Rebalancing 1/turn spells to 1/round (Create Bonfire, Wall of Fire, etc)

[Skylivedk]

Dear Playground,

My DM has made a ruling. Spells like Create Bonfire, Wall of Fire, etc only damages once per round. As such, I like the ruling from an in-fiction point of view: it makes little/no sense that you are hurt more by a stop/start burn than a continuous one.

On the other hand, it means those spells and the fun environmental interactions they can lead to, are not seeing much use.

How would you change them to be closer to their original value while keeping in mind their new triggering rules?

I thought the easiest fix was to increase damage dice with two sizes (often d8-d12). Otherwise, I'd add damage dice, but I think that's less elegant since it requires specific changes to each of those spells. Thoughts?

[CheddarChampion]

You're right that a fire burning for longer deals more damage, but only if it is the same intensity.
I'd leave the rules for most stuff as your DM ruled. The effect can deal damage once per creature per round but has multiple triggering conditions: moving into the space and/or starting their turn there and/or being moved through/into the area.

I am in a game where we used to have a Fighter 1/Divine Soul X and a Fighter 1/Cleric X that both cast spirit guardians and ran into a fight. Used to be they dealt damage twice each to an enemy before the enemy's turn.
Now, I don't think running towards an enemy counts as triggering the damage from your own spirit guardians on them but my example is more about how a double hit makes some spells much higher than the power curve. Who needs an 8d6 fireball when you can have 6d8 per round for 10 minutes for only your concentration?

[greenstone]

Is the DM applying the same ruling to things like fire elemental immolation?

[MaxWilson]

Dear Playground,

My DM has made a ruling. Spells like Create Bonfire, Wall of Fire, etc only damages once per round. As such, I like the ruling from an in-fiction point of view: it makes little/no sense that you are hurt more by a stop/start burn than a continuous one.

On the other hand, it means those spells and the fun environmental interactions they can lead to, are not seeing much use.

How would you change them to be closer to their original value while keeping in mind their new triggering rules?

I thought the easiest fix was to increase damage dice with two sizes (often d8-d12). Otherwise, I'd add damage dice, but I think that's less elegant since it requires specific changes to each of those spells. Thoughts?

I do this, but I leave the damage unchanged. I don't think WotC is sophisticated enough to have taken multi-triggering tactics into account in the first place when writing these spells (or they would never, ever have written Healing Spirit the way it is), so I don't feel the need to increase damage to compensate.

In a way it's too bad that players cannot abuse Sickening Radiance + Sculpt Spell + grappling + readied Move to deal horrific amounts of damage and exhaustion (at least three activations per round), because it's an interesting combo. But it's an interesting combo which makes no sense at all in-game, so I'm afraid it just doesn't work that way in my game: one activation per round is all you get. It's still a good combo to a lesser degree.

-Max

[Yakk]

Who needs an 8d6 fireball when you can have 6d8 per round for 10 minutes for only your concentration?
"only" your concentration? For a spellcaster, your concentration is your largest resource; more valuable than most of your spell slots.

The power of fireball is you can drop your concentration spell, and then spam fireballs.

[Skylivedk]

Is the DM applying the same ruling to things like fire elemental immolation?

I would guess so, but going by his text as written, no:
"You can only be affected by the same continuos AoE spell effect once per round. I.e. a wall of fire can damage you once per round. But getting slammed into a spiked pit, and lifted out and slammed back in during 1 round, will cause 2 instances of damage in that round."
I think he would include effects of the same kind though, so despite the text focusing on spells, I'd wager elementals would work the same way.


I do this, but I leave the damage unchanged. I don't think WotC is sophisticated enough to have taken multi-triggering tactics into account in the first place when writing these spells (or they would never, ever have written Healing Spirit the way it is), so I don't feel the need to increase damage to compensate.

In a way it's too bad that players cannot abuse Sickening Radiance + Sculpt Spell + grappling + readied Move to deal horrific amounts of damage and exhaustion (at least three activations per round), because it's an interesting combo. But it's an interesting combo which makes no sense at all in-game, so I'm afraid it just doesn't work that way in my game: one activation per round is all you get. It's still a good combo to a lesser degree.

