What spells do you consider useless?

[Yora]

What spells are so bad that they are never worth to prepare "just in case", or so bad that a bard, sorcerer, and warlock would never learn them?

The one that always comes to my mind first is enthrall. It is only mostly useless in most situations, but why would a bard or warlock pick them if they could take darkness, invisibility, hold person, spider climb, and suggestion instead? I would not be surprised if it's the least used spell in the entire game.

Similarly, why does compulsion exist? Another spell only available to bards and warlocks. It certainly won't be competing with dimension door, greater invisibility, and polymorph.

Speak with plants seems pretty awful for 3rd level. I can see a few circumstances in which druids or rangers would prepare it, but none in which a bard would learn it.

True strike is pretty obvious. Cast a spell in turn one and make an attack with advantage in round two. Or make an attack in round one and one attack in round two. The second option has the same chance to land one hit, but also has the chance of making two hits. Which you don't get if you cast true strike. This spell is not just useless, it actually makes you worse. Would be more useful if you can cast it on an enemy as a debuff.

Is blade ward for when you're 1st level and want to disarm a spear trap with your foot?

Bane is not that bad when you're a low level cleric. But I don't see why any warlock would waste an invocation to be able to cast it one time per long rest and still having to use a spell slot for it. This is so bad, I think this is actually a mistake. It's probably supposed to be "cast at will with expanding a spell slot". That would make a lot more sense.

[Mr A25]

Can't really speak for the others as I've never used them but I will speak up for Bladeward and Bane.

With Bladeward, not a great cantrip by any means but can help if you know you'll trigger a trap or are about to get whacked on by like six guys and your team mates can clear some out by your next turn. I actually think it's a decent pick on a Sorcadin or Sorcerer with Quicken spell. Not for all the time use but definitely OK every now and again.

Bane, not bad, not great, would rather cast bless most of the time but I did have a session where it landed on all three targets and basically ended the combat with an easy win.

I'll throw in a couple though. Find Traps and Abi Dalzims horrid wilting. I hate hate hate that second spell. Find traps serves no purpose in my eyes that can't be achieved by like literally anyone else.

[JellyPooga]

Bane is often hailed as being the worse cousin of Bless and the Warlock invocation is definitely terrible, but it does have its uses. For instance, Bless is great when you have friends, because it's a force multiplier for multiple allies. However, when you're on your own, in a small party of only two or three (or solo), or in a party that doesn't make much use of attack rolls, then Bane can be a much more useful spell despite offering a saving throw to resist. Further, the Save to resist is charisma; an ability score that is frequently low (beasts, monstrous, oozes and many undead all frequently have negative Cha modifiers), so getting it to stick is potentially a lot easier than might be expected. I'd definitely have to think carefully about taking Bane on a Bard, but I certainly wouldn't shy away from it for a witch or other curse-themed build. Certainly not one to put in the "always ignore" pile.

[airless_wing]

Aww Bane is a great spell! I've used it nearly every encounter on my lvl 6-8 swords Bard. It really has great potential to reduce the enemies DPR, especially considering that Charisma saves aren't horrible common amongst most grunt-type enemies. Plus the penalty applies to their saves as well, which is fantastic for the monk & controller casters in your party.

I'll second Find Traps, as it doesn't even really find any traps. Skywrite should be in the running though; it can have a handful of niche applications, but it's never shown up as a decent thing to do in any of the campaigns I've been in or run.

[ImproperJustice]

There is a thread below blowing up sorta on Speak with Plants.
Our group found it to be very versatile and helpful.
But looks like mileage is very GM dependent.


But Find Traps is pretty awful since it doesn’t find traps.
It could find a trap, maybe, but you only sorta know where it is. It could even be the one you just disabled. Who knows? Certainly a poor use of a second level slot.
You might even detect a trap above you and then fall to your death through rotten floorboards because the spell text says that’s not a trap.

Speak with Dead: Not being able to compel the dead for truthful answers really limits this spell’s usefulness IMO. Soul Cage is much better, but 6th level.

Arcane Gate: I want to love this! But the restrictions are so darn tight.

Elemental Weapon, Magic Weapon, Holy Weapon: Requiring concentration for such a minor benefit breaks these spells sadly.
I did get some Mileage blessing a Champion with 3 attacks when he didn’t have his primary weapon once using Holy Weapon, but bleh.

Same goes for Resist Energy. Maybe if it could affect multiple allies or energy types with upcasting?

[Bloodcloud]

I could really have used Blade ward to get out of Death house I will say...

[Asisreo1]

Weird is extremely...weird. It's a 9th level spell yet they can resist the effect as soon as it is their turn, meaning they could just not take damage. Sure, it's phantasmal killer on steroids, but phantasmal killer is already not the most stellar spell and weird certainly wouldn't be in my spells known on purpose.

Also, look at the duration, it is the only duration that spells out the number 1 rather than use the arabic symbol.

[elyktsorb]

Infestation is pretty garbage. A con save to deal 1d6 poison damage and then a d4 to move 5ft in a random N,S,E,or W, direction. Though if you manage to get someone to step off a cliff using this spell that's definite style points. At least Poison Spray is 1d12 damage for a con save.

Jump seems pretty bad, given it's 1 minute duration you'll only ever be able to use this to jump 1 large gap. It would be neat if the duration was an hour like Longstrider.

Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.

[airless_wing]

Also, look at the duration, it is the only duration that spells out the number 1 rather than use the arabic symbol.


How Weird.

For real, Weird is one of the most underwhelming 9th level spells, along with Storm of Vengeance.

[Arkhios]

True Strike.

[JellyPooga]

Infestation is pretty garbage. A con save to deal 1d6 poison damage and then a d4 to move 5ft in a random N,S,E,or W, direction. Though if you manage to get someone to step off a cliff using this spell that's definite style points. At least Poison Spray is 1d12 damage for a con save.

Jump seems pretty bad, given it's 1 minute duration you'll only ever be able to use this to jump 1 large gap. It would be neat if the duration was an hour like Longstrider.

Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.

I'm not so sure about Jump. It's utility is certainly pretty low once you start getting into the latter stages of Tier 2, but in Tier 1 and low-Tier 2 it's still pretty decent. I can think of a few encounters I've played where it could certainly have come in handy. As a "solve 1 encounter" utility spell it does its job. Perhaps not a pick for "spells known" guys, but not one to sniff at if you had the choice to put it in your spellbook.

Blindness/Deafness suffered hard from the shift to "save per turn" that 5ed made. In previous editions it has been permanent until dispelled (as I recall), which made it a nasty long-term curse, but now it's pretty trash.

[Skylivedk]

Witch bolt must have helluva Stealth check since it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Power word kill is pretty damn bad. Mordenkainen's nail cleaner.

Level 8 spells are overall pretty underwhelming on most classes (ie on Warlock I'd probably rather have a 7th level spell more: that's very very bad). There's a couple of good ones (antipathy, mind blank come to mind), but the rest of them are not worth a higher slot than forcecage.

Blindness/deafness has its uses as a concentration less debuff (when upcast)

[J-H]

Power Word: Kill is good on squishy casters and things with non-HP defenses. CR 12 Archmage with 9th level spells? PWK, done.
Sure, a Fighter or Barbarian can also bring it down, but PWK takes only a single action and you don't have to get next to the target.

I wonder how many HP the average king has?

From the DM side, Fear is "useless" in that it's un-fun for everyone who fails the save (run away 2-3 rounds, make save, run back 2-3 rounds). It's actually more effective than Hold Person...just not fun.

[Yora]

Witch bolt may be bad, but at least it does what it's supposed to do.

[Tes]

Other than mentionen:
Crown of Madness is pretty terrible over all. Concentration for a "Attack before you move", single target.


Blade Ward is situational if you can't quicken it and taking a Dodge action instead is often better. But it's guaranteed half damage if you know you're very likely to be hit or definitely can't avoid it. Like a Wizard about to get ripped to bits by something that will hit him no matter if he uses Dodge and Shield or simply out of Spellslots. Half damage is Offset by increased critchance by not taking Dodge, but aside from that Bladeward might make keeping concentration much easier. It also makes absolutely sure even a critical will only deal normal damage, making sure you live through that one hit even if it ends up a crit.
Main use I've seen was to keep Concentration up and if the Reaction was busy with Counterspell/Absorb Elements.

Used to think Bane is pretty garbage compared to Bless. However with PCs having a lot easier access to Advantage to bolster their own hitchances and abilities to impose Disadvantage on opponents, a -D4 with potential Disadvantage just is a bigger swing than a +D4 with potential Advantage. PCs will be pretty good at hitting most things somehow. Monsters will already have trouble hitting a PC with AC20+ and the -D4 might half their hitchance or worse with Disadvantage on top.
Likewise if Bane goes through it's much easier to follow up with other Spells and Abilities targeting Monster Saves. Bane adds a flat -12.5% to the usual 20-40% ~30% for a Monster to succeed on a weak Save into a 0-35% ~17.5% chance. Bless rarely has that much impact with Monsters getting less agency about targeting weak saves or attacking saving throws directly with save or suck effects.
Not many things can mess as hard with bounded accuracy and DCs as Bane. It's basically +2.5 AC and +2.5 DC for the whole party against Monsters that failed their Saves. Compare that to Shield of Faith, and you can still stack them if you want.
Similar to Slow vs Haste. Not even considering the massive downside if Haste gets cancelled, Slow has a much bigger impact as debuff than Haste as a buff.

[Garfunion]

Many cantrips like blade ward and true strike would be a lot more meaningful to use if using metamagic on a cantrip only cost 1 sorcery point.

[Zuras]

True strike is pretty bad, but it’s not garbage if you want to hit something with a leveled spell that uses an attack roll. Might be nice before you try to plane shift someone, for instance.

Sure, you’re probably not going to get much regular mileage out of it considering the best low level spells with an attack roll are on the Cleric list, but a Divine Soul Sorcerer with Elven Accuracy and quicken spell could spam Guiding Bolt with it (quicken Guiding Bolt on your turn, cast True Strike, repeat next turn), or use it with Spiritual Weapon.

It’s also handy if you have disadvantage, as two attacks at disadvantage is worse odds to hit than one straight roll in some cases. Using concentration makes it problematic though.

[ImproperJustice]

I'm not so sure about Jump. It's utility is certainly pretty low once you start getting into the latter stages of Tier 2, but in Tier 1 and low-Tier 2 it's still pretty decent. I can think of a few encounters I've played where it could certainly have come in handy. As a "solve 1 encounter" utility spell it does its job. Perhaps not a pick for "spells known" guys, but not one to sniff at if you had the choice to put it in your spellbook.

Blindness/Deafness suffered hard from the shift to "save per turn" that 5ed made. In previous editions it has been permanent until dispelled (as I recall), which made it a nasty long-term curse, but now it's pretty trash.

We had a Warlock who was going for a “Sailor Moon” type build, and she tool jump instead of the Levitate option for theatric purposes. As a result, we did discover that Jump does not require concentration allowing some Mobility options in combat while freeing up concentration for other things. Works ok for Eldritch Knights as well, to get at some opponents they may not normally reach.

Speaking of EKs, Blindness is pretty ugly combined with their Eldritch Strike, leaving foes open to advantage barrages. And it is universally more applicable than hold person. But that is a pretty niche use, I mist admit.

[Asisreo1]

In light defense of true strike, it may be good when casting something like an upcast chromatic orb. Of course, you usually don't want to upcast chromatic orb but it's a useful spell if your enemy has whatever damage type resistances that you've leaned heavily on. Like, if your sorcerer only has fire and lightning attacks besides cantrips and you fight a devil, you actually have a really good option for attacking.

It even bypasses magic resistance despite being a spell. True Strike just almost guarantees it hits.

[JellyPooga]

We had a Warlock who was going for a “Sailor Moon” type build, and she tool jump instead of the Levitate option for theatric purposes. As a result, we did discover that Jump does not require concentration allowing some Mobility options in combat while freeing up concentration for other things. Works ok for Eldritch Knights as well, to get at some opponents they may not normally reach.

Personally, I'd advocate Jump over Levitate as far as the Invocations go. They both come online after Fly is readily available and largely speaking Levitate doesn't offer much that Jump doesn't in terms of utility; Levitate offers greater vertical potential, while Jump offers horizontal. I reckon Levitates restrictions (e.g. concentration, only 20ft per turn) are what turn me off of it, but I could easily be persuaded otherwise, depending on the character I was playing. On the flipside, Levitate can be used offensively.

[Zuras]

I'm not so sure about Jump. It's utility is certainly pretty low once you start getting into the latter stages of Tier 2, but in Tier 1 and low-Tier 2 it's still pretty decent. I can think of a few encounters I've played where it could certainly have come in handy. As a "solve 1 encounter" utility spell it does its job. Perhaps not a pick for "spells known" guys, but not one to sniff at if you had the choice to put it in your spellbook.

Blindness/Deafness suffered hard from the shift to "save per turn" that 5ed made. In previous editions it has been permanent until dispelled (as I recall), which made it a nasty long-term curse, but now it's pretty trash.

The only time my players ever even noticed that Jump was in the 5e spell list was when they fought Grung. After getting trapped in Plant Growth and Spike Growth, then watching the enemy jump completely from once side of the growth to the other, they got quite annoyed and blew half their spell slots on a medium encounter.

[iTreeby]

Bane at least seems cool when combined with maddening hex or relentless hex.

[MaxWilson]

Can't really speak for the others as I've never used them but I will speak up for Bladeward and Bane.

With Bladeward, not a great cantrip by any means but can help if you know you'll trigger a trap or are about to get whacked on by like six guys and your team mates can clear some out by your next turn. I actually think it's a decent pick on a Sorcadin or Sorcerer with Quicken spell. Not for all the time use but definitely OK every now and again.

Blade Ward is useful in a number of circumstances.

You've got Armor of Agathys up and want to stretch it further.

You're trying to defend against an invisible foe (Dodge doesn't work against foes you can't see), while other PCs do the killing with ranged attacks.

You're trying to defend against something with a monstrous to-hit bonus like an Iron Golem or a Tarrasque, and its damage is mostly physical. Other PCs do the killing with ranged attacks.

You've been restrained by a monster (Dodge doesn't work while your speed is zero) and are trying not to get killed while other PCs do the killing.

Additional twist on defense scenarios above: you're a multiclassed Eldritch Knight/full claster and you plan to use Blade Ward + War Magic Attack to set up for your spell next turn (perhaps Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Phantasmal Force of a larger and tougher-looking duplicate of yourself as a decoy), without losing a whole lot of HP in the process.

[Throne12]

FIREBALL is the only spell you need. All other spell are for nerds who cant handle the power and glory of FIREBALL. You are politely asking a wimpy beta where they are hiding the sweet thich ass princess. Well they would be happy to tell you after one or 2 fireballs. That limp pick thief stole your spellbook of chick numbers and is hiding, just fireball everything untell he shows himself.

See all you need it that dank FIREBALL.

[Chronos]

In defense of Speak with Dead: Yes, the fact that the target isn't obligated to answer limits its usefulness. It's probably not one that you want to prepare every day. But the class who gets it is cleric, and they can change their preparations every day and have access to their entire list for free when they do so. And it does sometimes happen that there's someone who'd like to help you out, except for the minor inconvenience that they're formerly living. So when that happens, that's when you prepare and cast Speak with Dead.

[MaxWilson]

In defense of Speak with Dead: Yes, the fact that the target isn't obligated to answer limits its usefulness. It's probably not one that you want to prepare every day. But the class who gets it is cleric, and they can change their preparations every day and have access to their entire list for free when they do so. And it does sometimes happen that there's someone who'd like to help you out, except for the minor inconvenience that they're formerly living. So when that happens, that's when you prepare and cast Speak with Dead.

And Bards.

Any spell that can trivialize most murder investigations isn't useless, though. It would also be amazing for consulting famous (mummified) sages/generals/wizards of the past for guidance. Finally, it has interesting potential interactions with Clone, since you come back to life but still leave behind a corpse for people to consult.

[SociopathFriend]

Heat Metal.

I actually had a Wand of it made in a 5e game. And never again did we face an opponent in metal armor and the DM ruled repeatedly that stuff like swords and daggers had wooden hilts and so could be held without issue.

So, I consider it a useless spell, it might be useful if a DM didn't seemingly deliberately deny you chances to use it; but that was not the case.
Pretty sure once I sold it he threw like 8 full-plate greatsword warriors at us too.

[Garfunion]

I take back my previous post that true strike would be better to use if metamagic was cheaper to use on cantrips.
True strike still requires you to wait for your next turn to use its affect.

[Yuroch Kern]

I take back my previous post that true strike would be better to use if metamagic was cheaper to use on cantrips.
True strike still requires you to wait for your next turn to use its affect.

Yeah, that's why it can be good with an Arcane Trickster, Valor Bard, Eldritch Knight, some Sorcerers, and no one else that don't use nets. 🤔

[Garfunion]

Yeah, that's why it can be good with an Arcane Trickster, Valor Bard, Eldritch Knight, some Sorcerers, and no one else that don't use nets. 🤔
I think I’m misunderstanding you. The cantrip requires an action to cast or a bonus action to cast if you use meta-magic. But you still have to wait until your next turn to use it. That is of course if you do not lose concentration on the spell or you can no longer attack the creature. So unless there is a super ultra mega attack that needs to hit the creature on your next turn, it is a worthless spell.

[TIPOT]

Infestation is pretty garbage. A con save to deal 1d6 poison damage and then a d4 to move 5ft in a random N,S,E,or W, direction. Though if you manage to get someone to step off a cliff using this spell that's definite style points. At least Poison Spray is 1d12 damage for a con save.

Jump seems pretty bad, given it's 1 minute duration you'll only ever be able to use this to jump 1 large gap. It would be neat if the duration was an hour like Longstrider.

Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.

Jump isn't that bad. If there's difficult terrain it can act as a pseudo fly and has some use.

Blindness is really good. You're massively undervaluing the lack of concentration required. You can use it and keep a buff up which is huge.

[Yuroch Kern]

I think I’m misunderstanding you. The cantrip requires an action to cast or a bonus action to cast if you use meta-magic. But you still have to wait until your next turn to use it. That is of course if you do not lose concentration on the spell or you can no longer attack the creature. So unless there is a super ultra mega attack that needs to hit the creature on your next turn, it is a worthless spell.

Yes. The main reason to use it is if you are able to have a bonus action next to it, like Cunning Action to run away and set up a ranged attack, Inspiration, or Battle/War Magic to setup a possible Advantage every round, or attack with a net. It's main (only?) function is to preserve limited resources by making them hit more. At higher levels, it is probably swapped since resources are more available. Anybody else will have trouble with it, except Sorcerers with Quicken, since you can setup a next round attack roll after, say, a Quickened Fireball and TS, then whatever. Concentration is always a thing, but unless they hit you with more than 21 points a damage a pop, DC 10 isn't that difficult.

[Yuroch Kern]

I tend to look at spells like these as "difficult". True Strike, Witch Bolt, Entrall...these and the others are usable, but only if you know how to use them. Fireball is pretty useless in a ally/foe melee, unless they are fire-resistant and/or you don't care, neh?

[Desamir]

Heat Metal.

I actually had a Wand of it made in a 5e game. And never again did we face an opponent in metal armor and the DM ruled repeatedly that stuff like swords and daggers had wooden hilts and so could be held without issue.

So, I consider it a useless spell, it might be useful if a DM didn't seemingly deliberately deny you chances to use it; but that was not the case.
Pretty sure once I sold it he threw like 8 full-plate greatsword warriors at us too.

Classic adversarial DMing. I hope you've found better games since then.

My vote goes to Find Traps, since it effectively does nothing.

Blindness is a sleeper. How many save-or-suck spells exist that don't require concentration? You don't find them until 5th level at the earliest (Contagion, Bestow Curse, both touch spells). And it upscales to target multiple creatures!

[Yuroch Kern]

Classic adversarial DMing. I hope you've found better games since then.

My vote goes to Find Traps, since it effectively does nothing.

Blindness is a sleeper. How many save-or-suck spells exist that don't require concentration? You don't find them until 5th level at the earliest (Contagion, Bestow Curse, both touch spells). And it upscales to target multiple creatures!

Word. Heat metal is brutal, and having a DM specifically negate player advancement and/or loot he himself hands out is not a permanent DM...

Find Traps is a DM call, and is tedious with ones like the one above. Only useful in a novice game. It would only be useful to an Arcane Trickster, who doesn't get it...

[Yuroch Kern]

The absolute most tedious spell I can think of is Crown of Madness. If it were a 1st level spell, mayyyyyybe, but for a 2nd? There is little extra tactical advantage for this spell that can end any given round. It is a two round spell at best, and only suggests a weird delay of game for one opponent, maybe. Although the Charmed condition does keep you safe I suppose...maybe that is it's use?

[Tanarii]

I tend to look at spells like these as "difficult". True Strike, Witch Bolt, Entrall...these and the others are usable, but only if you know how to use them.
There's no reasonable PC use for True Strike and Witch Bolt. There's no "know how to use them". Folks have been trying to find a reasonable use for them, good enough to justify taking up space in your spells, in these forums for years and never succeeded. (Also note True Strike is a cantrip and cannot be swapped out when you inevitably get buyers remorse.)

DM monsters (which includes NPCs) is a different matter. As a DM close to useless or very niche spells can be used, because you can control the initial situation better, but more importantly extremely non-optimal is sometimes fine on an NPC.

[Asisreo1]

There's no reasonable PC use for True Strike and Witch Bolt. There's no "know how to use them". Folks have been trying to find a reasonable use for them, good enough to justify taking up space in your spells, in these forums for years and never succeeded. (Also note True Strike is a cantrip and cannot be swapped out when you inevitably get buyers remorse.)

DM monsters (which includes NPCs) is a different matter. As a DM close to useless or very niche spells can be used, because you can control the initial situation better, but more importantly extremely non-optimal is sometimes fine on an NPC.
True strike's only purpose would be to either cast plane shift for it to hit or be a sorcerer and upcast chromatic orb in the case that you're fighting something with resistance to any damage type you've leaned on.

Basically, you have chromatic orb because you have a limited number of spells known and most of the good ones are either lightning or fire which are pretty common (not super common). Chromatic orb lets you bypass a resistance that you choose correctly while also bypassing magic resistance/legendary resistance.

There's quite a few creatures with damage resistance but it's really the only noncantrip a sorcerer gets that can bypass magic resistance. I think that's also why chromatic orb is relatively expensive, any creature with magic resistance just has to take it as if it's another attack and it's rare to have a creature resistant to all of the possible damage types.

You won't know you need it until you do and true strike helps guarantee it.

[FabulousFizban]

true strike.

this!!!!!!

[Yuroch Kern]

So, yeah, despite the success or failure of certain spells, the effort to use them really turn them off completely. Find traps is soooo interpretable though. Heck, Mordenkainen's Sword is such a lesser version of Spiritual Weapon to the point of why didn't you get Forcecage? 1,500 gp of ruby dust should theoretically be easy for a 13th level+ caster.

[MrStabby]

I want to speak up for a couple of spells mentioned here and add one more.

Blindness/deafness is situational, but awesome when it is needed. I see it as a spell for shutting down caster types. Spellcasters are often not that tough and a con save will be tough for them to make in a way that something like a wisdom save wouldn't be.

It has different strengths in different classes. For a sorcerer I would skip it, too few spells known for one to go on something this situational. For a caster type I would just look to blow away their hit points instead.

On a bard it's great. So many spells targeting strong mental saves and little blasting. Drop hypnotic pattern on a crowd then follow up with blindness on the guy with high wisdom that made the save.

Bot saying it's the best save ever, but probably better than bane.

Compulsion is another spell mentioned that I think isnt that bad - mediocre rather than poor. You do get a lot of control and the spell only allows another saved when used. With each move you can take melee guys out of combat for a couple of turns.

My nomination is Dust Devil. A paltry d8 damage. A modest area of effect. And it's at end of turn so the enemy can just move away 5ft and pretty much ignore the spell.

[Chronos]

Mordenkainen's Sword isn't useless because of the comparison to Spiritual Weapon. It's useless because of the comparison to Bigby's Hand. Which does more damage at a lower level (or even more yet if upcast), and can move further, and that's just one option for the spell. Plus, it being, well, a hand, there's a lot more room to get creative with it.

Although, actually, come to think of it, as long a you have at least a +3 spellcasting ability modifier, a 6th-level Spiritual Weapon also outclasses the sword.

[Kireban]

Minor illusions- too dependent on the dm. Cant be switched later on into another spell since it is a cantrip, and if you have a dm that isnt into this spell, it will just be ignored when used. I consider dms who are too into this spell and decide that everything can be solved with it even worst.

Suggestion- too problematic and not well defined. Can be totaly ignored by dms even after the target failed its saves. But I find it much worst when the dm excepts the caster's suggestion for the enemy to defend it. Suddenly a level 2 spell makes a boss attack its own minions- better than the level 8 spell dominate monster.

These 2 spells are considered great spells, but they depend way too much on the dms and players for not being ignored/abused.

[Yora]

Compulsion is another spell mentioned that I think isnt that bad - mediocre rather than poor. You do get a lot of control and the spell only allows another saved when used. With each move you can take melee guys out of combat for a couple of turns.

The issue with compulsion is that it's a bard spell and warlock invocation. It does not just have to be useful in some situations, but useful enough so that you are willing to trade away other 2nd level (or higher) spells or another invocation to get it. And it just can't compete there.

[Tanarii]

The one that always comes to my mind first is enthrall. It is only mostly useless in most situations, but why would a bard or warlock pick them if they could take darkness, invisibility, hold person, spider climb, and suggestion instead? I would not be surprised if it's the least used spell in the entire game.Enthrall seems to be there specifically to all your team to pickpocket, sneak away and leave the caster behind, or get into perfect position to stab someone in the kidney when he might otherwise object. It's incredibly niche in a wilderness and dungeon and adventuring site game.

Basically, agreed on Enthrall, it's close to useless.


Speak with plants seems pretty awful for 3rd level. I can see a few circumstances in which druids or rangers would prepare it, but none in which a bard would learn it.If information gathering and planning ahead is relevant to your adventuring game it's extremely useful. This is a combat as war spell, not a combat as sport one.


True strike is pretty obvious.Agreed per my previous. It's just terrible. No one should take it.


Is blade ward for when you're 1st level and want to disarm a spear trap with your foot?Its there for an at-will defense when you're about to get whomped. Of course, not many players care about an active defense this weak. They'd rather Dodge even though that's a terrible choice for the typically low AC arcane caster but at least you don't use a cantrip slot, Disengage (often superior), or use a spell (usually superior but costs a resource). Also it's okay for EKs of level 7+.

So I can see where you'd consider it useless, and it's certainly not a popular pick.


Bane is not that bad when you're a low level cleric. But I don't see why any warlock would waste an invocation to be able to cast it one time per long rest and still having to use a spell slot for it. This is so bad, I think this is actually a mistake. It's probably supposed to be "cast at will with expanding a spell slot". That would make a lot more sense.Bane is fantastic. It penalizes saves. Let me say that again but louder IT PENALIZES SAVES.

The reason it uses a warlock slot is so it can be upcast, and because there's no way it should be at will. That'd be stupidly powerful. It'd be pretty cool if the invocation was 1/LR cast for free as a level one spell on top of the option to use it with slots though.

[Yuroch Kern]

Mordenkainen's Sword isn't useless because of the comparison to Spiritual Weapon. It's useless because of the comparison to Bigby's Hand. Which does more damage at a lower level (or even more yet if upcast), and can move further, and that's just one option for the spell. Plus, it being, well, a hand, there's a lot more room to get creative with it.

Although, actually, come to think of it, as long a you have at least a +3 spellcasting ability modifier, a 6th-level Spiritual Weapon also outclasses the sword.

The comparison is based largely on your second paragraph, but you did elaborate on it with the first. It is a better explanation than I was able at the time of my post. \m/

[MaxWilson]

Find Traps is a DM call, and is tedious with ones like the one above. Only useful in a novice game. It would only be useful to an Arcane Trickster, who doesn't get it...

Find Traps is as useful as the traps are deadly. In a normal game it's pretty useless. In a hypothetical game where you often wind up invading archmages' towers and uber-secure vaults (ancient or modern), and where the traps are designed to actually kill you instead of tickle (e.g. Glyph: Wall of Force + Glyph: Conjure Earth Elemental + Glyph: Cloudkill), Find Trap could speed up your raids by quite a bit by letting you know when you DON'T have to be paranoid. It also combos well with Augury/Divination, to get details once you know a trap is there.

It also potentially makes you better at dealing with the traps. "You don’t learn the location of each trap, but you do learn the general nature of the danger posed by a trap you sense." If you sense that hypothetical Force Dome of Poisony Death trap, maybe you have the Shadow Monk cautiously check out the room first, because she's immune to poison and can teleport.

Find Traps is a spell for certain genres of play that aren't common among 5E players, but it's not an inherently terrible spell.

==================================


True strike's only purpose would be to either cast plane shift for it to hit or be a sorcerer and upcast chromatic orb in the case that you're fighting something with resistance to any damage type you've leaned on.

True Strike is still bad in the Plane Shift scenario unless you're playing a solo adventure--by essentially forcing you to Help yourself, the other PCs are delaying nuking whatever bad guy you're about to Plane Shift. Why don't they just Help?

