Glyph of Warding

[jjordan]

Looking at what I could find it seems like the Glyph of Warding is cast upon an area with a specific focus item in the area. If the focus item is removed from the area, then the spell is broken.

If you made it so the spell was cast upon a focus item that could be moved, how badly would that break things?

What compensatory guidelines would you put in place to prevent a mobile glyph of warding from breaking things too badly?

[MaxWilson]

Looking at what I could find it seems like the Glyph of Warding is cast upon an area with a specific focus item in the area. If the focus item is removed from the area, then the spell is broken.

If you made it so the spell was cast upon a focus item that could be moved, how badly would that break things?

What compensatory guidelines would you put in place to prevent a mobile glyph of warding from breaking things too badly?

It allows spellcasters to stack concentration spells by spending gold, but 5E game balance is already broken via e.g. Planar Binding so this just lets you break the game more cheaply and at lower levels.

So, maybe you allow it but require a 5th level slot and 1000 gp, and also disallow too much stacking by saying the Glyphs go unstable if brought too close to each other ("glyphs will randomly detonate on a random creature in the area until there is only one glyph with no other glyphs within 30'").

Note BTW that Eberron twice mentions movable glyphs from House Kundarak in Rising From the Last War, but says nothing about how they work. I got the impression the author wasn't even aware that 5E Glyphs of Warding are immobile. Anyway, as DM the above is basically how I'd run the Eberron Glyphs for Kundarak packages and airship engines. Part of what you're paying House Kundarak for is the paperwork to make sure your package doesn't go in the same shipment as any other Glyphed package, and security on airships keeps out unauthorized glyphs.

It does make a zombie with a moveable Glyph an interesting Glyph-breaker, but oh well, it's no different from a bomb-defusing robot. No passive security measure is ever perfect.

[Zhorn]

Real shame about the movement restriction being on the whole spell and not just the concentration component.
Recently a member of the town's thieves guild killed my wizard's familiar to demonstrate they were not intimidated by the party's threats (my wizard was elsewhere, the familiar was going to be the "we need you to come back" messenger).
I've been thinking of somewhere down the line (say 4 or more sessions away) mailing that person a letter that explodes on being read saying "you killed my bird" written in explosive runes, but with the movement restriction, I won't be able to post it, and instead will need to return to the town to do so.

[MaxWilson]

Real shame about the movement restriction being on the whole spell and not just the concentration component.
Recently a member of the town's thieves guild killed my wizard's familiar to demonstrate they were not intimidated by the party's threats (my wizard was elsewhere, the familiar was going to be the "we need you to come back" messenger).
I've been thinking of somewhere down the line (say 4 or more sessions away) mailing that person a letter that explodes on being read saying "you killed my bird" written in explosive runes, but with the movement restriction, I won't be able to post it, and instead will need to return to the town to do so.

Well, maybe. Spell research has a long history in D&D. See if you can research Explosive Runes as a separate spell from Glyph of Warding.

D&D's game loop goes:

DM describes situation.
Player declares a course of action.
DM asks for rolls or clarification if necessary, then declares outcome.

Declare to your DM that you are trying to research a spell which has the same triggering conditions as Glyph of Warding, but can only explode (cannot be linked to a single-target or AoE spell like Glyph of Warding can), and is mobile enough to be put in a letter and mailed to somebody. See what outcome results.

P.S. If that fails, well, you can always mail them a mimic. :-P

[Zhorn]

If that fails, well, you can always mail them a mimic. :-P

Bag of Devouring with a Magic Mouth cast on it to trigger when that person gets eaten by it.

I'm the only one so far to not display murder hobo tendencies in game. But this guy killed my familiar when that bird did nothing to him...
This is personal.

[MaxWilson]

Bag of Devouring with a Magic Mouth cast on it to trigger when that person gets eaten by it.

Genius! Maybe another Magic Mouth to make clinking sounds to tempt them into reaching inside.

[Keltest]

You could also just sneak into their home and enchant the letter there. Nothing says it needs to get there by conventional mail, and demonstrating that you can get into and out of their home is a power move unto itself.