-Max
I don't get why they phrased those spells the way they did either. Once per round would make a lot more sense. Are you basing your assumption of lack of tactical sophistication amongst the designers on anything specific in this case or is it more your general model of the designers' in game tactical understanding?

To me 5d8+concentration slot seems to be on the weak side. Create Bonfire and Cloud of daggers are hit even harder. Especially because the current ruling is 5 ft radius means one grid square, not 4. The net result is that all hazard spells have yet to be picked.

[MaxWilson]

I don't get why they phrased those spells the way they did either. Once per round would make a lot more sense. Are you basing your assumption of lack of tactical sophistication amongst the designers on anything specific in this case or is it more your general model of the designers' in game tactical understanding?

More specific than Healing Spirit, you mean? It's clear from the DMG spell customization advice and what I've heard about WotC's internal use of spreadsheets for rating monster CRs that WotC somehow got it into their heads that modeling spells by average expected damage-or-healing-per-round-against-a-typical-party was a good analysis method (as opposed to e.g. Monte Carlo sims), and that Healing Spirit just flipped this on its head and took the DMG advice at face value by handing out that amount of healing per round, pretty much right off their spreadsheet. If anybody had put actual thought into it they would have realized that character behavior is not independent of spell effects, and that characters will act to minimize damage but maximize healing, and... I mean, it was immediately obvious to everybody who read Xanathar's that Healing Spirit was extremely broken, and the only explanation I have for why WotC even wrote it is that they were obviously just following their existing models to their logical conclusion. And those models don't take sophisticated multi-trigger combos into account.

Call it an educated guess on my part.


To me 5d8+concentration slot seems to be on the weak side. Create Bonfire and Cloud of daggers are hit even harder. Especially because the current ruling is 5 ft radius means one grid square, not 4. The net result is that all hazard spells have yet to be picked.

Well, Cloud of Daggers is a bad spell. Create Bonfire is, well, it's a cantrip so it's hard to say it's bad (they're all pretty similar from a damage perspective and at least this one has the potential to damage multiple creates or block a chokepoint), but it's not a standout use of your concentration even if you do run it by straight RAW.

Even with the modified rule however, Sickening Radiance is pretty interesting, especially for an Evoker. 4d10+Exhaustion combos well with grappling and/or cheap Web spells from another caster. Pretend Sickening Radiance is written this way instead:

On the first failed saving throw, the creature takes 4d10 radiant damage and has disadvantage on all ability checks until the caster loses concentration or 10 minutes passes.

On the second failed saving throw, the creatures takes another 4d10 radiant damage and its speed is halved until...

On the third failed saving throw, another 4d10 and disadvantage on all attack rolls and saving throws...

On the fourth, another 4d10 and its HP maximum is halved...

On the fifth, another 4d10 and its speed is zero...

On the sixth, it dies.

That helps you see it as a spell which does two things at once:

(1) provides crowd control against mobs (which friendlies are immune to BTW!) via immediate 4d10 damage to kill orcs and such, and also

(2) disabling/killing things over time with no save-every-round recovery like most spells offer (Slow, Hold Monster, etc.). Even just the first failed saving throw should help a lot with keeping the creature in the sickening radiance AoE, and by the time it fails two saving throws it's basically dead meat even it escapes the radiance: now its speed is halved and it can be easily avoided until such time as it's convenient to kill it. Friendlies are also immune to this.

The only downside is that a strict reading of Sculpt Spell implies that the Evoker cannot be personally protected from their own Sickening Radiance--only "other creatures" are eligible for protection, although Mike Mearls' tweets imply that was not intended (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154381/in-al-can-an-evocation-wizard-protect-themself-from-their-own-spell-with-the-sc) and indeed it is not logical. So you can't hide the whole party inside the Sickening Radiance unless the DM decides the RAW is dumb.

