Let's optimize magic stone.

[Segev]

Enchant up to three stones as a bonus action. They retain the enchantment until used or you cast it again, up to one minute. No concentration. Each stone does 1d6+[casting stat mod] bludgeoning damage on hit. 60 ft. range if thrown, sling range if used with a sling. Qualifies as a spell attack using your attack modifiers even if somebody else hurls them.

Used by just yourself, you can take a bonus action, then hurl one as your action. And still have two more for the rest of your turn. If you're a class with an extra attack (e.g. an Eldritch Knight), you can hurl two of them in a turn. Before level 5, if you can get two of them shot off in one round, you're doing slightly more damage than a character with Eldritch Blast, who won't get his second blast until level 5. Assuming no Agonizing Blast, you're actually keeping up or slightly ahead even until level 11, when eldritch blast gets a third attack (And even THEN 1d6+4 or 5 is better than 1d10).

But you're not getting that damage all in one round the way eldritch blast does, not once you hit level 11. Not unless you can fling all three. And you can probably fling them better at that point.

It's also questionable, for an Eldritch Knight, whether using these counts as a ranged weapon attack that would trigger the +2 to hit for Archery fighting style, or for an Arcane Trickster it would trigger Sneak Attack. Either way, a shortbow would do comparably, just off of Dex rather than a casting modifier.

For a necromancer wizard, it might be worthwhile since I think it would give 1d6+casting stat+proficiency to damage, which is probably higher than the skeletons' own dexterity modifier. But again, the undead will be almost as effective with plain shortbows.

Really, it doesn't make a non-necromancer wizard any better; the proficiency bonus to damage stacks with the magic stone use of the caster's bonuses.


It seems to me that the best way to optimize this spell is with hirelings or the like. Creatures with hands that can make attack actions but which are significantly less capable in terms of attacking and damaging things than you are (and, thus, ideally, are cheap and easy to get ahold of). You can bonus-action cast magic stones, hand them off, let them make their attacks, and then do whatever you want with your own action. It might not be feasible to have genuine hirelings who are expected to help fight, but then again, if you have them as camp servants, offering to arm them so they can do more than cower and look vulnerable might be a plus.

I'm not sure what other possibilities there are that might be superior. Familiars can't attack, generally, so that's not really helpful. Maybe trained (flying) monkeys?

It's hard to come up with options that are feasible but wouldn't already have better stats for attacking than just throwing your magic stones for you.

Bonus question: can you fire the enchanted pebbles with catapult? If so, what’s the result?

[Corran]

It's not really optimizing magic stone, but magic stone might be a great addition to a tomelock (unseen servants for fetch an carry?), or better yet, to a chainlock (for the added minion) with ritual caster, who relies a lot on danse macabre.

[Segev]

How would unseen servants be useful with this? I think I’m missing something.

[nickl_2000]

Use for Skeletons from a necromancer are some of the best uses that I've heard of, the scale and can make them actual hit at decent levels.

[Corran]

How would unseen servants be useful with this? I think I’m missing something.
To help getting the pebbles to the ones throwing them (if you cannot or don't want to be bunched up for some reason. Haven't thought this through, and it's likely more complicated in practice than how it sounds. Basically it's your idea of using undead minions, nothing new. On the other hand, fixing the class has an effect on optimization. It is different for a warlock who has good at will actions and few slots, to count on spamming a bonus action cantrip like magic stone, than it is for a necromancer wizard. The warlock will get more out of it just because of the smaller opportunity cost this has for him than for the wizard. Though I am not sure if something like this is what you are looking for, so if it's not, feel free to ignore.

[Stealthscout]

Don't forget you can make bonus action attacks. When you are alone this means you can make two attacks in round two or have that follower make that second round of attacks each round.

Best thing I can think of is abusing tiny servants instead of undead or followers though. Town safe but smaller and much less likely to be targeted unless you want them to be one. Arguably you could animate the bag holding all your rocks for convenience too.

