Uses of Contingency

[LudicSavant]

What are your favorite uses of Contingency? How about ones that are considered less often?

Here's a couple to start off: Mimic Subtle Spell, except even subtler because you don't have to manipulate a material component. Cast Detect Thoughts in a social situation, or Greater Invisibility even if you're Silenced. Or Mislead!

Another interesting tidbit is that it effectively has a divination component: It takes effect when a trigger is met, but you don't need to know if the trigger is met.

[Damon_Tor]

In the some other threads I've talked about the idea that you can:

Grow a clone in a Demiplane
Transfer your soul into that clone (the old fashioned way)
Set "Banish" as your contingency spell. The trigger is "I say [code word] or [gesture] or ever become unable to do both"

The cloned body is native to the demiplane, so the Banish spell works as easy transportation to that demiplane for you, using just a free action (speaking) and without using a spell slot. You can either decide to stay in your demiplane, in which case you simply maintain concentration for the full minute, or you can return whenever you wish by dropping concentration (no action required).

[Corran]

Another interesting tidbit is that it effectively has a divination component: It takes effect when a trigger is met, but you don't need to know if the trigger is met.
That sounds a bit controversial if I understand you correctly, especially since contingency is not a divination spell. We can certainly have a discussion about what it means ''when a certain circumstance occurs''. Meaning, who decides that, when it is not sth that can be subject to interpretation? Can it be even sth that is not open to interpretation? For example, does ''being lied to'' classify as a circumstance that will trigger contingency? And assuming it does, does this work based on DM knowledge or on PC instinct? I think selling contingency as a divination tool is well beyond RAI, and to my understanding also against RAW. Though I might have completely missed what you meant, so if you meant sth else, then an example would maybe help me understand your point better.

[LudicSavant]

That sounds a bit controversial if I understand you correctly, especially since contingency is not a divination spell.


Though I might have completely missed what you meant, so if you meant sth else, then an example would maybe help me understand your point better.

I'm not saying that it's a divination spell, I'm saying that it effectively has an information-gathering component.

For example, Magic Mouth can determine when a creature enters within 30 feet of it (this is explicitly one of the examples of its use given in the spell description), despite the fact that it's from the Illusion school.

For yet another example, Mislead allows you to see through the senses of your illusory double almost like it was a divination sensor, despite also being from the Illusion school.

For yet another example, Glyph of Warding has the ability to respond to triggering events in its surroundings, and is clearly intended to be able to do this without the creator's knowledge (it'd be a pretty poor trap if the creator had to be standing there). It too does not come from the Divination school.

In other words, Divination spells are not the only ones that allow you to gather information. You can think outside of that box.

In the case of Contingency, it just says that when a circumstance occurs, something happens, whether or not you want it to. Period.

The wording used is rather similar to those spells explicitly designed to be able to respond without you present, too. There's nothing about you needing to know that the circumstance occurred. You don't even need to conscious for Contingency to take effect.

[SVamp]

I'm not saying that it's a divination spell, I'm saying that it effectively has an information-gathering component.

For example, Magic Mouth can determine when a creature enters within 30 feet of it (this is explicitly one of the examples of its use given in the spell description), despite the fact that it's from the Illusion school.

For yet another example, Mislead allows you to see through the senses of your illusory double almost like it was a divination sensor, despite also being from the Illusion school.

For yet another example, Glyph of Warding has the ability to respond to triggering events in its surroundings, and is clearly intended to be able to do this without the creator's knowledge (it'd be a pretty poor trap if the creator had to be standing there). It too does not come from the Divination school.

In other words, Divination spells are not the only ones that allow you to gather information. You can think outside of that box.

In the case of Contingency, it just says that when a circumstance occurs, something happens, whether or not you want it to. Period.

The wording used is rather similar to those spells explicitly designed to be able to respond without you present, too. There's nothing about you needing to know that the circumstance occurred. You don't even need to conscious for Contingency to take effect.

I do agree that this is one valid interpretation. Possibly even raw (which doesn’t exist in 5e)

Coffelocks are also RAW, 100% rules legal. No, they are not going to be allowed at most tables. I am pretty sure neither will your interpretation.

“Contingency: the moment the bbeg is at his lair nearly out of spells so we can ambush him cast light” - Yeah.. no.

[LudicSavant]

I certainly agree that as a DM I would not allow either coffeelocks or omniscient hypothesis testing.

I think that it's up to a responsible DM to establish limits as to the sort of thing that the spell can use as a trigger, since the book didn't do so.

However, looking at past discussions of this topic, it does seem that a lot of DMs would allow some degree of information-gathering component to it (e.g. you don't necessarily need to know that the trigger happened). For example, the top result on Google for this question offers this upvoted answer: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/131054/what-are-the-limitations-of-the-circumstance-i-can-choose-to-trigger-the-conti

I think that this could be an interesting topic to pursue in and of itself: What limitations would you set at your table for the triggering conditions of Contingency?

Going by those past discussions (on stackexchange/reddit/gitp), it seems like people do want it to be able to respond to...
- A Wizard's lab being invaded.
- A Wizard being rendered unconscious or otherwise incapacitated by a status effect.
- A Wizard having someone move within 5 feet of them
- The vizier knowing that the king has died.

But don't want it to be able to respond to...
- Unearthing cosmological secrets
- Resolving challenging scientific dilemmas or mysteries outright
- Knowing when the BBEG is out of spell slots
- etc

What consistent wording for a table ruling might strike a fair balance between these desires, while still giving players a concrete set of expectations going forward?

[XmonkTad]

- Knowing when the BBEG is out of spell slots


Of all the examples you gave, this is the one I'm most torn on. On the one hand, it would be particularly meta-gamey to allow a PC access to this kind of info, but at the same time I feel like it is perfectly acceptable to allow a high level spell to have this kind of power. I mean, commune and contact other plane have colossal information gathering abilities at this level, so why not this one? A magic spell figuring out when someone is out of magic sounds really reasonable to me.

But I think the spell should be prevented from delivering omniscient-level info to the players. A good way to do that would probably say it "does not know information that a mind like mine does not know." This prevents it from figuring out what a God/Archfiend is up to, while still allowing a wizard to know when a thief is breaking into their laboratory.

But I haven't thought that ruling through, so maybe it has some obvious problems I haven't predicted yet.