Why is Animate Objects a 5th level spell?

[Dualswinger]

I don't see what would be unbalanced of having the same ability at the equivalent of a lower level, a 3rd level version that could only target 6 objects for example.

[Citadel97501]

I don't see what would be unbalanced of having the same ability at the equivalent of a lower level, a 3rd level version that could only target 6 objects for example.

I must agree that far too many spells that are only OK, or have a very narrow niche are kept at to high a level.

[Nhorianscum]

I don't see what would be unbalanced of having the same ability at the equivalent of a lower level, a 3rd level version that could only target 6 objects for example.

Why birds?

My guess is because have you SEEN the 3rd level spell bloat in 5e?

[MrStabby]

I would guess because it slows down the game, is a drag for other players and it is better used in moderation than coming out in most fights.

[Chronos]

Tiny Servants, from Xanathar's, might be what you're looking for.

[Dualswinger]

Tiny Servants, from Xanathar's, might be what you're looking for.

A good idea! And certainly opens up options for a fun build, but I'm looking for ways to create mass animated suits of armour so my Warforged can have that "I am legion" thing going on.

[Merudo]

I don't see what would be unbalanced of having the same ability at the equivalent of a lower level, a 3rd level version that could only target 6 objects for example.

Something like Conjure Animals, then?

[PhoenixPhyre]

A good idea! And certainly opens up options for a fun build, but I'm looking for ways to create mass animated suits of armour so my Warforged can have that "I am legion" thing going on.

Animated Armors are CR 1. You're absolutely not going to get more than 2 of those out of a 3rd level spell. And you'll have to provide the suits of armor. Which will get seriously expensive.

[stoutstien]

Tiny servant on a bunch of toy soldier would be cute

[Yunru]

I don't see what would be unbalanced of having the same ability at the equivalent of a lower level, a 3rd level version that could only target 6 objects for example.

It's imbalanced at it's current level.
It does twice as much damage per round as a one-and-done 5th level damaging spell (IIRC).

[SVamp]

It’s 5th lvl so you can’t spam it like crazy.

Now ask why it’s not 8th level. There isn’t a good reason, other than designers wanted it used more often, since it’s better than most 8th level spells.

Compare it with laughably horrid wilting, lol. Put horrid at lvl 5, this at lvl 8, and it’s still a good spell.

[Rukelnikov]

It's imbalanced at it's current level.
It does twice as much damage per round as a one-and-done 5th level damaging spell (IIRC).

Not really, the most damage comes from animating 10 tiny objects.

That translates to 10 attacks at +8 for 1d4+4 each, even assuming all of they hit, thats 10d4+40, which averages to 65 damage.

A 5th lvl Fireball or Lightning Bolt deals 10d6, avg 35, per target, so with 2 targets its already better.

This comparison is of course not very representative since no attack rolls or saves have been involved, but taking them into account only makes Fireball come out better when comparing a single round.

Comparing Animate Objects against other concentration damage based spells, lets take staple Spirit Guardians, when cast at 5th lvl, it deals 5d8, avg 22.5, so it needs 3 enemies to deal comparable damage (67.5).

The strength of Animate Objects comes from keeping it up for various rounds, against only one or at most two enemies, but its not overpowered when compared to other widely used spells.

[diplomancer]

Not really, the most damage comes from animating 10 tiny objects.

That translates to 10 attacks at +8 for 1d4+4 each, even assuming all of they hit, thats 10d4+40, which averages to 65 damage.

A 5th lvl Fireball or Lightning Bolt deals 10d6, avg 35, per target, so with 2 targets its already better.

This comparison is of course not very representative since no attack rolls or saves have been involved, but taking them into account only makes Fireball come out better when comparing a single round.

Comparing Animate Objects against other concentration damage based spells, lets take staple Spirit Guardians, when cast at 5th lvl, it deals 5d8, avg 22.5, so it needs 3 enemies to deal comparable damage (67.5).

The strength of Animate Objects comes from keeping it up for various rounds, against only one or at most two enemies, but its not overpowered when compared to other widely used spells.