==================================


Mordenkainen's Sword isn't useless because of the comparison to Spiritual Weapon. It's useless because of the comparison to Bigby's Hand. Which does more damage at a lower level (or even more yet if upcast), and can move further, and that's just one option for the spell. Plus, it being, well, a hand, there's a lot more room to get creative with it.

Although, actually, come to think of it, as long a you have at least a +3 spellcasting ability modifier, a 6th-level Spiritual Weapon also outclasses the sword.

One interesting difference between Mordenkainen's Sword and Bigby's Hand is: Bigby's Hand can be killed. Sometimes that's good (it can tank), sometimes it's bad. (BTW, I never thought of it before, but how are monsters supposed to know which spells/effects are killable and which are not? I've never had a bad guy attack an invulnerable Spiritual Weapon before, but... does it look any different from a Flying Sword monster or a Bigby's Hand force construct?)

Anyway, if it weren't for Spiritual Weapon you'd have to say, "Well, Mordenkainen's Sword has some advantages." But it's much, much worse than Spiritual Weapon (because of concentration and action economy and even damage!).

===========================================

Drawmij's Instant Summons is an almost-completely-useless spell.

[Luccan]

Friends: It is actually useful, but you better not care about the person liking you afterwards. Not good for making friends, fantastic for getting stabbed.

Gust: is your foe on the edge of a cliff? No? Then there are better spells to use. Otherwise an inferior Mage Hand.

Witch Bolt: Too many requirements make this an inferior option at all times.

[JellyPooga]

Drawmij's Instant Summons is an almost-completely-useless spell.

I've never understood why, in any edition, this has always been such a high level spell with such a high cost attached. It would be a niche spell at best if it were a 1st level utility with no material cost, but as a 6th level spell that costs 1,000gp every time you use it? Hard pass.

[DrKerosene]

Suggestion- too problematic and not well defined. Can be totaly ignored by dms even after the target failed its saves.

The spell does say you can (probably) make a Knight give away their warhorse (which is good loot for a level 2 spell, if you or a Party member can masquerade as the beggar that gets the horse later).

However, based on the last DM I had, I was going to say Suggestion and Command ended up being supremely useless for me.

Also, Identify had no use regarding magic items being given to us, or when used on NPC/creatures that were under some weird effect(s).

Additionally, Message, Animal Messenger, Sending, & Magic Mouth were ruled to have no interaction with the Actor feat either. Which was disappointing.

Every single death was in a way that Revivify wouldn’t actually work, due to the amount of damage done. I never actually got to use it all the way to character level 8.

I had Illusory Script from the beginning, and the DM always stonewalled us with never getting (or seeing) any official documents.

I actually used Bless a bunch, and only three roles were meaningfully affected over the entire campaign.

Lastly, the Knowledge Cleric channel divinity ability to use Detect Thoughts was also always auto-detected. Really defeated the purpose of trying to use the subtle “no verbal or somantic components” feature of channel divinity to aid in insight checking someone (don’t worry, every NPC had a +10 modifier to the save, it never actually worked in the first place).

[Telok]

I've never understood why, in any edition, this has always been such a high level spell with such a high cost attached. It would be a niche spell at best if it were a 1st level utility with no material cost, but as a 6th level spell that costs 1,000gp every time you use it? Hard pass.

The ad&d version is 7th level. However it's loosely enough written that there are some relatively normal rulings that make it very useful. First, at high enough levels, it's interplanar. Second, a common ruling is that you cast the spell on the item and then can memorize something else in the slot. Third, it is a very fast spell with a 1 segment cast/use time that makes it less likely to be interrupted. Fourth, you can use it on artifacts which may unplesant to carry continually but situationally exceptionally useful. Fifth, most dms didn't limit the mage to just one item marked at a time.

However in a newer context of "prep your 6th level spell & blow a wad of cash to teleport a wand of magic missile to you"... yeah, trash.

[Mr Adventurer]

True strike is pretty bad, but it’s not garbage if you want to hit something with a leveled spell that uses an attack roll. Might be nice before you try to plane shift someone, for instance.


For some reason I had never thought that it could be used for spells with an attack roll. That's knocked it up a small notch in my estimation.

[JellyPooga]

The ad&d version is 7th level. However it's loosely enough written that there are some relatively normal rulings that make it very useful. First, at high enough levels, it's interplanar. Second, a common ruling is that you cast the spell on the item and then can memorize something else in the slot. Third, it is a very fast spell with a 1 segment cast/use time that makes it less likely to be interrupted. Fourth, you can use it on artifacts which may unplesant to carry continually but situationally exceptionally useful. Fifth, most dms didn't limit the mage to just one item marked at a time.

However in a newer context of "prep your 6th level spell & blow a wad of cash to teleport a wand of magic missile to you"... yeah, trash.

And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it. You could make it a cantrip and it would still be little more than a niche and fluffy effect that had little in-game effect. Blade Pact Warlocks have a free and at-will version with their pact weapon from level 3.

If you could use it to summon items you haven't interacted with, if you could name an object owned by someone else, or that you didn't know where it was or how to locate it...if it was a "get what you want, whenever you want it" spell I might understand. If it was an "items only Gate", it would be a useful pick. But it isn't. It's a Bag of Holding, no, a backpack that costs 1000gp every time you reach into it. It is and always has been an incomprehensibly high-leveled and expensive piece of trash.

Yes. There is the argument that it allows for a certain degree of contingency/back-up plan, but largely speaking if things have gone that badly, then one item is probably not going to save you. Just 'port outta there and fight another day.

[MaxWilson]

Friends: It is actually useful, but you better not care about the person liking you afterwards. Not good for making friends, fantastic for getting stabbed.

Maybe the spell 's name should have air quotes added.

:)

[Chronos]

Quoth Tanarii:

Bane is fantastic. It penalizes saves. Let me say that again but louder IT PENALIZES SAVES.
"Man, it's really tough getting this monster to fail any saves, what do we do?"
"I know, I'll cast another spell that it has to fail a save against!"

I mean, granted, Charisma is often a poor save. But it's still not exactly the best solution to that problem, especially since any given monster is going to have other poor saves, too, that you can usually guess pretty easily, and which will do a lot worse to it on their own. And if a monster is good at making both Con and Wis, it's probably because it has spell resistance, which also makes it good at Cha.

[MaxWilson]

And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it. You could make it a cantrip and it would still be little more than a niche and fluffy effect that had little in-game effect. Blade Pact Warlocks have a free and at-will version with their pact weapon from level 3.

If you could use it to summon items you haven't interacted with, if you could name an object owned by someone else, or that you didn't know where it was or how to locate it...if it was a "get what you want, whenever you want it" spell I might understand. If it was an "items only Gate", it would be a useful pick. But it isn't. It's a Bag of Holding, no, a backpack that costs 1000gp every time you reach into it. It is and always has been an incomprehensibly high-leveled and expensive piece of trash.

Yes. There is the argument that it allows for a certain degree of contingency/back-up plan, but largely speaking if things have gone that badly, then one item is probably not going to save you. Just 'port outta there and fight another day.

Having put a certain amount of thought into uses for this spell, I can confidently say... You're very close to correct. But the spell isn't completely useless in all situations.

Fundamentally it's a way to have your stuff in multiple places. You can have it where you have it, or have it where you have a sapphire. It's Find My Phone for D&D.

If you're a 20th level wizard who's acquired enough spells for a backup spellbook to take several thousand gp and weeks of effort to create, even with the backup discount, it's not totally foolish to invest another 1000 gp in a summoning ritual for it. Then instead of carrying multiple spellbooks on your adventures, you just carry one spellbook and a couple of sapphires linked to spellbooks.

You might also want to cast it on important possessions like Robe of the Archmagi or Staff of the Magi, especially if there's any chance your Clone might someday need to retrieve them from your corpse. (Scry first if possible to make sure they're not being held, and have a backup sapphire just in case the first one goes wrong.)

So for a filthy-rich high-level wizard it's not useless. No wonder said wizard didn't bother to research it down below 6th level.

[Tanarii]

"Man, it's really tough getting this monster to fail any saves, what do we do?"
"I know, I'll cast another spell that it has to fail a save against!"

Exactly. All at the low low cost of a 1st level slot.


And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it.
That does not follow at all.

[Yora]

For some reason I had never thought that it could be used for spells with an attack roll. That's knocked it up a small notch in my estimation.

Examples seem to be limited to chromatic orb, though.

But even then, I think it might usually be a better idea to just cast chromatic orb twice. Yes, you loose an additional spell slot if the first attempt fails, but when you are that desperate that upcast chromatic orb is your only real option, then I think losing a slot it better than losing a round.

[Tanarii]

Examples seem to be limited to chromatic orb, though.
It might have some use if the DM ruled (despite sage advice) that the S component is the described pointing finger in the spell text, AND it's not immediately obvious you're casting a spell. Although what they would think about you pointing at them during (for example) a negotiation that might turn into combat any second would still be a thing.

But that's a fundamental changing of spellcasting. It affects the use of many spells, and will change their relative power. For example, Dissonant Whispers, or Suggestion.. And for the latter part about not being immediately obvious, it also makes figuring out how Counterspell triggers an issue.

[Asisreo1]

It might have some use if the DM ruled (despite sage advice) that the S component is the described pointing finger in the spell text, AND it's not immediately obvious you're casting a spell. Although what they would think about you pointing at them during (for example) a negotiation that might turn into combat any second would still be a thing.

But that's a fundamental changing of spellcasting. It affects the use of many spells, and will change their relative power. For example, Dissonant Whispers, or Suggestion.. And for the latter part about not being immediately obvious, it also makes figuring out how Counterspell triggers an issue.
It isn't an awful cast if you get it proc'd before you become polymorphed by another caster. You can also use it for +# ammunition. Even though they aren't nonmagical until they hit, it may be too dangerous in a fight to get them back immediately.

What's cool about +# ammunition is that it stacks with +# bows and crossbows, so they're still relevant even after you get +3 bows, which I think is really cool. If your DM is good at letting you have downtime up to months, it wouldn't hurt to use excess coins to make ammunition.

If your a pure spellcaster, using your prepared spells for chromatic orb may not be worth it, but it doesn't hurt to have it as a spellscroll just in case.

True strike is definitely not a wise pick for an initial spell.

[Telok]

Having put a certain amount of thought into uses for this spell, I can confidently say... You're very close to correct. But the spell isn't completely useless in all situations.

Fundamentally it's a way to have your stuff in multiple places. You can have it where you have it, or have it where you have a sapphire. It's Find My Phone for D&D.

If you're a 20th level wizard who's acquired enough spells for a backup spellbook to take several thousand gp and weeks of effort to create, even with the backup discount, it's not totally foolish to invest another 1000 gp in a summoning ritual for it. Then instead of carrying multiple spellbooks on your adventures, you just carry one spellbook and a couple of sapphires linked to spellbooks.

You might also want to cast it on important possessions like Robe of the Archmagi or Staff of the Magi, especially if there's any chance your Clone might someday need to retrieve them from your corpse. (Scry first if possible to make sure they're not being held, and have a backup sapphire just in case the first one goes wrong.)

So for a filthy-rich high-level wizard it's not useless. No wonder said wizard didn't bother to research it down below 6th level.

It's a spell from ad&d, if you think of the way that version of d&d was run at higher levels you can see the benefit. The wizard should have gotten a tower around 10th level as the game moved towards high power politics, securing a realm, and planar adventuring. That would include apprentices, men-at-arms, and loyal henchmen. The wizard's spells wouldn't all fit in one book and you didn't want to carry all your spellbooks with you. Item saving throws and equipment loss were things that happened if you made enough mistakes or had bad enough luck. So carrying literally all your magic items and spell books in a bag of holding wasn't a good idea. Lastly you could literally be unable to bring everything with you. With random treasure you weren't certain to have extra-dimensional storage and may not want to have lower level henchmen carry all your wealth around all the time.

Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.

[Tanarii]

Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.
The game doesn't have to be murderheros hoboing from place to place with all their worldly possessions on them. And indestructible and un-stealable to boot.

It just usually is. :smallamused:

[MaxWilson]

It's a spell from ad&d, if you think of the way that version of d&d was run at higher levels you can see the benefit. The wizard should have gotten a tower around 10th level as the game moved towards high power politics, securing a realm, and planar adventuring. That would include apprentices, men-at-arms, and loyal henchmen. The wizard's spells wouldn't all fit in one book and you didn't want to carry all your spellbooks with you. Item saving throws and equipment loss were things that happened if you made enough mistakes or had bad enough luck. So carrying literally all your magic items and spell books in a bag of holding wasn't a good idea. Lastly you could literally be unable to bring everything with you. With random treasure you weren't certain to have extra-dimensional storage and may not want to have lower level henchmen carry all your wealth around all the time.

Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.

First of all, AD&D is probably played primarily at levels even lower than 5E. (Just look at level limits for halfling fighters!)

Secondly, I agree that 5E is rarely played in a logistics-intensive way, and that Drawmij's Instant Summons is useless in almost every circumstance. I just wanted to highlight some circumstances under which it's not useless.

Third, item loss and damage is definitely not forbidden in 5E per se--the DMG has rules for it, and the PHB has costs for backup spellbooks. There are also ways to lose items, via DMG Disarm, or theft, or capture, or via dying + Clone. Your items do not teleport back to your clone. Especially if your party TPKs, Drawmij's Usually-Useless Summons takes on some value if you had the foresight to cast it. Surely you're not going to argue that high-level TPKs never happen?

[Mr Adventurer]

Now I'm wondering if DIS could be used in some incredibly convoluted way by chaining, i.e. the item you summon with the sapphire is the sapphire to summon the actual item you want.

If you use the sapphire to summon the item, can you reuse the sapphire that would have summoned the sapphire you just crushed?

[MaxWilson]

Now I'm wondering if DIS could be used in some incredibly convoluted way by chaining, i.e. the item you summon with the sapphire is the sapphire to summon the actual item you want.

If you use the sapphire to summon the item, can you reuse the sapphire that would have summoned the sapphire you just crushed?

No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.

[Asisreo1]

No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.
When the DM gives the cleric a level 9 spell scroll for True Resurrection (or any legendary item/artifact you don't want stolen/looted), you can put the item somewhere where even a caster with Gate can't get to, like hidden with your Patron as a safe keeping in the Nine Hells. Your almighty Archdevil friend keeps it guarded and when you need it back, it's only the cost of a sapphire, which is probably F-you money at that point.

It isn't something I'd pick up, but I can see this usage as useful with the wish spell. Gate isn't a high priority 9th-level spell and it might be much more trouble than it's worth just to get to where you need to be using planeshift so having instant access to the item can be a life saver.

[Yuroch Kern]

Find Traps is as useful as the traps are deadly. In a normal game it's pretty useless. In a hypothetical game where you often wind up invading archmages' towers and uber-secure vaults (ancient or modern), and where the traps are designed to actually kill you instead of tickle (e.g. Glyph: Wall of Force + Glyph: Conjure Earth Elemental + Glyph: Cloudkill), Find Trap could speed up your raids by quite a bit by letting you know when you DON'T have to be paranoid. It also combos well with Augury/Divination, to get details once you know a trap is there.

It also potentially makes you better at dealing with the traps. "You don’t learn the location of each trap, but you do learn the general nature of the danger posed by a trap you sense." If you sense that hypothetical Force Dome of Poisony Death trap, maybe you have the Shadow Monk cautiously check out the room first, because she's immune to poison and can teleport.

Find Traps is a spell for certain genres of play that aren't common among 5E players, but it's not an inherently terrible spell.


You are right in these regards. It grants PCs meta knowledge. However, I have experiences where anything that is still up to any interpretation can be argued and invalidated, like the various divinations like Speak with Dead. It isn't terrible on paper, but extremely difficult in practice, as a lot of spells on this thread cover.
==================================



True Strike is still bad in the Plane Shift scenario unless you're playing a solo adventure--by essentially forcing you to Help yourself, the other PCs are delaying nuking whatever bad guy you're about to Plane Shift. Why don't they just Help?


I have been told repeatedly the answer to this question, and it was the party are not responsible to do anything for you. I disagree with this answer, since sometimes you gotta Help yourself.
==================================



One interesting difference between Mordenkainen's Sword and Bigby's Hand is: Bigby's Hand can be killed. Sometimes that's good (it can tank), sometimes it's bad. (BTW, I never thought of it before, but how are monsters supposed to know which spells/effects are killable and which are not? I've never had a bad guy attack an invulnerable Spiritual Weapon before, but... does it look any different from a Flying Sword monster or a Bigby's Hand force construct?)

Anyway, if it weren't for Spiritual Weapon you'd have to say, "Well, Mordenkainen's Sword has some advantages." But it's much, much worse than Spiritual Weapon (because of concentration and action economy and even damage!).


You got the right stuff here. No one without Arcana knowledge or practical experience should really instantly know what limits are on certain spells, which contributes a lot to some spells being labeled "useless". I think the Hand being destructable is it's check on power, but since it's not known, probably a minor check. And yeah, the Sword looks like it was converted as an afterthought.
===========================================

Drawmij's Instant Summons is an almost-completely-useless spell.

Clearly, this spell is what crushes the sapphire. Otherwise, how does the wizard crush perhaps the 2nd hardest gem short of diamond? The price is wayyyyy steep, but being able to mark your entire catalog of stuff for instant retrieval can be huge. Just figure a contract with a dwarven gem mining operation or a Earthen Planar being and you will possibly negate it's main downfall.

[JellyPooga]

That does not follow at all.

In the context of someone on an "adventure" or expedition where they've prepared for a journey or series of events (i.e. the majority of what PCs do in d&d), considering that extradimensional storage exists, considering that teleportation magic also exists...yes it does. If you have decided to leave something behind, it almost certainly means that it is either too valuable and/or not useful for whatever it is that you're doing.

Sure, you might need your Boots of the Winterland when you're going to the Elemental Plane of Fire...but probably not. If you do need them, for whatever reason, if you're high enough level to cast DIS, then you're also high enough level to just pop home and get them, if you haven't already got them tucked away somewhere in a Bag of Holding.

Yes. There are certain things, like a spare spellbook; redundancies, powerful one-shot items and the like, that you might want to keep somewhere safe until needed. The use is niche (I never said otherwise). This does not, IMO, justify the cost.

Like I said, if it was a Cantrip, it would by no means break the game or engender massive abuse because the utility itself is so extremely limited. Hell, if it was a Cantrip I'd be all over it as a fun and fluffy spell; it'd be great on assassin/charlatan/entertainer style characters to highlight their profession in a magical context. As one of the most powerful spells in the game, limited only to Tier 3 play, on the other hand? No.

[Witty Username]

I am not a fan of identify this gen. Identify looks good until it is known that magic items can be identified over a short rest. making it redundant. And it doesn't work on cursed items.

Call lightning and confusion(on non-clerics) are (dis?)honorable mentions, they are not bad spells so much as better spells exist at lower levels
hypnotic pattern > confusion.
Moonbeam > Call lightning.

[Chaos Jackal]

First, an honorable mention to suggestions and most illusions. Can be among the most powerful spells in the game, or can be the worst, depending on the DM. Good thing I've convinced most of mine so far, I like these spells.
Second, most 8th-level spells aren't outright useless, but are quite underwhelming. Especially in the case of a warlock. I'd much, much rather pick another one from Crown of Stars, Forcecage and Plane Shift than any 8th-level warlock spell.

Now, let's make a list.

Infestation. Bad save, bad damage type, too much competition. No reason to pick it over another damaging cantrip.
True Strike. For reasons, search "True Strike 5e", for more than half a decade of repetitive disappointment.
Quite tempted to say Jump, primarily for the very short duration. But it's not entirely pointless. Close, but not entirely.
Witch Bolt. It doesn't actually do what it's supposed to, which is repeated unavoidable damage. It's very easily avoidable, and its damage scales poorly.
Aganazzar's Scorcher. A 30ft line isn't gonna work.
Barkskin. Its increase to AC ranges from "no increase" to "low enough not to justify a 2nd-level slot and concentration". Seriously, even if you're captured and stripped of your armor, it's usually not worth it for anyone in your party, because there are far better things to do with your concentration than this. Yes, it can prove useful sometimes, but I find these times to be quite negligible in the grand scheme.
Continual Fla- oh wait, there's the magical darkness interaction. Still, you can make it once and forget about it. Commission it from somewhere maybe.
Crown of Madness. The order in which the affected enemy takes actions ruins it.
Find Traps. It doesn't find traps. Half the time you don't even need it to tell you there are traps. Even when it tells you it's not worth its slot. There's a lot of ways to search for traps. Using a 2nd-level spell that doesn't really search isn't one.
Melf's Acid Arrow. Upcast Magic Missile instead.
Snilloc's Snowball Storm. The area and damage are dreadful.
Catnap. Extremely niche. There are some cases that it's better than Leomund's Tiny Hut, but Leomund's Tiny Hut is so good that you'll almost never bother with Catnap just for those very few cases.
Conjure Barrage. I get it, area damage for the ranger. Too bad the damage is pathetic for the level a ranger gets it.
Erupting Earth. Maybe if it also knocked enemies prone...
Compulsion. Too high level for what it does.
Enervation. A more powerful Witch Bolt that heals and has better range. That's still not a great spell. And it's never a good use for a 5th-level slot. If it gave 1d4 negative levels without a save, I'd reconsider.
Circle of Death. Although to be fair, it has two uses. One is spending a 6th-level slot to murder a village using a huge Con necrotic fireball. The other is to attempt to kill your party with the same method.
Drawmij's Instant Summons. Crushing that sapphire pains me.
Find the Path. It's very restrictive. Items from the place, specific locations, concentration... yeah, I don't think you'll ever manage to use this properly.
Flesh to Stone. It's not gonna work.
Mordenkainen's Sword. One of the few times a wizard should've looked at a cleric to see how it's done. Wizards don't get Spiritual Weapon, but this would be bad even without that comparison. Low damage, average economy, takes concentration.
Sequester seems very, very unlikely. I can see its uses, I just don't see the situations coming up in the extreme majority of games. For players, at least. The DM can certainly use it to make a Sleeping Beauty story.
Imprisonment. That's another Sequester deal. If a player ends up using it, odds are it was plot-forced and likely the last spell to be cast in the campaign.
Storm of Vengeance. Even a villain using this can't bring down a building block. Might kill a few pedestrians.
Weird. Phantasmal Killer isn't a good spell. Mass Phantasmal Killer as a 9th-level spell is a crime.

[Chronos]

Funny story: Most of the talk in this thread about wizards retrieving their items, folks weren't using the name of the spell. I'm reading through it thinking, "Man, I don't remember the key item for Leomund's Secret Chest costing that much, or being expended". I double-check my book, and indeed it's not.

Then I finally realize that that's not the spell that's being discussed, it's Jim Ward's Instant Summons. Which is indeed as described.

So, OK, yeah, you can think of some use cases for Instant Summons. How many of those use cases are not satisfied by the spell that's two levels lower, doesn't use up its components, and can fetch more stuff?

[Mr Adventurer]

As far as I can see, the things it's got going for it are:

- it's a Ritual
- it puts the object in your hand

It could be useful for sneaking delicate or sensitive or secret things into places. Assault Mount Doom and bring the Ring to you at the last possible moment style.

It could be useful for going into sensitive social situations you're sure are likely to turn violent - use it on a weapon, if you are a martial character with Ritual Caster, like it's an expensive poor man's (rich man's) Blade Pact or Bonded Weapon.

You could use it to sneak poison into a castle or other items through security in general?

It could be useful in some heists where you intentionally get captured? Though you need somewhere to hide the sapphire... 😳

[Nifft]

No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.

What if you reject Bob's marriage proposal, which leaves Bob emotionally crushed? Do you get your staff teleported?

If so, perhaps you can build Bob back up again and crush him later. You'd need to change him somehow -- he must count as different for the spell to work -- but you just need to find some way to change the nature of a man, and how hard can that be, right?

[Tanarii]

In the context of someone on an "adventure" or expedition where they've prepared for a journey or series of events (i.e. the majority of what PCs do in d&d), considering that extradimensional storage exists, considering that teleportation magic also exists...yes it does.But that's not what you said. You said "And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it."

There are lots of reasons you might not have something on you but you need it. What if someone killed you and took your powerful magic item? Once you've been brought back to life, even if they have it on them, it'd be nice to know who has your artifact or whatever and where to go get it back once you've raised a posse.

I can tell you right now that many of my players would have given up 1000gp to have the ability to do that in upper Tier 2 play. As far as I'm concerned the primary use is not to carry the gem and bring something to you when you are in the field. It's to leave the gem in a safe place so you can get something back or find out who has it.

[JellyPooga]

But that's not what you said. You said "And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it."

There are lots of reasons you might not have something on you but you need it. What if someone killed you and took your powerful magic item? Once you've been brought back to life, even if they have it on them, it'd be nice to know who has your artifact or whatever and where to go get it back once you've raised a posse.

I can tell you right now that many of my players would have given up 1000gp to have the ability to do that in upper Tier 2 play. As far as I'm concerned the primary use is not to carry the gem and bring something to you when you are in the field. It's to leave the gem in a safe place so you can get something back or find out who has it.

But that's not what you said. :smallwink:

The holes in your scenario include:
1) You don't usually need your material goods when you're dead.

2) If you've been dead and recently got better from it, you probably already know who has your best stuff or at least who knows where it is (hint: it'll be whoever it was that made you dead).

2a) If you were recently dead, it's likely that you're only not dead now because your powerful friends managed not to be dead and managed to keep at least a piece of you in the process. Might want to ask them where your best stuff is first and if the answer isn't "oh, here it is; we brought that back for you", why not.

3) If someone made you dead when you had all your best stuff, they'll probably be able to make you dead again when you don't. This spell does not change this state of affairs.

4) Post-humous item retrieval is definitely a niche and limited use (see point 1).

5) One reason is not "lots".

If it's useful in "upper tier 2", then it would also be useful in Tier 1. Given the extreme niche use, why restrict it to Tier 3 play? Ressurection magic is rare enough at lower levels that the use you describe isn't likely to come into play very often. Given that it's a ritual, the spell slot cost is negligible, so the only reason to make it level 6 is to gate it's use to Tier 3. Why?

I don't deny that it has some use; it clearly does (I even said myself that I'd "be all over it" if it was a cantrip). What I can't wrap my head around is why it's such a high level spell with such a high material cost. It'd be like if Knock was a level 6 ritual that had a consumed material component of a diamond lockpick worth 1000gp; yeah, ok, the spell has its uses, beyond that of mundane means, but the effect clearly doesn't match the cost and level. You might get some people using it, but most people are just going to pack some regular thieves tools instead.

Tl;dr - The spell is trash because of its level and cost, not its utility.

[HPisBS]

There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.


Edit:

Given the extreme niche use, why restrict it [Instant Summons] to Tier 3 play? Ressurection magic is rare enough at lower levels that the use you describe isn't likely to come into play very often. Given that it's a ritual, the spell slot cost is negligible, so the only reason to make it level 6 is to gate it's use to Tier 3. Why?

I'd look at its synergy with Clone more than "normal" resurrection.

I'd also look at using it to steal a mcguffin away from the bbeg before he can raise hell with it (whether you're trying to steal it from him or steal it back from him after he stole it from you.) Or maybe to yoink it off of a booby-trapped pedestal from a safe distance.

But mostly for retrieving your main gear after you wake up in your Demiplane of Clones. Otherwise, the spell may be Dispelled before you can trigger it.


It's niche, but as with most other niche spells, when you need it, nothing else will really do quite so well.


That said, I'd definitely prefer a much, much lower cost so that it could be used in more situations. The problem with that, though, is all the implications a cheap Yoink spell could have for the game world. Not only could it virtually invalidate Secret Chest, it could let wizards supplant rogues as the ultimate thieves. So, I guess expensive casting is relatively understandable. 500 gp should do it.

[JellyPooga]

There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.


Edit:


I'd look at its synergy with Clone more than "normal" resurrection.

I'd also look at using it to steal a mcguffin away from the bbeg before he can raise hell with it (whether you're trying to steal it from him or steal it back from him after he stole it from you.) Or maybe to yoink it off of a booby-trapped pedestal from a safe distance.

But mostly for retrieving your main gear after you wake up in your Demiplane of Clones. Otherwise, the spell may be Dispelled before you can trigger it.


It's niche, but as with most other niche spells, when you need it, nothing else will really do quite so well.


That said, I'd definitely prefer a much, much lower cost so that it could be used in more situations. The problem with that, though, is all the implications a cheap Yoink spell could have for the game world. Not only could it virtually invalidate Secret Chest, it could let wizards supplant rogues as the ultimate thieves. So, I guess expensive casting is relatively understandable. 500 gp should do it.

As a "yoink" or thieving spell, it's pretty useless; you have to be able to touch the object during the spells 1 minute casting time. So unless all you want is to put distance between you and the location before stealing it, whilst having the time to cast the spell without anyone interrupting you, it's a major factor in why it's such a limited spell. If you have the opportunity to cast the spell, you also have the opportunity to just take it (and have a 1 minute head-start).

[MaxWilson]

So, OK, yeah, you can think of some use cases for Instant Summons. How many of those use cases are not satisfied by the spell that's two levels lower, doesn't use up its components, and can fetch more stuff?