[BarneyBent]

Don't forget you can make bonus action attacks. When you are alone this means you can make two attacks in round two or have that follower make that second round of attacks each round.

Best thing I can think of is abusing tiny servants instead of undead or followers though. Town safe but smaller and much less likely to be targeted unless you want them to be one. Arguably you could animate the bag holding all your rocks for convenience too.

Where does it say you can make a Bonus Action attack?

[sambojin]

Just to continue from another thread, since they're *magic* pebbles, so in theory everyone is proficient in throwing them, could you give them to a Beastmaster Ranger's Flying Snake companion, to let it spit them at enemies?

Their mouth is their only "throwing" appendage.

Assuming a +3Wis mod at lvl3, that's still a +5 to-hit, 1d6+3 magic attack from a 60' movement flyer. They don't need to be big pebbles, they're *magic*, so it carries all three in its mouth.
(+2 added ranger proficiency for the snake, +3Wis mod from you).

How far can a flying snake spit a pebble? 60 feet apparently, if it's a *magic* pebble :)


(considering they get +8 to-hit at lvl3 with 3(piercing)+3d4(poison) by default, this is just an optional ranged attack, not an upgrade)

[sambojin]

Also, every druid that wants a thrown attack in wildshape, ever. Because proficiencies carry over, and magic is magic. It's just usually better to face-rip when you want, rather than twaddle about using actions on singular ranged attacks if it costs a turn ramp-up to do it. Could've done lots of other things with a bonus action, but thought it'd be fun to chuck +3 to +5 to-hit, 1d6+3/+5 60' ranged magic attacks next turn sometimes too....

(cast Magic Stone as bonus action on pebbles, object interact "put pebbles wherever your wildshape form can use them", then wildshape into that form as an action. Now *most* forms have a +Wis/1d6+Wis mod magic ranged attack available next turn, three of them, once a turn, for a minute. It's like not casting a spell, instead of casting a spell, then maybe doing that anyway for a couple of encounters a day because it's fun and quirky :) )

[BarneyBent]

Warlock 2/Lore Bard 7

4th level Tiny Servant for 3 tiny servants. Strap a Bag of Holding or similar to your back which the Tiny Servants sit in, bodies poking out, with the order "Each turn, take a Magic Stone and fire it at either the enemy I last attacked, or if that enemy is dead or disabled, another enemy in range, before ducking into the Bag of Holding for 6 seconds, then repeat."

Action: Eldritch Blast, 2d10+10 damage.
Bonus acton: Magic Stone, 3d6+15 damage.

Resourceless for up to 8 hours, except for the expenditure of a single 4th level spell.


When you want to cast a leveled spell, you use your bonus action to inspire as required, but you can also use your Bardic Inspiration with your reaction, being a Lore Bard.

You're out-damaging a Sorlock spamming quickened Eldritch Blasts until level 11, but even after that, unlike a Sorlock, you're not limited by your number of Sorcery Points.

Your Tiny Servants are protected from AoE effects due to full cover from the Bag of Holding.

And if for whatever reason this strategy becomes temporarily or permanently unviable, you're still a very powerful build regardless.

Edit: You may lose out a bit on Hex damage compared to a Sorlock Quickening EB, but as a level 7+ Lore Bard you have so many better things to be using your Concentration on that it really doesn't matter.

[sambojin]

^ 👍
This is good

[Dr. Cliché]

Warlock 2/Lore Bard 7

4th level Tiny Servant for 3 tiny servants. Strap a Bag of Holding or similar to your back which the Tiny Servants sit in, bodies poking out, with the order "Each turn, take a Magic Stone and fire it at either the enemy I last attacked, or if that enemy is dead or disabled, another enemy in range, before ducking into the Bag of Holding for 6 seconds, then repeat."

Action: Eldritch Blast, 2d10+10 damage.
Bonus acton: Magic Stone, 3d6+15 damage.

Resourceless for up to 8 hours, except for the expenditure of a single 4th level spell.


This doesn't work.

You need to use your Bonus Action to order the Tiny Servants to attack each turn.