The ability to focus fire (which spirit guardians, fireball and lightning bolt don't have) puts animate objects ahead of them.

Main limitation of animate objects is resistance to non magical weapon damage.

[KorvinStarmast]

That translates to 10 attacks at +8 for 1d4+4 each, even assuming all of they hit, thats 10d4+40, which averages to 65 damage. Yes, and when it is good it is very, very good.
The ability to focus fire (which spirit guardians, fireball and lightning bolt don't have) puts animate objects ahead of them.

Main limitation of animate objects is resistance to non magical weapon damage. Yes. Resistance to non magical attacks is common enough that its raw damage output gets dampened.
(But against fiends, if you animate a handful of silver ball bearings ... :smallbiggrin: )

[PhoenixPhyre]

Yes, and when it is good it is very, very good. Yes. Resistance to non magical attacks is common enough that its raw damage output gets dampened.
(But against fiends, if you animate a handful of silver ball bearings ... :smallbiggrin: )

Also vulnerability to AoE. One fireball or breath and they're all toast.

Not to mention the sheer space that they take up. There's no indication that they can share spaces with each other, so you can put 4/square (being tiny). But if you do so, 2 of them are taking cover penalties to attack.

Oh, and you must order them to attack the same target if you want to have them all active at the same time, because you can only order one group of them at a time and have to give the same order to each group. So it's really bonus action intensive to micromanage a full swarm.

[diplomancer]

There is no cover for melee attacks, and no rule that if 4 tiny creatures are in the same space they cannot all attack normally.

They are tiny, its not like they are going to block each other's attacks.

[PhoenixPhyre]

There is no cover for melee attacks, and no rule that if 4 tiny creatures are in the same space they cannot all attack normally.

They are tiny, its not like they are going to block each other's attacks.



A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC...The obstacle might be...a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or friend.


Applies equally well to ranged or melee attacks. It usually doesn't come up, but it does for reach weapons (which for a tiny object would be a 5' reach like the animated objects have).

They're not in the same space--they're in separate, 2.5'x2.5' spaces. As such, there is a creature between the "back" two and the target on any facing.

Edit: And they're not swarms, which are explicitly allowed (by separate exception in the stat block) to share spaces with creatures. As such, they impose the "can't end your turn there" condition. Thus, they occupy spaces and impose all the penalties (and benefits) associated with that state on everyone. Small enemies cannot move through their square (making them effective at blocking the way). Allies can move through their spaces, as can Medium (or larger) enemies, but they cannot end their movement there (PHB 191).

[Willie the Duck]

A good idea! And certainly opens up options for a fun build, but I'm looking for ways to create mass animated suits of armour so my Warforged can have that "I am legion" thing going on.

Yeah, AO is not the spell for this, as it has to accommodate the combat potential of the spell. We had that issue with Telekinesis in previous editions, before Mage Hand was a thing.

You could always just buy armor and make animated suits of armor.

[Nhorianscum]

Also vulnerability to AoE. One fireball or breath and they're all toast.

Not to mention the sheer space that they take up. There's no indication that they can share spaces with each other, so you can put 4/square (being tiny). But if you do so, 2 of them are taking cover penalties to attack.

Oh, and you must order them to attack the same target if you want to have them all active at the same time, because you can only order one group of them at a time and have to give the same order to each group. So it's really bonus action intensive to micromanage a full swarm.

If an enemy uses AOE's larger objects are useful. 1d8+2 swords live average damage on fireball with the same DPR as tiny. Big objects make excellent grapples.

Similarly the objects use very little real space because.... they fly. Park 9 of am over the target's head and you're good to go in situations where this matters.

BA ordering at it's worst is either 65/turn with BA which is a little bit insane or a strong BA BC. The ability to improve on this with a lenient DM is nice but we lose nothing if the DM is strict.

[Damon_Tor]

(But against fiends, if you animate a handful of silver ball bearings ... :smallbiggrin: )

Why bother getting silver ball bearings when you've almost certainly got a pocket full of silver coins?

[diplomancer]

Applies equally well to ranged or melee attacks. It usually doesn't come up, but it does for reach weapons (which for a tiny object would be a 5' reach like the animated objects have).