All of them. Leomund's Secret Chest is useless for anything important because it can destroy your items. "After 60 days, there is a cumulative 5 percent chance per day that the spell’s effect ends. This effect ends if you cast this spell again, if the smaller replica chest is destroyed, or if you choose to end the spell as an action. If the spell ends and the larger chest is on the Ethereal Plane, it is irretrievably lost."

There's no overlap between items you'd want to Drawmij and items you'd want to Secret Chest. Secret Chest is for cheap, disposable stuff that you don't mind losing.

[iTreeby]

One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.

[Mr Adventurer]

There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.


IMO they are mostly for finding mid- or low-level enemies or targets that have just escaped you. Works especially well if you are already on their home territory and so are unlikely to have gone miles away, since even if they arrive out of range of the spell, you can zip about a bit to triangulate back in on them.

[MaxWilson]

One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.

Heh. That is demented but awesome.

Still doesn't help against Dispel Magic but still awesome.


IMO they are mostly for finding mid- or low-level enemies or targets that have just escaped you. Works especially well if you are already on their home territory and so are unlikely to have gone miles away, since even if they arrive out of range of the spell, you can zip about a bit to triangulate back in on them.

I would totally leverage Locate Creature (Mind Flayer) and Locate Creature (Intellect Devourer) during an assault on a mind flayer bastion to avoid running into one unexpectedly. Knowledge is power.

[Nifft]

One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.

Some settings have big crystal swords.

If weapon destruction is ever an issue, then having a Sacred Squirrel Soul Sword might be a big deal.

[Mr Adventurer]

Presumably you could then make said sword into a magical weapon? That has interesting potential.

[Skylivedk]

Presumably you could then make said sword into a magical weapon? That has interesting potential.

Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"

[Nifft]

Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"

This is now the canonical origin for several artifacts.

[Bardon]

Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"

I endorse your statements and wish to subscribe to your newsletter!

[Mr Adventurer]

Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"

As a DM I would say that the process of making intelligent items is more involved than and distinct from the process of entrapping a creature permanently. Though there may be overlap, it's not just casting one spell before starting enchanting.

[Skylivedk]

I endorse your statements and wish to subscribe to your newsletter!
I'm happy to hear that! Unfortunately, my newsletter is more about saving people with tech than with d20s.


As a DM I would say that the process of making intelligent items is more involved than and distinct from the process of entrapping a creature permanently. Though there may be overlap, it's not just casting one spell before starting enchanting.
Boo boos! ;)

[Trustypeaches]

Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.
Ok but did you miss that doesn't take concentration?

That's the main appeal since a lot of classes, such as Bard, often don't have much they can do with their spell slots when they concentration up on something. Blindness is also one of the most debilitating conditions you can inflict on another creature.

[Trustypeaches]

Speak with Dead: Not being able to compel the dead for truthful answers really limits this spell’s usefulness IMO. Soul Cage is much better, but 6th level.
As someone who played a warlock with at-will speak with dead, I strongly disagree.

Step 1: Look around the battlefield
Step 2: Cast disguise self to appear like one of the other dead enemy combatants
Step 3: Cast Speak with Dead and pretend to be their former ally
Step 4: Profit

[Corran]

I didn't see anyone mention immolation, so I am assuming that there was an errata that removed it from 5e until further notice.

Edit: The spell could be more interesting if you could use it to target flammable objects, or if your DM (unwisely) rules that a lit creature can ignite flammable objects if there is contact.

[Deathtongue]

Find Traps really is that useless.

1) It's line of sight. You know what places tend to have lots of traps in them? Multi-level complexes with lots of corridors and closed doors. Indeed, if a trap is placed behind a door or just around the corner, you have to put yourself in danger just to use the spell. If it was 120 ft. that went through barriers or at least wasn't Instantaneous duration, we might have something.

2) Find Traps doesn't give you any real new information except in situations where you need to NOPE the hell out of it anyway. It can detect traps that have an arbitrarily high DC, but that's it. Forgetting caveat 1 (which would already kill the usefulness of the spell): it doesn't tell you where the traps are, it doesn't tell you how to bypass them, and it doesn't do anything about natural hazards, so you still need to bust out the Perception/Investigation checks. And you know what, if you find yourself in a situation where Find Traps actually makes a difference over an above-average case perception check i.e. a rogue with Reliable Talent, Perception and Investigation expertise, and some Guidance action isn't enough you're already in the soup.

There's some other nonsense with the spell as well, such as costing a 2nd-level slot, but those two aspects make the spell completely useless.

[Deathtongue]

While there are definitely worse spells out there, a useless spell that I've actually seen players willingly cast is Ice Storm. I think the only reason why you'd prepare this spell is if you regularly fight bunched-up monsters in feature-free plains where combat stats 200+ ft. away. A situation I didn't even see in Storm King's Thunder, because 300 ft is literally too much to depict on most battlemats that use standard-sized squares.


I didn't see anyone mention immolation, so I am assuming that there was an errata that removed it from 5e until further notice.Can you believe that this spell used to be WORSE before the Xanathar's update?

[Corran]

Can you believe that this spell used to be WORSE before the Xanathar's update?
It used to target CON, right? Heh, what a simple and elegant fix...

Edit: To be fair, it could be a lot more useful at the hands of the characters' enemies, particularly during a difficult encounter. At the very least it stops yo-yo healing which will increase the (probably already high) chance of a TPK (or at least of more pc's dying). And then there's the turning to ash bit. Definitely more useful as a monster ability than a spell for a pc.

[diplomancer]

While there are definitely worse spells out there, a useless spell that I've actually seen players willingly cast is Ice Storm. I think the only reason why you'd prepare this spell is if you regularly fight bunched-up monsters in feature-free plains where combat stats 200+ ft. away. A situation I didn't even see in Storm King's Thunder, because 300 ft is literally too much to depict on most battlemats that use standard-sized squares.

Can you believe that this spell used to be WORSE before the Xanathar's update?

I've had at least one good use for it, when my 13th level party (Ancients Paladin, Life Cleric, Bladesinger) had to deal with a tavern full of not-yet polymorphed wereboars. After 1 minute of rising tensions talk between the Paladin and the wereboars, an almost simultaneous Delayed Blast Fireball, Ice Storm, and Flamestrike killed all of the wereboars before they could react. My Paladin suffered a few light scratches from all the spells.

As to the Instant Summons spells, yes, it's very situational, but that's alright for a Wizard Ritual. On that same campaign, my Paladin had a powerful magic weapon that was magically connected (and therefore unescapably tracked) by one of the BBEG. We used the spell on it, and went after the BBEG leaving the weapon behind, he was very surprised when we popped up for a "chat", as he knew the weapon was so good I very likely wouldn't leave it behind.

[Chronos]

Leomund's Secret Chest really doesn't have a risk of losing your items. You only start rolling for random disappearance after 60 days, and you can reset that timer by recasting the spell. If you're going two months straight without any chance to cast a non-combat spell, then you're already screwed. The only other way the spell would be lost is if someone destroys or dispels the miniature, but again, if that's happening, you're already screwed.

diplomancer, sure, Ice Storm can be used. It does damage in an area of effect; that's useful. But there are a lot of spells that do that. Was it really any better, in that situation, than a second Fireball or Flame Strike? Was there anything about it that specifically made Ice Storm the spell you wanted?

[KorvinStarmast]

Item saving throws and equipment loss were things that happened if you made enough mistakes or had bad enough luck. So carrying literally all your magic items and spell books in a bag of holding wasn't a good idea. That's a fair assessment. The question is, in re 5e, at which tables does a Wizard need to make sure he has a back up spell book stashed somewhere? That's a table where D.I.S. is a good selection. :smallcool:

[diplomancer]

Leomund's Secret Chest really doesn't have a risk of losing your items. You only start rolling for random disappearance after 60 days, and you can reset that timer by recasting the spell. If you're going two months straight without any chance to cast a non-combat spell, then you're already screwed. The only other way the spell would be lost is if someone destroys or dispels the miniature, but again, if that's happening, you're already screwed.

diplomancer, sure, Ice Storm can be used. It does damage in an area of effect; that's useful. But there are a lot of spells that do that. Was it really any better, in that situation, than a second Fireball or Flame Strike? Was there anything about it that specifically made Ice Storm the spell you wanted?

Well, it was the one the Paladin could cast :smallwink: but ,yes, other AoE would work just as well. I don't recall exactly whether the Wizard jumped in with another AoE, but I think it wasn't needed.

[ImproperJustice]

While there are definitely worse spells out there, a useless spell that I've actually seen players willingly cast is Ice Storm. I think the only reason why you'd prepare this spell is if you regularly fight bunched-up monsters in feature-free plains where combat stats 200+ ft. away. A situation I didn't even see in Storm King's Thunder, because 300 ft is literally too much to depict on most battlemats that use standard-sized squares.

Can you believe that this spell used to be WORSE before the Xanathar's update?

I have found a few instances where immolation has worker to my advantage.

1. As a sorceror, using subtle spell to make a foe burst into flames with no warning or indication of my presence. Same can be said for fireball but this is single target only.

2. It’s verbal and single target only. So it has been a go too in a grapple situation. I will be unharmed, and can cast freely as they burn.

3. Against heavy plate strength fighters with garbage dex saves it is largely a death sentence.
The rider ensures they won’t get back up.

4. Works good in hostage situations. Bonus points if you say Dracaris when igniting someone.

5. If an opponent is grappled, bound, or tangled. They are well done. They won’t make their save and their restraints won’t be harmed.

[MrCharlie]

In order for a spell to be useless, it needs to do one of two things.

A. Do something so weak for its spell level that anything else is better.

B. Do something so situational that more than 90% of the time you wasted a slot.

As a bonus, if it manages to actively hurt the caster, that's even better. This isn't to say that summon greater demon is bad-because holy **** is it dangerous-because it's so strong that it compensates. It needs to be both useless and harmful to be truly awful. Other spells like life-transference get a pass for doing something unique for their class, even if they do it badly.

There are a lot of spells which do A. The elemental evil spells are about 50-50 awful and great, with earth tremor and other duds mixed with absorb elements and other amazing spells, so that's a good place to start to find underpowered spells. Immolation is an example already mentioned, and is just not good for its level. The king of this is Witch Bolt, which does cantrip damage every turn and fails if the enemy walks away slowly, followed shortly by true strike, which doesen't have enough attack roll spells at higher levels to be worth wasting a turn on.

In general, spells which simply don't have the damage or effect to stand up to scrutiny fall here, but it's hard to be sure-Blindness was mentioned earlier, but blindness is actually a fine spell because it isn't concentration. And at worst, the always do something, even if it's weak, and hence you've contributed however pathetically to the parties goals-which is why immolation and witch bolt don't "win" these competitions.

The spells which do B are more difficult to parse, but there are some standouts. Find Traps is the immediate winner. 95% of the time, you've done nothing. 4% of the time, you've learned that there are traps and nothing more, meaning that you have the less information than a perception or investigation check would give you. 1% of the time it actually tells you something useful in any way.

However, in my opinion there are two spells which stand out from their peers for being both uselessly weak and utterly situational while also harming their casters.

First, we have enthrall, which does one thing badly. It makes it so that you captivate an enemies attention, slightly-perception checks are at disadvantage to see other people. Given that the enemy gets a wisdom save as well, this is really, really bad-and you've accomplished something that is typically bad, namely you've focused attention on a caster.

The second is the king of useless spells-Find the Path. Yes, you can come up with situations where its useful, but the specific circumstances needed to even cast the spell constrain that. You need to both know where you are going, it needs to be stationary, you need an object from that destination, and you need to be familiar with the destination. Hence, you either need to be lost, or going somewhere you've seen but don't know the location of, something only likely with other divination magic, and you need something from that location for the spell to work even then! Given that you are almost at a level where you can just teleport to places you have scried on or back home if you are lost, the spell is almost always a poor choice.

But here is the kicker for Find the Path-the path does not need to be in any way safe or actually traversable. RAW, find the path should happily tell you that the fastest way across a broken bridge is to jump into the ravine and climb your way back out, rather than go around it; it's physically the shortest distance. Add that it can actively lead you into danger, and it may be the worst spell ever printed. Now people can quibble over if the path is implied to be traversable and hence it wouldn't actually tell you to climb over a solid edifice, but the point about leading you into danger is explicit in the text.

Oh, and it also costs 100 gold to cast (paid once), which given that your never going to cast it twice means that you've wasted a bunch of gold, depending on how much you get when you sell the components back.

[Sigreid]

I don't think any spell is completely useless. There are lots of spells, however (like jump) that are niche enough the odds of you having spent a prepartation slot on them when they would do you some good is slim to none.

I don't know about the rest of you, but most days my casters prepare spells that are most generally useful for a wide variety of applications and have lots of spells that only get prepared if I know with a high degree of likelihood that the situation to use them will come up.

[Corran]

First, we have enthrall, which does one thing badly. It makes it so that you captivate an enemies attention, slightly-perception checks are at disadvantage to see other people. Given that the enemy gets a wisdom save as well, this is really, really bad-and you've accomplished something that is typically bad, namely you've focused attention on a caster.
I don't get the hate for enthrall. It's the spell you are using to distract someone in order for one of your allies to steal something from them. Classic application is when the bard is performing and the rogue picks the pockets of the crowd watching the bard's performance. Sure, you don't really need a spell to do that, but the spell is there to potentially give disadvantage to the victims' perception. Much like enhance ability would be used to give advantage to the rogue's checks. Yes, it's a far more situational and far less versatile spell than enhance ability (not to mention that it relies on the enemies' failing saves while EA does not), but it clearly has its purpose. Sometimes you want be able to roll checks to distract targets, other times you might want every edge you can give yourself to prevent failure. Or you might want to delay someone for … okay, the duration is not great.

It's not a great spell, not at all. But I appreciate spells that facilitate approaches other than the usual smash and loot.

[Deathtongue]

I don't get the hate for enthrall. It's the spell you are using to distract someone in order for one of your allies to steal something from them. Classic application is when the bard is performing and the rogue picks the pockets of the crowd watching the bard's performance. Sure, you don't really need a spell to do that, but the spell is there to potentially give disadvantage to the victims' perception.The thing is, Enthrall has a roleplaying penalty that's not included in the spell. The obvious reason why you'd use this spell is to distract your targets so you can get away with swiping documents/picking pockets/sneaking through the gate, but the mere fact that you're casting a spell is going to arouse suspicion and risk blowing your cover. Anyone who has ever watched someone get put under arrest because they cast Guidance when randomly stopped by a suspicious patrol knows what I'm talking about.

[Tanarii]

Leomund's Secret Chest really doesn't have a risk of losing your items. You only start rolling for random disappearance after 60 days, and you can reset that timer by recasting the spell. If you're going two months straight without any chance to cast a non-combat spell, then you're already screwed. The only other way the spell would be lost is if someone destroys or dispels the miniature, but again, if that's happening, you're already screwed.
Use Drawguys Instant Summons on the Loedude's Chest miniature, and leave it at home?

What happens if you cast dispel on the sapphire?

[MaxWilson]

Leomund's Secret Chest really doesn't have a risk of losing your items. You only start rolling for random disappearance after 60 days, and you can reset that timer by recasting the spell. If you're going two months straight without any chance to cast a non-combat spell, then you're already screwed. The only other way the spell would be lost is if someone destroys or dispels the miniature, but again, if that's happening, you're already screwed.

This part is why it's worse than Drawmij's Instant Summons for your valuables. If something destroys your Drawmij sapphire, nothing bad happens to your valuables. They're not permanently destroyed or anything, they're just no longer summonable unless you have another sapphire linked to the same item.

[HPisBS]

This part is why it's worse than Drawmij's Instant Summons for your valuables. If something destroys your Drawmij sapphire, nothing bad happens to your valuables. They're not permanently destroyed or anything, they're just no longer summonable unless you have another sapphire linked to the same item.

So maybe we should house rule that it reappears in / next to the miniature's space if the mini gets destroyed.

- Or maybe that upcasting adds this effect.

[Deathtongue]

This part is why it's worse than Drawmij's Instant Summons for your valuables.The plural use of that word is interesting. Assuming you can use Instant Summons on a bag or a backpack (which I think would be reasonable) you need to prepare an extra sapphire for each 10 pounds of gear. Backup spellbooks are 3 lb., a wand is another pound, a full waterskin 5 pounds -- it can really start to add up depending on how seriously you're taking the idea of having emergency backup gear.

But Secret Chest has much greater availability than Instant Summons anyway, so it's hard to call Drawmij's Instant Summons better even if you only want to use it for one or two things. If I want to be able to, say, access my backup spellbook as a mid-level wizard when I'm stuck in the middle of nowhere, having to wait four extra levels is a dealbreaker.

[Corran]

@Deathtongue:

The thing is, Enthrall has a roleplaying penalty that's not included in the spell. The obvious reason why you'd use this spell is to distract your targets so you can get away with swiping documents/picking pockets/sneaking through the gate, but the mere fact that you're casting a spell is going to arouse suspicion and risk blowing your cover. Anyone who has ever watched someone get put under arrest because they cast Guidance when randomly stopped by a suspicious patrol knows what I'm talking about.
Sure, but that's not the default assumption. It's certainly not my assumption when I am running or joining a game. I agree that casting components should be accounted for, so the act of casting a spell has consequences when it's reasonable to assume that it would. But what you are describing goes too far with it IMO. Unless the setting specifically calls for the opposite (as it would for example if I am playing in a world where magic is forbidden because reasons, and perhaps casters visit cities so they can fireball a crowd before turning invisible and escaping), I like to assume that magic is not seen as a loaded weapon under any circumstances. When a bard is performing on the street, they are more than a real world street performer. They may use illusions and all kind of magic stuff to enhance their performance and earns a crowd's attention and thus more coin. And I wouldn't say it would be natural to expect any passing by casters to counterspell you just in case you are casting meteor swarm, because what they see is natural within the game world. Perhaps they counterspell you if they want to sabotage your performance because they are jerks, or because they are rival street performers, or for some other reason that actually makes sense within the game world.

Besides, the spell description of this particular spell allows enough room for a DM to make a ruling that the components are unidentifiable. And since this is hardly a combat spell, or even a powerful out of combat spell, I am leaning to rule it that way. That would not be my default approach (and I would think twice before doing that for spells that are also on the sorcerer's list), but I think it is very appropriate in the case of enthrall.

[MrCharlie]

I don't get the hate for enthrall. It's the spell you are using to distract someone in order for one of your allies to steal something from them. Classic application is when the bard is performing and the rogue picks the pockets of the crowd watching the bard's performance. Sure, you don't really need a spell to do that, but the spell is there to potentially give disadvantage to the victims' perception. Much like enhance ability would be used to give advantage to the rogue's checks. Yes, it's a far more situational and far less versatile spell than enhance ability (not to mention that it relies on the enemies' failing saves while EA does not), but it clearly has its purpose. Sometimes you want be able to roll checks to distract targets, other times you might want every edge you can give yourself to prevent failure. Or you might want to delay someone for … okay, the duration is not great.

It's not a great spell, not at all. But I appreciate spells that facilitate approaches other than the usual smash and loot.
If they fail a save, then fail their perception check, sure, that could work.

Of course, if they failed a wisdom save, then they were likely going to fail the perception check anyway. And you've now visibly and obviously cast a spell on them, so good luck explaining that one.

Enthrall exists to get the bard arrested/dead at the best of times. Usually it just starts a big fight. It's bad enough that it could be a cantrip, and it would still be bad.

Oh, and if you want to sneak in and grab stuff? Cast charm person. The person you've charmed is likely going to be willing to just leave with you after that-and you can distract them regardless-it's the same save, and you have the duration to actually make use of it. Because both are obviously spells, people know you've done something to then when they end regardless, they just know what with charm person.

Basically, enthrall simply doesn't do anything better spells don't, or which simply using skills doesn't accomplish, unless it's hurting you.

(There is an exception-a Bard might cast it as part of a public event, because it can affect a lot of people. But if it's niche is that "Bard has to be allowed to be there and cast spells, and the rest of the party has to sneak" Then it's still 99.99% useless and might see play in one game in a thousand.)

Edit: And no, casting is visible and should be accounted as such by characters. If you cast a verbal spell you spoke a weird language at best, if you cast a somatic spell it's more believable but still weird. If I saw someone in our completely mundane and non-magical world wave their hands around and start talking in a weird language while staring at me, I'd assume they were mentally ill-people in any world with magic should react appropriately.

If you want to make that argument then suggestion is still a vastly superior spell for the same reason-you just suggest something as a verbal component, and the target has to do it. It's not obvious you cast anything, and there is significantly more justification to say that casting is non-obvious. The only downside is that its single target-but enthrall allows a wisdom save on all targets anyway, and you're unlikely to affect more than 60-70% of them, so unless it is, again, a giant crowd, the AOE is incidental.

[MaxWilson]

The plural use of that word is interesting. Assuming you can use Instant Summons on a bag or a backpack (which I think would be reasonable) you need to prepare an extra sapphire for each 10 pounds of gear. Backup spellbooks are 3 lb., a wand is another pound, a full waterskin 5 pounds -- it can really start to add up depending on how seriously you're taking the idea of having emergency backup gear.

But Secret Chest has much greater availability than Instant Summons anyway, so it's hard to call Drawmij's Instant Summons better even if you only want to use it for one or two things. If I want to be able to, say, access my backup spellbook as a mid-level wizard when I'm stuck in the middle of nowhere, having to wait four extra levels is a dealbreaker.

Bear in mind that nobody here is arguing that Drawmij's Instant Summons is *good*, just that for a high-level wizard with money to burn, it's better than useless.

I'd never put my primary backup spellbook in a Leomund's Secret Chest but I might put a tertiary backup in there if I happened to know the spell.

[Deathtongue]

I don't think this is off-topic, because we're talking about useless spells. And how Enthrall is perceived in-game is a big contributor to its uselessness.


I like to assume that magic is not seen as a loaded weapon under any circumstances. When a bard is performing on the street, they are more than a real world street performer. They may use illusions and all kind of magic stuff to enhance their performance and earns a crowd's attention and thus more coin. And I wouldn't say it would be natural to expect any passing by casters to counterspell you just in case you are casting meteor swarm, because what they see is natural within the game world.

Sure, if you're at a festival and you have your own booth, the guards probably might not arrest you just for casting a spell on some passerbys.

But people who justify enthrall never want to bring it up for situations like that or a librarian trying to catch the interest of some bored children. They always want to do something shady with it like sneak past guards or distract merchants long enough for shoplifting -- you know, situations where treating all not-agreed-upon magic like a loaded weapon is justified, because it's part of their job description/livelihood to be alert to possible illegal activity.

And I gotta say, it's really weird for enthrall apologists to go 'it's great in these situations when you're trying to distract important people like merchants and gatekeepers from seeing something you don't want them to see' to 'expecting important people like merchants and gatekepeers to react with hostility to unknown spellcasting is being too paranoid'.

[Deathtongue]

I'd never put my primary backup spellbook in a Leomund's Secret Chest but I might put a tertiary backup in there if I happened to know the spell.Why not? By the time I start getting 4th level spells, it's a reasonable expectation for players to be at a point in their career where they're globetrotting. Calling a time-out and heading back to your secret base or even at the country's local bank to get, say, a backup spellbook can be an adventure-derailing complication. It's a pretty rare complication -- I've only encountered that situation once in 5E D&D -- but it's a complication that DIS doesn't provide more convenience in handling. After all, the failure condition requires massive amounts of Gygaxian DM machinations and/or player carelessness. And being available four character levels earlier way outweighs this minor drawback.

[sithlordnergal]

Heh, I'm sure a lot of my spell choices are going to be controversial, but here ya go:


Charm Person: I've never really had any use for this spell, ever. The only good things about it are that its not concentration and lasts an hour, but outside of that I've never had a use for it. It only works on Humanoids, which limits the spell a ton. It has Verbal and Somatic components, so you generally can't cast it in a social situation without people noticing. It causes the creature to regard you as friendly, which is ok, and causes the creature to be charmed, which is not ok. The Charmed condition has been nerfed beyond belief in 5e, to the point that it doesn't really do anything. Sure it grants advantage on a Charisma check...but so can good roleplaying and another creature aiding you. As for the not attacking you, creatures can still Grapple, Shove, ect., because those are not attacks or abilities that cause direct harm to you.


Friends: Its like Charm Person but worse. Never waste a cantrip on this spell.


True Strike: I've looked at this spell, I've tried to find some way to make it useful...I can't think of anything. The only time I can think of that it would ever be useful is in the hands of a poorly optimized Eldritch Knight or Valor Bard because you can cast and attack at the same time and could theoretically get advantage every round after the first one, but even then...you have so many better spells to choose from.


Enthrall: This is another "social" spell that just has no real use. I can't really think of any time when the party needed to make a distraction and thought "Hey, lets cast Enthrall". Usually we just lured people away with other spells and abilities. Not only that, but the disadvantage on perception checks can be pretty negligible depending on how well the DM rolls.


Detect Evil and Good: I'm sure there are times when this spell is really handy...but as someone who generally plays a Paladin, and has never been in a party without a Paladin, then there's really no point to it. The Paladin's Divine Sense works just as well and has a larger range. Even then, there aren't many times when I needed to do a Divine Sense...


Augury: I want to like this spell, but this spell has a lot of problems. First, its actually quite limited in how you can use it. You can only ask a question about a specific action you're planning to take in the next 30 minutes. Second, the answers tend to be really obvious or really vague. The times you get Weal or Woe, its usually pretty clear to know why and your party will usually tell you as such long before you cast Augury. For the questions that matter, you'll generally get nothing or Weal and Woe, which indicates good and bad, because it all depends on how well you roll on the check for it. The only times I have used this spell are to have some fun, I never actually expect the results to be useful.


Continual Flame: This spell is basically like a 2nd level Light spell, only it can effect torches and lamps. It is fun if you wanna make your Wizard tower look cool, but outside of that...I can't see why you'd prepare this spell for an adventuring day.


Dream: This is what I like to call a "DM only spell". It has a really cool effect, but I can't really see a party making use of this all that often. Its great to harass people since you can deny them a full night of rest, but at the same time that's just such a niche thing that its really only useful to DMs. You can also use it as a sort of Greater Sending, since its not limited by how many words you can send...but then again, Sending is a 3rd level spell, this is a 5th. Do you really wanna use a 5th level spell on a Sending spell?


Slow: Please note, I only consider this spell useless to players, but this is the best DM debuff spell in the game. So, why do I feel that Slow is a terrible choice for PCs? Simple, because at you have access to so many better 3rd level debuff spells than Slow. I will admit, Slow is a very nice debuff, and it does a lot. However, I feel Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, and Stinking Cloud are better debuffs for players to use then Slow does. Fear and Hypnotic Pattern only have one save, and if the targets fail then they can't do anything at all. Stinking Cloud allows multiple saves, but they happen every round and can prevent a creature from taking actions. That said, this spell is perfect for DMs, since it debuffs everything a player can do. In fact, it is the perfect debuff for DMs to use against their players, since it hamstrings the PCs without making them do nothing.


The Smite Spells: Yup, all of the Smite spells with the exception of Wrathful Smite and Banishing Smite. This is sort of one of those situations where they're ok melee spells...but why would you want to spend your Concentration on a spell that generally deals pitiful damage and has a lackluster secondary effect when you could use that spell slot to deal 2d8-5d8 damage. The only two decent Smite spells are Wrathful Smite, because if they fail the save they have to make a Wisdom check as an action to end the effect for being Frightened, and Banishing Smite, because it deals an extra 5d10 Force damage and can temporarily Banish a creature without a save if you knock their HP down low enough.


Hex: I hate this spell...I hate this spell because of potential it has to be good. In fact, it could be a great spell if there was one tiny change made to it...Remove Concentration from Hex and its perfect. The fact that this spell is concentration really limits this spell. You have to choose between doing an extra 1d6 damage on every hit for the next 1 to 24 hours...and every other concentration spell in the game.

[MaxWilson]

Why not? By the time I start getting 4th level spells, it's a reasonable expectation for players to be at a point in their career where they're globetrotting. Calling a time-out and heading back to your secret base or even at the country's local bank to get, say, a backup spellbook can be an adventure-derailing complication. It's a pretty rare complication -- I've only encountered that situation once in 5E D&D -- but it's a complication that DIS doesn't provide more convenience in handling. After all, the failure condition requires massive amounts of Gygaxian DM machinations and/or player carelessness. And being available four character levels earlier way outweighs this minor drawback.

Because I don't want to risk losing my primary backup, that's why. If I get Fireballed or captured and lose both my primary and primary backup, I'm sunk.

[Deathtongue]

Because I don't want to risk losing my primary backup, that's why. If I get Fireballed or captured and lose both my primary and primary backup, I'm sunk.DIS doesn't really help you out in that situation, though. Sure, if you're in a Wolf of Wall Street situation where you're imprisoned and don't get your stuff back (i.e. chest replica or sapphires) for several years DIS has your back, but how often does that happen? But in more typical situations where you can't immediately access your primary OR your backup spellbook -- you die and wake up in your Clone chamber, you get captured by slavers who strip you of valuables -- neither spell does better than the other.

[Lille]

Friends: Its like Charm Person but worse. Never waste a cantrip on this spell.

Friends can be pretty useful, it's just niche. Among other things, it can give an at-will advantage on Intimidate, since it benefits all CHA checks.


