannot attack you, you have advantage on social skills against it.
2.) You can make enemy attack adjacent creatures.

It's still not a great spell, but it's about as good in combat as Charm Person, with no disadvantage for being in combat and no humanoid-only target restriction.

Crown of madness is humanoid only.

Hold person is almost always better except when: 1) the party cannot or should not move to the target, 2) the caster is planning on using the charmed condition, 3) the range matters beyond just access to the target (avoiding range on enemy options), and 4) you want to spread out opponents / promote movement and the control factor is a good enough alternative.

I find #4 to be the most common so far, in my experience (because of opportunity attacks), and crown of madness is my preference over dissonant whispers unless the targets aren't humanoids. I find #1 usually happens due to areas of effect that would have negative impact on party members and that's when I use it over hold person. Both are common enough that the spell is decent enough before considering the additional charm ability. Range isn't usually that important but has it's moments.

It's not the best spell but it is better than it looks on paper.

I had stopped debating it and just wanted to respond to the humanoid error.

[Chronos]

To be fair, it hadn't occurred to me before to use it on a mounted combatant. It would actually be decent in that case.

[SharkForce]

To be fair, it hadn't occurred to me before to use it on a mounted combatant. It would actually be decent in that case.

sure, but it is it as good as just throwing an AOE CC on them and getting a huge chance to succeed on it because the mount probably has weaker saves and they both have to succeed for the pair of them to move?

[Ashrym]

sure, but it is it as good as just throwing an AOE CC on them and getting a huge chance to succeed on it because the mount probably has weaker saves and they both have to succeed for the pair of them to move?

That's old school mechanics. Neither normally has proficiency in 5e, and mounts normally have better STR and WIS than humanoids, covering the vast majority of lower level CC. Even a CON save like blindness is usually better on the rider than the a warhorse if neither has save proficiency.

An 8th level fighter usually has a worse WIS save than his horse and even though the STR save will be better than the horse the fighter's WIS save is the weakest save to target overall.

Mounts having weaker saves isn't a good assumption facing monsters, but can be facing NPCs with PC levels. Most NPCs in the NPC section of the monster manual don't have save proficiencies.

That's all part of bounded accuracy and keeping lower CR monsters relevant at higher levels in 5e.

A mounted opponent isn't necessarily in the area of entangle or web because he's above the effects and definitely not if on a flying mount. Those are examples of low level AoE and target higher saves instead of weaker saves.

A trained mount doesn't require actions to control and gets to move and dash with higher base speed so range can become more important.

Just popping in on saves because the assumption wasn't a good assumption.

[SharkForce]

an 8th level fighter has indomitable, and a lot of motivation to pick up resilient:wisdom (since they already have con, and have the HP to be relatively less worried about typical dex saves).

and not very many mounts will actually put you above a web spell unless they're flying (note: the web spell collapses at the start of your next turn when cast without something to support it, not immediately, so you can totally web a flying target out of the sky and laugh at them as they crash into the ground; frankly, that sounds like mission accomplished to me).

if they're riding something like a mammoth their legs would be above a web layered on the ground. but on a horse? your legs are probably at most 3 feet up.

[Ashrym]

an 8th level fighter has indomitable, and a lot of motivation to pick up resilient:wisdom (since they already have con, and have the HP to be relatively less worried about typical dex saves).

and not very many mounts will actually put you above a web spell unless they're flying (note: the web spell collapses at the start of your next turn when cast without something to support it, not immediately, so you can totally web a flying target out of the sky and laugh at them as they crash into the ground; frankly, that sounds like mission accomplished to me).

if they're riding something like a mammoth their legs would be above a web layered on the ground. but on a horse? your legs are probably at most 3 feet up.

I was thinking of the fact riding a warhorse is above 5 feet. A shire or clydesdale gets over 17 hands at the withers, just under 6 ft, so the web collapses below the 3 dimensional occupied space.