They're not in the same space--they're in separate, 2.5'x2.5' spaces. As such, there is a creature between the "back" two and the target on any facing.

Edit: And they're not swarms, which are explicitly allowed (by separate exception in the stat block) to share spaces with creatures. As such, they impose the "can't end your turn there" condition. Thus, they occupy spaces and impose all the penalties (and benefits) associated with that state on everyone. Small enemies cannot move through their square (making them effective at blocking the way). Allies can move through their spaces, as can Medium (or larger) enemies, but they cannot end their movement there (PHB 191).

Corrected on the melee question, thank you; but still, a target has half-cover when half of its body is covered by another creature. I'm not sure I would play with a DM who claims that two flying coins cover half the body of a medium (or even a small) creature.

Im also not sure about your ruling as regards occupying 4 2.5' squares", at least I don't think it is especified this way in the rules., just that 4 of them can occupy the same square.

[Rukelnikov]

The ability to focus fire (which spirit guardians, fireball and lightning bolt don't have) puts animate objects ahead of them.

Main limitation of animate objects is resistance to non magical weapon damage.

Not quite, it may put them ahead in specific scenarios, namely when you can't hit 3 targets with Fireball/Lightning Bolt, the enemy doesn't have resistance to damage fron non magical attacks, and the enemy doesn't have a simple way of disposing of all of them, plus, you need to have 10 tiny objects within 30 ft of the enemy in question, 20 ft realistically since a single enemy probably already has other creatures adjacent to it, and only 4 tinies can share space.

The spell is pretty good, but I don't find it broken.


Yes, and when it is good it is very, very good. Yes. Resistance to non magical attacks is common enough that its raw damage output gets dampened.
(But against fiends, if you animate a handful of silver ball bearings ... :smallbiggrin: )

And that's perfectly good, if it always was very, very good, it would be a problem.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Im also not sure about your ruling as regards occupying 4 2.5' squares", at least I don't think it is especified this way in the rules., just that 4 of them can occupy the same square.

That's specifically in the rules themselves. PHB table pg 191, Size Categories.

Things can only share a space if they have a trait that lets them do it (like swarms).

Cover is important if you have to worry about hitting the covering object instead of the target. So an erratically moving coin flying around in a 2.5' square (creatures are considered to always be moving within their square) presents a much larger object than its actual size. A static piece of cover the same size (for example a coin sitting on the floor) would not provide cover IMO.

[Pex]

Why bother getting silver ball bearings when you've almost certainly got a pocket full of silver coins?

You expect a PC to risk their loot?

[Pipquake]

Animate objects does a TON of damage. In addition to this, it has a very flexible use as a pseudo telekinesis as the spell says:


You decide what action the creature will take and where it will move during its next turn

So no more huge or smaller port cullasses cutting you and your friends off. Also this spell has a great RP use if you really wanna beauty and the beast your manor up with dancing cutlery that comes out and sets the table in front of the guests. That's what my transmuter does to wow partygoers in her mage tower anyway.

[sithlordnergal]

Well, the cover shouldn't be a problem since most objects you animate should have a fly speed, and should be able to hover. Meaning, for any being that takes up a single square, they have a max of 17 squares to surround said foe, 8 on the ground and 9 above. And since the tiny objects can fit four to a square, you can just put two in each 5 foot space. So theoretically there is enough room to fit up to 34 tiny, flying objects around a creature that takes up a 5ft space.

As for why it is 5th level...I don't know. I mean, Druids get Conjure Animal as a 3rd level spell, and that is easily comparable to Animate Objects. Though it might be because you technically get more mooks from the base Animate Objects then you do Conjure Animals, and the animated objects tend to be a bit tougher and more accurate then most CR 1/4 beasts

Edit: Oh, and the caster gets to choose what objects are animated, where as the DM chooses what is summoned

[NaughtyTiger]

Not really, the most damage comes from animating 10 tiny objects.

That translates to 10 attacks at +8 for 1d4+4 each, even assuming all of they hit, thats 10d4+40, which averages to 65 damage.

