Bane vs. Bless

[bloodgroove]

Was wanting to get opinions on whether bane or bless is more effective.
With bless you get a definite benefit but with bane there is a saving throw
involved so you do not get a guaranteed result. I guess the debate is do
you go with the definite +1-+4 to your party's rolls or try for the maybe
-1 - -4 rolls for your opponents. Thoughts?

[Clone]

I believe Bless to be better as, especially in fights with multiple targets, you can use it more often and it can have a larger impact. Enemies can save against Bane, but Bless automatically grants the benefit and only goes away if your concentration is broken, which gets the benefit of Bless to maintain it.

Mix that with characters who can spike their damage, like GWM or SS characters or buffing spellcasters who are holding Haste or Slow spells up, and you can have a very potent spell.

[napoleon_in_rag]

Was wanting to get opinions on whether bane or bless is more effective.
With bless you get a definite benefit but with bane there is a saving throw
involved so you do not get a guaranteed result. I guess the debate is do
you go with the definite +1-+4 to your party's rolls or try for the maybe
-1 - -4 rolls for your opponents. Thoughts?

Bless, definitely. Just because of the saving throw.

[Boci]

Worth noting though that the party may be better able to exploit the benefits of bane than bless though. Against an enemy that doesn't force you to make forces, the bonus to saves for he party isn't useful, but the party can choose to make the enemy take saving through. And sometimes players are accurate enough, and monster low AC enough, that the +1d4 to hit isn't that useful, whilst the effectively +1d4 to party AC will be useful in almost any fight. So it depends on the enemy, but other all yeah, bless is more reliable, therefor better.

[Theodoxus]

Depends on what you're facing. One DM threw a pair of ogres at our party at 2nd level. After knocking 2 members out with 1 hit to each, the bard tossed Bane on them - one stuck, and that ogre never hit anyone else the rest of the fight - saving us from a TPK.

If you have access to both on two different characters, a Bane/Bless combo is a decent use of party Concentration. I plan on using such a combo with my Paladin and buddy who's playing a Cleric.

[Chugger]

I agree that bless is good if a party member has GWM or sharpshooter. Also the saving throw benefit to bless will help if fighting something that forces you to make saves or suffer something nasty.

I'm kind of new to 5e, so tell me if I'm wrong, but I think that bard (in the example above) would have been better off burning a slot to cast faerie fire on the ogres (giving all party members advantage, which is is much stronger than bless - a cleric or pal at that point can possibly save the spell slot and not bless - or bless to be over the top and help burst those ogres down). Then, vicious mockery would have given one ogre a disad. to hit. Of course bane lasts and v mock has to be recast, which is not good (the bard is just cantripping the whole fight, unless he uses healing word as a bonus action or something). Or cutting words (was the bard not a lore bard? or out of insp?) as a reaction giving one ogre a minus 1 to 6 (and no ST, and can use after seeing Ogre's roll if I read the PHB correctly) instead of a minus 1 to 4 (from bane). With FF virtually guaranteeing hits (on say the ogre who missed his ST vs bane), the ogre would die much faster, I would think.

I'm just not a fan of bane because it has a save, and it might only be minus one to hit - that only effects one in twenty possible dice rolls. FF has a save, too, but the benefit is (to me) much bigger - everyone gets adv and the creature can't go invis (and to get back on topic, bless of course has no save). Now sure, you can't always cast FF - if the monsters ambush and are in your midst (you'd ff party members too if you tried it then, a bad thing). So bane could have uses (but there are other ways to debuff - something to consider). At least the bane save is vs Cha, which many monsters have a low stat in. Where bane might shine is if players are going to cast spells that require the monsters to roll STs - bane also lowers their ST rolls 1-4 - so if the plan is to force the monsters to roll STs and if the monsters have low Cha, then bane is a good option to consider. Otherwise, I'd look to other spells/abilities.

[hymer]

As a rule of thumb, Bless is better. But if your side isn't targeted on their saving throws, and perhaps make very few attack rolls for one reason or another (being mostly spellslingers using few spell attack rolls, e.g.), Bane could very well do better for that fight.