I should note parenthetically that I trust Mike Mearl's insights more than Crawford's because Mearls' role as a designer lets him speak to intent--what they intended to care about--whereas Crawford's role as a developer clearly hasn't made him an expert in execution and what they did actually write, or he wouldn't get so much stuff wrong. And besides I'm not impressed with their execution anyway, see above comments on Healing Spirit. But when Mearls says something like, "Sure, you could give Sorcerers a couple more spells known," I take that as an insight that there's no deep design reason why they wanted Sorcerers to have a highly restricted spell list--they just happened to pick a number and that number was probably too low.

[CheddarChampion]

"only" your concentration? For a spellcaster, your concentration is your largest resource; more valuable than most of your spell slots.

The power of fireball is you can drop your concentration spell, and then spam fireballs.

Apologies if you are colorblind or new.

Blue text is sarcasm. I don't actually mean fireball = bad. It is great burst damage compared to spirit guardians. (Especially if/since spirit guardians can only damage once per round. The comparison was based on pretense I disagree with, hence the sarcasm.)

1. Concentration vs actions each turn. IMO action economy value is comparable to concentration value.
2. You can cast bonus action spells like healing word when using spirit guardians vs fireball (because of bonus action non-cantrip spell rules).
3. Spell slot value depends on the campaign: specifically how often you can rest, how tough enemies are, and what level you are/how many spell slots you have. YMMV.
4. Fireball is better than spirit guardians at certain things. Range for example, and setting things on fire.
5. Spirit guardians scales better than fireball. 1d8 each round vs 1d6 once.

[Skylivedk]

More specific than Healing Spirit, you mean? It's clear from the DMG spell customization advice and what I've heard about WotC's internal use of spreadsheets for rating monster CRs that WotC somehow got it into their heads that modeling spells by average expected damage-or-healing-per-round-against-a-typical-party was a good analysis method (as opposed to e.g. Monte Carlo sims), and that Healing Spirit just flipped this on its head and took the DMG advice at face value by handing out that amount of healing per round, pretty much right off their spreadsheet. If anybody had put actual thought into it they would have realized that character behavior is not independent of spell effects, and that characters will act to minimize damage but maximize healing, and... I mean, it was immediately obvious to everybody who read Xanathar's that Healing Spirit was extremely broken, and the only explanation I have for why WotC even wrote it is that they were obviously just following their existing models to their logical conclusion. And those models don't take sophisticated multi-trigger combos into account.

Call it an educated guess on my part.



Well, Cloud of Daggers is a bad spell. Create Bonfire is, well, it's a cantrip so it's hard to say it's bad (they're all pretty similar from a damage perspective and at least this one has the potential to damage multiple creates or block a chokepoint), but it's not a standout use of your concentration even if you do run it by straight RAW.

Even with the modified rule however, Sickening Radiance is pretty interesting, especially for an Evoker. 4d10+Exhaustion combos well with grappling and/or cheap Web spells from another caster. Pretend Sickening Radiance is written this way instead:

On the first failed saving throw, the creature takes 4d10 radiant damage and has disadvantage on all ability checks until the caster loses concentration or 10 minutes passes.

On the second failed saving throw, the creatures takes another 4d10 radiant damage and its speed is halved until...

On the third failed saving throw, another 4d10 and disadvantage on all attack rolls and saving throws...

On the fourth, another 4d10 and its HP maximum is halved...

On the fifth, another 4d10 and its speed is zero...

On the sixth, it dies.

That helps you see it as a spell which does two things at once:

(1) provides crowd control against mobs (which friendlies are immune to BTW!) via immediate 4d10 damage to kill orcs and such, and also

(2) disabling/killing things over time with no save-every-round recovery like most spells offer (Slow, Hold Monster, etc.). Even just the first failed saving throw should help a lot with keeping the creature in the sickening radiance AoE, and by the time it fails two saving throws it's basically dead meat even it escapes the radiance: now its speed is halved and it can be easily avoided until such time as it's convenient to kill it. Friendlies are also immune to this.

The only downside is that a strict reading of Sculpt Spell implies that the Evoker cannot be personally protected from their own Sickening Radiance--only "other creatures" are eligible for protection, although Mike Mearls' tweets imply that was not intended (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154381/in-al-can-an-evocation-wizard-protect-themself-from-their-own-spell-with-the-sc) and indeed it is not logical. So you can't hide the whole party inside the Sickening Radiance unless the DM decides the RAW is dumb.

