[Brainstorming] Phantasmal Killer fix? (And other spells.)

[Nifft]

I'm thinking about a hybrid mechanic for spells like Phantasmal Killer.

If you are not concentrating on the spell, then the first successful saving throw ends the spell.

So, Phantasmal Killer would change to read:



Duration: Up to 1 minute

You tap into the nightmares of a creature you can see within range and create an illusory manifestation of its deepest fears, visible only to that creature. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw or take 4d10 psychic damage.

At the start of each of the target’s turns before the spell ends, the target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or take 4d10 psychic damage. On a successful save, the spell ends unless you are concentrating on the spell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 5th level or higher, the damage increases by 1d10 for each slot level above 4th.


What other spells could benefit from this hybrid mechanic?

[Louro]

Insanely broken

Hold person
The target must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the target becomes paralyzed for the duration. At the end of each of the target’s turns before the spell ends, the target is still pretty ****ed as long as you maintain concentration.

Edit: I'm not quite sure of what your idea is. A spell requiring concentration ends in the very moment the concentration is broken, no save needed.

[Nifft]

Insanely broken ... for Hold Person, which is not Phantasmal Killer. This is okay and not a problem.


Edit: I'm not quite sure of what your idea is. A spell requiring concentration ends in the very moment the concentration is broken, no save needed. Uh, yeah, so that's why this is a new mechanic. Not identical to any currently existing mechanics. That means: not identical to the current Concentration mechanic.

Currently:
- Some spells end when the target saves against the spell.
- Some spells persist while the spellcaster maintains Concentration.
- Some spells end when either the target saves against the spell, or the spellcaster fails to maintain Concentration.

This is a new thing:
- This spell ends when the target saves against the spell, and the spellcaster is not Concentrating on the spell.

- - -

This new mechanic is suitable for spells which:
- Have a multiple-turn duration.
- Have an effect every turn.
- Have a save every turn to negate the effect.

Hold Person is not a good match, because being paralyzed isn't an effect that reoccurs each turn. It has a discrete start and end point.

[Louro]

You are missing a very important point here.
With that new mechanic a caster will be able to do what designers intend to control: wizardry over escalating over the roof.

With that new mechanic, turning (some) concentration spells into non-concentration ones will allow casters to become so powerful that smart ones will clearly unbalance the game.

Greater indivisibility (C) + phantasmal killer + stinking cloud + whatever... while still being invisible ( he maintains GI while just cast-and-forget the others.

[Nifft]

You are missing a very important point here. That's presumptuous, wrong, and kinda ironic.

This is not a proposal for every spell.

Currently, it's a proposal for one spell.

One.

Spell.

Not all the others.

- - -

I am curious if there are any others for which this is appropriate.

[Louro]

You just came up with a new mechanic that overrides the principle that controls magic (concentration) to boost one spell. And now you ask for more spells to add that mechanism.

BBEG
I cast phantasmal killer, then phantasmal killer, and after that one I will cast phantasmal killer using all my slots until he is dead.

I'm just trying to warn you about possible incoming unbalance.

[Nifft]

You just came up with a new mechanic that overrides the principle that controls magic (concentration) to boost one spell. And now you ask for more spells to add that mechanism. That is correct.
Glad you're all caught up.


BBEG
I cast phantasmal killer, then phantasmal killer, and after that one I will cast phantasmal killer using all my slots until he is dead. 4d10 psychic / save negates is not an overpowered use of a level 4 spell.

If he's not Concentrating, it's unlikely to last very long.

You do know why the original Phantasmal Killer is rated as very weak, right?

[TurboGhast]

That is correct.
Glad you're all caught up.

4d10 psychic / save negates is not an overpowered use of a level 4 spell.

If he's not Concentrating, it's unlikely to last very long.

You do know why the original Phantasmal Killer is rated as very weak, right?

The issue that Loulo has is that you can stack spells that have this mechanic extremely easily.