Detect Evil and Good: I'm sure there are times when this spell is really handy...but as someone who generally plays a Paladin, and has never been in a party without a Paladin, then there's really no point to it. The Paladin's Divine Sense works just as well and has a larger range. Even then, there aren't many times when I needed to do a Divine Sense...

Which I'm sure is great, for people who are lucky enough to have a useful Paladin in the party. For the rest of us, Detect Evil and Good works well enough. Besides, Detect Evil and Good can be used to find fey, aberrations, and elementals, which Divine Sense doesn't help with.


Continual Flame: This spell is basically like a 2nd level Light spell, only it can effect torches and lamps. It is fun if you wanna make your Wizard tower look cool, but outside of that...I can't see why you'd prepare this spell for an adventuring day.

Not good for an adventuring day, but getting a 3rd-level Continual Flame cast gives you a permanent torch or lantern that can even light up a Darkness spell.

[Corran]

If they fail a save, then fail their perception check, sure, that could work.

Of course, if they failed a wisdom save, then they were likely going to fail the perception check anyway.
It gives a small numerical boost nonetheless. How important that boost is depends on how badly you want the targets to fail that perception check.


And you've now visibly and obviously cast a spell on them...
I believe that there is some room for interpretation here because of the spell description (see my answer to Deathtongue above). But this is a point I would rather not argue about since I understand it probably is very controversial.


… , so good luck explaining that one.
Enthrall exists to get the bard arrested/dead at the best of times. Usually it just starts a big fight. It's bad enough that it could be a cantrip, and it would still be bad.
I don't agree with that. I can see how it could hold true in certain settings, or in certain parts of one setting, but this is definitely not my default assumption or one that even makes sense IMO (see my previous post). I can understand if that's the way you like to run or play the game though.


Oh, and if you want to sneak in and grab stuff? Cast charm person. The person you've charmed is likely going to be willing to just leave with you after that-and you can distract them regardless-it's the same save, and you have the duration to actually make use of it. Because both are obviously spells, people know you've done something to them when they end regardless, they just know what with charm person.
I don't agree with that. Unless I am misinterpreting what you are saying. Do you mean that when enthrall ends, the people affected by it learn that they were affected by a spell but they don't know what the spell was? While in the case of charm person, they learn that they were affected by a spell, and furthermore they know that the spell was charm person? That's how what you wrote reads to me, and it's obviously not true, since nothing in enthrall says that the target learns they were affected by a spell when the spell ends.


Basically, enthrall simply doesn't do anything better spells don't, or which simply using skills doesn't accomplish, unless it's hurting you.
It gives a clear benefit, but its true value lies in the way you can use it (usually as part of some kind of performance). I would agree that in a game world where casting spells in public provokes the kind of reactions that range from being counterspelled to being arrested, it would be a useless spell to have.
It would be far less useful -but still useful- if we had concrete rules regarding ability checks. For example, rolling a performance of 20 or higher could -among other things- impose disadvantage on the perception checks of people watching that performance


(There is an exception-a Bard might cast it as part of a public event, because it can affect a lot of people. But if it's niche is that "Bard has to be allowed to be there and cast spells, and the rest of the party has to sneak" Then it's still 99.99% useless and might see play in one game in a thousand.)
Niche? Sure. But everything else is unnecessarily restricting. The bard could be casting this spell while performing in the street (and the rogue pretends to be a member of the audience), or in the tavern where the evil cultists will be meeting Thursday night and that's why the bard took a job there some days ago (and the rogue is working as a waiter). Or during a party that a noble is throwing at his mansion, and a small performance on the bard's part would help the rogue in trying to sneak out of the ball room unnoticed. It's one of those spells that help when you are trying to do things while avoiding combat. It's not a great spell, but it has its place in the game (outside combat obviously), and it happens to be very thematic for a bard.

[Deathtongue]

Continual Flame: This spell is basically like a 2nd level Light spell, only it can effect torches and lamps. It is fun if you wanna make your Wizard tower look cool, but outside of that...I can't see why you'd prepare this spell for an adventuring day.You wouldn't prepare this spell for an adventuring day. It's used in downtime. If you have the time and money, you can prepare a lot of Continual Flame objects without having to deal with the issues of heat or handedness -- while still having your cantrip slot open.


Slow: Please note, I only consider this spell useless to players, but this is the best DM debuff spell in the game. So, why do I feel that Slow is a terrible choice for PCs? Simple, because at you have access to so many better 3rd level debuff spells than Slow.Slow has two benefits that, while still making it inferior to Hypnotic Pattern/Fear, doesn't make it totally worthless. The first is that there's no monster in the game that can natively resist slow. A monster can have fear immunity, it can have charm immunity, and it can have poison immunity. It can't have slow immunity.

The second one is that Slow is party-safe. If you're fighting in a group with a lot of melee bruisers in cramped spaces like dungeon crawls, Slow is much easier to use than those other three spells.

Is it largely inferior to the three spells you mentioned? Yes. But it's not a 'I can't think of a reason why you would use this at all given alternatives' spell the way I feel about Ice Storm.


The Smite Spells: Yup, all of the Smite spells with the exception of Wrathful Smite and Banishing Smite.I used Thunderous Smite on my Flying Boots-wearing Sorceradin quite a bit. Proning and pushing a flying melee creature without sacrificing attacks is no joke. Granted, I also used the Shove action quite a bit as well, especially when I had Haste up, but it was still a nice option to have for the low, low cost of a 1st-level spell slot.


Hex: I hate this spell...I hate this spell because of potential it has to be good. In fact, it could be a great spell if there was one tiny change made to it...Remove Concentration from Hex and its perfect. The fact that this spell is concentration really limits this spell. You have to choose between doing an extra 1d6 damage on every hit for the next 1 to 24 hours...and every other concentration spell in the game.If Hex wasn't concentration it'd be freakishly overpowered. My Hexblade Warlock 1 / Evoker Wizard 15 used that spell all of the time in Adventurer's League. Especially once Simulacrums became a thing.

[Nifft]

Hmm.

I feel like Enthrall is useful when the caster can use a disguise to sneak on stage somehow, but the rest of the party can't sneak as effectively.

It's a way to leverage one character's disguise to cover the whole party.

IMXP that can be used reasonably often.

[MaxWilson]

DIS doesn't really help you out in that situation, though. Sure, if you're in a Wolf of Wall Street situation where you're imprisoned and don't get your stuff back (i.e. chest replica or sapphires) for several years DIS has your back, but how often does that happen? But in more typical situations where you can't immediately access your primary OR your backup spellbook -- you die and wake up in your Clone chamber, you get captured by slavers who strip you of valuables -- neither spell does better than the other.

You're conflating two things:

(1) situations where <spell> helps you, and
(2) situation where <spell> hurts you.

In the Clone scenario, you don't need Leomund's Secret Chest at all for a spellbook--you just keep your spellbook wherever you keep your clone, probably a Demiplane. Drawmij's Instant Summons can help retrieve your valuables (Staff of the Magi, Robe of the Archmagi, Ring of Free Action, whatever) that you lost when your last body died. Leomund's Tiny Chest can't retrieve those valuables. Score one for #1, "situations where Drawmij's Instant Summons helps you."

In the "all my stuff got stolen or destroyed but I'm still alive" scenario, which is the opposite of the Clone scenario, neither Drawmij's Instant Summons nor Leomund's Secret Chest will help you, because you don't have the tiny replica chest or sapphires. But in this situation, as long as the original stuff is not in a Secret Chest, you still have the ability to access the original stuff in its actual location, e.g. by Teleporting home after the adventure. You haven't permanently lost anything, you've just been inconvenienced. But if that stuff was in a Secret Chest, I'm sorry dude, it's gone. Score one for #2, "situations where Leomund's Secret Chest hurts you."

Hence why I wouldn't put anything truly important in a Secret Chest. You can if you want to--it's no skin off my nose.

[MrCharlie]

It gives a small numerical boost nonetheless. How important that boost is depends on how badly you want the targets to fail that perception check.


I believe that there is some room for interpretation here because of the spell description (see my answer to Deathtongue above). But this is a point I would rather not argue about since I understand it probably is very controversial.


I don't agree with that. I can see how it could hold true in certain settings, or in certain parts of one setting, but this is definitely not my default assumption or one that even makes sense IMO (see my previous post). I can understand if that's the way you like to run or play the game though.


I don't agree with that. Unless I am misinterpreting what you are saying. Do you mean that when enthrall ends, the people affected by it learn that they were affected by a spell but they don't know what the spell was? While in the case of charm person, they learn that they were affected by a spell, and furthermore they know that the spell was charm person? That's how what you wrote reads to me, and it's obviously not true, since nothing in enthrall says that the target learns they were affected by a spell when the spell ends.


It gives a clear benefit, but its true value lies in the way you can use it (usually as part of some kind of performance). I would agree that in a game world where casting spells in public provokes the kind of reactions that range from being counterspelled to being arrested, it would be a useless spell to have.


Niche? Sure. But everything else is unnecessarily restricting. The bard could be casting this spell while performing in the street (and the rogue pretends to be a member of the audience), or in the tavern where the evil cultists will be meeting Thursday night and that's why the bard took a job there some days ago (and the rogue is working as a waiter). Or during a party that a noble is throwing at his mansion, and a small performance on the bard's part would help the rogue in trying to sneak out of the ball room unnoticed. It's one of those spells that help when you are trying to do things while avoiding combat. It's not a great spell, but it has its place in the game (outside combat obviously), and it happens to be very thematic for a bard.
I really can't break this down except to say that I disagree with every line of this particularly and specifically.

To begin, it's really not debatable that spells are noticeable-they are. That's part of the reason why spells have verbal and somatic components, so it is the default assumption that they are noticeable. Unless you're in a situation where casting one is acceptable, this has to be worked into the usage of the spell. Enthrall specifically draws attention, so that's quite a big issue-and it provides no ability to get out of drawing attention. You can house-rule what you want, but this needs to be clear-it is a house rule. How the campaign world looks as such is a separate topic, but it's a massive knock against enthrall that you did something obviously magical; it doesn't need to be as extreme as "counterspelling guards on every corner".

More than that, there are a ton of much stronger spells. Enthrall simply isn't competitive with charm person, let alone suggestion, let alone other charms. Charm person specifically has a negative of telling people what you did, but once you have their money you can just leave. Enthrall is no better there, because once you've stolen from them they will pretty obviously remember the enthralling bard.

That, again, leaves a crowded area where you are allowed to cast spells, and again, this is rare and uncontrollable. Yes, you can use it to pick-pocket, but if these other circumstances even exist depends on the DM-and trust me, you're overstating how often a single useful occurrence will occur in a campaign. I can think of one situation where enthrall would have been useful in my past six campaigns. It's that bad.

Oh, and if you do use it to pick-pocket? You've drawn attention to yourself, so be prepared for some pointed questions once the theft is noticed if the authorities are vaguely competent. The wonders of enthrall at work.

The real final nail in the coffin is that the two classes that can pick it have limited spells known, so if they want to waste a spell known on a once-in-a-blue moon spell, they will be permanently weaker than if they took a much more versatile and powerful spell like charm person or suggestion, which is almost universally better.

Hmm.

I feel like Enthrall is useful when the caster can use a disguise to sneak on stage somehow, but the rest of the party can't sneak as effectively.

It's a way to leverage one character's disguise to cover the whole party.

IMXP that can be used reasonably often.
Part of what people need to understand is that there is a difference between "I can use this spell!" and "This spell helped me!". You can engineer situations where enthrall is used to do something involving a party sneaking, but because it's a wisdom save and perception is a wisdom skill, most of the times it works you would have been fine to begin with. That is ignoring that most situations where enthrall can be used but not charm person or suggestion involve a lot of people, and the number of times that the best and only option for the party is to sneak past a crowd is going to be singularly rare and generally a losing position to begin with. And this is ignoring that you had to pick a spell for this single situation. Given that other magics can also accomplish what you need, you're basically always better off picking them instead.

[Deathtongue]

You're conflating two things:

(1) situations where <spell> helps you, and
(2) situation where <spell> hurts you.

In the Clone scenario, you don't need Leomund's Secret Chest at all for a spellbook--you just keep your spellbook wherever you keep your clone, probably a Demiplane. Drawmij's Instant Summons can help retrieve your valuables (Staff of the Magi, Robe of the Archmagi, Ring of Free Action, whatever) that you lost when your last body died. Leomund's Tiny Chest can't retrieve those valuables. Score one for #1, "situations where Drawmij's Instant Summons helps you."DIS is rather bad at helping you out in situations where you lose your stuff due to post-death theft, especially to level 11+ threats who know how spells like these work. Its success condition is very easily subvertible; assuming I wasn't wearing these swanky new Robes of the Archmagi myself (wrong alignment?) and didn't want my target getting them back, I could always just put them in a sack and either carry it around or give it to my minion for carrying. I mean, if what killed me was too stupid to formulate a plan like that, such as a horde of uncontrolled iron golems, sure, I could see it. But a halfway intelligent rival appropriate for a level 11+ wizard who doesn't want to destroy your stuff yet can't wear it? Eh.

Don't get me wrong, it's functionality DIS has that LSC doesn't if you have money to burn, but I wouldn't rely on it as my first line of defense of getting back on my feet after I got ganked and my stuff stolen. It's just a nice, but unreliable bonus when something catastrophic like that happens.


In the "all my stuff got stolen or destroyed but I'm still alive" scenario, which is the opposite of the Clone scenario, neither Drawmij's Instant Summons nor Leomund's Secret Chest will help you, because you don't have the tiny replica chest or sapphires. But in this situation, as long as the original stuff is not in a Secret Chest, you still have the ability to access the original stuff in its actual location, e.g. by Teleporting home after the adventure. You haven't permanently lost anything, you've just been inconvenienced. But if that stuff was in a Secret Chest, I'm sorry dude, it's gone. Score one for #2, "situations where Leomund's Secret Chest hurts you.".Unless you were unlucky enough to get ganked before your schedule of refreshing the Secret Chest (which is why you should do it more often than every 59 days) two months should be plenty of time to mount an item retrieval. Unless it was a situation where you were arrested or killed for several months plus and couldn't do anything about it. A reasonable expectation for NPCs, not so much PCs.

And I wouldn't put anything irreplaceable in a Secret Chest either. Maybe like a spare ring of Spell Storing when I already have three other attunement items, but mostly just things that would get me back on my feet after the worst happens. Like losing my spellbook and expensive components in the middle of Chult but not the miniature chest replica I swallow every morning and retrieve every evening. But I wouldn't expect to get anything irreplaceable back just because it's backed up by DIS either.

[MaxWilson]

BTW MrCharlie, I enjoyed your remarks on Find the Path. You argued cogently.


To begin, it's really not debatable that spells are noticeable-they are. That's part of the reason why spells have verbal and somatic components, so it is the default assumption that they are noticeable. Unless you're in a situation where casting one is acceptable, this has to be worked into the usage of the spell. Enthrall specifically draws attention, so that's quite a big issue-and it provides no ability to get out of drawing attention. You can house-rule what you want, but this needs to be clear-it is a house rule. How the campaign world looks as such is a separate topic, but it's a massive knock against enthrall that you did something obviously magical; it doesn't need to be as extreme as "counterspelling guards on every corner".

On this point I do not think you have a strong argument.

If you mean "will be noticed" instead of "potentially capable of being noticed," it isn't beyond debate at all. It's frankly quite unclear. There are plenty of spells like Friends and Charm Person and Mislead and Suggestion which rely for much on their impact on the implication that the spell has at least a chance to go undetected until much later. E.g. Friends says, When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you., but if casting Friends were always noticed by the target this clause would be essentially redundant. Of course it realizes you used magic, it saw you cast the spell!

I suspect it's kind of like the Stealth rules: the 5E designers probably expected DMs to make case-by-case rulings based on the particular spell. Enthrall is probably one they expected to be more unobtrusive.


That, again, leaves a crowded area where you are allowed to cast spells, and again, this is rare and uncontrollable. Yes, you can use it to pick-pocket, but if these other circumstances even exist depends on the DM-and trust me, you're overstating how often a single useful occurrence will occur in a campaign. I can think of one situation where enthrall would have been useful in my past six campaigns. It's that bad.

I remember a scenario where my players were competing with each other for NPC votes to see who would become the sheriff of their new space colony. Enthrall is basically a "everybody listen to ME, not those other guys" spell, and would have been useful in that scenario, and presumably in other noncombat scenarios as well like entertainment, so you can certainly justify it as a roleplaying pick for a bard who's a performer--kind of like a wizard picking up Fabricate because he's a tradesman/maker.

================================================== ==========================


DIS is rather bad at helping you out in situations where you lose your stuff due to post-death theft, especially to level 11+ threats who know how spells like these work. Its success condition is very easily subvertible; assuming I wasn't wearing these swanky new Robes of the Archmagi myself (wrong alignment?) and didn't want my target getting them back, I could always just put them in a sack and either carry it around or give it to my minion for carrying. I mean, if what killed me was too stupid to formulate a plan like that, such as a horde of uncontrolled iron golems, sure, I could see it. But a halfway intelligent rival appropriate for a level 11+ wizard who doesn't want to destroy your stuff yet can't wear it? Eh.

Don't get me wrong, it's functionality DIS has that LSC doesn't if you have money to burn, but I wouldn't rely on it as my first line of defense of getting back on my feet after I got ganked and my stuff stolen. It's just a nice, but unreliable bonus when something catastrophic like that happens.

Unless you were unlucky enough to get ganked before your schedule of refreshing the Secret Chest (which is why you should do it more often than every 59 days) two months should be plenty of time to mount an item retrieval. Unless it was a situation where you were arrested or killed for several months plus and couldn't do anything about it. A reasonable expectation for NPCs, not so much PCs.

And I wouldn't put anything irreplaceable in a Secret Chest either. Maybe like a spare ring of Spell Storing when I already have three other attunement items, but mostly just things that would get me back on my feet after the worst happens. Like losing my spellbook and expensive components in the middle of Chult but not the miniature chest replica I swallow every morning and retrieve every evening. But I wouldn't expect to get anything irreplaceable back just because it's backed up by DIS either.

Okay, sounds like we agree on the key points now: Drawmij's Instant Summoning is not 100% useless, but almost useless and should not be relied on, and its use cases do not overlap with Leomund's Secret Chest.

[Tanarii]

On this point I do not think you have a strong argument.

If you mean "will be noticed" instead of "potentially capable of being noticed," it isn't beyond debate at all. It's frankly quite unclear. There are plenty of spells like Friends and Charm Person and Mislead and Suggestion which rely for much on their impact on the implication that the spell has at least a chance to go undetected until much later. E.g. Friends says, When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you., but if casting Friends were always noticed by the target this clause would be essentially redundant. Of course it realizes you used magic, it saw you cast the spell!

I suspect it's kind of like the Stealth rules: the 5E designers probably expected DMs to make case-by-case rulings based on the particular spell. Enthrall is probably one they expected to be more unobtrusive.
My rule is V components are the same volume as speaking. That means at 30ft away they sound like a whisper. At 60ft you'd have to be yelling to be heard.

I also rule that as long as they can perceive any component, they know you're casting a spell.

Something I'd allow based on putting those together: Enthrall has a 60ft range. It's entirely possible to cast it while peeking around a corner from 50ft away, and then step out around the corner just as the spell is finished, then raise your voice and yell to keep their attention under the spell.

I've never had to allow that. My players don't take Enthrall for wilderness adventuring sites and dungeon delving. It probably didn't phelp that my ruling for seeing spells cast is long standing, but my sound distance carries codified rulings are relative new (a year or so?). But if I make it clear that's allowable it might become more popular as a set up for an ambush spell, or closing distance undetected except for the one guy.

[Zuras]

This thread has lead to my realization that I’ve been making a much more generous interpretation of the “known to you” clause in Find The Path than most of you. Basically, if you know the place exists and you have an object from it, it will point you there. Great for the underdark or trackless wastes. I even let it work for finding things in the Deep Ethereal.

I love it as a DM because it turns random trinkets from some location into a mcguffin parties of treasure hunters/etc. can fight over. Also, you're an orphan who doesn’t remember where you were born but you have the blanket you were found it all those years ago? Boom, plot device!

[sithlordnergal]

If Hex wasn't concentration it'd be freakishly overpowered. My Hexblade Warlock 1 / Evoker Wizard 15 used that spell all of the time in Adventurer's League. Especially once Simulacrums became a thing.

It really wouldn't be that op. Hex allows you to do an extra 1d6 necrotic damage when you hit with an attack, and gives a creature disadvantage on ability checks. That isn't really that strong to be honest. At best, with a maxed out Eldritch Blast that would be 4d10+4d6. That's only adding an average of 14 damage to your attacks attack at level 17. And hey, if you wanna cheese it, you could go Fighter and Action Surge, letting you add a whole 8d6 necrotic to your attacks, which is strong...but its a one time use every Short Rest.

I have a few Warlocks and two of them are Tier 3. I actually got rid of Hex from their spell lists because I simply wasn't bothering with using it. I had far better concentration spells to use with things like Darkness, Hold Person, Invisibility, Hunger of Hadar, Banishment, Shadow of Moil, ect.




I used Thunderous Smite on my Flying Boots-wearing Sorceradin quite a bit. Proning and pushing a flying melee creature without sacrificing attacks is no joke. Granted, I also used the Shove action quite a bit as well, especially when I had Haste up, but it was still a nice option to have for the low, low cost of a 1st-level spell slot.


I'm surprised you managed to get the spell to go off since its a Strength save. I guess it does have its niche uses...but again, its that versus an extra 2d8 radiant damage. 9 times out of 10, I'll take the 2d8 over the potential of nothing happening.

[MaxWilson]

I'm surprised you managed to get the spell to go off since its a Strength save. I guess it does have its niche uses...but again, its that versus an extra 2d8 radiant damage. 9 times out of 10, I'll take the 2d8 over the potential of nothing happening.

Strength is actually a pretty decent save to target. I'll take 2d6 thunder damage + ~50% chance of knocking an enemy out of the sky over 2d8 radiant damage.

[Deathtongue]

It really wouldn't be that op. Hex allows you to do an extra 1d6 necrotic damage when you hit with an attack, and gives a creature disadvantage on ability checks.Remembering who Hex was actually designed for reminds me of how that spell is so much better in other classes' hands or as part of team combos than it is in its native class. Yeah, if I had only two or three spell slots I'd find it really frustrating. Even if I got to cast and concentrate on the spell through a short rest (which is by no means guaranteed).


I'm surprised you managed to get the spell to go off since its a Strength save. I guess it does have its niche uses...but again, its that versus an extra 2d8 radiant damage. 9 times out of 10, I'll take the 2d8 over the potential of nothing happening.It's by no means foolproof, especially since 5E D&D loves having giant flyers like dragons and rocs. Still, there are creatures like Succubi afoot. It might just be selection bias in my case.

[Chronos]

In what possible world is Dream useless? You can attack anyone who's known to you, at any distance, as well as preventing them from renewing any long rest resources like spells, and eventually giving them levels of exhaustion. Granted, it'd take a while to kill an equal-level target, but sometimes you have that time, sometimes it'd be really convenient to kill the right weak target like a king or something, and sometimes even just preventing them from regaining abilities is enough. And there's no other spell that does the same thing.

And with the smite spells, remember that you can use one of them and a Divine Smite on the same attack; it's not necessarily an either-or. If you know that you don't need to conserve resources for another battle, a paladin has amazing nova potential.

[MaxWilson]

Remembering who Hex was actually designed for reminds me of how that spell is so much better in other classes' hands or as part of team combos than it is in its native class. Yeah, if I had only two or three spell slots I'd find it really frustrating. Even if I got to cast and concentrate on the spell through a short rest (which is by no means guaranteed).

It's by no means foolproof, especially since 5E D&D loves having giant flyers like dragons and rocs. Still, there are creatures like Succubi afoot. It might just be selection bias in my case.

It's still great in aerial combat against Rocs and any dragons without legendary resists. A Roc has a Strength save of +9 (no proficiency). At level 9 as a Paladin you've got around 20 Cha, and DC 17, so a Roc needs to roll 8+, giving it a 65% chance of success. Thunderous Smite has a 65% chance of doing 2d6 damage to that Roc, and a 35% chance of doing 2d6 thunder damage knocking it out of the sky (let's guesstimate a 100' fall, so 10d6 damage). Averaging ~8d6 (28) damage as a bonus action with a first-level spell slot is not bad!

A Young Red Dragon has only +6 to Strength saves, gets knocked out of the sky fully 50% of the time.

Obviously much depends on how high you're flying though.


In what possible world is Dream useless? You can attack anyone who's known to you, at any distance, as well as preventing them from renewing any long rest resources like spells, and eventually giving them levels of exhaustion. Granted, it'd take a while to kill an equal-level target, but sometimes you have that time, sometimes it'd be really convenient to kill the right weak target like a king or something, and sometimes even just preventing them from regaining abilities is enough. And there's no other spell that does the same thing.

And with the smite spells, remember that you can use one of them and a Divine Smite on the same attack; it's not necessarily an either-or. If you know that you don't need to conserve resources for another battle, a paladin has amazing nova potential.

Dream is basically mandatory if you want to get any use at all out of Geas for its intended purpose, otherwise they can just heal the once-a-day damage and ignore your commands forever. (Even then, Geas is still more useful for the long-duration-or-permanent Charm effect than for the actual geas part, because who wants to be constantly nagging your reluctant servants in their dreams? No thanks.)

[Tanarii]

In what possible world is Dream useless?
Because unless your DM rules otherwise, they just immediately start the long rest over. They can only benefit from one long rest per 24 hours, not only attempt one.

[MaxWilson]

Because unless your DM rules otherwise, they just immediately start the long rest over. They can only benefit from one long rest per 24 hours, not only attempt one.

...You're right. I never noticed that before.

Okay, Dream is pretty much useless then for anything but communication. There's no feasible way to haunt your target's dreams 24 x 7.

[Nifft]

Do monsters and other NPCs get long rests?

[HPisBS]

Idk about you, but even when I've pulled an all-nighter, I still find it pretty hard to get to sleep during the day - particularly when it's a sunny day outside.

Besides, depending on the target, chances are good that he/she/it will have too much to do for them to simply spend half of their day just trying to rest.

[sithlordnergal]

In what possible world is Dream useless? You can attack anyone who's known to you, at any distance, as well as preventing them from renewing any long rest resources like spells, and eventually giving them levels of exhaustion. Granted, it'd take a while to kill an equal-level target, but sometimes you have that time, sometimes it'd be really convenient to kill the right weak target like a king or something, and sometimes even just preventing them from regaining abilities is enough. And there's no other spell that does the same thing.


The problem with Dream is the fact that your target needs to be asleep for it to work. And that brings up a small host of issues:

1) Creatures that don't sleep, like Undead, Constructs, and technically Elves are automatically immune to Dream because they simply don't sleep.

2) You need to know your target's sleep schedule, and get them while they are sleeping. This can be harder then it seems...I know that people assume NPCs go to bed at a reasonable hour, but that's not really the case. I know that, if I were to base my NPC's sleeping habits off my own they'd be up till 2-3am and sleeping till 11pm at the latest, and even that fluctuates. I guess you could always try Scrying on them to see if they're asleep or no...but that just seems like a lot more effort then its worth.

3) There's nothing preventing an NPC, or PC for that matter, from taking a Long Rest immediately after waking up from Dream. The rules for Long Resting state "A character can’t benefit from more than one Long Rest in a 24-hour period, and a character must have at least 1 hit point at the start of the rest to gain its benefits.", and Dream states "On a failed save, echoes of the phantasmal monstrosity spawn a Nightmare that lasts the Duration of the target's sleep and prevents the target from gaining any benefit from that rest.". Since the target didn't benefit from a Long Rest, they can technically choose to take a Long Rest as soon as they wake up. There's nothing preventing them from doing so.

The only way you'd manage to get this to work is if you were less then 8 hours away from your intended target, and want to drain them a bit while giving yourselves a Long Rest. Which...I guess that could work, but why not just go stab them in their sleep if you're that close and know they're asleep? They don't gain the benefits of a Long Rest, and you can get an auto-crit and surprise due to them being asleep.

[sithlordnergal]

Idk about you, but even when I've pulled an all-nighter, I still find it pretty hard to get to sleep during the day - particularly when it's a sunny day outside.

Besides, depending on the target, chances are good that he/she/it will have too much to do for them to simply spend half of their day just trying to rest.

You and I are very different then. Unless something weird is happening, it doesn't matter what time I go to sleep, I'll just fall asleep. And I dunno about that, I'd say taking a 2nd long rest is well worth the time lost. Especially if its some BBEG, they can delegate tasks to underlings and sleep. Honestly, only PC's are ever under a time crunch in DnD.

[Tanarii]

Honestly, only PC's are ever under a time crunch in DnD.
There are a number of spells which are at least passable as a DM tool but worth less to PCs.

[MaxWilson]

Do monsters and other NPCs get long rests?

Yes. The rules in the PHB apply to everybody in the game: Dodge, Dash, Hide, etc. are for everybody. At one point the PHB was errata'ed to make this explicit for Beastmasters and short rests:

Ranger’s Companion (p. 93). The following sentence has been added to the end of the first paragraph: “Like any creature, the beast can spend Hit Dice during a short rest.”