[bloodgroove]

I believe Bless to be better as, especially in fights with multiple targets, you can use it more often and it can have a larger impact. Enemies can save against Bane, but Bless automatically grants the benefit and only goes away if your concentration is broken, which gets the benefit of Bless to maintain it.

Mix that with characters who can spike their damage, like GWM or SS characters or buffing spellcasters who are holding Haste or Slow spells up, and you can have a very potent spell.

thanks for the insight....

[bloodgroove]

Worth noting though that the party may be better able to exploit the benefits of bane than bless though. Against an enemy that doesn't force you to make forces, the bonus to saves for he party isn't useful, but the party can choose to make the enemy take saving through. And sometimes players are accurate enough, and monster low AC enough, that the +1d4 to hit isn't that useful, whilst the effectively +1d4 to party AC will be useful in almost any fight. So it depends on the enemy, but other all yeah, bless is more reliable, therefor better.

thanks for the insight....

[bloodgroove]

Depends on what you're facing. One DM threw a pair of ogres at our party at 2nd level. After knocking 2 members out with 1 hit to each, the bard tossed Bane on them - one stuck, and that ogre never hit anyone else the rest of the fight - saving us from a TPK.

If you have access to both on two different characters, a Bane/Bless combo is a decent use of party Concentration. I plan on using such a combo with my Paladin and buddy who's playing a Cleric.

thanks for the insight....

[bloodgroove]

I agree that bless is good if a party member has GWM or sharpshooter. Also the saving throw benefit to bless will help if fighting something that forces you to make saves or suffer something nasty.

I'm kind of new to 5e, so tell me if I'm wrong, but I think that bard (in the example above) would have been better off burning a slot to cast faerie fire on the ogres (giving all party members advantage, which is is much stronger than bless - a cleric or pal at that point can possibly save the spell slot and not bless - or bless to be over the top and help burst those ogres down). Then, vicious mockery would have given one ogre a disad. to hit. Of course bane lasts and v mock has to be recast, which is not good (the bard is just cantripping the whole fight, unless he uses healing word as a bonus action or something). Or cutting words (was the bard not a lore bard? or out of insp?) as a reaction giving one ogre a minus 1 to 6 (and no ST, and can use after seeing Ogre's roll if I read the PHB correctly) instead of a minus 1 to 4 (from bane). With FF virtually guaranteeing hits (on say the ogre who missed his ST vs bane), the ogre would die much faster, I would think.

I'm just not a fan of bane because it has a save, and it might only be minus one to hit - that only effects one in twenty possible dice rolls. FF has a save, too, but the benefit is (to me) much bigger - everyone gets adv and the creature can't go invis (and to get back on topic, bless of course has no save). Now sure, you can't always cast FF - if the monsters ambush and are in your midst (you'd ff party members too if you tried it then, a bad thing). So bane could have uses (but there are other ways to debuff - something to consider). At least the bane save is vs Cha, which many monsters have a low stat in. Where bane might shine is if players are going to cast spells that require the monsters to roll STs - bane also lowers their ST rolls 1-4 - so if the plan is to force the monsters to roll STs and if the monsters have low Cha, then bane is a good option to consider. Otherwise, I'd look to other spells/abilities.

thanks for the insight....

[JellyPooga]

Bane is one of the very few ways to penalise an enemies Saving Throws. If you have a party with a lot of save-or-suck abilities, then Bane can pay in dividends compared to Bless. In a more usual party, though, Bless is generally better.

[Theodoxus]

I'm kind of new to 5e, so tell me if I'm wrong, but I think that bard (in the example above) would have been better off burning a slot to cast faerie fire on the ogres (giving all party members advantage, which is is much stronger than bless - a cleric or pal at that point can possibly save the spell slot and not bless - or bless to be over the top and help burst those ogres down). Then, vicious mockery would have given one ogre a disad. to hit. Of course bane lasts and v mock has to be recast, which is not good (the bard is just cantripping the whole fight, unless he uses healing word as a bonus action or something). Or cutting words (was the bard not a lore bard? or out of insp?) as a reaction giving one ogre a minus 1 to 6 (and no ST, and can use after seeing Ogre's roll if I read the PHB correctly) instead of a minus 1 to 4 (from bane). With FF virtually guaranteeing hits (on say the ogre who missed his ST vs bane), the ogre would die much faster, I would think.