+8 is equal to my level 9 fighter...
65 damage PER turn. Given 10 objects with 18 AC and 20 hit points that's a lot of turns...

5th level ain't high enough

[diplomancer]

That's specifically in the rules themselves. PHB table pg 191, Size Categories.

Things can only share a space if they have a trait that lets them do it (like swarms).

Cover is important if you have to worry about hitting the covering object instead of the target. So an erratically moving coin flying around in a 2.5' square (creatures are considered to always be moving within their square) presents a much larger object than its actual size. A static piece of cover the same size (for example a coin sitting on the floor) would not provide cover IMO.

You are equating controlling a space with occupyiing a space, with creating cover in a space, and none of those are the same thing. You are also actually increasing the utility of the spell (they fly, and they can all be over the target, without interfering with another attack from a creature in the ground while remaining within reach of the target, AND now they can provide cover for the party if needed)

Also, I would like to mention that the default isTheater of the Mind. There is no way a DM would rule that two coins create cover over half the body of a medium (or even a small) creature in Theater of the Mind. However, if the DM does it, it will work against the player once (when he is surprised by this ruling for the first time), and then greatly increase the combat power of the spell defensively.

Final question; if a standing giant is surrounded by 100 chihuahuas, all on the ground, how would you rule cover if an Archer tried to shoot him? Do the dogs provide full cover for the giant and tough luck for the archer? That's where your agument leads to.

[PhoenixPhyre]

You are equating controlling a space with occupyiing a space, with creating cover in a space, and none of those are the same thing. You are also actually increasing the utility of the spell (they fly, and they can all be over the target, without interfering with another attack from a creature in the ground while remaining within reach of the target, AND now they can provide cover for the party if needed)

Also, I would like to mention that the default isTheater of the Mind. There is no way a DM would rule that two coins create cover over half the body of a medium (or even a small) creature in Theater of the Mind. However, if the DM does it, it will work against the player once (when he is surprised by this ruling for the first time), and then greatly increase the combat power of the spell defensively.

Final question; if a standing giant is surrounded by 100 chihuahuas, all on the ground, how would you rule cover if an Archer tried to shoot him? Do the dogs provide full cover for the giant and tough luck for the archer? That's where your agument leads to.

As to the final question: I covered that. They don't provide any cover at all, because they're constantly down on the ground.

An object isn't just its own size for the amount of cover it provides, as long as it's mobile. A coin, moving constantly in a 3d 2.5'x2.5'x2.5' cube provides a cross section that's much larger than its actual size. If it were that size but lying on edge on the ground, it wouldn't provide any cover at all.

To say otherwise is to say that you can turn edge on or crouch down so you don't provide cover for enemies in combat. Which the rules don't allow.

And I'm fine with increasing the defensive potential of it, but it doesn't get around the fact that you can't really micromanage them effectively. You can provide an order to subsets, but you only get one order per bonus action. So positioning them around the creature takes a bunch of turns, and if it moves, you lose cohesion. Or you can have them all attack, in which case you get whatever arrangement they find best (which would be as dense as possible if they're coming from the same direction originally. You don't get full micromanagement control. No summon allows that for groups of things. The alternative is just a full on ban, because micromanagement is obnoxious for everyone else at the table.

My policy on minions is that you get one order, and it has to be simple. You can say "attack those guys", in which case they fly off and attack the nearest one. You can say "move over there", and they'll do it. But you can't say "surround that guy, move with him, and stay spread out but still attack." Not for animated objects ( which are INT 0), not for undead, not for anyone. I'm going to treat all your summons as a block, and they'll all take the same action and move the same way. Anything else takes way too much time and isn't fair to anyone else.

[Renvir]

The more I've played the more I wish WotC had picked a different way to handle "summoning" spells like conjure animals and animate objects. In my perfect world the spells would let you choose a swarm of low CR creatures or one moderately strong creature. The strength of both can grow with upcasting. That way it's only one thing that needs to be tracked, controlled, given a turn, etc.