I should note parenthetically that I trust Mike Mearl's insights more than Crawford's because Mearls' role as a designer lets him speak to intent--what they intended to care about--whereas Crawford's role as a developer clearly hasn't made him an expert in execution and what they did actually write, or he wouldn't get so much stuff wrong. And besides I'm not impressed with their execution anyway, see above comments on Healing Spirit. But when Mearls says something like, "Sure, you could give Sorcerers a couple more spells known," I take that as an insight that there's no deep design reason why they wanted Sorcerers to have a highly restricted spell list--they just happened to pick a number and that number was probably too low.

Thank you for an excellent and very well written answer. I agree with your premises regarding intentionality in regard to the designers. I think there's a couple of other examples like Healing Spirit (Simulacrum, Hexblade, many more), but I'm not sure enough in my math checks to know if it is consistent. So many things aren't.

At a glance it seems to me that with only one trigger per round, the damaging ones aren't with the concentration slot cost. I was hoping someone had looked at this before. Sickening radiance being a major exception to this whole ordeal. With a good control party (grapplers, EBs, Battlemasters, shovers, etc), it's approaching the broken territory with a per turn proc. At the same time, I'd be happy to increase the damage slightly in a power round format since that's not the strong side of the spell.

Anyone else who have looked into this conversion?

[MaxWilson]

At a glance it seems to me that with only one trigger per round, the damaging ones aren't with the concentration slot cost. I was hoping someone had looked at this before. Sickening radiance being a major exception to this whole ordeal. With a good control party (grapplers, EBs, Battlemasters, shovers, etc), it's approaching the broken territory with a per turn proc. At the same time, I'd be happy to increase the damage slightly in a power round format since that's not the strong side of the spell.

Anyone else who have looked into this conversion?

I think even the pure damaging ones like Wall of Fire are situationally worth it, in the same way that Fireball is situationally worthwhile: if you're surrounded e.g. a whole horde of fifty orcs spread out over a medium-sized area (say 30 yards by 30 yards), one Fireball can't possibly take them all out, but Wall of Fire (plus lying prone inside the wall of fire to impose disadvantage on ranged javelin attacks) will vaporize any orcs who try to get close to you, and might buy you enough time to start throwing down other AoEs on top like Erupting Earth.

It's not something I would normally prepare, but it's something I would prepare, as a Moon Druid, before venturing into hordes-of-orcs territory. In this scenario it's much better than regular druid staples like Conjure Animals.

Ditto if I were venturing into Star Spawn territory (Grues + any other star spawn are extremely nasty, so you have to kill the grues ASAP!).

[Aimeryan]

DAs such, I like the ruling from an in-fiction point of view: it makes little/no sense that you are hurt more by a stop/start burn than a continuous one.

Agree that the per turn stuff in nonsensical, however, per round is also nonsensical; it makes little sense that stepping into a Moonbeam for 5ft of movement subjects you to the same damage as spending all your movement in one (and action, too).

If you wanted a mechanic that did make sense you would have to assign time values in some way and then calculate the amount of time subject to the effect. Then you would still have the issue of non-synchronous turns and forced movement.

[MaxWilson]

Agree that the per turn stuff in nonsensical, however, per round is also nonsensical; it makes little sense that stepping into a Moonbeam for 5ft of movement subjects you to the same damage as spending all your movement in one (and action, too).

If you wanted a mechanic that did make sense you would have to assign time values in some way and then calculate the amount of time subject to the effect. Then you would still have the issue of non-synchronous turns and forced movement.

And you'd also have the issue of surface area/volume ratios: should a dragon take more damage than a human from Fireball because it gets hit with more fire, or less damage because it has more internal volume? And that turns into a debate over the nature of HP.

But we can at least make the simple fix and say "damage definitely shouldn't go up just because you're running in and out of a fire instead of standing still. Only one damage instance per round allowed."