Anyway, resting works for everybody including monsters.


Honestly, only PC's are ever under a time crunch in DnD.

In my game it's the opposite: PC crunch time is often the result of trying to beat NPCs to the punch (e.g. first one to the newly-discovered dungeon gets to loot it, and PCs have a contact who tips them off early enough that they have 24 hours to explore the dungeon before rivals get there). That means NPCs are under as much of a time crunch as PCs, maybe more.

[sithlordnergal]

There are a number of spells which are at least passable as a DM tool but worth less to PCs.

Oh yeah, there a lot of spells that are great for DMs, but worthless to PCs. Stuff like Dream, Geas, Power Word Kill, and Glyph of Warding are spells that come to mind. Sure, the PC's can use them, but they're far more effective when the DM uses them against the players.

[Desamir]

Charm Person: I've never really had any use for this spell, ever. The only good things about it are that its not concentration and lasts an hour, but outside of that I've never had a use for it. It only works on Humanoids, which limits the spell a ton. It has Verbal and Somatic components, so you generally can't cast it in a social situation without people noticing. It causes the creature to regard you as friendly, which is ok, and causes the creature to be charmed, which is not ok. The Charmed condition has been nerfed beyond belief in 5e, to the point that it doesn't really do anything. Sure it grants advantage on a Charisma check...but so can good roleplaying and another creature aiding you. As for the not attacking you, creatures can still Grapple, Shove, ect., because those are not attacks or abilities that cause direct harm to you.

Agree that Charm Person isn't worth it most of the time, but Grapple/Shove are attacks so you can't do that to someone who has charmed you.


Continual Flame: This spell is basically like a 2nd level Light spell, only it can effect torches and lamps. It is fun if you wanna make your Wizard tower look cool, but outside of that...I can't see why you'd prepare this spell for an adventuring day.

Cast with a 3rd level slot, Continual Flame penetrates a 2nd-level Darkness spell area, so there is a niche benefit there.


Dream: This is what I like to call a "DM only spell". It has a really cool effect, but I can't really see a party making use of this all that often. Its great to harass people since you can deny them a full night of rest, but at the same time that's just such a niche thing that its really only useful to DMs. You can also use it as a sort of Greater Sending, since its not limited by how many words you can send...but then again, Sending is a 3rd level spell, this is a 5th. Do you really wanna use a 5th level spell on a Sending spell?

Dream is less usable than Sending most of the time, but Warlocks don't get Sending (and also don't care much about the difference between 3rd and 5th level slots).


Slow: Please note, I only consider this spell useless to players, but this is the best DM debuff spell in the game. So, why do I feel that Slow is a terrible choice for PCs? Simple, because at you have access to so many better 3rd level debuff spells than Slow. I will admit, Slow is a very nice debuff, and it does a lot. However, I feel Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, and Stinking Cloud are better debuffs for players to use then Slow does. Fear and Hypnotic Pattern only have one save, and if the targets fail then they can't do anything at all. Stinking Cloud allows multiple saves, but they happen every round and can prevent a creature from taking actions. That said, this spell is perfect for DMs, since it debuffs everything a player can do. In fact, it is the perfect debuff for DMs to use against their players, since it hamstrings the PCs without making them do nothing.

Slow has a weaker effect than those other spells, but it's party safe. There are situations where Slow is a better spell to cast.

[Corran]

I really can't break this down except to say that I disagree with every line of this particularly and specifically.
Since this conversation is getting out of topic (but I am interested in continuing it), I am putting my answer in a spoiler.

To begin, it's really not debatable that spells are noticeable-they are. That's part of the reason why spells have verbal and somatic components, so it is the default assumption that they are noticeable.
I agree that the components are noticeable. I would not agree that this automatically means everyone knows you are casting a spell. For example, the cantrip friends implies (strongly IMO) that the S component is the act of applying make up, and the material component is (clearly) a mirror. Would you rule that everyone automatically knows you are casting a spell at that point? I would not, and I cannot see how I am contradicting any RAW when I do. Enthrall is one (of the few) spell(s) where I would be willing to extend that benefit, as I think that the description (but more importantly, the purpose) of the spell allows some room to interpret that the nature of your action can go unnoticeable (at the very least to the uninitiated and of course under the right circumstances, eg as part of a performance). To be fair, a few more things weight in to my decision, such as that enthrall is strictly (or mostly, if you prefer) an out of combat spell, not very powerful in the first place, and not in the sorcerer's list. That's why for example I would allow myself to be inconsistent when I would be ruling this way for enthrall, but differently for suggestion (for which one could make the same argument that I made, regarding the spell description).



Unless you're in a situation where casting one is acceptable...
Qualify this restriction.



... this has to be worked into the usage of the spell. Enthrall specifically draws attention, so that's quite a big issue-and it provides no ability to get out of drawing attention.
Why? Drawing attention is the point of the spell anyway. Why do you presume that we also need a way to divert attention afterwards?


You can house-rule what you want, but this needs to be clear-it is a house rule.
Provide the RAW I am contradicting then.


How the campaign world looks as such is a separate topic, but it's a massive knock against enthrall that you did something obviously magical; it doesn't need to be as extreme as "counterspelling guards on every corner".
Debatable. But even if that was the case, I think it's the main reason why you find this spell useless. I am not interested to change your mind regarding how you run your game world, or what to expect from campaigns you are playing in. But keep in mind that how the world reacts is something there are not rules for intentionally.


More than that, there are a ton of much stronger spells. Enthrall simply isn't competitive with charm person, let alone suggestion, let alone other charms. Charm person specifically has a negative of telling people what you did, but once you have their money you can just leave.
Charm person and suggestion do not (potentially) impose disadvantage on the perception checks of multiple people. Are there situations where you could use charm person or suggestion instead of enthrall for similar gain? Sure. The fact that you cannot think of situations where enthrall would have the upper hand, stems from how the game worlds you are used to would react to spellcasting, and from your reluctance to accept that witnessing the components of a spell being cast does not necessarily equate to knowing that a spell is being cast.


Enthrall is no better there, because once you've stolen from them they will pretty obviously remember the enthralling bard.
Nothing in the spell gives them reason to make a connection (as opposed to how charm person specifically suggests). They might have suspicions, or they might not. Up to the GM (and perhaps to any rolls you might had to make).



That, again, leaves a crowded area where you are allowed to cast spells, and again, this is rare and uncontrollable.
Once again, that holds true for certain games, it's so very very obviously not a default assumption. And yet you always come back to it. That's why I am saying that you are thinking this spell is useless because of how you are used to playing or running the game.



Yes, you can use it to pick-pocket, but if these other circumstances even exist depends on the DM-and trust me, you're overstating how often a single useful occurrence will occur in a campaign.
I am not overstating anything. I agree that situations where enthrall would be extremely effective will be rare, and in many such cases perhaps there is a better course of action that does not even involve using it (ie you can go about your plan without needing to have someone draw attention). And sure, it is somewhat DM dependent. I'd say it's more campaign dependent, though we are probably talking about the same thing here. You wont be needing enthrall too much if your campaign revolves around fighting beasts in the wilderness, or generally around combat. It's an out of combat spell after all. The only other DM dependent thing I see about it, is how the DM rules on the act of casting the spell, and how the DM has the world react to spellcasters. Though from what you've said so far, I can safely assume that these were not the kind of stuff you had in mind where you talked about DM-dependency.


I can think of one situation where enthrall would have been useful in my past six campaigns. It's that bad.
Sometimes ideas come more easily once you have the option available. Cause that alone kind of forces you to think of solutions to problems but only in term of your available tools. Based on your comments so far (regarding your specific way of playing/running the game), I dont doubt at all that there were almost no situations where enthrall would help you in your previous campaigns. To be honest, I am surprised there was even one such potential occasion. Enthrall basically facilitates your teammates when checks against npcs' perception are required, in an out of combat scenario. I dont think this is a particularly rare occurrence. Personally I view it as an upgrade (personal taste; I am not arguing if it's better or not) to charm person. It's essentially my city spell for a (not very lawful) bard. It will give me something to do in the city, give me incentive to seek out and interact with certain npc types (that perhaps might be able to help me down the road) especially if I dont have a thief in the group (but even if I had), a source of extra coin if all go smoothly (or a source for trouble if things go poorly). And who knows, every once in a while I might even come across a situation where a (few) failed perception check(s) might yield me something greater than a cut from the valuables stolen.



Oh, and if you do use it to pick-pocket? You've drawn attention to yourself, so be prepared for some pointed questions once the theft is noticed if the authorities are vaguely competent. The wonders of enthrall at work.
That's why I would only be using it after I had glibness, so that I can fool or the zone of truth spells heading my way. After etherealness too, cause casting a spell in public will probably put me in jail.
Sure, using enthrall to strengthen a picking -pockets scheme can get you into trouble. So does the act of picking pockets, or using thieves' tools for breaking into somewhere you are not supposed to be. Or using deception to lie to powerful creatures. Or going into dungeons for that matter. Are these skill and tool proficiencies and actions based on them worthless because they carry some risk? Of course not. And I know that you agree with that general point. Why you are singling out enthrall though? Only one reason. Because you think the risk is too great for what you gain. Why do you think that the risk is so great? Because.... ''You've drawn attention to yourself, so be prepared for some pointed questions once the theft is noticed if the authorities are vaguely competent.'' ... because of the way you are used to running and playing the game.


The real final nail in the coffin is that the two classes that can pick it have limited spells known, so if they want to waste a spell known on a once-in-a-blue moon spell, they will be permanently weaker than if they took a much more versatile and powerful spell like charm person or suggestion, which is almost universally better.
That's a downside I can agree too (ie about having limited spell picks).


Part of what people need to understand is that there is a difference between "I can use this spell!" and "This spell helped me!". You can engineer situations where enthrall is used to do something involving a party sneaking, but because it's a wisdom save and perception is a wisdom skill, most of the times it works you would have been fine to begin with.
That's not how math work. It's like saying that I didn't really need the advantage because my to-hit was already a high one. The spell always helps you, cause the outcome is unknown before you roll the dice. I will agree with the point I think you are trying to make, that is that the boost it gives you will be a relatively small one.



That is ignoring that most situations where enthrall can be used but not charm person or suggestion involve a lot of people...
Not necessarily, but sure, that's one of the benefits.


... and the number of times that the best and only option for the party is to sneak past a crowd is going to be singularly rare and generally a losing position to begin with.
Sneaking (as in using the stealth skill, cause I am assuming that's what you meant) is just one of the options. It is equally likely that you might just want to steal something (which might even be important; eg a set of keys, hunging from the belt of one of the guards, just for a brief moment so that you can outline it onto wax before trying to put them back, or that map that the adventurers two tables to your right are focusing on for the past hour, which might not even be too important but damn it, you have to know what it is, and if it leads to treasure, you might as well steal it and go do this side quest before them, etc). It's a spell that can help you under situational circumstances realize a goal (which may or may not be important) when you also want violence not to be your first option. The ability to use it to affect multiple different people at the same time is what keeps it relevant in certain situations over the generally more useful spells like suggestion. And the fact that (IMO) there is room for DM calls regarding its casting is what keeps it relevant again over generally more powerful spells like hypnotic pattern (that a bard also gets, coincidentally). Not sure what you mean by ''being in a losing position''. Violence might be the back up option as a choice. But even if it's not by choice but by necessity, then surely you can see how the value of out of combat spells goes up.



And this is ignoring that you had to pick a spell for this single situation. Given that other magics can also accomplish what you need, you're basically always better off picking them instead.
You have to further support this position if you are to convince me. As a reminder, I am not arguing this is a good spell. I am arguing that it's not a useless one.


ps: Enthrall has some value mainly because of lacking detailed rules about ability checks. It's perfectly logical for me to assume that a good performance check could result in similar benefits to what enthrall gets me, but in the absence of a RAW way to achieve it, certain spells like enthrall exist partly to cover that lack of rules.

[Telok]

I've seen Enthrall work once, for one round, in 3.5, with a beguiler using sleight of hand to disguise the casting. It bought that one round of time for the rest of the party to move into surprise round range before attacking.

For the rest of the time its all: "Hey Bob, that guy spoke a funny language and waved his arms then I felt funny for a sec. You think he cast a spell? Bob? Bob? Holy cow, Bobs been mind controlled! That means I resisted mind control! Burn the witch!" and cue up a lynch mob chasing the bard.

[MaxWilson]

Slow has a weaker effect than those other spells, but it's party safe. There are situations where Slow is a better spell to cast.

Slow is a lot better than I used to think it was. In Slow's case the key points are:

(1) No friendly fire.

(2) Works on anything, even if it's immune to being charmed or frightened. Implication: reduced uncertainty. Even when you're facing undead or extra-planar creatures or constructs, you're not afraid that casting it will be a waste of your action + spell slot.

(3) Halves movement speed AND denies actions as well as reducing number of attacks = melee monsters are basically helpless against kiting unless they have speed 60'+, sometimes even then.

There are significant numbers of encounters I've seen over the years where Slow (or Confusion) would have been better choices than Hypnotic Pattern or Fear--and of course there have been plenty of the opposite where Hypnotic Pattern (or Fear) would come out on top.


Agree that Charm Person isn't worth it most of the time, but Grapple/Shove are attacks so you can't do that to someone who has charmed you.

It's a controversial claim either way. There is not broad agreement on which PHB rule is actually the most specific, the highly-specific definition of what counts as an attack or the rule for the highly-specific attack called "grappling" which may or may not count as an attack for purposes of interactions with other rules. Probably best not to fight that battle on this thread.

[Luccan]

I've seen Enthrall work once, for one round, in 3.5, with a beguiler using sleight of hand to disguise the casting. It bought that one round of time for the rest of the party to move into surprise round range before attacking.

For the rest of the time its all: "Hey Bob, that guy spoke a funny language and waved his arms then I felt funny for a sec. You think he cast a spell? Bob? Bob? Holy cow, Bobs been mind controlled! That means I resisted mind control! Burn the witch!" and cue up a lynch mob chasing the bard.

As has been pointed out, this requires several assumptions to be made about the setting and spell (all spellcasting is recognized even by regular people, magic is considered inherently dangerous and probably illegal, the casting of Enthrall is something obviously magical to these people and not a speech or song as might be justified by the description). Also, this is one of those cases where a strict mechanical effect plays to its strengths; it just distracts people, it doesn't leave them slackjawed idiots just standing around. If being distracted is enough to get someone hanged, I'd probably worry the town was actually being magically influenced by something dangerous

[Yuroch Kern]

While this is an interesting thread, I noticed a slight discussion on the nature of noticing spell casting pop up, even responded a couple times. While the system is supposed to be simpler than life, I was tooling around and came across a visual study on, of all things, Sentencing Enhancement Zones for 1000' distance punishments in Hampden County, Massachusetts. It's a downloadable PDF, and could help with the discussion on sight and hearing. It appears public and shareable. Let me know if it's not.

https://www.prisonpolicy.org/zones/1000ft_distance.pdf

Get your Eyes of the Eagle SOON.

[Yuroch Kern]

I've seen Enthrall work once, for one round, in 3.5, with a beguiler using sleight of hand to disguise the casting. It bought that one round of time for the rest of the party to move into surprise round range before attacking.

For the rest of the time its all: "Hey Bob, that guy spoke a funny language and waved his arms then I felt funny for a sec. You think he cast a spell? Bob? Bob? Holy cow, Bobs been mind controlled! That means I resisted mind control! Burn the witch!" and cue up a lynch mob chasing the bard.

So, Enthrall still worked then?

[LudicSavant]

What spells are so bad that they are never worth to prepare "just in case", or so bad that a bard, sorcerer, and warlock would never learn them?

The one that always comes to my mind first is enthrall. It is only mostly useless in most situations, but why would a bard or warlock pick them if they could take darkness, invisibility, hold person, spider climb, and suggestion instead? I would not be surprised if it's the least used spell in the entire game.

Similarly, why does compulsion exist? Another spell only available to bards and warlocks. It certainly won't be competing with dimension door, greater invisibility, and polymorph.

Speak with plants seems pretty awful for 3rd level. I can see a few circumstances in which druids or rangers would prepare it, but none in which a bard would learn it.

True strike is pretty obvious. Cast a spell in turn one and make an attack with advantage in round two. Or make an attack in round one and one attack in round two. The second option has the same chance to land one hit, but also has the chance of making two hits. Which you don't get if you cast true strike. This spell is not just useless, it actually makes you worse. Would be more useful if you can cast it on an enemy as a debuff.

Is blade ward for when you're 1st level and want to disarm a spear trap with your foot?

Bane is not that bad when you're a low level cleric. But I don't see why any warlock would waste an invocation to be able to cast it one time per long rest and still having to use a spell slot for it. This is so bad, I think this is actually a mistake. It's probably supposed to be "cast at will with expanding a spell slot". That would make a lot more sense.

Melf's Acid Arrow.

Let me explain just how mathematically terrible this spell is. Imagine for a moment if we gave Melf's Acid Arrow a massive buff: it now deals all its damage on one turn, and hits automatically! So basically just a straight 6d4 (15) damage.

Oh wait, an upcast Magic Missile does 4d4+4 (14), has a better damage type, range, and combos better with various things? Guess a super-buffed version of Melf's Acid Arrow already exists.

[Necroanswer]

The problem with Dream is the fact that your target needs to be asleep for it to work. And that brings up a small host of issues:

1) Creatures that don't sleep, like Undead, Constructs, and technically Elves are automatically immune to Dream because they simply don't sleep.

2) You need to know your target's sleep schedule, and get them while they are sleeping. This can be harder then it seems...I know that people assume NPCs go to bed at a reasonable hour, but that's not really the case. I know that, if I were to base my NPC's sleeping habits off my own they'd be up till 2-3am and sleeping till 11pm at the latest, and even that fluctuates. I guess you could always try Scrying on them to see if they're asleep or no...but that just seems like a lot more effort then its worth.

3) There's nothing preventing an NPC, or PC for that matter, from taking a Long Rest immediately after waking up from Dream. The rules for Long Resting state "A character can’t benefit from more than one Long Rest in a 24-hour period, and a character must have at least 1 hit point at the start of the rest to gain its benefits.", and Dream states "On a failed save, echoes of the phantasmal monstrosity spawn a Nightmare that lasts the Duration of the target's sleep and prevents the target from gaining any benefit from that rest.". Since the target didn't benefit from a Long Rest, they can technically choose to take a Long Rest as soon as they wake up. There's nothing preventing them from doing so.

The only way you'd manage to get this to work is if you were less then 8 hours away from your intended target, and want to drain them a bit while giving yourselves a Long Rest. Which...I guess that could work, but why not just go stab them in their sleep if you're that close and know they're asleep? They don't gain the benefits of a Long Rest, and you can get an auto-crit and surprise due to them being asleep.

With regards to point #2: You can generally guess pretty well when someone is going to be asleep. If you are wrong the spell has an 8 hour duration and you or your proxy (the spell is unusual in that it allows you to designate someone else as a the 'messenger') can just wait to see if the target goes to any time during the duration.

With regards to point #3: The target could choose to do a long rest afterwards, but the spell could be recast on them again. If two casters are doing this spell in tandem it could get nasty.

With regards to point #1: No argument with you there.

This is a niche spell, but not useless in many campaigns; and probably less useful for PCs than most 5th spells.

If Dream is being called useless why hasn't anyone mentioned Feign Death?

[MaxWilson]

If Dream is being called useless why hasn't anyone mentioned Feign Death?

Feign Death arguably has some synergies with Magic Jar, if you want to bring your original body along in case of Antimagic Fields. This relies though on the DM treating your catatonic body as a separate "creature" from you-in-the-possessed body. Reasonable but not necessarily RAW.

[Chronos]

Quoth MaxWilson:

It's still great in aerial combat against Rocs and any dragons without legendary resists. A Roc has a Strength save of +9 (no proficiency). At level 9 as a Paladin you've got around 20 Cha, and DC 17, so a Roc needs to roll 8+, giving it a 65% chance of success. Thunderous Smite has a 65% chance of doing 2d6 damage to that Roc, and a 35% chance of doing 2d6 thunder damage knocking it out of the sky (let's guesstimate a 100' fall, so 10d6 damage). Averaging ~8d6 (28) damage as a bonus action with a first-level spell slot is not bad!
While a 20 casting stat is probably realistic for a 9th-level full-caster, it might be a bit optimistic for a paladin, who also wants to pump their combat stat (Str or Dex), and also would like a number of feats.

On the other hand, knocking down the flier probably also makes it a lot easier for the rest of the party to get at that roc or dragon. And for a first-level slot and a bonus action, heck, why not? Plus, you can (probably, debatably) share it with your Greater Steed (I assume that's how you're reaching the flier to begin with), for another 2d6 and another chance for the monster to fail its save.

Slow really isn't in the same class as some of the other spells here. It, Hypnotic Pattern, and Fear are all similar enough in their applications that I probably wouldn't prepare/learn more than one of those three on any given character, and of those three, I'm probably picking one of the other two, because the situations where they're better are more common... but Slow is competitive enough that if it's the one I take instead, it's not much of a downgrade. And of course, if I'm a wizard and get the chance, I might as well copy it into my book, and if I have reason to believe that it'll be the right spell for the job today, I might switch to preparing it. Alternately, if I happen to loot a spellbook with Slow in it before I've learned either of the other two, I might delay those other two for quite a while.

On the other hand, if I loot a spellbook with Witch Bolt in it, it's not even worth the cost of the ink.

On Dream, and restarting long rests: After I deliver the Dream payload, I can just spend the next seven hours doing whatever it is that I do, then take a brief nap and cast it again. My enemy is now spending all of their time sleeping and not even getting any benefit from it, while I'm spending most of my time doing something productive. Yes, the spell is still limited, but again, there's nothing else that can do that at all, not from a continent away.

[MrCharlie]

BTW MrCharlie, I enjoyed your remarks on Find the Path. You argued cogently.

On this point I do not think you have a strong argument.

If you mean "will be noticed" instead of "potentially capable of being noticed," it isn't beyond debate at all. It's frankly quite unclear. There are plenty of spells like Friends and Charm Person and Mislead and Suggestion which rely for much on their impact on the implication that the spell has at least a chance to go undetected until much later. E.g. Friends says, When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you., but if casting Friends were always noticed by the target this clause would be essentially redundant. Of course it realizes you used magic, it saw you cast the spell!

I suspect it's kind of like the Stealth rules: the 5E designers probably expected DMs to make case-by-case rulings based on the particular spell. Enthrall is probably one they expected to be more unobtrusive.

I remember a scenario where my players were competing with each other for NPC votes to see who would become the sheriff of their new space colony. Enthrall is basically a "everybody listen to ME, not those other guys" spell, and would have been useful in that scenario, and presumably in other noncombat scenarios as well like entertainment, so you can certainly justify it as a roleplaying pick for a bard who's a performer--kind of like a wizard picking up Fabricate because he's a tradesman/maker.



60 feet is relatively close, and if casting a spell ends stealth-which it does-it ought to be detectable in general. Xanathars provides rules for noticing spells, and enthrall qualifies under them and spades. But Enthrall is even more blatant-everyone suddenly wonks out and stares at you? If you're in a crowd someone is going to put two and two together, and if your talking to guards it will depend on how competent the guards are and how close you are. But in situations where people try to apply enthrall or imagine it can be applied I don't see justifying it being unnoticeable.

As for the first part of your argument; Charm person explicitly changes what someone feels towards you, knowledge that they were charmed or not. Suggestion likewise simply works. Even if they recognize the spell being cast, they can't use this knowledge. The reason why it says that they realize something changed is because there are situations where a target wouldn't be able to hear or see you cast, but they would know their personality changed when the spell ended. Friends is similar. Mislead invokes the fact that a lot of other wizard spells are subtle-they know you cast something, but since when does a wizard not cast something in combat? They don't know you cast mislead, just that you cast a spell-hence why it being noticed isn't an issue.

I'm not saying someone will know exactly what you did, just that they will be able to put two and two together and, if you are standing in front of you, know that you cast a spell. You can't cast it without being perceived, and I can't imagine an NPC acting passively after a spell was cast and their behavior changed. And my other point was that Enthrall isn't worth this effort; it's effect is purely mediocre and absolutely worthless compared to simply charming someone or using suggestion. The only plus is the AOE, and good luck making that work.


I remember a scenario where my players were competing with each other for NPC votes to see who would become the sheriff of their new space colony. Enthrall is basically a "everybody listen to ME, not those other guys" spell, and would have been useful in that scenario, and presumably in other noncombat scenarios as well like entertainment, so you can certainly justify it as a roleplaying pick for a bard who's a performer--kind of like a wizard picking up Fabricate because he's a tradesman/maker.

That's similar to the scenario I'd remembered-if you're allowed to enthrall someone, using magic to do so isn't going to raise any eyebrows. But most PCs aren't traveling politicians and most campaigns don't involve scenarios like that.

If Bards didn't have limited spells known, I'd argue that this was a situational use where the spell was worth it. As it is, it's rare enough I'm 100% confident that almost any other spell would be worth it-particularly because a Bard can just use his astronomical skills to do the same thing.


Since this conversation is getting out of topic (but I am interested in continuing it), I am putting my answer in a spoiler.

I agree that the components are noticeable. I would not agree that this automatically means everyone knows you are casting a spell. For example, the cantrip friends implies (strongly IMO) that the S component is the act of applying make up, and the material component is (clearly) a mirror. Would you rule that everyone automatically knows you are casting a spell at that point? I would not, and I cannot see how I am contradicting any RAW when I do. Enthrall is one (of the few) spell(s) where I would be willing to extend that benefit, as I think that the description (but more importantly, the purpose) of the spell allows some room to interpret that the nature of your action can go unnoticeable (at the very least to the uninitiated and of course under the right circumstances, eg as part of a performance). To be fair, a few more things weight in to my decision, such as that enthrall is strictly (or mostly, if you prefer) an out of combat spell, not very powerful in the first place, and not in the sorcerer's list. That's why for example I would allow myself to be inconsistent when I would be ruling this way for enthrall, but differently for suggestion (for which one could make the same argument that I made, regarding the spell description).

Qualify this restriction.

Why? Drawing attention is the point of the spell anyway. Why do you presume that we also need a way to divert attention afterwards?

Provide the RAW I am contradicting then.

Debatable. But even if that was the case, I think it's the main reason why you find this spell useless. I am not interested to change your mind regarding how you run your game world, or what to expect from campaigns you are playing in. But keep in mind that how the world reacts is something there are not rules for intentionally.


Charm person and suggestion do not (potentially) impose disadvantage on the perception checks of multiple people. Are there situations where you could use charm person or suggestion instead of enthrall for similar gain? Sure. The fact that you cannot think of situations where enthrall would have the upper hand, stems from how the game worlds you are used to would react to spellcasting, and from your reluctance to accept that witnessing the components of a spell being cast does not necessarily equate to knowing that a spell is being cast.


Nothing in the spell gives them reason to make a connection (as opposed to how charm person specifically suggests). They might have suspicions, or they might not. Up to the GM (and perhaps to any rolls you might had to make).

Once again, that holds true for certain games, it's so very very obviously not a default assumption. And yet you always come back to it. That's why I am saying that you are thinking this spell is useless because of how you are used to playing or running the game.

I am not overstating anything. I agree that situations where enthrall would be extremely effective will be rare, and in many such cases perhaps there is a better course of action that does not even involve using it (ie you can go about your plan without needing to have someone draw attention). And sure, it is somewhat DM dependent. I'd say it's more campaign dependent, though we are probably talking about the same thing here. You wont be needing enthrall too much if your campaign revolves around fighting beasts in the wilderness, or generally around combat. It's an out of combat spell after all. The only other DM dependent thing I see about it, is how the DM rules on the act of casting the spell, and how the DM has the world react to spellcasters. Though from what you've said so far, I can safely assume that these were not the kind of stuff you had in mind where you talked about DM-dependency.

Sometimes ideas come more easily once you have the option available. Cause that alone kind of forces you to think of solutions to problems but only in term of your available tools. Based on your comments so far (regarding your specific way of playing/running the game), I dont doubt at all that there were almost no situations where enthrall would help you in your previous campaigns. To be honest, I am surprised there was even one such potential occasion. Enthrall basically facilitates your teammates when checks against npcs' perception are required, in an out of combat scenario. I dont think this is a particularly rare occurrence. Personally I view it as an upgrade (personal taste; I am not arguing if it's better or not) to charm person. It's essentially my city spell for a (not very lawful) bard. It will give me something to do in the city, give me incentive to seek out and interact with certain npc types (that perhaps might be able to help me down the road) especially if I dont have a thief in the group (but even if I had), a source of extra coin if all go smoothly (or a source for trouble if things go poorly). And who knows, every once in a while I might even come across a situation where a (few) failed perception check(s) might yield me something greater than a cut from the valuables stolen.

That's why I would only be using it after I had glibness, so that I can fool or the zone of truth spells heading my way. After etherealness too, cause casting a spell in public will probably put me in jail.
Sure, using enthrall to strengthen a picking -pockets scheme can get you into trouble. So does the act of picking pockets, or using thieves' tools for breaking into somewhere you are not supposed to be. Or using deception to lie to powerful creatures. Or going into dungeons for that matter. Are these skill and tool proficiencies and actions based on them worthless because they carry some risk? Of course not. And I know that you agree with that general point. Why you are singling out enthrall though? Only one reason. Because you think the risk is too great for what you gain. Why do you think that the risk is so great? Because.... ''You've drawn attention to yourself, so be prepared for some pointed questions once the theft is noticed if the authorities are vaguely competent.'' ... because of the way you are used to running and playing the game.