[MrStabby]

The more I've played the more I wish WotC had picked a different way to handle "summoning" spells like conjure animals and animate objects. In my perfect world the spells would let you choose a swarm of low CR creatures or one moderately strong creature. The strength of both can grow with upcasting. That way it's only one thing that needs to be tracked, controlled, given a turn, etc.

Yes, probably better.

Personally I would also like it if it was fixed when you learn the spell or first cast it. Something that preserves a theme. So if you want to conjure wolves you stick with wolves, but get stronger wolves as you level up.

[JackPhoenix]

Not to mention the sheer space that they take up. There's no indication that they can share spaces with each other, so you can put 4/square (being tiny). But if you do so, 2 of them are taking cover penalties to attack.

They can fly, so you can put 8 of them into one "square". The space is actually 5' cube, and they take 2.5' vertically as well as horizontally. Correct on the cover, though.

[Rukelnikov]

+8 is equal to my level 9 fighter...
65 damage PER turn. Given 10 objects with 18 AC and 20 hit points that's a lot of turns...

5th level ain't high enough

Yeah... lets compare it to similar spells:

Conjure Animals, 5th lvl slot: 16 CR 1/8 creatures, most of the times you get better DPR against AC 17 (level appropiate), in many cases you can get absurdly more damage (Giant Poisonous Snakes, all Cowlikes, wolves, a couple more). Lasts 1 hour.

Conjure Minor Elementals, 6th lvl slot (there's no 5th version): More varyance than the last one, 8 CRs 1/2 mean 16d6 or 16d4 breath weapon plus similar death burst damage. Lasts 1 hour.

Conjure Woodland Beings, 6th lvl slot (there's no 5th version): This one deals far less damage than AO, but brings a lot of versatility. Lasts 1 hour.

Giant Insect, 4th lvl slot (no 5th): Giant Wasps and Scorpion deal about 60% the damage of AO, asumming enemies always make their saves vs poison. Lasts 10 min.

So, from the multiple-creature summoning spells, its below Conjure Animals in single target damage, and below Conjure Elementals in total damage, both those spells also last 1 hour. I don't see how AO is unbalanced when compared to similar spells.

EDIT:

Danse Macabre, 5th lvl slot: 5 skeletons deal about 75% the damage of AO, however this spell scales with proficiency bonus, at 17th lvl, even when using a 5th lvl slot, it has slightly better DPR than AO (2-3%). Lasts 1 hour.

[stoutstien]

Animate object wins due to being able to smack people with a boat.

[Dualswinger]

I’m not going to deny that animate objects is an incredibly potent combat spell, just that I wish that there were lesser versions of it so that I could build a character around the concept and not have to wait until 9th level to do it.

[Rukelnikov]

I’m not going to deny that animate objects is an incredibly potent combat spell, just that I wish that there were lesser versions of it so that I could build a character around the concept and not have to wait until 9th level to do it.

Well, as others have said, you can get Tiny servant at 5th lvl, and will probably keep using it even when you get AO, since it lasts 8 hours and doesn't require concentration.

Besides that, you can grovel, cower, and beg your DM to let you have one as a familiar, they have stats closer to Chainlock familiars than regular ones, but since you can't attack with them anyway, the only real "exploit" I can see with it is using familiars sense for cheap blindsight. That does make me doubt a bit about it, so if I were DMing and a player wanted one, maybe I'd allow it removing the share senses.

[sithlordnergal]

Isn't Tiny Servant kinda...junk though? Animate Dead is better in every way to it, so why not use that instead of Tiny Servant?

[Rukelnikov]

Isn't Tiny Servant kinda...junk though? Animate Dead is better in every way to it, so why not use that instead of Tiny Servant?

Because people don't come at you with torches

[diplomancer]

Because people don't come at you with torches

Have you seen Beauty and the Beast? ;)

[Rukelnikov]

Have you seen Beauty and the Beast? ;)

Beast made the mistake of keeping Lumiere hidden, he would've charmed the town :P

[Sigreid]

Something to consider with Animate Objects is while it can be used for attack and defense, it can also be used for more utilitarian purposes...Animating gate wenches, moving carts, whatever.

