Can eyebite be applied to the same character more than once?

[holywhippet]

The spell description for eyebite indicates you can't retarget the same creature with the same casting of the spell if they pass their save. But what about the same creature if they don't pass their save? You could put multiple eyebite effects on them.

[MaxWilson]

The spell description for eyebite indicates you can't retarget the same creature with the same casting of the spell if they pass their save. But what about the same creature if they don't pass their save? You could put multiple eyebite effects on them.

Sure. Looks legal to me.

[DMThac0]

It would, if I understand correctly, result in the same ruling as casting a buff spell twice on the same person: The strongest/newest version of the spell remains in place.

As such, each time you cast Eyebite you would choose a new effect, replacing the old one, or simply "refresh" the current one.

The trick here is that they would then save vs the new casting of the spell, and if they succeed, then the newest spell fails, they can no longer be targeted, but the current condition will run/finish it's duration.

[holywhippet]

It would, if I understand correctly, result in the same ruling as casting a buff spell twice on the same person: The strongest/newest version of the spell remains in place.


That isn't actually correct. If the same magical spell is in place multiple times on the same charcter only the strongest is in effect, but all remain in place for their duration. So if you had 10 clerics cast 10 bless spells on you you'd only be able to add 1d4 to your rolls when appropriate. If those clerics started taking damage and losing concentration then the remaining bless spells would remain in effect.

I think you could add multiple sickened conditions to the same character and they'd need to make a save for each of them to get rid of them. As soon as they succeed with one save they couldn't be targeted again for the same casting.

[MaxWilson]

That isn't actually correct. If the same magical spell is in place multiple times on the same charcter only the strongest is in effect, but all remain in place for their duration. So if you had 10 clerics cast 10 bless spells on you you'd only be able to add 1d4 to your rolls when appropriate. If those clerics started taking damage and losing concentration then the remaining bless spells would remain in effect.

I think you could add multiple sickened conditions to the same character and they'd need to make a save for each of them to get rid of them. As soon as they succeed with one save they couldn't be targeted again for the same casting.

I don't think I buy the part in bold. But stacking Frightened + Sickened? Sure, sounds okay to me.

[DMThac0]

PHB 205

The effects of different spells add together while the duration of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. lnstead, the most potent effect-such as the highest bonus-from those castings applies while their duration overlaps.
For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell's benefit only once; he or she doesn't get to roll two bonus dice.

With that I agree that the spells would overlap, but that leads me to question: What would you consider the most potent effect?

Since the example says you don't get 2 die rolls from Bless then it could be assumed you don't get 2 effects from Eyebite. So how do you figure which of the effects is "most potent"?

[MaxWilson]

PHB 205


With that I agree that the spells would overlap, but that leads me to question: What would you consider the most potent effect?

Since the example says you don't get 2 die rolls from Bless then it could be assumed you don't get 2 effects from Eyebite. So how do you figure which of the effects is "most potent"?

I'd just say they get both effects. Note that this isn't two different spells, it's just one spell, so the section you quoted doesn't strictly apply.

[Galithar]

I don't think I buy the part in bold. But stacking Frightened + Sickened? Sure, sounds okay to me.

It is RAW. All of the effects are present, but only the strongest is present. It doesn't dispell any of the spells though or you could actually use this for some 'debuff removal' cheese.

My ally got hit by a level 2 Hold Person and failed the save.
I cast level 3 hold person on the same ally, causing my hold person to 'take effect'. I then immediately drop concentration removing my hold person effect from them.
If you can't stack multiple instances on in the background, while only one is in effect, then that scenario would result in me dispelling the hold person by casting hold person on top of it...

It's silliness like this that shows why they have to still be there in the background but only the strongest is in effect.


Edit: I misread the original post. I don't think you could do multiple sickened. The effect would only be created by the spell once. You and an Ally both casting Eyebite would work as originally described though.

So I actually agree with what you said I just didn't realize it at first lol
But my silly example shows why TWO casters could accomplish the same task of stacking sickened conditions to force multiple saves to be freed of the effect.

[MaxWilson]

It is RAW. All of the effects are present, but only the strongest is present. It doesn't dispell any of the spells though or you could actually use this for some 'debuff removal' cheese.

My ally got hit by a level 2 Hold Person and failed the save.
I cast level 3 hold person on the same ally, causing my hold person to 'take effect'. I then immediately drop concentration removing my hold person effect from them.
If you can't stack multiple instances on in the background, while only one is in effect, then that scenario would result in me dispelling the hold person by casting hold person on top of it...

It's silliness like this that shows why they have to still be there in the background but only the strongest is in effect.

The Hold Person scenario you're proposing is different in two ways:

(1) It involves multiple spells;
(2) The target doesn't make a saving throw.

Eyebite says that failing a save means you're "affected by one of the following effects of your choice for the Duration," which means that for Sickened, "At the end of each of its turns, it can make another Wisdom saving throw. If it succeeds, the effect ends."

I don't think I buy the idea that a successful save doesn't end Sickened just because the Eyebite caster tried to Sicken you multiple times. The way I see it, once you're Sickened, you're Sickened until you make your Wisdom save against Sickening, and then you're not.

That is how I would run it, and--less importantly--that is what the rules as written appear to be saying, so as far as I'm concerned the RAW in this case don't need changing. They're good enough.

[dragoeniex]

Personally, I would treat each effect as able to be layered once. So you could in theory have someone asleep, panicked, and quickened- and by gosh must that be the most restless, flailing nap. If the target is damaged/shaken, they wake up with the other two effects.

That said, I would still only have them make one saving throw. And when they passed, they would be immediately free and clear of all effects.

This makes some of what you're after possible; it can be harder on enemies. But it's also a calculated risk for the caster on whether they want to spend more actions layering on someone who could save for both effects next round.

Caster still has the option to choose new targets after, of course, so they've got rebound options.

[MaxWilson]

Personally, I would treat each effect as able to be layered once. So you could in theory have someone asleep, panicked, and quickened- and by gosh must that be the most restless, flailing nap. If the target is damaged/shaken, they wake up with the other two effects.

That said, I would still only have them make one saving throw. And when they passed, they would be immediately free and clear of all effects.

This makes some of what you're after possible; it can be harder on enemies. But it's also a calculated risk for the caster on whether they want to spend more actions layering on someone who could save for both effects next round.

Caster still has the option to choose new targets after, of course, so they've got rebound options.

Sounds reasonable.

[Galithar]

The Hold Person scenario you're proposing is different in two ways:

(1) It involves multiple spells;
(2) The target doesn't make a saving throw.

Eyebite says that failing a save means you're "affected by one of the following effects of your choice for the Duration," which means that for Sickened, "At the end of each of its turns, it can make another Wisdom saving throw. If it succeeds, the effect ends."

I don't think I buy the idea that a successful save doesn't end Sickened just because the Eyebite caster tried to Sicken you multiple times. The way I see it, once you're Sickened, you're Sickened until you make your Wisdom save against Sickening, and then you're not.

That is how I would run it, and--less importantly--that is what the rules as written appear to be saying, so as far as I'm concerned the RAW in this case don't need changing. They're good enough.

Read my edit. I misread and was applying the sickened conditions from multiple castings if Eyebite (multiple casters). Which would layer and need saves for each (two saves at the end of each turn, one against each instance) ending only after both spells had been saved against.

Also the presence of a saving throw does not differentiate whether something can be stacked or not. I could rewrite that example using sleep, or blindness/deafness, and it will operate the same.