The fighter isn't in the space; he's touching the space from about the knee or thigh down because he's not riding straight-legged. That might turn into what the DM thinks. I would apply difficult terrain to the fighter as a movement cost dismounting or trying to climb the saddle to leap away but wouldn't consider him in the area.

Entangle sprouts from the ground with no 3D volume and the rider isn't on the ground so that one is a wash.

I like the flying web idea as long as the shorter range isn't stopping it.

In either case, however, the spell targets a strong save instead of a weak save, and if a fighter with indomitable hasn't used it already it will be even more effective against the stronger save. Indomitable doesn't only apply to the WIS save.

Stating he could have resilient WIS is true but he just gave up something else for it so what is possible isn't what would necessarily be taken. That just turns into Shrodinger's fighter.

The hobgoblin captain example wouldn't have proficiency or indomitable. The horse would have better saves, which is common because save proficiency is very uncommon in the MM.

My point was that 5e save proficiencies don't usually favor riders over mounts, which seems accurate browsing the MM.

[SharkForce]

there is no square (or cube) combat in 5e by default. and if you dismount, then you are *definitely* in the area.

[Ashrym]

there is no square (or cube) combat in 5e by default. and if you dismount, then you are *definitely* in the area.

Baloney. Read the areas of effect in the magic section of the PHB and the spell descriptions again. Web, for example, is a cube as listed in the description and follows the cube area of effect under the magic section. Entangle, is a square area on the ground per the spell description. Spells have definite 3D qualities defined in the descriptions and elevation is a factor.

If you dismount directly then yes. If you dismount by trying to jump from the mount to get over the edge, no, not if you can clear the edge.

[Chronos]

Note that I didn't say that it's the only thing that would be decent against mounted combatants. You've got plenty of other options for dealing with them, so I still wouldn't necessarily prepare Crown of Madness. In the specific case where the mount is as powerful as the rider and will hold a grudge, like the dragonrider example from earlier, it just might be the optimal spell, but unless you can know in advance that you're in that situation, I'd still probably prepare something else instead. But I think that having even a single niche use like that is still enough to save it from being the worst spell in the game (which I agree is probably Weird).

[PoeticDwarf]

The worst cantrip is true strike
Nobody wants true strike, or friends, because it just give advantage and he is often hostile when it ends.

[asorel]

The worst cantrip is true strike
Nobody wants true strike, or friends, because it just give advantage and he is often hostile when it ends.

Friends has a niche which it fills quite effectively--interrogations. Hostility doesn't matter when the target is already unfriendly, and you can recast the spell right before it ends. Its use is rather limited in any other situation, but it isn't a bad cantrip to take if you plan to interrogate frequently.

[PoeticDwarf]

Friends has a niche which it fills quite effectively--interrogations. Hostility doesn't matter when the target is already unfriendly, and you can recast the spell right before it ends. Its use is rather limited in any other situation, but it isn't a bad cantrip to take if you plan to interrogate frequently.

I don't like it because it doesn't make your friends, it just give advanched on charisma checks, it just works with ONE target.

[asorel]

I don't like it because it doesn't make your friends, it just give advanched on charisma checks, it just works with ONE target.

It's a cantrip. You can only expect so much power from it.

[ChubbyRain]

I don't like it because it doesn't make your friends, it just give advanched on charisma checks, it just works with ONE target.

Just like in real life, friendship doesn't always last and there is always a good chance that one will hate the other at some point. Friendship cantrip just speeds up everything and then makes sure one outcome (hostility) happpens.

Advantage on charisma checks is fantastic.

But friends isn't for the good guys or the feint at heart. No, friends is for the mischievous ones.

Need that person who hates you to sign a legal document?

Cast disguise self and then use friends... Have fun with that one.

Have the ability to shape shift (coughracialtraitcough)? Turn into another person at will and use friends.

Friends can be a messed up cantrip with too much power set in the right hands with the right ideas to use it with.