That's a downside I can agree too (ie about having limited spell picks).


That's not how math work. It's like saying that I didn't really need the advantage because my to-hit was already a high one. The spell always helps you, cause the outcome is unknown before you roll the dice. I will agree with the point I think you are trying to make, that is that the boost it gives you will be a relatively small one.



Not necessarily, but sure, that's one of the benefits.


Sneaking (as in using the stealth skill, cause I am assuming that's what you meant) is just one of the options. It is equally likely that you might just want to steal something (which might even be important; eg a set of keys, hunging from the belt of one of the guards, just for a brief moment so that you can outline it onto wax before trying to put them back, or that map that the adventurers two tables to your right are focusing on for the past hour, which might not even be too important but damn it, you have to know what it is, and if it leads to treasure, you might as well steal it and go do this side quest before them, etc). It's a spell that can help you under situational circumstances realize a goal (which may or may not be important) when you also want violence not to be your first option. The ability to use it to affect multiple different people at the same time is what keeps it relevant in certain situations over the generally more useful spells like suggestion. And the fact that (IMO) there is room for DM calls regarding its casting is what keeps it relevant again over generally more powerful spells like hypnotic pattern (that a bard also gets, coincidentally). Not sure what you mean by ''being in a losing position''. Violence might be the back up option as a choice. But even if it's not by choice but by necessity, then surely you can see how the value of out of combat spells goes up.

You have to further support this position if you are to convince me. As a reminder, I am not arguing this is a good spell. I am arguing that it's not a useless one.

ps: Enthrall has some value mainly because of lacking detailed rules about ability checks. It's perfectly logical for me to assume that a good performance check could result in similar benefits to what enthrall gets me, but in the absence of a RAW way to achieve it, certain spells like enthrall exist partly to cover that lack of rules.
First, I really don't like the line-by-line reply, nor the spoiler. Just my opinion here.

To begin; The RAW you are contradicting is the Xanathar's guide to everything, page 85. This section deals with perceiving spells, and it simply says that casting a spell is perceivable if it has a verbal, material, of somatic component. Now, people interacting with the spell can identify the specific spell with a fairly high DC-although if 20 people are there then someone is going to make it on average-but they know a spell has been cast regardless. It doesn't say that they know it's a spell, but it's strongly implied that being "perceivable" involves some knowledge that it is magic-but I really, really cannot stress enough how unbelievable it is that a person in a high fantasy setting would not recognize magic like this.

I can sit here and argue this more, but the fact remains that your argument requires a specific game-world for enthrall to work-and enthrall stops working if this world doesn't exist. I could have said that enthrall is worthless if everyone is deaf, but instead I'm saying that enthrall is worthless unless people don't care about being charmed or don't recognize spells being cast. That's why I feel that this point is worth repeating. The DM needs to be playing in your court to make the spell work like you're saying it does.

Without a way to get away, withdraw attention, or end the spell safely, you've just made a situation where you obviously cast a spell on someone without any explanation. While this may not be illegal in your campaign world, it is hard to imagine situations where this is acceptable to someone-the few that exist would be situations where people want to be enthralled (a Bardic performance), but then why are you casting the spell? Roleplaying? If your using it to then accomplish something illegal-which all of your suggests seem to be doing-then once that is discovered you've got problems because you made yourself noticeable.

As for "well, suggestion and charm person don't let you impose disadvantage on..." I'm unamused. In most situations where enthrall could be used to distract someone, charm person accomplishes that task and suggestion just removes them from the situation-"Close your eyes and count to a million" is a valid suggestion, and is significantly better than enthrall. So is "Walk south until you're on another continent". Charm person just lets you use your skills to effectively distract them, which is, again, well within the bounds of what a successful skill check can do-or you can rely on their charmed condition letting you leverage something more significant, like guards leaving their posts, the guy you're pickpocketing "lending" you money, or any number of other situations. The only thing limiting them is targets, but as your number of enthrall targets increases so does the chance that someone fails-and then, again, you've just cast a spell on them.

And the idea that I just can't think of enthrall situations is insulting. No, I'm not missing something, I'm just not selectively creating situations for it to work. The number of situations where you can cast a spell, visibility and audibly, to distract someone without there being a consequence and accomplish anything of note are almost nill. I run and play in campaigns with heavy roleplaying, usually in intrigue settings-and enthrall is still completely useless. There simply aren't any safe ways to use it to distract people.

Again, this is predicated on not having a situation where you can enthrall people with impunity-but hell, let's assume you can, then you've still only given disadvantage to a check that could have been avoided with other spells, or at least almost certainly accomplished with a performance or deception check anyway. Having a spell in the game to have a "sure thing" is, in this case, irrelevant, given that it's not a sure thing; the check and saves still get made. And I don't think the argument that "we don't know if a skill check can do that" is reasonable. It's almost the textbook usage of performance to distract the guards so the party can sneak past.

A final word; I can well imagine situations where you've found enthrall useful because of your DM interpretation, but in those situations your DM is stretching to make your choices meaningful. A performance check would do the same thing without requiring mental gymnastics to construct just the right type of setting where it can be used safely. And if a spell is this limited-it is useless. I don't think there is actually a spell that would fit that definition as you're providing it-you can always stretch to fit a situation where you can use it-but it's so godawful and the situation is so rare that this is a pointless discussion.

[Telok]

As has been pointed out, this requires several assumptions to be made about the setting and spell (all spellcasting is recognized even by regular people, magic is considered inherently dangerous and probably illegal, the casting of Enthrall is something obviously magical to these people and not a speech or song as might be justified by the description). Also, this is one of those cases where a strict mechanical effect plays to its strengths; it just distracts people, it doesn't leave them slackjawed idiots just standing around. If being distracted is enough to get someone hanged, I'd probably worry the town was actually being magically influenced by something dangerous

The assumptions required are that people know generally what spell casting looks like, know if they"ve made/failed a save, and know that mind control magic exists. Generally I think that we can assume that most people don't like mind control being used on them.

[Yuroch Kern]

I've told my players awhile ago that Enthrall is the "Pull Aggro" spell. As WoW players, they LOVE it. The Bard tries to use it as a crowd distraction spell, and much like a movie theater, making your save doesn't always mean you notice everyone else anyway. Despite whether or not you can disguise the casting, the angry mob is commonplace for a Bard that fails, so the scenario still fits. The spell synergizes well with Thaumaturgy too. Still niche, but if you understand limitations, spells can be used effectively anyway, even "useless" ones. Personally, any fortune-telling spell is next to useless as pure DM-interpretation is difficult to quantify and adjucate.

[diplomancer]

The assumptions required are that people know generally what spell casting looks like, know if they"ve made/failed a save, and know that mind control magic exists. Generally I think that we can assume that most people don't like mind control being used on them.

And 2 of those assumptions are a setting assumption, and the 3rd is a metagaming assumption. None of them are part of the game rules. They all fall within the DM's purview; whatever he rules, goes. Whatever he rules, it's not a houserule.

As I've stated before, a Bard singing and playing on his lute fulfills all the requirements for spell components, with the possible exception of those very few spells (like burning hands) that specify what the somatic component looks like; the singing fulfills the vocal component, the strumming fulfills the somatic component, and the lute fulfills the material component.

In fact, if there is ANY mechanical benefit to have a musical instrument as an arcane focus instead of just using a component's pouch, this is it. Instruments usually requiee 2 hands, and are terrible to use during battle, unlike the other arcane foci.

[Yuroch Kern]

And 2 of those assumptions are a setting assumption, and the 3rd is a metagaming assumption. None of them are part of the game rules. They all fall within the DM's purview; whatever he rules, goes. Whatever he rules, it's not a houserule.

As I've stated before, a Bard singing and playing on his lute fulfills all the requirements for spell components, with the possible exception of those very few spells (like burning hands) that specify what the somatic component looks like; the singing fulfills the vocal component, the strumming fulfills the somatic component, and the lute fulfills the material component.

In fact, if there is ANY mechanical benefit to have a musical instrument as an arcane focus instead of just using a component's pouch, this is it. Instruments usually requiee 2 hands, and are terrible to use during battle, unlike the other arcane foci.

Cheers, my dude. \m/

[MaxWilson]

While a 20 casting stat is probably realistic for a 9th-level full-caster, it might be a bit optimistic for a paladin, who also wants to pump their combat stat (Str or Dex), and also would like a number of feats.

Paladins get a lot of benefit from maxing Cha, and it goes well with multiclassing. I've seen more Cha 20 Paladins than Str 17-20 Paladins.

[Corran]

First, I really don't like the line-by-line reply, nor the spoiler. Just my opinion here.

To begin; The RAW you are contradicting is the Xanathar's guide to everything, page 85. This section deals with perceiving spells, and it simply says that casting a spell is perceivable if it has a verbal, material, of somatic component.
It will help if you are quoting the rules you are referring to. The casting of the spell can indeed be perceptible. What the rules don't clarify, but instead leave it to the GM's judgement, is if witnessing the casting of the spell automatically equates to knowing that a spell is indeed being cast (which was what I said in my previous post and I wanted to get your answer to that, instead of having to backtrack). Knowing what spell is being cast (and by logical extension if a spell is being cast at all; notice how the absence of this logical extension only plays in favor of my argument here, since the absence of rules requires the GM to step in and rule), is handled by a check. The GM calls for checks when doing so makes sense.

Do you agree?
If not, provide the RAW that confirm your implication, that witnessing the casting of the spell always and under any circumstances leads to actual knowledge of that a spell is indeed being cast. (Hint: They don't exist)



Now, people interacting with the spell can identify the specific spell with a fairly high DC-although if 20 people are there then someone is going to make it on average-but they know a spell has been cast regardless.
You are within the RAW when ruling this way. I wouldn't rule this way (for reasons that have nothing to do with the discussion in this thread), and I am within the RAW too when doing so.

But I have to mention this once again, because you keep doing it. ''The spell is useless because of how I run the game'' is a position I don't care to discuss, because there is nothing worth discussing about it, other than saying that I do agree. Enthrall would indeed be (almost entirely) useless in your games. So would other things (eg the spell disguise self, deception and slight of hand checks, etc), if the above is an indication of how often and how much you are generally calling for (opposed) checks. But I digress.



It doesn't say that they know it's a spell, but it's strongly implied that being "perceivable" involves some knowledge that it is magic-but I really, really cannot stress enough how unbelievable it is that a person in a high fantasy setting would not recognize magic like this.
So what if they do know that a spell is being cast? Would it be so unbelievable or so worthy of suspicion if the bards of a high fantasy setting (your words) enhanced their performance gigs with magic? I can certainly imagine a bard using all sorts of performance enhancing magic to up his show, from minor illusion and thaumaturgy (how is this not a bard cantrip, I will never know) to stuff like enthrall, enhance ability and major image. They are bards, after all. And not just your average mundane street performer. Just how the person doing card tricks around the corner could be an actual illusionist, and not just someone with a very good slight of hand check.

Look, I am not trying to tell you how to run your game or how to build your fantasy world. I am only stating (in response to your comments), that your way of running things is not the default one or even necessitated by the RAW.



I can sit here and argue this more, but the fact remains that your argument requires a specific game-world for enthrall to work-and enthrall stops working if this world doesn't exist.
Really? You think I am the one doing this?



I could have said that enthrall is worthless if everyone is deaf, but instead I'm saying that enthrall is worthless unless people don't care about being charmed or don't recognize spells being cast. That's why I feel that this point is worth repeating. The DM needs to be playing in your court to make the spell work like you're saying it does.
You are essentially saying (and I am paraphrasing) that enthrall is worthless in your games because of how your game world is structured and programmed to react to certain things. With which I would agree. You are also slowly softening your position (again, paraphrasing) from ''this contradicts the RAW'' to ''this in fact falls under DM's discretion but a DM has to be naïve to allow it''. With which I would not agree, but I do think it's a step in the right direction, at least to what concerns this particular conversation.



Without a way to get away, withdraw attention, or end the spell safely, you've just made a situation where you obviously cast a spell on someone without any explanation.
House rules! Heh.
Pending any proof of that, I'll repeat what I said earlier. You are within RAW when ruling this way, and I am within RAW when ruling differently.


While this may not be illegal in your campaign world, it is hard to imagine situations where this is acceptable to someone-the few that exist would be situations where people want to be enthralled (a Bardic performance)...
You are playing heavily to the name of the spell while ignoring the actual effect and how it could be put into use without raising (m)any eyebrows (GM call, logically heavily influenced by pc's actions). As far as I can understand, there are two main reasons why you keep clinging to this idea. First, you assume that spellcasting is automatically known for what it is under any circumstances (at least when V,S or M components are involved). This is also influenced by how you call for checks. Secondly, your game worlds run off the assumption that magic used as part of some performance gig is something unusual and something to be wary about.

I can see how these assumptions make the spell useless. Can you see how lacking these assumptions is not contradicting RAW, and furthermore, how lacking these assumptions raises the value of this spell?



but then why are you casting the spell? Roleplaying? If your using it to then accomplish something illegal-which all of your suggests seem to be doing-then once that is discovered you've got problems because you made yourself noticeable.
That's for the player to decide. It's up to them to figure out creative or effective uses for their spells/skills/etc.


As for "well, suggestion and charm person don't let you impose disadvantage on..." I'm unamused. In most situations where enthrall could be used to distract someone, charm person accomplishes that task and suggestion just removes them from the situation-"Close your eyes and count to a million" is a valid suggestion, and is significantly better than enthrall. So is "Walk south until you're on another continent".
Sure. If you can weave your suggestion into your character's actions so that its casting may pass off as inconspicuous or at the very least as harmless, I'd agree. For reasons I already mentioned previously, I would not allow that to be the case. The other limitation is the number of people you can affect at the same time.



Charm person just lets you use your skills to effectively distract them, which is, again, well within the bounds of what a successful skill check can do-or you can rely on their charmed condition letting you leverage something more significant, like guards leaving their posts, the guy you're pickpocketing "lending" you money, or any number of other situations.
Eh, I am not sure I would agree with how you would have charm person work, at least without any further context. But that's not very relevant. The point is, that (unfortunately) there is not RAW way in which using your skills (as in, ability checks), would guarantee disadvantage on perception checks. At least within the context of a (mostly) social situation. Would I be willing to rule that a good performance check can do the same thing that enthrall does? Sure. That would not make enthrall obsolete. It would although make it redundant enough, for me to consider homebrewing the spell into giving you a bonus to your performance checks or something like that. In the absence of rules we might need to step in an create some of our own. But in doing so, there will probably be existing rules that we might need to tweak, in this case the enthrall spell.



The only thing limiting them is targets, but as your number of enthrall targets increases so does the chance that someone fails-and then, again, you've just cast a spell on them.
They might not even know. The spell effect can be explained away as a natural reaction to what might be happening (and unlike similar-ish spells like charm person there is no clauses after the fact). The casting of the spell could very well be incorporated as part of some performing act you are doing already (''scaramoush, scaramoush, pingo bongo fandago!'' he sang and the clapped his hands), which may or may not alert anyone that a spell is indeed being cast. Even if it is obvious that a spell is indeed being cast, would enthrall be necessarily any different or more worthy of rousing suspicion if I am already enhancing my performance with stuff like minor illusion (power slide which causes sparks to spring forth from my guitar). After all, I am just a performer trying to impress an audience. The answers to such questions are meaningless without additional context, and surely depend a lot on GM's discretion as much as the circumstances under which all this is happening. If you want to call ''house rules'', then you also need to provide the actual rules that restrict you to ruling in the way that coincidentally also makes (the only) sense to you.


And the idea that I just can't think of enthrall situations is insulting. No, I'm not missing something, I'm just not selectively creating situations for it to work. The number of situations where you can cast a spell, visibility and audibly, to distract someone without there being a consequence and accomplish anything of note are almost nill. I run and play in campaigns with heavy roleplaying, usually in intrigue settings-and enthrall is still completely useless. There simply aren't any safe ways to use it to distract people.
There is nothing to be insulted by. Saying that there might be other people who can figure out more creative uses for one spell is not cause for insult. To be fair, I dont believe that you cant see what little value this spell has because of a lack of creativity. I believe that your experience, preferences and expectations of a dnd game is what makes this spell seem useless to you, because you can only think about its uses under the prism of how things would work out in one of your games. People do that all the time around here. I do that quite often as well. However, an argument that essentially boils down to ''this feature is bad in general because it is worthless in my games'', is not a serious argument.


Again, this is predicated on not having a situation where you can enthrall people with impunity-but hell, let's assume you can, then you've still only given disadvantage to a check that could have been avoided with other spells, or at least almost certainly accomplished with a performance or deception check anyway. Having a spell in the game to have a "sure thing" is, in this case, irrelevant, given that it's not a sure thing; the check and saves still get made. And I don't think the argument that "we don't know if a skill check can do that" is reasonable. It's almost the textbook usage of performance to distract the guards so the party can sneak past.
Sure. If you can use skill checks to replicate spell effects (which I dont find an inherently bad idea) to a substancial effect, then certain spells might have to be altered if they are to remain part of the game. Is it a textbook use of performance to impose disadvantage on perception checks? Or to even deny perception checks? And sure, there will be many occasions where you can rely better on some other spell (or on some entirely different course of action that may not even involve spellcasting) to fulfill the aim that enthrall would help you accomplish. But can you not think of situations where enthrall would be the better option? I am sure you can. So what if they are niche or if they dont happen often in your games? The latter is not a measure of a spell's value in general. And as for the former, no one here is arguing that enthrall is a must-have.


A final word; I can well imagine situations where you've found enthrall useful because of your DM interpretation, but in those situations your DM is stretching to make your choices meaningful. A performance check would do the same thing without requiring mental gymnastics to construct just the right type of setting where it can be used safely. And if a spell is this limited-it is useless. I don't think there is actually a spell that would fit that definition as you're providing it-you can always stretch to fit a situation where you can use it-but it's so godawful and the situation is so rare that this is a pointless discussion.
I am not stretching anything, nor do I engage in mental gymnastics. That's your view of it, but it's clearly not mine. Am I attempting to create situations that are somewhat tailor-made to uses of enthrall, and provide them as examples? I sure do. It's a quick and easy way to prove that something is not useless. Am I trying to create a setting where enthrall would not be useless? Hardly. I am just contradicting your game world (unreasonable IMO) assumptions by just saying that this is not how I would run my game world, and somewhere in there trying to explain that how you run your game world (in the sense of npc reactions, consequences, and the like) is not decided by RAW, but by the GM. I agree with the point you are making about how skill checks should be more important than what some DM's would give them credit for in the absence of RAW, and this is obviously a factor that influences how spells like charm person, suggestion, enthrall, etc, end up power-wise.

[Tanarii]

Enthrall can be counterspell when cast as long as the spell components are perceptible.

Faking the spell components and not actually casting the spell won't allow someone to counterspell. Neither will a Bard singing and playing their instrument.

Counterspell is pretty good indication of which interpretation of RAW is the correct one. Of course, so is the developer clarification, albeit unofficially.

You don't have to use either. It totally nerfs a lot of illusion and enchantment spells (and a few others) to make spelkcasting identifiable and the V and S components in addition to the spell text. Or conversely it hugely buffs some of them to crazy levels to make them not. Depends on your POV.

Or you can just stand outside audible range, which is about 30ft IRL, and somewhere where they won't instantly notice your somatic components.

[Mukade]

Heat Metal.

I actually had a Wand of it made in a 5e game. And never again did we face an opponent in metal armor and the DM ruled repeatedly that stuff like swords and daggers had wooden hilts and so could be held without issue.

So, I consider it a useless spell, it might be useful if a DM didn't seemingly deliberately deny you chances to use it; but that was not the case.
Pretty sure once I sold it he threw like 8 full-plate greatsword warriors at us too.

The bard I'm DMing for uses heat metal as basically his signature spell. Have used it on a belt buckle, to get a night hag to remove her belt (where the thing that lets her go ethereal was stashed). Used it on a door handle to stop enemies escaping a room. Grappled a noblewoman's hand to the table and used it on her ring, for intimidation (accidentally initiated a combat). Maybe I'm overly generous but seems like your DM was trying to deny you usefulness..

[diplomancer]

Enthrall can be counterspell when cast as long as the spell components are perceptible.

Faking the spell components and not actually casting the spell won't allow someone to counterspell. Neither will a Bard singing and playing their instrument.

Counterspell is pretty good indication of which interpretation of RAW is the correct one. Of course, so is the developer clarification, albeit unofficially.

You don't have to use either. It totally nerfs a lot of illusion and enchantment spells (and a few others) to make spelkcasting identifiable and the V and S components in addition to the spell text. Or conversely it hugely buffs some of them to crazy levels to make them not. Depends on your POV.

Or you can just stand outside audible range, which is about 30ft IRL, and somewhere where they won't instantly notice your somatic components.

You can just as easily rule that those who learn how to counterspell (a very small minority of people the world over) are specially attuned to when a spell is being cast and can notice it automatically within range. It's having this skill that allows them to counterspell in the first place. Heck, a DM could rule, without houseruling, that you can't counterspell if you don't see the spell being cast, i.e, if the caster was able to somehow hide his spellcasting from the counterspeller, be it through deception, invisibility, hiding, or just plain cover..

By RAW, spells are perceptible. Whether and how they are perceived is a separate question, mostly up to the DM.

Developers clarification is that it is explicitly up to the DM.

[Telok]

Another way to check on the usefulness of "social" spells like Enthrall is to consider how you'd run them against the party.

If an npc bard-ish caster were to throw Enthrall at a crowd containing the pcs what happens? Does the npc get subtle spell for "performing" the spell? Can the champion and thief recognize spell casting? Do the pcs know if they've had to save versus mind control? Can they evem notice that their fellow party members just suddenly can't take their eyes off the npc?

It will also depend on how you rule npcs vs pcs. Are pcs special and only they get to know about spell casting? What if there's an npc knight or mage in the crowd? How about the town mayor? Where's the cut off between special pc perogative to make saves or arcana checks, and the npcs ability to do the same?

[Satori01]

There are a number of spells which are at least passable as a DM tool but worth less to PCs.

Dream is useful for a PC. A Familiar can be chosen to be the messenger, freeing up the PC.

Do people just read the texts of spells without imagining what the spell effect would be like?

Not being able to go back to sleep after a nightmare is not uncommon.

Now imagine you are trapped in a nightmare not generated by your own mind, but by an enemy trying to hurt you. You can’t wake up, you are trapped. You also remember the nightmare perfectly upon waking.

Also folks there is this:
On a failed save, echoes of the phantasmal monstrosity spawn a nightmare that lasts the duration of the target’s sleep and prevents the target from gaining any benefit from that rest. In addition, when the target wakes up, it takes 3d6 psychic damage.

So the night before a gladiatorial duel against the evil Emperor Commodus, you cast Dream and disrupt his sleep. The duel is set for dawn, and can not be delayed without forfeiture, which is a loss of Face/Prestige.

Commodus, for these reasons CAN NOT just go back to sleep, and push back the duel start time.

Commodus probably has a level of Exhaustion as well.
Now, imagine, (if you can), doing this for a week.

Not sleeping is lethal to humans folks, in real life.

I’m sorry, but if causing your foe to spend 16 hours of a 24 hour day trying to sleep, instead of trying to be an effective foe, is worthless in you game; then your games are quite different from the games I play in.

Those games also sound dull, lifeless and boring AF.

[TigerT20]

Dream is useful for a PC. A Familiar can be chosen to be the messenger, freeing up the PC.

Do people just read the texts of spells without imagining what the spell effect would be like?

Not being able to go back to sleep after a nightmare is not uncommon.

Now imagine you are trapped in a nightmare not generated by your own mind, but by an enemy trying to hurt you. You can’t wake up, you are trapped. You also remember the nightmare perfectly upon waking.

Also folks there is this:
On a failed save, echoes of the phantasmal monstrosity spawn a nightmare that lasts the duration of the target’s sleep and prevents the target from gaining any benefit from that rest. In addition, when the target wakes up, it takes 3d6 psychic damage.

So the night before a gladiatorial duel against the evil Emperor Commodus, you cast Dream and disrupt his sleep. The duel is set for dawn, and can not be delayed without forfeiture, which is a loss of Face/Prestige.

Commodus, for these reasons CAN NOT just go back to sleep, and push back the duel start time.

Commodus probably has a level of Exhaustion as well.
Now, imagine, (if you can), doing this for a week.

Not sleeping is lethal to humans folks, in real life.

I’m sorry, but if causing your foe to spend 16 hours of a 24 hour day trying to sleep, instead of trying to be an effective foe, is worthless in you game; then your games are quite different from the games I play in.

Those games also sound dull, lifeless and boring AF.

I've been thinking this. There's also the fact that NPCs aren't aware of the existence of long rests, and may not even know that Dream is a spell or it has been cast on them.
How many times have you woken up in the morning, to find yourself exhausted by a nightmare, and then just... go back to sleep? Like sure, you might fall back to sleep for maybe up to an hour, but people actually do things. They don't exist in a vacuum, they have jobs and children and commitments and religions and bowling clubs (bowling in the mornng may be the reason why they're being tormented by a spellcaster)

[sithlordnergal]

I've been thinking this. There's also the fact that NPCs aren't aware of the existence of long rests, and may not even know that Dream is a spell or it has been cast on them.

How many times have you woken up in the morning, to find yourself exhausted by a nightmare, and then just... go back to sleep? Like sure, you might fall back to sleep for maybe up to an hour, but people actually do things. They don't exist in a vacuum, they have jobs and children and commitments and religions and bowling clubs (bowling in the mornng may be the reason why they're being tormented by a spellcaster)

Well...first off, everyone is aware that Long Rests exist. They may not know its called a "Long Rest", but they would certainly know "Hey, if I rest for about 8 hours, I feel much better and I can do all my stuff again". They aren't so dumb that they wouldn't notice that they don't feel refreshed. They'd be exhausted still, and it can be reasonably assumed that they'd know they did not get a refreshing sleep.

As for falling back asleep, I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding. A long rest does not require you to sleep in order to gain its benefits. Otherwise Warlocks with Aspect of the Moon, Undead, and Constructs would be unable to take Long Rests since they cannot sleep. All it requires is that you take 8 hours of downtime, where you only do light activities. This can include sleeping, but it can also include reading, talking, eating, ect. You could have a nightmare, read for an hour, make some food and eat for the next half hour, then sleep for another 6.5 hours.

[Skylivedk]

Dream is useful for a PC. A Familiar can be chosen to be the messenger, freeing up the PC.

Do people just read the texts of spells without imagining what the spell effect would be like?

Not being able to go back to sleep after a nightmare is not uncommon.

Now imagine you are trapped in a nightmare not generated by your own mind, but by an enemy trying to hurt you. You can’t wake up, you are trapped. You also remember the nightmare perfectly upon waking.

Also folks there is this:
On a failed save, echoes of the phantasmal monstrosity spawn a nightmare that lasts the duration of the target’s sleep and prevents the target from gaining any benefit from that rest. In addition, when the target wakes up, it takes 3d6 psychic damage.

So the night before a gladiatorial duel against the evil Emperor Commodus, you cast Dream and disrupt his sleep. The duel is set for dawn, and can not be delayed without forfeiture, which is a loss of Face/Prestige.

- snip -

I’m sorry, but if causing your foe to spend 16 hours of a 24 hour day trying to sleep, instead of trying to be an effective foe, is worthless in you game; then your games are quite different from the games I play in.

Those games also sound dull, lifeless and boring AF.
If you start building empires, commanding armies and fight threats on and from multiple planes then having your Warlock spam Dream can become viable. He can short rest the slots right back while having caused major set backs for enemy Wizards and their ability to act.

Niche late-tier case maybe, but pretty much my campaign at the moment. At bit like Clone and upcasted Planar Binding which I doubt many play around with.

I wouldn't argue for Dream being a good spelk though; and if it is (like in my campaign) odds are you know.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Witch bolt must have helluva Stealth check since it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Power word kill is pretty damn bad. Mordenkainen's nail cleaner.

Level 8 spells are overall pretty underwhelming on most classes (ie on Warlock I'd probably rather have a 7th level spell more: that's very very bad). There's a couple of good ones (antipathy, mind blank come to mind), but the rest of them are not worth a higher slot than forcecage.

Blindness/deafness has its uses as a concentration less debuff (when upcast)

Demiplane is 8th level. I'm a fan of it.




As for worst spells, yeah PWK is a pretty bad spell. It's a trap spell, because it looks awesome to just point at someone and say "DIE!" and have them die, but just actually winds up being using your one 9th level spell slot to kill a minion-level enemy.

I'm also generally harsher on higher levels that are sub par, because there are fewer high level spell slots to use so there's no room to use sub-par spells. And, at the same time, I feel increasingly less effective and valuable as I level up after around level 10 or 11 or so, so there's more pressure to make my one level 9 spell slot one with good effect.

[MaxWilson]

Demiplane is 8th level. I'm a fan of it.