Phantasmal Killer could get potentially stacked into dealing 12d10 damage a turn with this change. Along this, messing with base design assumptions is highly risky change. I think a different sort of change might work better:

TurboGhast's Phantasmal Killer Fix Concept
4th lv illusion

Cast time: 1 action
Range: 120 ft
Components: V,S
Duration: Concentration, max 1 min

You tap into the nightmares of a creature you can see within range and create an illusionary manifestation of its deepest fears, visible to only it. The target is frightened for this spell's duration, and must make a Wisdom saving throw at the start of each of its turns. On a failed save, it takes 4d10 damage, and on the first successful save takes 2d10 damage instead for as long as the spell continues. The second successful save against this spell ends it.

I might need to reword this to be cleaner... the idea is the first save reduces the damage for as long as it keeps going, and you need a second save to break free of the spell.

[Strill]

The issue that Loulo has is that you can stack spells that have this mechanic extremely easily.

Phantasmal Killer could get potentially stacked into dealing 12d10 damage a turn with this change.And what are the chances of that happening? Three turns, three 4th-level slots, and three failed saves in a row just for that? Let me remind you that 12d10 is 66 damage on average. One spell level later you get Animate Objects that does 65 damage per turn with a bonus action!

Your supposedly overpowered combo is totally fine. I don't see anything wrong with that scenario you just mentioned. It means you spent a boatload of spell slots to kill a single creature who got extremely unlucky.

[SharkForce]

still seems like a pretty bad spell to me, even with your upgrade. i can't imagine that breaking much of anything.

[Nifft]

still seems like a pretty bad spell to me, even with your upgrade. i can't imagine that breaking much of anything.

The damage isn't great, but the damage type is very good, and it's not all that hard to have another party member force Disadvantage on Wisdom saves, or for a Diviner to turn two bad rolls into two failed saves.

It's a spell that rewards cooperation.

[Strill]

The damage isn't great, but the damage type is very good, and it's not all that hard to have another party member force Disadvantage on Wisdom saves, or for a Diviner to turn two bad rolls into two failed saves.

It's a spell that rewards cooperation.

Portent is not at all worth using on Phantasmal Killer. Not even in the slightest. If you use Portent, it's for something that makes a serious difference, like Counterspell, or Hold Person.

[Nifft]

Portent is not at all worth using on Phantasmal Killer. Not even in the slightest.

Okay.

- - -

So, we've got one group of people screaming that this is too strong.

And another group complaining that it's two weak.

Is that one definition of balance?

[DivisibleByZero]

Okay.

- - -

So, we've got one group of people screaming that this is too strong.

And another group complaining that it's two weak.

Is that one definition of balance?

No.
It's too strong.
That spell requires concentration for a reason, just like every single other spell with any effect which is detrimental to an enemy for a prolonged period of time.

[Strill]

No.
It's too strong.
That spell requires concentration for a reason, just like every single other spell with any effect which is detrimental to an enemy for a prolonged period of time.

I think that's more because of the Fear effect. Not the damage effect.

[DivisibleByZero]

I think that's more because of the Fear effect. Not the damage effect.

Which part of the spell's effects you believe it is for is irrelevant.
What's relevant is the fact that the spell contains an effect which otherwise requires concentration in the first place.
Does that part exist?
Yes?
Then the spell requires concentration for a reason.

[Strill]

Which part of the spell's effects you believe it is for is irrelevant.Yes it is relevant. We're discussing homebrew mechanics changes. Isolating what should and shouldn't require concentration is at the very core of this discussion.

What's relevant is the fact that the spell contains an effect which otherwise requires concentration in the first place.
Does that part exist?
Yes?
Then the spell requires concentration for a reason.Hey, you don't get to decide what this thread is about. We'll be discussing which parts justify concentration and which parts don't. We're not going to end this thread just because you think that it's wrong to analyze the individual parts of a spell and decide which ones justify concentration. If you don't like it then please leave the thread so we can get on with things.

[Nifft]

Yes it is relevant. We're discussing homebrew mechanics changes. Isolating what should and shouldn't require concentration is at the very core of this discussion.

Hey, you don't get to decide what this thread is about. We'll be discussing which parts justify concentration and which parts don't. We're not going to end this thread just because you think that it's wrong to analyze the individual parts of a spell and decide which ones justify concentration. If you don't like it then please leave the thread so we can get on with things.

Absolutely correct.

This isn't a finished product looking for reviews -- this is a discussion about the mechanics of a spell which is generally thought to be too weak to use.