So at best you can do this every other turn (As you have to alternate using your Bonus Action to create the Magic Stones and order the servants to actually attack with them).

[BarneyBent]

This doesn't work.

You need to use your Bonus Action to order the Tiny Servants to attack each turn.

So at best you can do this every other turn (As you have to alternate using your Bonus Action to create the Magic Stones and order the servants to actually attack with them).

Not quite true.



Once given an order, the servant continues to follow that order until its task is complete.

You would only need to tag a statement like "until all enemies have been killed or incapacitated" for this to work.

Yes, some DMs would argue that's too complicated an order, so run it by them first. You might need a simpler order like "hide in the Bag of Holding and throw Magic Stones at enemies until they are defeated" which cedes a bit more control to the DM.

But it makes Magic Stone useable, isn't drastically overpowered, and particularly smart enemies can still target the Bag of Holding to try to break it.

[N810]

Would there be any advantage to using magic stones as ammo for the catapult spell ?

[Segev]

Would there be any advantage to using magic stones as ammo for the catapult spell ?

I asked this earlier, but reading catapult, I don't think so. Catapult doesn't make an attack roll. It forces a save. It also defines the amount of damage it does. This would override any benefit from the magic stone spell on the stones. Though it wouldn't end the magic stone spell, either, so they could still be used as weapons in their own right after being chucked with catapult.

If there's an interaction I'm missing, I'd love to hear about it, though.

[N810]

yea, I'm not seeing it either, I was hoping it might turn them into magical attacks at least.
Altho I did see an argument for launching alchemist fire flask, that would cause extra damage if they broke.

[Segev]

yea, I'm not seeing it either, I was hoping it might turn them into magical attacks at least.
Altho I did see an argument for launching alchemist fire flask, that would cause extra damage if they broke.

Catapult is a spell. Its attacks count as magical by the rules of thumb Jeremy Crawford has given for determining if an attack counts as magical (namely, it meets the criterion that somebody spent a spell slot to make it happen).

Argument can be made that this is an imperfect rule of thumb ("Does this mean the second attack action somebody under haste takes is magical damage even with no other magical damage source? What about the damage done by somebody under enlarge with the extra +1d4?"), but I think the "indirection" argument for catapult is much weaker. It's clear the whole purpose of the spell is to make the hurled objects do damage.

Now, a stronger balance argument might be that catapult has versatility and range that is superior to other spells of its level, and thus "it's not magical damage" would be a minor downside to counterbalance this. But that's really in DM's-call territory. If you're finding catapult to be too much better than comparable 1st level spells, making it not do magic damage is a possibility. At which point letting magic stone restore the "magicalness" of the damage might be just fine.

[Dr. Cliché]

You would only need to tag a statement like "until all enemies have been killed or incapacitated" for this to work.

Yes, some DMs would argue that's too complicated an order, so run it by them first. You might need a simpler order like "hide in the Bag of Holding and throw Magic Stones at enemies until they are defeated" which cedes a bit more control to the DM.

I think even that would fall outside of the purview of the 'general orders'




But it makes Magic Stone useable, isn't drastically overpowered, and particularly smart enemies can still target the Bag of Holding to try to break it.

Yeah, I don't think this is particularly broken in terms of power. Just that it might take some house-ruling with regard to the level of commands you're able to give the tiny servants. :smalltongue:

[stoutstien]

Magic Stone is the best option for lv 2-5 artificers other than battle Smith lv 3+.
MS+repeating shot infusion on a sling. With 3 Int mod: 1d6+4 with +6 attack.

*Lv 5 artillerist can be funky but you can add 1d8 to one of the stones Damage rolls. Could turn stack arcane firearm and enchanted arcane focused on top of the combo above. So 1d8 once a casting and +1 attack and ignore half cover.

After that you could go rogue and start adding sneak attack.