[Chronos]

Because who doesn't like an animated wench?

[Sigreid]

Because who doesn't like an animated wench?

Yep, used the wrong spelling for winch. Well played.

[jdolch]

I think you are severely underestimating that spell.

[noob]

It is a fifth level spell only because it was one in old dnd editions.
There is absolutely no other reason.

[JackPhoenix]

It is a fifth level spell only because it was one in old dnd editions.
There is absolutely no other reason.

3.5: Animate Objects: Bard 6, Cleric 6

[noob]

Weird.
I guess then that it is more complicated than just that.
Are not level 6 spells slots capped to 1 slot?
If that is true it is maybe because they wanted the player to cast it as much as an old 6th level spell?
Or they decided they would make broken swarms one single spell away and available earlier than before due to underestimating greatly how bounded accuracy made swarms overpowered.

[Nhorianscum]

Weird.
I guess then that it is more complicated than just that.
Are not level 6 spells slots capped to 1 slot?
If that is true it is maybe because they wanted the player to cast it as much as an old 6th level spell?
Or they decided they would make broken swarms one single spell away and available earlier than before due to underestimating greatly how bounded accuracy made swarms overpowered.

You get another 6th and 7th slot at 19 and 20 in full caster progression.

[Danielqueue1]

With tiny objects, the bonus to hit will make it outpace conjure animals against anything with a decent AC. Also, if paladin pops crusader's mantle suddenly add a bunch of radiant damage to all of them.

[Fryy]

Have you seen Beauty and the Beast? ;)

With the Animated Objects spell, I always picture the scene from X-Men 2 when Magneto breaks out of prison using 2-3 tiny, animated metal objects.

The Tiny Servant spell from XGtE seems to better fit Lumiere & co. from Beauty and the Beast.

[Dualswinger]

While I can’t create the build I wanted, my new build is a Gnome Bard marionetteer that animates his puppets with tiny servant

[Phhase]

Why has noone thought of animating ropes or heck, even wires? You could make one HELL of a gallows.

[jdolch]

It's rated as second best Spell at fifth Level, so good luck arguing that it should be a third level spell. You probably just don't understand how it works. See here:

JUMP TO 7:40 minutes in the Video! (for some reason i can't post it with timestamp.)


https://youtu.be/kcA9IXM7Zvg?t=464

[Dualswinger]

It's rated as second best Spell at fifth Level, so good luck arguing that it should be a third level spell. You probably just don't understand how it works. See here:

JUMP TO 7:40 minutes in the Video! (for some reason i can't post it with timestamp.)


https://youtu.be/kcA9IXM7Zvg?t=464

As I’ve tried explaining, I’m aware it’s a good spell, even a great spell, I’m just wondering why there’s not a lesser version at lower levels. Animating 10 objects at 3rd would be insane.

[jdolch]

As I’ve tried explaining, I’m aware it’s a good spell, even a great spell, I’m just wondering why there’s not a lesser version at lower levels. Animating 10 objects at 3rd would be insane.

Sorry, didn't see that.

Anyway: Building a Character around one spell is also a really bad Idea in my opinion. I am sure you can come up with an interesting concept were you ALSO get Animate Objects at Level 9 and get lots of other good stuff as well.

[Willie the Duck]

As I’ve tried explaining, I’m aware it’s a good spell, even a great spell, I’m just wondering why there’s not a lesser version at lower levels. Animating 10 objects at 3rd would be insane.

Why? Because 'like Animate Objects, but lower level and with fewer objects' was not something for which anyone knew there was going to be a great number of people clamoring (and, to the best of my knowledge, there isn't). Mind you, I think it would be interesting if all spells were re-analyzed with the perspective of 'what's the lowest level we could make a version of this thing, with it being balanced?' and have that be the introduction point of the spell (with the current level and power of the thing being an upcast). That would have been a significantly greater design challenge, and I can see why they didn't do so (along with reducing the number of uniquely high-level spells).

There is something of a gap, though, between mage hand and animate objects, which does kind of cry out for a custom spell. Or just creating animated objects using the rules for animated swords and suits of armor as a base.