An analysis of exactly why it's too weak goes right to the heart of that issue.

[Strill]

So I think we need to compare Phantasmal Killer to similar spells. I'll list spells that target a single creature and incapacitate it somehow.

At 2nd level we have Blindness/Deafness (no concentration), and Hold Person (concentration).
At 3rd level we have Bestow Curse (concentration)
At 4th level we have Phantasmal Killer (concentration)
At 5th level we have Bestow Curse (no concentration), and Hold Monster (concentration)
At 6th level we have Otto's Irresistable Dance (concentration, no saving throw)

Phantasmal Killer applies Fear. That imposes disadvantage on all the target's attacks. Well, that's what all the other incapacitation spells do, but they do more. For example, Blindness also gives advantage to allies' attacks, and it forces the target to guess what tile enemies are on or automatically miss. So Phantasmal Killer seems to be relatively mediocre in the debuff department.

Let's look at the damage then. The DM's Guide says that a 4th-level single-target spell should deal 6d10 damage. We can see that Phantasmal killer deals 4d10, but if you assume that there's a 50% chance of the target failing the second saving throw, that averages out to pretty close to 6d10. So it's on-par.

If you compare 6d10 to other single-target attack spells, like Scorching Ray, you see that Phantasmal Killer deals 33 to Scorching Ray's 35. Certainly on-par for its level.

So the impression I'm getting is that Phantasmal Killer is primarily a single-target damage spell, approximately on-par with Scorching Ray, but with a better damage type, and a fear effect thrown in. The question then is whether concentration is worth the fear effect, and most people seem to say no.

Ultimately I can see why it was balanced the way it is. It's a high-damage attack with an extra bonus debuff thrown in, over and above what the guidelines suggest. The fear effect on top made them add concentration to compensate.

I think people don't like it because it's trying to be too many things at once. If you want to incapacitate the target there are better spells, and if you want to do damage to the target there are better spells. Combining those two effects together just doesn't make for a synergistic result, so you've got something that's less than the sum of its parts, but costs full price.

[Nifft]

Let's look at the damage then. The DM's Guide says that a 4th-level single-target spell should deal 6d10 damage. We can see that Phantasmal killer deals 4d10, but if you assume that there's a 50% chance of the target failing the second saving throw, that averages out to pretty close to 6d10. So it's on-par.

If you compare 6d10 to other single-target attack spells, like Scorching Ray, you see that Phantasmal Killer deals 33 to Scorching Ray's 35. Certainly on-par for its level. I think you're on the right track here.

The main issue is: in order to hit "on-par for its level", it eats your Concentration.


So the impression I'm getting is that Phantasmal Killer is primarily a single-target damage spell, approximately on-par with Scorching Ray, but with a better damage type, and a fear effect thrown in. The question then is whether concentration is worth the fear effect, and most people seem to say no. Exactly right.

That's basically why my proposed mechanic works like it does: if you just want expected damage for your level, don't Concentrate, and get the same expected value as another spell of the same level.

If you want to enforce the Fear debuff, and have a chance at quite a lot of damage over time, then you dedicate your Concentration for a minute.

That seems fairly balanced and useful in more different situations, including the situation where you're already using your Concentration for something important.

[Kryx]

The problem is you're creating a whole new type of spell (can possibly concentrate) to fix the 1 spell.

I'd love to fix this spell as you saw on my bottom of the barrel thread, but I don't think a new system of sometimes concentrating is a good solution.

The first step is the spell should be an Intelligence Saving throw as it is an Illusion spell. Beyond that I don't have great ideas at the moment.

[Nifft]

The problem is you're creating a whole new type of spell (can possibly concentrate) to fix the 1 spell.

Why is that a problem?

There are other spells which have some unique feature, and they don't seem to be problems.

[Kryx]

You're looking to fix a poor spell by making it more complicated. That should be a last resort.

In 3.X Phantasmal Killer had 1 Will save to disbelieve and then a Constitution save or die. A save or die with some minor dmg if they succeeded.

I really think making it an intelligence save, making the damage auto apply at the start of the round, and moving the secondary saves to the END of the turn would make it much more useful. Guarantees 1 round of frightened + damage.