[Segev]

I think even that would fall outside of the purview of the 'general orders'




Yeah, I don't think this is particularly broken in terms of power. Just that it might take some house-ruling with regard to the level of commands you're able to give the tiny servants. :smalltongue:

If you can give a general order of "attack anybody but me and those I designate who enter this room," you should be able to give a general order of "throw the rocks I give you at anybody I or those I designate attack."

[BarneyBent]

If you can give a general order of "attack anybody but me and those I designate who enter this room," you should be able to give a general order of "throw the rocks I give you at anybody I or those I designate attack."

Exactly. Requesting they do so from the cover of a bag of holding may stretch it a little, but the general order to attack enemies is far from excessively complex.

The way I wrote my initial order was probably needlessly wordy in order to be specific. But if you look at the spell, "stand guard" is an example of a general order, and for that to be effective, you have to assume that either the tiny servant is smart enough to know enemies from allies, to know to inform you if they see an enemy, and to know to do it for a certain amount of time, or alternatively it's assumed you can give them that extra detail as part of the general command.

Either way, you can clearly give pretty complex commands as part of a general command. You may not get to specify which enemies the Tiny Servants target, but honestly as a DM I'd just give the player full control, within reason and provided it was within the bounds of the general command.

[Segev]

They are pretty dumb. 2 Int means they're as stupid as, say, a froghemoth, and way dumber than a familiar.


Oh, hey, a niche use for magic stone: With any familiar that can throw them, you can use the ability to let your familiar cast touch spells to cast it on the stones it's carrying with it when scouting. Admittedly, this only works if it's within 100 feet of you, but it's not an impossibility.


Drat, no, familiars can't attack unless they're Chainpacted or are variant familiars who volunteer to be with you (And then they can't do the touch spell thing!), so that doesn't work. I suppose you could send your homonculus and your familiar out together, or your spell familiar and your variant familiar out together, but now we're getting really invested, here, and still only out to 100 feet.

[BarneyBent]

They are pretty dumb. 2 Int means they're as stupid as, say, a froghemoth, and way dumber than a familiar.

A reasonable point, though their INT is 3, not 2. But that just suggests you are intended to be able to give them more information as part of general commands. An object with INT of 3 can't effectively stand guard without further instruction.


Oh, hey, a niche use for magic stone: With any familiar that can throw them, you can use the ability to let your familiar cast touch spells to cast it on the stones it's carrying with it when scouting. Admittedly, this only works if it's within 100 feet of you, but it's not an impossibility.


Drat, no, familiars can't attack unless they're Chainpacted or are variant familiars who volunteer to be with you (And then they can't do the touch spell thing!), so that doesn't work. I suppose you could send your homonculus and your familiar out together, or your spell familiar and your variant familiar out together, but now we're getting really invested, here, and still only out to 100 feet.

My suggested build is just one level away from a Chain Familiar, so could be an option to add some versatility.

[Stealthscout]

A magic stone is a thrown weapon, just like an ordinary stone. The only difference is you are using a different attack/damage modifier, range, and it is a magical weapon. I suppose you could argue if it has the ammunition property, but that is another discussion.

Therefore collar you can treat it like two thrown daggers or the like. No problem with doing that so shouldn't be a problem here. Doesn't help on round one because of casting time but round two or someone else is fair game.

[stoutstien]

A magic stone is a thrown weapon, just like an ordinary stone. The only difference is you are using a different attack/damage modifier, range, and it is a magical weapon. I suppose you could argue if it has the ammunition property, but that is another discussion.

Therefore collar you can treat it like two thrown daggers or the like. No problem with doing that so shouldn't be a problem here. Doesn't help on round one because of casting time but round two or someone else is fair game.

Throwing /Sling a magic Stone is a spell attack so no twf.

[Misterwhisper]

A magic stone is a thrown weapon, just like an ordinary stone. The only difference is you are using a different attack/damage modifier, range, and it is a magical weapon. I suppose you could argue if it has the ammunition property, but that is another discussion.

Therefore collar you can treat it like two thrown daggers or the like. No problem with doing that so shouldn't be a problem here. Doesn't help on round one because of casting time but round two or someone else is fair game.