[Ace Jackson]

How about time stop? It's 9th level, concentration, ends if you do anything to affect anyone or anything held by anyone else, ends if you're 1000 ft away from where you cast it, and only lasts 5 rounds/half a minute at most. its exploration use is severely limited by the time limit, its combat use limited by the inability to really self buff by concentration and inability to affect any other combatants in any way. And again, it's 9th level. And unless I've missed some fine print that makes this stellar, there are far better options for the slot: wish, foresight, meteor swarm, imprisonment, prismatic wall, power word heal/kill, or even gate, alternatively bump one of your other spells up to the 9th level slot.

[SharkForce]

How about time stop? It's 9th level, concentration, ends if you do anything to affect anyone or anything held by anyone else, ends if you're 1000 ft away from where you cast it, and only lasts 5 rounds/half a minute at most. its exploration use is severely limited by the time limit, its combat use limited by the inability to really self buff by concentration and inability to affect any other combatants in any way. And again, it's 9th level. And unless I've missed some fine print that makes this stellar, there are far better options for the slot: wish, foresight, meteor swarm, imprisonment, prismatic wall, power word heal/kill, or even gate, alternatively bump one of your other spells up to the 9th level slot.

still better than weird. I can envision a scenario in which this is useful. some magic items don't require concentration, some spells can be set up that require no concentration - for example, you could pepper the battlefield with mordenkainen's faithful hound spells and then as your last action throw a spell that holds the enemies where they are. you could potentially be able to heal yourself, or hide, and so on.

weird gives your targets 2 saving throws before it even has a chance to do anything. and if it does anything at all, that anything is less damage than a fireball each round plus frightened condition, but they get yet another save each round, before their turn starts (ie before they take damage or use their action).

thrown against a typical group of enemies you might face when you're throwing level 9 spells, weird has an uncomfortably high chance to literally have no effect whatsoever. even if they aren't straight-up immune for one reason or another.

time stop, by comparison, is actually pretty good.

[ChubbyRain]

I always felt that healing clerics should have time stop but can only use their actions/bonus actions to heal creature of conditions or damage.

Big old "screw you" yo the BBEG or whomever.

[Chronos]

The other great use for Friends is to combine it with a disguise (magical or otherwise). Everyone always seems to focus on using the disguise to prevent the target from hating you... but it also has the benefit of making them hate someone else. Want to set your enemies against each other? Disguise yourself as one of them, cast Friends on the other. Maybe persuade them of something while you're at it, but that's optional. That's a lot of mileage to get out of a cantrip and a first-level spell, or a cantrip and a kit.

[jkat718]

Could you use Disguise Self and Friends to make someone hate themselves? :smalltongue:

[Pex]

I always felt that healing clerics should have time stop but can only use their actions/bonus actions to heal creature of conditions or damage.

Big old "screw you" yo the BBEG or whomever.

Clerics used to have a spell like that in 2E, called Withdraw, a 2nd level spell. Can only target yourself but good for extra time to spend rounds to cast healing and buff spells on yourself while only using 1 round of the combat. It wasn't a popular spell way back when. Either players didn't understand how it worked to use or didn't realize the value of action economy. 2E clerical spells not being so powerful may also be a factor. At the time to think cleric usually meant to think healbot so buffing for battle, as little as a 2E cleric could, wasn't a widely considered option.

[SharkForce]

Clerics used to have a spell like that in 2E, called Withdraw, a 2nd level spell. Can only target yourself but good for extra time to spend rounds to cast healing and buff spells on yourself while only using 1 round of the combat. It wasn't a popular spell way back when. Either players didn't understand how it worked to use or didn't realize the value of action economy. 2E clerical spells not being so powerful may also be a factor. At the time to think cleric usually meant to think healbot so buffing for battle, as little as a 2E cleric could, wasn't a widely considered option.

actually, clerics had some excellent buffs in 2e. chant and prayer were great, for example, and that's just some of the core options. but those weren't options when you used withdraw. you could cast divination spells, and heal/cure spells that target yourself and only yourself. you couldn't move, you couldn't heal anyone else, you couldn't cast any other spells.

the reason withdraw wasn't popular is that it was super-niche, and preparing it meant you weren't preparing something more useful.