We were 2nd level at the time, so no archetype abilities... However, I think your premise is wrong, at least in regards to ogres. They are just bags of HP with low AC that hit like trucks. FF would have granted advantage, but hitting them was never a problem - avoiding their impressive attacks was. They knocked out three of the 6 characters through the fight - each time it was a one shot. We did use HW to scrape the fallen back up, but it wasn't until the was used that the hurting stopped. We focused fired on one and drove it off with a well placed Dissonant Whispers. The other that failed on the Bane struggled against the spell but ultimately was defeated without it landing another blow.

[NinaWu]

Bless would seem to be the better choice, though a CHA save isn't necessarily one of an NPC's stronger saves. Still, it offers a chance of failure so Bless becomes a better option.
It's funny since it's asking whether one wants (effectively) AC or Atk Bonus. Most times when offered magical items players will go the +? Weapon over Armour (IME). Just shows the power of a saving throw!

[Citan]

Was wanting to get opinions on whether bane or bless is more effective.
With bless you get a definite benefit but with bane there is a saving throw
involved so you do not get a guaranteed result. I guess the debate is do
you go with the definite +1-+4 to your party's rolls or try for the maybe
-1 - -4 rolls for your opponents. Thoughts?
Bless is usually better simply because you can more easily determine the actual benefit that comes from it. It's, at worst, a guaranteed +1 on attacks/saves for the next minute.

Bane, on the other hand, may be a total waste of a slot, or affects the one creature that you don't care about but fail to affect the one you really wanted to.

With that said, as soon as you know you have a decent to good chance to make it stick and don't want to spend a higher slot on Bestow Curse, it's a very good spell to cast.
As an EK (Eldricht Strike), AT (Magical Ambush), Diviner Wizard (Portent), Wild Magic Sorcerer (Heightened/Bend Luck), Lore Bard (Cutting Words), or with any ally that is one of the aforementioned except EK/AT, it can be a biggest game-changer than Bless. ;)

[JackPhoenix]

thanks for the insight....


thanks for the insight....


thanks for the insight....


thanks for the insight....

You know you can multiquote instead of spamming the thread, right?

[JellyPooga]

Bane, on the other hand, may [snip] affects the one creature that you don't care about but fail to affect the one you really wanted to.

I see this as a strength of Bane, more than a weakness. The fact that it's multi-target means that even if your primary target isn't affected, it will probably stick to someone. Unlike single-target spells like Bestow Curse, it has a "consolation prize" and in an economy where getting save-or-sucks to stick is a tricky prospect at best (which 5ed is), that's invaluable.

[Dalebert]

Bane is one of the very few ways to penalise an enemies Saving Throws.

This. I'm generally more likely to prepare Bless myself for the reasons given, but I feel like I may want to reconsider that. This can be a great one-two combo punch. Have the cleric cast Bane following by the sorcerer or wizard casting a possibly high level slot and limited resource save-or-suck spell. You could stack it with Bend Luck. Maybe the Bane doesn't land but it might, and overall you've probably substantially increased the chance of your other spell landing.

[JellyPooga]

This. I'm generally more likely to prepare Bless myself for the reasons given, but I feel like I may want to reconsider that. This can be a great one-two combo punch. Have the cleric cast Bane following by the sorcerer or wizard casting a possibly high level slot and limited resource save-or-suck spell. You could stack it with Bend Luck. Maybe the Bane doesn't land but it might, and overall you've probably substantially increased the chance of your other spell landing.

The problem with Bane is that for a solo character, it's like True Strike; you're almost always better off doing what you want to do in the first place, instead of taking the time to "set it up" first e.g. if you want, say, Hold Person to stick, you're better off just casting Hold Person instead of hoping Bane will stick and then casting it. If you have friends that also enjoy using save-or-sucks, however, Bane starts coming into its own; other spellcasters are the obvious candidates for this, but don't forget Battlemaster Fighters, Druids in Wildshape (many beasts have a Save-or-suck attached to their attacks) and Monks, among others. Even a Paladin might reconsider using one of the Smite line of spells instead of using the slot on Divine Smite, if there's an active Bane effect in play to increase the chances of the secondary effects going off.