Not exactly, it is a ranged spell attack not a ranged weapon attack so no archery, and no sneak attack.

Also, why does the spell not have material components?
You literally imbue 3 pebbles.

[stoutstien]

Not exactly, it is a ranged spell attack not a ranged weapon attack so no archery, and no sneak attack.

Also, why does the spell not have material components?
You literally imbue 3 pebbles.

Sneak attack and sharpshooter work if magic Stone is used with a sling because they call for attacks made with ranged weapons which a sling is

[Damon_Tor]

Not exactly, it is a ranged spell attack not a ranged weapon attack so no archery, and no sneak attack.

Also, why does the spell not have material components?
You literally imbue 3 pebbles.

The pebbles are targets, not components. Fine line I suppose.

[Segev]

The pebbles are targets, not components. Fine line I suppose.

One which 5e in particular (but earlier editions weren't innocent, either) is guilty of muddying from spell to spell, as sometimes the enchanted items are also listed as material components. Like fabricate, which lists the raw materials as components.

[sktt1cutie]

the problem is not about the spell it is who gets it.
Magic stone is a cantrip of DRUID, who has horrible weapon proficiency and exceptionally horrible cantrips, the stone is going to be good for early game bc non-moon druid (I love shepherds) can prevent themselves from being useless.
People complain that lv5 the stones dont scale, but if u are a druid........they do............and in an insane way.......
because, everyone can throw magic stones......
because, u can conjure baboons to throw them now............
baboons have hands and there is no restriction at all on how to throw stone.
8 baboons tossing one each (u can stack up 27 stones before a fight, and make 3 each turn, so it will last 4 turns if u have time to prepare) is 8d6+32 for a 18wis, each with a reliable hit.
THAT IS TWO FIREBALLS ON A SINGLE TARGET.
not good, since fireball hits more than one most of the time, BUT.

u can get FOUR double-fireball on single target for 4 rounds with NO resource cost at the time when your party wizard can only cast 2 fireballs per day.

but even bigger problem is that, usually conjure animals dont last long when there are many ememies or AOE damage due to animals are low ac and IN MELEE AND LARGE AND ATTRACT FULL ATTENTION FROM MONSTERS.
but catapulting baboons are not.......
u can scatter them around, dig trenches, make them hop out and fire like a swarm of goblins and expect them to survive until u run out of ammunition then if u are evil aligned u can sacrifice them by taking 8 help actions (your rogue would be hilarious) or if u are good aligned u can get them run around feeding everyone goodberries (if u dip life cleric like some does since good shepherds are like helping little lives everywhere they goes) for 4 regen per round.

another good thing is many dm and players HATE CONJURE ANIMALS because 8 constrictor snakes maybe fine (they are helping ur friends to grapple so they may also have fun) but 8 elks or 8 giant owls mess up battlefields and slow games down and make everyone else less fun.

Thing is, 8 baboon catapults, small size and at range, require much less space than a traditional elk swarm, and less running around which means less operation time (and dm suspiciously looking at map to see if some elks cannot reach or cannot charge time)

you shout FIRE AT WILL, and they roll 8d20s, and thats all.

so, if u are a druid who likes conjure animals like me, the magic stone provide magic for both your power and your friendship with your dms, who would have been banging their heads on the wall to track hp and speed and charging status of 8 elks.

but.......if ur dm refuse to give baboons enough intelligence to know pebbles are to be tossed (which dont make a lot of sense to me since baboons have highter int (4) than a lot of animals) then forget about everything i say.

[Damon_Tor]

(u can stack up 27 stones before a fight, and make 3 each turn, so it will last 4 turns if u have time to prepare)

I hate to shatter a charop post that's so long and involved as this one with a simple "nah uh" but unless I'm missing something "If you cast this spell again, the spell ends early on any pebbles still affected by it" means that you cannot accumulate a hoard of stones before a fight.

[Peelee]

The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Resurrection spells do not work on stones.