As for worst spells, yeah PWK is a pretty bad spell. It's a trap spell, because it looks awesome to just point at someone and say "DIE!" and have them die, but just actually winds up being using your one 9th level spell slot to kill a minion-level enemy.

And the worst part is, PWK is ubiquitous on WotC-authored archmages, along with the equally-feeble Time Stop. Why?!? [shakes fist]

I don't know if they're deliberately picking bad spells to keep CR low, or if they think these are good spells that archmages would and should actually learn, but to me it reads like a tremendous lack of respect for their own NPCs. "Hi, I'm Mordenkainen, and today I prepared Power Word Kill and Time Stop instead of Wish and Shapechange, because I'm in love with uselessness!"

[HPisBS]

As for worst spells, yeah PWK is a pretty bad spell. It's a trap spell, because it looks awesome to just point at someone and say "DIE!" and have them die, but just actually winds up being using your one 9th level spell slot to kill a minion-level enemy.

To be fair, it's one of the only ways to end a lvl 20 moon druid's constant wildshaping. It's also good to finish off anything with super high saves and AC (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?612408-5e-Throwdowns-2-Judgement-Day-aka-the-terminator!/page3&p=24520968#post24520968).

Kinda like Disintigrate, but with a higher hp threshold.

Edit: If there were any way around Time Stop's ending early limitation, it'd be much, much better. (Like some sort of Delayed Spell Metamagic.) But even then, it still wouldn't be as good as other 9th level spells.

[Asisreo1]

Edit: If there were any way around Time Stop's ending early limitation, it'd be much, much better. (Like some sort of Delayed Spell Metamagic.) But even then, it still wouldn't be as good as other 9th level spells.
For Time Stop, it seems you may be able to get away with Create Undead and Animate Dead since they effect uncarried objects (corpses).

Force cage + cloudkill is classic.

Having the time to buff for concentration & effect an object & deal damage all at once isn't bad. It's not spam delayed fireball good for NOVA or stacking hella buffs good but it's not horrible. A spellcaster at 9th level may just have more than one 9th-level spell known and it's possible for them to grab them all so it's not a huge waste of known spells.

[Tanarii]

And the worst part is, PWK is ubiquitous on WotC-authored archmages, along with the equally-feeble Time Stop. Why?!? [shakes fist]
Because it instakills kills a Con 12 or lower 20th PC Wizard or sorcerer? Or a 17th or lower Con 12 PC Cleric, rogue, monk, or warlock? Taking out a Pc fighter might take more damage first. But PCs have relative few hit points.

[MaxWilson]

Because it instakills kills a Con 12 or lower 20th PC Wizard or sorcerer? Or a 17th or lower Con 12 PC Cleric, rogue, monk, or warlock? Taking out a Pc fighter might take more damage first. But PCs have relative few hit points.

Hooray, you spent a 9th level spell slot and a 3rd-5th level spell slot to preemptively counteract a 3rd level Revivify spell or neutralize a 4th level Death Ward, target's choice. (PWK + Counter-Counterspell, since I assume you're not going to risk having your 9th level spell wasted by a Counterspell.)

Why would an NPC specialize in killing PCs in close-range PWK combat anyway? If you want to mess with PCs you're much better off Wishing their enemies back to life and introducing them to each other, followed by offers of a group Teleport. PWKing one PC out of four is a terrible use of an action + spell slots for an archmage with no bodyguards, which is apparently the only kind of archmage WotC writes.

[Yora]

Feign Death arguably has some synergies with Magic Jar, if you want to bring your original body along in case of Antimagic Fields. This relies though on the DM treating your catatonic body as a separate "creature" from you-in-the-possessed body. Reasonable but not necessarily RAW.

I think feign death is meant as a last ditch escape spell for NPCs. You just have to hope the players don't stab you just to be sure, and leave your body behind.
Being able to suspend poisons and diseases for an hour is pointless, as bards, clerics, and druids get lesser restoration at a lower level.

[Tanarii]

Hooray, you spent a 9th level spell slot and a 3rd-5th level spell slot to preemptively counteract a 3rd level Revivify spell or neutralize a 4th level Death Ward, target's choice. (PWK + Counter-Counterspell, since I assume you're not going to risk having your 9th level spell wasted by a Counterspell.)

Why would an NPC specialize in killing PCs in close-range PWK combat anyway? If you want to mess with PCs you're much better off Wishing their enemies back to life and introducing them to each other, followed by offers of a group Teleport. PWKing one PC out of four is a terrible use of an action + spell slots for an archmage with no bodyguards, which is apparently the only kind of archmage WotC writes.Dude, you're not thinking like a player. Instant death / one shot spells with no save scare the bejeebus out of them. PWK is a scary spell to PCs and their players. Players aren't emotionless tactical robots. Well, most of them aren't :smallamused:

[kazaryu]

Dude, you're not thinking like a player. Instant death / one shot spells with no save scare the bejeebus out of them. PWK is a scary spell to PCs and their players. Players aren't emotionless tactical robots. Well, most of them aren't :smallamused:

another thing thats extremely important to note. as has already been hinted at. PC's effective HP is much, much higher than their actual HP. since most of them have strong defensive measures. PWK ignores literally all of them except for counter spell and antimagic field. (although tbf, if you know you're going against an archmage, just AMF and let your barb **** 'em). Its not 'useless'. its somewhat niche, but definitely not useless.

[Tanarii]

another thing thats extremely important to note. as has already been hinted at. PC's effective HP is much, much higher than their actual HP. since most of them have strong defensive measures. PWK ignores literally all of them except for counter spell and antimagic field. (although tbf, if you know you're going against an archmage, just AMF and let your barb **** 'em). Its not 'useless'. its somewhat niche, but definitely not useless.
Any spell that is close to useless or extremely niche for players will be judged on that standard. And thats not completely unreasonable.

But I almost exclusively DM. And I dont use NPC casters much. I'm trying to force myself to look at spells in thesee threads from a DMs perspective, with an eye towards future encounter ideas.

Although PWK is outside of the levels I typically run games for.

[Asisreo1]

Dude, you're not thinking like a player. Instant death / one shot spells with no save scare the bejeebus out of them. PWK is a scary spell to PCs and their players. Players aren't emotionless tactical robots. Well, most of them aren't :smallamused:
It's darn near game-changing if there was only one cleric in the game and he was targeted. Maybe the Druid or Bard has something to say about death but the cleric insta-dying will always cause panic.

[Zuras]

It's darn near game-changing if there was only one cleric in the game and he was targeted. Maybe the Druid or Bard has something to say about death but the cleric insta-dying will always cause panic.

Well sure, but why didn’t the Cleric have Death Ward on themselves if they were the only one capable of rezzing folks?

Besides which, the topic is useless spells, not ones unlikely to be worth their spell slot, and I don’t think anyone reasonable would argue instakilling enemies is useless. Given the way casting works in 5e vs AD&D, the power word spells lack their primary reason for existing (single segment casting time) anyway, but it doesn’t have another spell that is strictly better.

Anyone who can would have Wish loaded into their 9th level slot, regardless of what else they have prepared, but the mental load of running that optimally for any foe besides a big bad I’ve already spent 3 sessions RP’ing and living in their headspace is too much.

[Asisreo1]

Well sure, but why didn’t the Cleric have Death Ward on themselves if they were the only one capable of rezzing folks?

He did, the lich just casted dispel magic before and when the cleric tried to reapply, the lich casted counterspell.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Melf's Acid Arrow.

Let me explain just how mathematically terrible this spell is. Imagine for a moment if we gave Melf's Acid Arrow a massive buff: it now deals all its damage on one turn, and hits automatically! So basically just a straight 6d4 (15) damage.

Oh wait, an upcast Magic Missile does 4d4+4 (14), has a better damage type, range, and combos better with various things? Guess a super-buffed version of Melf's Acid Arrow already exists.
Acid Arrow can combo with twin spell, But that's about it.
I could see a wand of acid arrow being useful as the up-scaling damage is 1d4 on the primary and secondary. So each additional charge would add 2d4 instead of 1d4+1.

But if you really want to shame Acid Arrow. A 2nd level Chromatic Orb deals 4d8(18) and you get to pick the element from a list.


Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.
How about a spell that makes the entire party invisible to one target? You really under estimate how debilitating blindness is.



Blindness/deafness is situational, but awesome when it is needed. I see it as a spell for shutting down caster types. Spellcasters are often not that tough and a con save will be tough for them to make in a way that something like a wisdom save wouldn't be.
What do you call a blind beholder? Easy pickings. Even if you only blind it for a round that's three eye ray's and possibly some more from its legendary actions. If it can't see you it can't target you with an eye ray.

[Asisreo1]

Acid Arrow can combo with twin spell, But that's about it.
I could see a wand of acid arrow being useful as the up-scaling damage is 1d4 on the primary and secondary. So each additional charge would add 2d4 instead of 1d4+1.

But if you really want to shame Acid Arrow. A 2nd level Chromatic Orb deals 4d8(18) and you get to pick the element from a list.

Druids don't get access to Magic Missile or Chromatic Orb, but a swamp Druid gets access to Acid Arrow.

[Skylivedk]

Druids don't get access to Magic Missile or Chromatic Orb, but a swamp Druid gets access to Acid Arrow.
Yeah and it would be a shame if he picked it. It's a bad spell

[MaxWilson]

Dude, you're not thinking like a player. Instant death / one shot spells with no save scare the bejeebus out of them. PWK is a scary spell to PCs and their players. Players aren't emotionless tactical robots. Well, most of them aren't :smallamused:

Exactly, I'm thinking like an archmage. An archmage is a campaign feature, not a prop for briefly scaring PCs who've never meet one before, before dying messily. (Even if they are briefly scared the first time, Fridge Logic will kick in afterwards and they'll realize that PWK is countered by Death Ward, Revivify, Fog Cloud, Invisibility, Darkness, being 61' away, etc., and will stop feeling helpless and will instead be glad it isn't Meteor Swarm or something worse.) Giving Time Stop and PWK to their archmages feels like a mark of WotC's disrespect, like they exist only to make the PCs look good.

You realize Acererak was originally supposed to be a bog-standard lich? *Every* thousand-year-old lich and hundred-year-old archmage should be treated as scarily cunning and over-prepared. PWK is a reactive tactical spell. Why can't they default to pre-casting Prismatic Sphere or Shapechange instead of PWK and Time Stop?

Time Stop is even more ubiquitous than PWK and even worse, outside of niche scenarios that the Archmages in question aren't set up to exploit. Even the Time Stop + Forcecage + Cloudkill combo is a bad use of a 9th level spell--anything that can't get out of a Forcecage was already defeated when you landed the Forcecage, and you don't need Time Stop to add the Cloudkill element, you can do it on the next round. (You also need to be prepared to shut down Dispel Magic on the Cloudkill, for things that can dispel but not teleport.)

==============


another thing thats extremely important to note. as has already been hinted at. PC's effective HP is much, much higher than their actual HP. since most of them have strong defensive measures. PWK ignores literally all of them except for counter spell and antimagic field.

It also doesn't ignore the other two standard defenses against almost all spells: not being seen, and not being within forty paces. (120')

It could run into serious trouble against another defense sometimes used by clever players in tough campaigns: scrambling everybody's appearance with Seeming. Acererak has Truesight out to 120' so wouldn't run into this unless he was out of PWK range anyway, but wasting a 9th level spell slot on an apparent wimpy wizard which turns out to be just an animated skeleton under Seeming, or a nothing-at-all generated by Mislead, would be bad.

PWK would be somewhat scary of it were a guaranteed perma-kill like Disintegrate on steroids, but it's too easy to work around to deserve 9th level respect. It plays like an 8th level spell, competitive with Feeblemind but far worse than even other tactical spells like Psychic Scream. If you really just want to scare players, try Acererak + Invulnerability.

================

P.S. Tip for those one-cleric-only parties: cleric should set up a Glyph of Raise Dead in advance (probably at home base) so that even if he dies, the party can still retrieve his body and raise him, and he can raise any others. Ditto one-bard parties. High-level wizards of course use Clone instead.

[Asisreo1]

Yeah and it would be a shame if he picked it. It's a bad spell
To the swamp Druid, compared to what? It's the only spell he has in his arsenal at the time that can bypass magic resistance apart from ice knife, which is worse because the damage if it hits is worse and the damage if it misses is worse, which doesn't even bypass magic resistance and cold is a fairly common resisted damage type.

[MaxWilson]

To the swamp Druid, compared to what? It's the only spell he has in his arsenal at the time that can bypass magic resistance apart from ice knife, which is worse because the damage if it hits is worse and the damage if it misses is worse, which doesn't even bypass magic resistance and cold is a fairly common resisted damage type.

Compared to Spike Growth, for example, which requires neither a save nor an attack roll.

By the time the druid hits 5th level, Melf's Acid Arrow is even starting to look bad compared to cantrips like Produce Flame.

[Skylivedk]

To the swamp Druid, compared to what? It's the only spell he has in his arsenal at the time that can bypass magic resistance apart from ice knife, which is worse because the damage if it hits is worse and the damage if it misses is worse, which doesn't even bypass magic resistance and cold is a fairly common resisted damage type.

Spiked growth does according to Mike Meals:
www.sageadvice.eu/2018/03/26/does-any-piercing-bludgeoning-or-slashing-damage-from-spells-count-as-magical-in-nature/amp/

Stack Exchange seems to reach a similar conclusion. Thunderwave is another option, but essentially you are fighting the wrong fight if you paint yourself into relying on melfs. It's a bad use of your slot more often than not.

If you for a specific reason need to fight something with a weakness you can exploit or you for some reason can't contribute in other ways than dealing direct damage AND your concentration slot is taken AND you're a swamp druid then maybe it's ok.

^that's a bad spell, close enough to useless

[Asisreo1]

Compared to Spike Growth, for example, which requires neither a save nor an attack roll.

By the time the druid hits 5th level, Melf's Acid Arrow is even starting to look bad compared to cantrips like Produce Flame.
Spike growth doesn't compete with AA because AA isn't concentration. So while Spike Growth is a good spell, if they can also cast AA, they could. There's nothing expressly preventing them from combo-ing.

AA compared to Produce Flame is hardly a contest.

They use the same attack modifier so we can just compare damage. If AA hits, it does 6d4 which has an average of 15 damage while Produce Flame has an average of 9. If Produce Flame misses, nothing. If AA misses, it still does a guaranteed 2d4 damage.

[JackPhoenix]

Hooray, you spent a 9th level spell slot and a 3rd-5th level spell slot to preemptively counteract a 3rd level Revivify spell or neutralize a 4th level Death Ward, target's choice. (PWK + Counter-Counterspell, since I assume you're not going to risk having your 9th level spell wasted by a Counterspell.)

Why would an NPC specialize in killing PCs in close-range PWK combat anyway? If you want to mess with PCs you're much better off Wishing their enemies back to life and introducing them to each other, followed by offers of a group Teleport. PWKing one PC out of four is a terrible use of an action + spell slots for an archmage with no bodyguards, which is apparently the only kind of archmage WotC writes.

It can also kill another archmage, who, conspicuously, has 99 hp. And no way to cast Death Ward outside Wish (which they don't have). And if you're an archmage, you propably worry about other archmages more than you worry about PCs, as archmages are much more common.

[micahaphone]

Have none of you ever DM'd with a BBEG who has a flair for the dramatic? Power Word Kill and Time Stop are two perfect spells to be flashy.
Waltz into a scene and insta kill someone for ****s and giggles? Oh man, even if the party has revivify, it's a hell of a way to make your players hate them.
And Time Stop is the perfect "foiled again, curse you!" spell, you drop it and GTFO. Leave a note telling the players that they only stopped the ritual with dumb luck and next time, oh man next time, you'll take over the realm!

[MaxWilson]

It can also kill another archmage, who, conspicuously, has 99 hp. And no way to cast Death Ward outside Wish (which they don't have). And if you're an archmage, you propably worry about other archmages more than you worry about PCs, as archmages are much more common.

So you're saying that WotC's idiot archmages are perfectly suited to killing each other because they don't bother to learn Wish (which gives Clone, which trumps PWK)? Is that supposed to be a defense of WotC's archmages, or an additional attack?

[Asisreo1]

So you're saying that WotC's idiot archmages are perfectly suited to killing each other because they don't bother to learn Wish (which gives Clone, which trumps PWK)? Is that supposed to be a defense of WotC's archmages, or an additional attack?
It might be because from a design perspective, it's just cheap. If the PC's were such a threat, why wouldn't they have just wished them dead? And if they wish them dead, it happens. Maybe there's this cool thing where the DM monkeypaw's his spell and he gets worse, but the DM is absolutely free to just say nothing bad happens.

I like to believe that Archmages actually had Wish, but they casted it for something outside the bounds and can no longer cast it. It also makes an interesting NPC as he may have wished to rescue his love from the Chains of Carceri due to a deal with a devil. IDK, something like that.

Plus, an Archmage actually has quite a few spells to buff himself with. Fire shield and Mirror Image, assuming they've already casted the spells assumed to be casted. They can also freely position themselves to an optimal position and 8th-level blast Cone of Cold, their strongest spell, without threat of Counterspell.

[samcifer]

Daylight

It has only 2 real uses and has no effect on creatures harmed by sunlight. Why use a level 3 spell slot for the Light cantrip or for getting rid of magical darkness when you can use Counterspell/Dispel Magic instead?

[Tanarii]

Have none of you ever DM'd with a BBEG who has a flair for the dramatic? Power Word Kill and Time Stop are two perfect spells to be flashy.
Waltz into a scene and insta kill someone for ****s and giggles? Oh man, even if the party has revivify, it's a hell of a way to make your players hate them.
And Time Stop is the perfect "foiled again, curse you!" spell, you drop it and GTFO. Leave a note telling the players that they only stopped the ritual with dumb luck and next time, oh man next time, you'll take over the realm!
MaxWilson approaches the game as something resembling advanced chess, with high optimization or at least highly tactical play, as from what I can tell do the groups he plays with. That's why I pointed out the same thing. But since we're talking about archmages, his approach is probably more appropriate to the discussion. They're supposed to be super intelligent. :smallamused:

[micahaphone]

MaxWilson approaches the game as something resembling advanced chess, with high optimization or at least highly tactical play, as from what I can tell do the groups he plays with. That's why I pointed out the same thing. But since we're talking about archmages, his approach is probably more appropriate to the discussion. They're supposed to be super intelligent. :smallamused:

Maybe their motivation for being evil is that they were forced into the arcane studies despite always wanting to be a theatre kid :smallbiggrin:

[MaxWilson]

MaxWilson approaches the game as something resembling advanced chess, with high optimization or at least highly tactical play, as from what I can tell do the groups he plays with. That's why I pointed out the same thing. But since we're talking about archmages, his approach is probably more appropriate to the discussion. They're supposed to be super intelligent. :smallamused:

You raise an interesting point. If the reward for making deals with Dark Powers were 18 levels of Wizard, instead of 1 level of Warlock with the chance to gain more, I would be perfectly happy when Biff Tanner the local bully turns into Biff the Archmage using the flashy spells listed in the Archmage statblock. He's *supposed* to be a meathead.

But yeah, I don't like it when WotC (or TSR) writes important, rare, highly intelligent veteran NPCs like disposable meatheads designed only for eighteen seconds of combat before dying. It breaks my willing suspension of disbelief.

P.S. Some of my players are much, much more tactically sophisticated than others. When I say on the Internet, "wizards should do XYZ, not ABC!" that in no way implies that I've never seen a player do ABC with disastrous results. In fact if I've witnessed that disaster I will be even more frustrated and vehement than if it's purely theoretical. That's one reason I'm a big believer in sandboxes, so players can choose the level of challenge that feels right to them.

Nevertheless I do find that even PCs using totally straightforward tactics are not as close to TPK as the DM may think. I'd guesstimate that Deadly x4 is approximately the point at which it's 50/50 whether the PCs or the monsters win, using straightforward tactics in both sides and assuming the DM isn't deliberately gaming the system (monsters are typical MM monsters chosen for roleplaying appropriateness, vs. deliberately chosen to be overpowered for their adjusted XP cost). Deadly x5-6 is slanted toward the monsters, in the simple case, and Deadly x10 or more essentially *requires* the players to do something clever with roleplaying, tactics, and/or magic items--at that point you can no longer count on winning straightforwardly through good die rolls.

But not everyone is comfortable in those types of encounters and players have the right to take it slow.

[Yuroch Kern]

You raise an interesting point. If the reward for making deals with Dark Powers were 18 levels of Wizard, instead of 1 level of Warlock with the chance to gain more, I would be perfectly happy when Biff Tanner the local bully turns into Biff the Archmage using the flashy spells listed in the Archmage statblock. He's *supposed* to be a meathead.

But yeah, I don't like it when WotC (or TSR) writes important, rare, highly intelligent veteran NPCs like disposable meatheads designed only for eighteen seconds of combat before dying. It breaks my willing suspension of disbelief.

P.S. Some of my players are much, much more tactically sophisticated than others. When I say on the Internet, "wizards should do XYZ, not ABC!" that in no way implies that I've never seen a player do ABC with disastrous results. In fact if I've witnessed that disaster I will be even more frustrated and vehement than if it's purely theoretical. That's one reason I'm a big believer in sandboxes, so players can choose the level of challenge that feels right to them.

Nevertheless I do find that even PCs using totally straightforward tactics are not as close to TPK as the DM may think. I'd guesstimate that Deadly x4 is approximately the point at which it's 50/50 whether the PCs or the monsters win, using straightforward tactics in both sides and assuming the DM isn't deliberately gaming the system (monsters are typical MM monsters chosen for roleplaying appropriateness, vs. deliberately chosen to be overpowered for their adjusted XP cost). Deadly x5-6 is slanted toward the monsters, in the simple case, and Deadly x10 or more essentially *requires* the players to do something clever with roleplaying, tactics, and/or magic items--at that point you can no longer count on winning straightforwardly through good die rolls.

But not everyone is comfortable in those types of encounters and players have the right to take it slow.

Well, don't forget about Wishs' flaw: these archmages probably DID have it, and now they can never have it again...

[JackPhoenix]

So you're saying that WotC's idiot archmages are perfectly suited to killing each other because they don't bother to learn Wish (which gives Clone, which trumps PWK)? Is that supposed to be a defense of WotC's archmages, or an additional attack?

What makes you think they even *can* learn Wish or Clone? "Pick whatever spell from the list you want when you level up" is a PC mechanic that's not necessarily shared by NPCs, just like there are NPCs mechanics not available to PCs. An archmage is not a wizard, despite the similarities.

[Satori01]

Exactly, I'm thinking like an archmage.

You are also Max, thinking like a player that memorizes every detail of every spell, probably looks up the opponent they are fighting so they can target every possible weakness, and metagame the hell out of every encounter.

No hate here, I’m that way as well...but 96.3% of players, are very much NOT like this.

With Mythic monsters on the menu now, PWK is useless.....die creature.....oops the Mythic Monster just transformed and regained 400HP.

[Zuras]

Daylight

It has only 2 real uses and has no effect on creatures harmed by sunlight. Why use a level 3 spell slot for the Light cantrip or for getting rid of magical darkness when you can use Counterspell/Dispel Magic instead?

Daylight is weak for a 3rd level spell, and deserves all the hate it gets for false advertising, but it’s an ongoing Dispel effect, meaning you only need to cast it once to stop all the globs of darkness that the enemy might be using.

The vast majority of the encounters I have run with Darkness using creatures, Dispel Magic would have been wasted because the enemy in question would simply re-cast it, or multiple enemies use multiple castings (Drow are never short of Darkness, many Demons cast it at will). It’s no worse than Water Walking. Niche but very handy if it comes up.

I wouldn’t regularly prepare it, but every player I’ve seen who took a Driftglobe as their treasure share has gotten at least one awesome combat use out of Daylight.

[JellyPooga]

Archmages (along with any other NPC) don't have Wish because its effects are adjudicated by the GM. It's a terrible spell to give an NPC from a narrative perspective, because it replicates an ability that the GM already has. It's entirely redundant to give an NPC that ability. It'd be like attaching a sword to a sword; yeah, ok, it's still pretty stabby, but it's way less useful than just using the sword you have without strapping on another. You don't gain anything by giving an NPC Wish because you already have the power to give them whatever spells they need and you don't need a spell to give you that justification. The only use I can see is if you wanted to use it as a narrative justification for the bad guy to defeat himself, but even then that's a terrible use because it's not your job to defeat the villains; it's the PCs.

Archmages don't have Wish, not because they're stupid, but because they don't need it.

[Chaos Jackal]

What makes you think they even *can* learn Wish or Clone? "Pick whatever spell from the list you want when you level up" is a PC mechanic that's not necessarily shared by NPCs, just like there are NPCs mechanics not available to PCs. An archmage is not a wizard, despite the similarities.

Well, if you have supposedly reached the pinnacle of magical capability, a master among arcane casters, and all you managed to learn is Time Stop and/or PW:K... yeah, my own suspension of disbelief suffers here too. Sure, the archmages might not be able to instantly learn two spells after beating up an arbitrary number of monsters, but they can most certainly scribe, maybe even research, some. They're archmages, they're supposed to be very smart, very careful and very powerful.

If the very smart, very careful and very powerful guy decided to pick up "How to terrify peasants and kill local heroes 101" over "The Sevenfold Veil, 5th edition: Takes 17 levels, still makes you untouchable" or "The secret of many bodies: Why wizards truly are gods"... yeah, I wouldn't find it very convincing either. Goes with allied NPCs too. We have a 10th or 11th level cleric ally in a Pathfinder campaign we're currently running, and he's built like a newbie's blaster. Believe me, it's really hard not to scoff every time it's brought up how he supposedly is one of his great god's finest.

Why high-level casters in general seem to suffer from a bad spell selection, I'm not sure. It could be that the writers didn't want to make a monster seem "unfair", but then again, PW:K is textbook unfair for many players, since it requires no attack and gives no save (despite likely not doing much against a properly prepared party). Or maybe, given how a monster's spellcasting is supposed to be freely modifiable without actually changing its CR, it's more like a customizable toy. "We give you the basics to use against your group of drunk murderhoboing players, and you can tune it up to match the tactical thinkers you always dream or dread of meeting."

[Tanarii]

It'd be like attaching a sword to a sword; yeah, ok, it's still pretty stabby, but it's way less useful than just using the sword you have without strapping on another.Swordchucks Yo!


You don't gain anything by giving an NPC Wish because you already have the power to give them whatever spells they need and you don't need a spell to give you that justification. The only use I can see is if you wanted to use it as a narrative justification for the bad guy to defeat himself, but even then that's a terrible use because it's not your job to defeat the villains; it's the PCs.

Archmages don't have Wish, not because they're stupid, but because they don't need it.
the primary purpose of Wish is to replicate any spell you don't have prepared/known of level 8 or lower.

So it's useful if you want your archmage NPC to cast a e.g. Cleric 8 spell in the battle using their 9th level spell slot.

[Yora]

Yeah and it would be a shame if he picked it. It's a bad spell

Druids prepare spells. They can choose to prepare it when they think they have good use for it, and then switch it back to something else when they don't need it anymore.

[JellyPooga]

Swordchucks Yo!Dammit! You made me snort my tea!:smallbiggrin:

the primary purpose of Wish is to replicate any spell you don't have prepared/known of level 8 or lower.

So it's useful if you want your archmage NPC to cast a e.g. Cleric 8 spell in the battle using their 9th level spell slot.

As GM, you can give your Archmage whatever spells you like; NPCs aren't limited to one list or another. If you want your Archmage to be able to cast a Cleric spell or a Paladin spell, then you don't need Wish for that; you can just give them that spell prepared. Wish in that context is just an additional level of redundancy; an uneccesary "explainer", if you will. An Archmage is, by definition, supposed to be one of the most powerful spellcasters alive, so who's to say what research he's done or magic he's capable of?

[kazaryu]

It also doesn't ignore the other two standard defenses against almost all spells: not being seen, and not being within forty paces. (120')

It could run into serious trouble against another defense sometimes used by clever players in tough campaigns: scrambling everybody's appearance with Seeming. Acererak has Truesight out to 120' so wouldn't run into this unless he was out of PWK range anyway, but wasting a 9th level spell slot on an apparent wimpy wizard which turns out to be just an animated skeleton under Seeming, or a nothing-at-all generated by Mislead, would be bad.

PWK would be somewhat scary of it were a guaranteed perma-kill like Disintegrate on steroids, but it's too easy to work around to deserve 9th level respect. It plays like an 8th level spell, competitive with Feeblemind but far worse than even other tactical spells like Psychic Scream. If you really just want to scare players, try Acererak + Invulnerability.


you missed the point of my post. which is fair enough, i didn't really spell it out. a barbarian isn't tanky because it has 200+ HP. 200+ HP is actually really freaking low. Small side note: the 200+ HP is also, actually, at a much higher level than can start showing up on monsters. ~150 HP would actually be a much more reasonable number. anyway, back to the meat of the topic, that 150HP is really low relatively. the reason it *seems* high, is that PC's have a ton of inherent defensive abilites that stretch that HP out. At the levels that PWK comes into play vs PC's, its literally a threat to anyone in the party. Including the 'tanky' melee character that don't really have the option of well...not being in melee.

just so we're clear, im not talking about deploying the spell just as a scare tactic, im showing that it actually has tactical utility. not *the most* tactical utility. but it definitely has some.

i will agree that its utility falls off somewhat on a PC, as at lvl 17+ doing ~100 damage in a turn is really not that much. and doing it over the course of the round is standard. it gets even worse if you as the player have no way of knowing what their actual HP is.