[Zhorn]

You could also just sneak into their home and enchant the letter there. Nothing says it needs to get there by conventional mail, and demonstrating that you can get into and out of their home is a power move unto itself.

Part of the thing I was going to go for was while in town, my wizard was going to act above it all, as if it's not a valuable time investment.
Learn the spell a few levels later
post a letter from some distant town (write down a physical prop)
ask the DM how long it would take to deliver
in-game time, on that day, hand the DM the letter

[DrKerosene]

Looking at what I could find it seems like the Glyph of Warding is cast upon an area with a specific focus item in the area. If the focus item is removed from the area, then the spell is broken.

If you made it so the spell was cast upon a focus item that could be moved, how badly would that break things?

What compensatory guidelines would you put in place to prevent a mobile glyph of warding from breaking things too badly?

It would allow PCs to craft items similar to spell-scrolls or potions, for approximately a 200GP per “item”, which probably breaks WBL or bounded accuracy as it should become increasingly affordable for PCs (if a DM is giving gold instead of magic items as they level up, or allowing items to be exchanged for gold/diamond dust) to make their own stored spells.

Also, this provides PCs with the ability to specifically word a trigger for non-action activation, or remote triggering, which probably breaks action economy or enables wider shenanigans.

The ability to stack multiple concentration based spells onto a target would also allow new levels of “going nova” for a boss fight that will probably be a little reminiscent of 3.5e power-buffing routines.

Depending on the wording and ruling, a Necromancer with that 2nd level ability Grim Harvest might become increasingly hard to kill if they have a bunch of GoW set to kill small animals when the Necromancer hits 0HP.

It also enables a terrorist villain to use Animal Messenger, or a Familiar, or Animal Friendshipped creature, to deliver remote bombs. Fireball, Contagion, Suggestion, Dominate, etc.

Edit: I’d probably houserule to allow GoW to be cast on mobile objects like on some part of the inside of a ship that sails/moves. I suppose allowing it to be cast on a Chest that can be moved would be logical too.

The limit of 30ft between GoW spells seems reasonable, though I think “no stacking concentration spells” would be my main rule of thumb.

[Segev]

I suspect one of the reasons explosive runes got mixed into glyph of warding and made immobile was concern over the "book full of explosive runes"->dispel trick people discussed in theorycraft in 3.5.

The fact that it's one way to break concentration is another, of course.

You could also try using a 6th-level casting of conjure elemental (http://5e.d20srd.org/srd/spells/conjureElemental.htm) to get an Invisible Stalker (http://5e.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/invisibleStalker.htm), bound by planar binding (http://5e.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planarBinding.htm) at a level high enough to ensure it has time to get to your target. Have the Stalker follow the letter and attack the target when he reads it.

Though it's lacking style and elegance compared to the old-fashioned explosive runes.

[MaxWilson]

You could also just mail a letter coated with contact poison, plus a Magic Mouth speaking a curse to make it seem magic.

[No brains]

After thinking about this a lot, both as a player wanting cheese and a DM trying to prevent cheese, I figure it would be fair for a Glyph of Warding to move if it is on a surface that counts as a map itself. So you cast Glyph of Warding on whatever in a 5-foot square somewhere. As long as the Glyph stays within 10 feet of the origin square on its map, it can remain stable. If you can move the entire map with it, the Glyph is fine.

The way I see it, if you have a huge carriage or ship, you can place a stable Glyph on there. This way, players can secure their 'base' and not just have a free floating spell anywhere. Then, a canny DM can just put encounters an appropriate distance away from some small hole the ship can't pass through. If enemies take the offensive and give the players over an hour to prepare, woe be to them.

I feel like this is a good solution that lets players use the spell and not just have it be a way for enemy spellcasters to waste diamonds and hurt them. Imagine getting the revival diamonds stolen and finding a Glyph of Warding with Minor Illusion saying, "This cost 100gp in diamonds to make." Then there's a real trap after the players charge forward in anger.