(also, ironically, PWK is actually one way to kill someone through invulnerability. although obviously you'd have to get tehir HP down low enough so...ya know, just pointing out the irony, not that it'd actually be super useful).

[Chronos]

A swamp druid would never need to prepare Melf's Acid Arrow. As one of their circle spells, it automatically always counts as prepared for them. So if they're in a situation where they're already concentrating on something, and it's a tough enough combat to justify another spell slot being used, and single-target damage is what seems like it'd be most useful, then Acid Arrow just might be the right choice. The only cost there is the opportunity cost in choosing to be a swamp druid rather than some other circle, but there might be some other reason for that.

[Tanarii]

200+ HP is actually really freaking low.
So low that a 18 Con Fighter or Paladin would have to be level 20 to have it.

Even a 18 Con Barbarian would be level 19.

[MaxWilson]

the primary purpose of Wish is to replicate any spell you don't have prepared/known of level 8 or lower.

So it's useful if you want your archmage NPC to cast a e.g. Cleric 8 spell in the battle using their 9th level spell slot.

It's also great for replicating a spell that takes longer than one action to cast. For example, Wish (Druid's Grove) is very powerful for blinding and slowing an entire group of enemies, and Wish (Symbol of Insanity) is a great disabler. Wish (Planar Binding VIII) is combat-usable in a way that isn't true of regular Planar Binding.

[Deathtongue]

I played in a T3 Adventurer's League game where we, a six-person party, were fighting an archmage with an AL-customized spell list alongside their minions, after winning initiative, they cast Psychic Scream. That would've been a TPK if we weren't clustered around a paladin who had 22 CHA. And if the paladin wasn't there, there would've been three people (a cleric, a fighter/barbarian, and a sorcerer) who needed to roll a 17-18 or higher on a d20 every round not to be stunned.

So I'm not particularly bothered by NPC spellcasters not picking their best spells and even sandbagging. If a DM wants to, they can easily kill most parties with high-level spellcasters given how much encounters are designed. Ask me feel about AL Season 8 deciding to give Mindflayers and Alhoons a bigger spotlight in T2 and T3 adventures.

[AdAstra]

So low that a 18 Con Fighter or Paladin would have to be level 20 to have it.

Even a 18 Con Barbarian would be level 19.

I think they're talking about in relation to other things in the universe, like say, monsters. Even a Roc (CR11) has 248 hit points, though admittedly the roc has a lot of hit points for its CR. While Power Word Kill is terrible against most monsters, it's definitely useful against PCs before level 11 or so, especially casters, who in most cases are prime targets to disable first.

[MaxWilson]

I played in a T3 Adventurer's League game where we, a six-person party, were fighting an archmage with an AL-customized spell list alongside their minions, after winning initiative, they cast Psychic Scream. That would've been a TPK if we weren't clustered around a paladin who had 22 CHA. And if the paladin wasn't there, there would've been three people (a cleric, a fighter/barbarian, and a sorcerer) who needed to roll a 17-18 or higher on a d20 every round not to be stunned.

So I'm not particularly bothered by NPC spellcasters not picking their best spells and even sandbagging. If a DM wants to, they can easily kill most parties with high-level spellcasters given how much encounters are designed. Ask me feel about AL Season 8 deciding to give Mindflayers and Alhoons a bigger spotlight in T2 and T3 adventures.

Better solution: give the Archmage good spells instead of crummy ones, update the CR, and write adventures in which archmages are treated as actual threats instead of combat speedbumps. The fact that you feel like you could potentially have *lost* that fight is a feature, not a bug.

[Zuras]

Better solution: give the Archmage good spells instead of crummy ones, update the CR, and write adventures in which archmages are treated as actual threats instead of combat speedbumps. The fact that you feel like you could potentially have *lost* that fight is a feature, not a bug.


Dying because you failed a DC 20 Int save on a spell and never got to even take an action is hardly a tactically satisfying combat for anyone.

[MaxWilson]

Dying because you failed a DC 20 Int save on a spell and never got to even take an action is hardly a tactically satisfying combat for anyone.

Classic Combat As Sport response to a Combat As War scenario. Both perspectives are deeply gamist, but they don't agree on what the game is. One style thinks the game starts when you roll initiative, and gets frustrated e.g. when someone scries the opposition ahead of time and has the perfect spell or tactic prepared to curb stomp the other guy in the first round of the fight. The other style sees the whole adventure (or even campaign) as one game, and gets bored and frustrated if just charging straight in with no preparation is always sufficient because the DM takes responsibility for making sure that even ostensibly-big-and-scary enemies are always ill-prepared--why even bother playing the game when the DM has already played it for you?

A CAW approach to a Psychic Scream archmage might involve e.g. learning that the Archmage favors Psychic Scream and having a Contingency (Greater Invisibility) in place to preempt it for at least one PC (who can then attempt Counterspell with no fear of Counter-Counterspell). Maybe also some illusions like Seeming to try to gain surprise and gank the archmage before he can cast any spells, but with Contingency (Greater Invisibility) as backup even if the deception fails, possibly also a Sharpshooter from out of spellcasting range, or an invisible monk, etc. Whatever the party can do to tilt the odds in their favor given the situation under which the meeting occurs.

I'm a CAW fan and I know from past discussions with you Zuras that you're not. There's no easy way to write a single adventure that satisfies both of us.

[Asisreo1]

Classic Combat As Sport response to a Combat As War scenario. Both perspectives are deeply gamist, but they don't agree on what the game is. One style thinks the game starts when you roll initiative, and gets frustrated e.g. when someone scries the opposition ahead of time and has the perfect spell prepared to curb stomp the other guy in the first time of the fight. The other style sees the whole adventure (or even campaign) as one game, and gets bored and frustrated if just charging straight in with no preparation is always sufficient because the DM teaches responsibility to making sure that even big scary enemies are always ill-prepared.

I'm a CAW fan and I know from past discussions with you Zuras that you're not. There's no easy way to write a single adventure that satisfies both of us.
But if the archmage was that all-powerful from the start, the entire fight has gone to DM fiat. The archmage could wish for your party to be imprisoned for eternity in the chains of carceri with no escape and if the DM monkey paws, he was going easy. If he doesn't, he just flexed his DM muscle.

I think an archmage would be prepared in different ways. He'd probably not even fight the players. He'd just need to lead them into a trap constantly and if things got dangerous, probably as soon as combat started, he'd Time Stop, delayed Blast Fireball, and Teleport to wherever would be somewhere safe for you (like a lair/bunker). Besides, an archmage is CR 13, which means the maximum level they'll be threatened by an archmage is level 12-13. PC's have just gotten 6th-7th level spells and counterspelling his Time Stop would be pretty difficult at a 35% success rate.

[MaxWilson]

But if the archmage was that all-powerful from the start, the entire fight has gone to DM fiat. The archmage could wish for your party to be imprisoned for eternity in the chains of carceri with no escape and if the DM monkey paws, he was going easy. If he doesn't, he just flexed his DM muscle.

I think an archmage would be prepared in different ways. He'd probably not even fight the players. He'd just need to lead them into a trap constantly and if things got dangerous, probably as soon as combat started, he'd Time Stop, delayed Blast Fireball, and Teleport to wherever would be somewhere safe for you (like a lair/bunker). Besides, an archmage is CR 13, which means the maximum level they'll be threatened by an archmage is level 12-13. PC's have just gotten 6th-7th level spells and counterspelling his Time Stop would be pretty difficult at a 35% success rate.

I edited in some more comments about how a CAW fight against a Psychic Scream archmage might look. The archmage is not all-powerful at all--Psychic Scream has lots of weaknesses. The game is more fun when players have to learn and exploit those weaknesses in order to triumph.

It has nothing to do with DM fiat BTW. No DM fiat is needed to learn better spells than PWK, only in-character intelligence and regular wizard abilities that archmages are known to have, by everyone including the players.

And yes, preventing an archmage from simply Teleporting away from a confrontation is a problem PCs should be prepared to solve (through role-playing, deception, or brute force). That's one thing that make PWK such a bad spell--why PWK and remain instead of casting a spell to get you out of there? Timestop + DBF is reasonable in these circumstances but so is Teleport, and it preserves your 9th level spell slot.

[Deathtongue]

Better solution: give the Archmage good spells instead of crummy ones, update the CR, and write adventures in which archmages are treated as actual threats instead of combat speedbumps. The fact that you feel like you could potentially have *lost* that fight is a feature, not a bug.
"could potentially have *lost* that fight" is a pretty big elision that handwaves the structural reasons why that fight was so potentially deadly. Given our tactical setup (90' in squares away, only one person with counterspell in the party, archmage went first) we pretty much only won that fight because we had a paladin in the party. And bumping up its CR is an extremely unsatisfying solution, not least because A) our party gaining a few levels wouldn't have really changed the difficulty of the fight and B) whether at CR13 or CR19, the archmage would've been a cake fight with some simple tactical changes reasonable for a group -- like a damage-dealer winning initiative, the fight starting in range of two casters with counterspell, soforth.

[MaxWilson]

Given our tactical setup

Exactly. In CAW influencing the eventual tactical setup (learning that the archmage likes Counterspell, preparing countermeasures, expecting the archmage to have surprises, preparing what you hope are better and more appropriate surprises) is key to the whole adventure. In CAS it's just something that the DM picks for you.

Note the purple text. If you like CAS it's fine, but I only like CAS for CRPGs. I play TTRPGs for the Combat As War, which is impossible in CRPGs.

[Deathtongue]

Exactly.

Note the purple text.I'm not sure what you're getting at. What should other parties that may not have had a paladin have done to avoid getting iced before anyone could take a turn?

[MaxWilson]

I'm not sure what you're getting at. What should other parties that may not have had a paladin have done to avoid getting iced before anyone could take a turn?

I don't know the details of what capabilities your party has or the circumstances of the conflict with the archmage so here's my best guess based on some commonly-available options.

Scrying, consulting sages or spies, seeking info on MOs. Once you know this archmage favors Psychic Scream, Contingency (Greater Invisibility, when said archmage begins using any verbal or somatic spell components) can be cast to counter Psychic Scream. Then Seeming on a bunch of animated skeletons to look like the PCs, plus Invisibility IV on the actual PCs (also counters Psychic Scream), and avoid Fireball Formation just in case said archmage has True Seeing up. Hopefully you're initiating this combat at a time and place he didn't know in advance, but if he did then you should probably assume True Seeing is in play. Try to Dispel Magic on him ASAP. Pass out Bardic Inspiration in advance to use with Counterspell/Dispel Magic and saves.

Ideally you probably want less than half the party affected by any given AoE, so try to keep at least 60' between your vanguard and main body, with Sharpshooter rearguard if you've got one as far away as possible while still keeping everyone within mutual support range and with decent lines of sight. (Precast Longstrider and prepare/learn mobility spells if possible. Also try to precast Death Ward and Freedom of Movement if you happen to have access.) Psychic Scream is hardly the only spell with a range around 100', and True Seeing is only 120', so if you've got e.g. an invisible monk 50' from the archmage at the same time the decoy PCs are 80' away and the real, invisible wizard and invisible lore bard are 120' away and the invisible Sharpshooter Fighter is 350' away in an overwatch position, that puts you in a pretty good tactical position even if the enemy wizard turns out to have True Seeing AND Psychic Scream AND Contingency (Greater Invisibility) AND hidden bodyguards AND a Teleport fallback. Prep Teleport if you can just in case you were wrong about being in a good position. (Fighter will need an independent exfiltration plan if so, but hopefully you've got a rescue plan for if his exfiltration fails.)

Nothing's a sure thing, but with the preparations listed above I'd feel relatively confident that we were ready for a CAW scenario. I'd have my fingers crossed that I wasn't overlooking anything vital. :) (Might be worth doing a quick Dispel Magic + Detect Thoughts on all the friendlies before the op to make sure they're actually friendlies, though, not Doppelgangers or hostile Simulacra replacements or bodysnatched or possessed.)

Oh, and bring whatever Planar Binding-bound elementals/Couatls you can, and keep them with the decoy PCs.

You can probably see now why a straightforward CAS fight with a PWK archmage feels like you're not even getting to play the game for a CAW fan. Nothing surprising even *happens*. That's not chaos--that's not war.

Also you can see why wizards have a lot of pressure on their spells known, and why e.g. Spell Versatility UA was irksome. Any given CAW wizard is probably going to have spells they wish were in their spellbook but aren't.

[Zuras]

Exactly. In CAW influencing the eventual tactical setup (learning that the archmage likes Counterspell, preparing countermeasures, expecting the archmage to have surprises, preparing what you hope are better and more appropriate surprises) is key to the whole adventure. In CAS it's just something that the DM picks for you.

Note the purple text. If you like CAS it's fine, but I only like CAS for CRPGs. I play TTRPGs for the Combat As War, which is impossible in CRPGs.

Max, sadly Combat as War isn’t really feasible in AL module play. You have a limited time to complete the objectives and the DM doesn’t really have the freedom to allow in extra elements from completely outside the self contained story the PCs are in.

It’s also very difficult to handle CAW when you have a different DM every night. Hard to set up an ideal ambush if you don’t know your current DMs interpretation of cover and line of sight/line of effect. Players can also get really salty when the DM kills their PC with a maneuver or rule interaction that would have been illegal at their table last week.

[Asisreo1]

And yes, preventing an archmage from simply Teleporting away from a confrontation is a problem PCs should be prepared to solve (through role-playing, deception, or brute force). That's one thing that make PWK such a bad spell--why PWK and remain instead of casting a spell to get you out of there? Timestop + DBF is reasonable in these circumstances but so is Teleport, and it preserves your 9th level spell slot.
Well, as soon as you're changing spells on an NPC, it was by DM intervention that the NPC has a different, more effective ability.

Archmages don't have PWK, liches do. For good reason that I'll return to in a moment.

Time Stop prevents any spells within to be counterspelled, including teleport. Time stop itself is harder to counterspell than Teleport. Of course, they don't have Delayed Blast Fireball so the best spell would probably be just to Teleport with maybe a domed Wall of Force just to mess with the party.

If he gets 3 turns, he can dispel magic, pwk, then animate dead on the cleric. This doesn't make the combat just bad, it makes it much worse. Now the cleric has switched teams as a zombie, unrevivable. A lich would definitely try to do that as soon as he can.

I'd imagine he'd do these things in this order assuming 2 martials, a frontliner and backliner, a wizard, and a cleric:

1st turn: Globe of Invulnerability, only the Martials or high level spells will even get to him.

2nd turn: Depending on the save of the frontliner, he'd hit him with either a Dominate Monster, Plane Shift, or Power Word Stun.

3rd Turn: target the cleric with Dispel Magic.

4th Turn: PWK the cleric

5th Turn: Animate Dead Cleric.

He may or may not have goons but he's definitely in his lair. If he doesn't have goons, he'll make some with his Animate Dead spell at some point in this rotation. Probably somewhere in between Turn 2&3.

[HPisBS]

If he gets 3 turns, he can dispel magic, pwk, then animate dead on the cleric.
...
5th Turn: Animate Dead Cleric.

He may or may not have goons but he's definitely in his lair. If he doesn't have goons, he'll make some with his Animate Dead spell at some point in this rotation. Probably somewhere in between Turn 2&3.

Animate Dead & Create Undead have 1 minute cast times. They aren't mid-combat spells. You'd have to Finger of Death to zombify the cleric like that.

[MaxWilson]

Max, sadly Combat as War isn’t really feasible in AL module play. You have a limited time to complete the objectives and the DM doesn’t really have the freedom to allow in extra elements from completely outside the self contained story the PCs are in.

It’s also very difficult to handle CAW when you have a different DM every night. Hard to set up an ideal ambush if you don’t know your current DMs interpretation of cover and line of sight/line of effect. Players can also get really salty when the DM kills their PC with a maneuver or rule interaction that would have been illegal at their table last week.

Yep, understood. AL is definitely CAS-oriented from everything I've heard of it.


Well, as soon as you're changing spells on an NPC, it was by DM intervention that the NPC has a different, more effective ability.

Archmages don't have PWK, liches do. For good reason that I'll return to in a moment.

Time Stop prevents any spells within to be counterspelled, including teleport. Time stop itself is harder to counterspell than Teleport. Of course, they don't have Delayed Blast Fireball so the best spell would probably be just to Teleport with maybe a domed Wall of Force just to mess with the party.

If he gets 3 turns, he can dispel magic, pwk, then animate dead on the cleric. This doesn't make the combat just bad, it makes it much worse. Now the cleric has switched teams as a zombie, unrevivable. A lich would definitely try to do that as soon as he can.

I'd imagine he'd do these things in this order assuming 2 martials, a frontliner and backliner, a wizard, and a cleric:

1st turn: Globe of Invulnerability, only the Martials or high level spells will even get to him.

2nd turn: Depending on the save of the frontliner, he'd hit him with either a Dominate Monster, Plane Shift, or Power Word Stun.

3rd Turn: target the cleric with Dispel Magic.

4th Turn: PWK the cleric

5th Turn: Animate Dead Cleric.

He may or may not have goons but he's definitely in his lair. If he doesn't have goons, he'll make some with his Animate Dead spell at some point in this rotation. Probably somewhere in between Turn 2&3.

There are so many holes in that battle plan it's hard to count them all.

Your Time Stop breaks when you cast your Dominate Monster/Power Word Stun/etc., and if you're concentrating on Dominate Monster your Globe of Invulnerability also ends. You don't have enough spell slots to PWK after casting Time Stop, and Animate Dead takes a minute to cast, not an action.

[Yora]

Max, sadly Combat as War isn’t really feasible in AL module play. You have a limited time to complete the objectives and the DM doesn’t really have the freedom to allow in extra elements from completely outside the self contained story the PCs are in.

But should that be the standard by which we judge things? If some people arbitrarily tie both their arms behind their back, it's no surprise that certain things don't work for them. That should not be the yardstick to evaluate normal campaigns.

[JellyPooga]

It's also great for replicating a spell that takes longer than one action to cast. For example, Wish (Druid's Grove) is very powerful for blinding and slowing an entire group of enemies, and Wish (Symbol of Insanity) is a great disabler. Wish (Planar Binding VIII) is combat-usable in a way that isn't true of regular Planar Binding.

Hmm, ok, I'll concede the point on that front. That is a great use of Wish, not only for the raw versatilty/power of it but as a tool to showcase the spellcasting proficiency of the Archmage. It could be considered a little niche, but there's a wealth of opportunities for this use of the spell, limited only by the number of splatbooks you have.

[Chaos Jackal]

But should that be the standard by which we judge things? If some people arbitrarily tie both their arms behind their back, it's no surprise that certain things don't work for them. That should not be the yardstick to evaluate normal campaigns.

Certainly not, but, to be fair, neither is CAW a proper standard. It's not just a matter of AL. Plenty of games follow some general story which throws PCs into new situations with little to no chance of preparing beforehand. There are very few, if any, recurring enemies to study and scry upon, your information is something along the lines of "X kind of creature sighted there", and any hooks you might be given are red herrings, lead to nowhere, or are purposefully vague with no way to clear them.

I like CAW. I enjoy it a lot more than CAS. But experience has shown that for the game to be CAW, you need both sides of the table playing like that. If the players see CAS and the DM sees CAW, the players are dead. If the DM sees CAS and the players see CAW, then the players are likely to roll over most of the campaign, but the vast majority of their strategies will be invalidated because the DM hasn't made a game suited to that. They will limit the intelligence game on purpose to keep a surprise factor, focus a lot more on spontaneous encounters and face-offs rather than letting the party plan meticulously, and employ plot devices to explain or advance situations, plot devices which the PCs, limited in their own mechanics as they are, have no way to account for. They also generally won't build against the PCs because the overall lack of the intelligence game works both ways, which is why even with general preparations and measures you can survive what they're throwing at you. But that's all you can count on doing in regards to CAW. Sensible preparation, general tactics and defenses, a good plan in the fight. But nothing more specific. You can rarely truly plan for a specific encounter. In fact, more often than not, you shouldn't, because your information is almost always going to be lacking and you'll commonly find yourself doing something completely irrelevant than what you expected over the course of the day, because another plot device kicked in and you're fighting rogue celestials rather than the devils you were told to expect.

CAS, on the other hand, needs only one side of the table to establish itself. If the players are doing CAS and the DM is doing CAW, the game will be over very quickly, or the DM will end up doing CAS. If the DM is doing CAS and the players are doing CAW, the players will quickly find out that most of their planning and preparation is irrelevant or can't even happen, and the game will either be over or fully turn to CAS.

However, even when that is taken into account, there's a difference between CAS and flat-out making mistakes. An archmage with Time Stop or, I don't know, Weird, is still silly even in CAS. A player group doesn't need to treat CAW in order to not walk into a room side by side and invite whatever is in there to fireball them. CAS often eliminates strategy, but tactics can still apply.

So yeah, CAS games are a lot better as a standard if you want to evaluate a "normal" campaign, but there's a difference between CAS and making mistakes like having the whole party grouped together inside a lich's lair, or a sorcerer picking up Hold Person in a game full of elementals. Likewise, there's a difference between CAS and just throwing together a bunch of spells and calling the end result an archmage.

[Deathtongue]

I also want to point out that CAW is not and SHOULD NOT BE the standard way that people who play 5E D&D want to play, AL or not. I find it fun to memorize the entire spell list and read peoples' posts of 'most common monster save', but let's not get a fat head or anything: from my experiences with home games and AL, we're a super-minority of players. The game should not advance even an inch in that direction, because if CAW became the typical way to run a campaign most players would quit out of frustration from how CAW takes a dump all over their 4Elem Monk with 12 CHA.

[Asisreo1]

There are so many holes in that battle plan it's hard to count them all.

Your Time Stop breaks when you cast your Dominate Monster/Power Word Stun/etc., and if you're concentrating on Dominate Monster your Globe of Invulnerability also ends. You don't have enough spell slots to PWK after casting Time Stop, and Animate Dead takes a minute to cast, not an action.
I never put Time Stop on the Lich's battle plan. Archmages have Time Stop, Lich's don't.

He can't raise the cleric like the plan, but he can raise the wizard with a Finger of Death. Though he'd probably still PWK the cleric just to kick him out the fight.

Globe of invulnerability existed to buy him some time until the martial arrived. Hopefully, it took 2-3 turns for him to reach anyways, and he can use his cantrip legendary action to benefit from that. Once the Martial engages, He can still cast PWS or Plane Shift, those aren't concentration. Though the martial might be threatening enough to risk Dominate Monster, The Lich will want to fall back on not dropping Globe until after the wizard has died.

I haven't even gotten into his lair options which would involve tethering the wizard, a DC18 con save or half the damage the martial does to the lich. He would target the frontliner with his 15d6 spirit attack which still does at least half damage on a success. If he used a spellslot, he's going to try to roll high on his spell slot recovery.

[Zuras]

I also want to point out that CAW is not and SHOULD NOT BE the standard way that people who play 5E D&D want to play, AL or not. I find it fun to memorize the entire spell list and read peoples' posts of 'most common monster save', but let's not get a fat head or anything: from my experiences with home games and AL, we're a super-minority of players. The game should not advance even an inch in that direction, because if CAW became the typical way to run a campaign most players would quit out of frustration from how CAW takes a dump all over their 4Elem Monk with 12 CHA.

The key is to remember it can be a continuum. I am mostly a combat-as-sport guy. The monsters will seldom totally outclass the players, and the total XP per day they can run into will be along DMG guidelines, spaced out so there is a reasonable balance between short and long rest classes.

On the other hand, I work to ensure that if the PCs want to ambush an enemy or otherwise pursue a non-direct solution, it succeeds or fails based on the enemies logical reaction. I try to set up my big finish fights to be winnable but highly risky (TPK or multiple PC death chances greater than zero but less than 30%), and usually the potential fights can be significantly easier with proper tactics.

At any rate, you can be tempermentally CAS and still give your players options to use their cleverness to bypass or simplify encounters, or feel like their own poor choices led them into the sad straits they find themselves in.

I just find, when DMing for a mix of teenagers and veterans, rolling out a TPK every time someone does something stupid would waste way too much time building new PCs. At one point my players suggested the campaign should be renamed “Ambushes Gone Wrong”.

[MaxWilson]

The game should not advance even an inch in that direction, because if CAW became the typical way to run a campaign most players would quit out of frustration from how CAW takes a dump all over their 4Elem Monk with 12 CHA.

This statement probably needs some evidence because it's not obvious that it's actually true. Taking the Psychic Scream Archmage as one example: you thought it was insanely difficult as a CAS challenge and you asked how it could have been dealt with via CAW preparation, and I showed you in detail--it turns out to be very doable, yes? Now instead of asking Max on the Internet, what if you'd gotten that same information in-game from spies, NPC sages, and the archmage's rivals and defeated enemies (maybe via Speak With Dead)? That makes it functionally a mystery/puzzle that can *optionally* be solved via brute force--if you're confident in your party you can just attack the archmage without doing any prep work and hope for the best, but if you want to "solve the mystery" you can travel around gathering info/allies and maybe some spell scrolls.

Mysteries are popular in RPGs. I personally feel that CAW-based puzzle/mystery adventures are more fun than linear CAS adventures, including and maybe even especially for Cha 12 Elemonks who are optimized for something other than raw combat. If you invested in Cha 12 presumably you want to use it to talk to people, gain info, and make allies, no? CAW is all about making that kind of activity matter.

But some people just aren't into CAW and that's okay too. I don't think there's a great way to accommodate both CAS and CAW in the same adventure because they don't agree on what the game is about.

[JellyPooga]

because if CAW became the typical way to run a campaign most players would quit out of frustration from how CAW takes a dump all over their 4Elem Monk with 12 CHA.

Fun fact! I'm currently playing in a CaW style game as a 4E Monk with 11 Cha, fully intent on bumping it to 12 with a +1/+1 ASI at lvl.4 (the other +1 going into my 13 Str). Having a blast so far with zero intention of rage-quitting :smallbiggrin:

[JackPhoenix]

if CAW became the typical way to run a campaign most players would quit out of frustration from how CAW takes a dump all over their 4Elem Monk with 12 CHA.

If anything, that character would be more viable in CaW than in CaS. CaW style accepts that the sides of conflict aren't balanced, and leave it up to the players how to deal with that imbalance through their own ingenuity. Some of that imbalance being player-induced rather than the result of the set scenario won't change much.

In CaS, it is assumed the sides are roughly balanced for the expected difficulty. If one character doesn't fit that expected balance (either by under- or overperforming), well... that's where many of the "x is broken!" threads originate from (not all of them, of course... few things genuinely *are* broken).

[Skylivedk]

Max, sadly Combat as War isn’t really feasible in AL module play. You have a limited time to complete the objectives and the DM doesn’t really have the freedom to allow in extra elements from completely outside the self contained story the PCs are in.

It’s also very difficult to handle CAW when you have a different DM every night. Hard to set up an ideal ambush if you don’t know your current DMs interpretation of cover and line of sight/line of effect. Players can also get really salty when the DM kills their PC with a maneuver or rule interaction that would have been illegal at their table last week.
I really hope that DnD won't be designed around AL (and fear that it will). True to all the gods I don't believe, and with no intent of belittling other people's fun, AL sounds to me as something approaching the worst way of playing I've heard of (barring hardcore railroading and extremely arbitrary DMs and Mary Sues)


Well, as soon as you're changing spells on an NPC, it was by DM intervention that the NPC has a different, more effective ability.

Archmages don't have PWK, liches do. For good reason that I'll return to in a moment.

Time Stop prevents any spells within to be counterspelled, including teleport. Time stop itself is harder to counterspell than Teleport. Of course, they don't have Delayed Blast Fireball so the best spell would probably be just to Teleport with maybe a domed Wall of Force just to mess with the party.

If he gets 3 turns, he can dispel magic, pwk, then animate dead on the cleric. This doesn't make the combat just bad, it makes it much worse. Now the cleric has switched teams as a zombie, unrevivable. A lich would definitely try to do that as soon as he can.

I'd imagine he'd do these things in this order assuming 2 martials, a frontliner and backliner, a wizard, and a cleric:

1st turn: Globe of Invulnerability, only the Martials or high level spells will even get to him.

2nd turn: Depending on the save of the frontliner, he'd hit him with either a Dominate Monster, Plane Shift, or Power Word Stun.

3rd Turn: target the cleric with Dispel Magic.

4th Turn: PWK the cleric

5th Turn: Animate Dead Cleric.

He may or may not have goons but he's definitely in his lair. If he doesn't have goons, he'll make some with his Animate Dead spell at some point in this rotation. Probably somewhere in between Turn 2&3.

My experience is that (single) liches don't live that long against a good party. Action economy makes them pretty squishy.


But should that be the standard by which we judge things? If some people arbitrarily tie both their arms behind their back, it's no surprise that certain things don't work for them. That should not be the yardstick to evaluate normal campaigns.

Agreed! I find the tension to be one of the ongoing tensions in 5e. Some years ago I wrote a pretty long thread to get inspiration on why parties do NOT get killed by high level Wizards once they get a certain reputation. I think the game really struggles with balance in long-term sandbox games since Simulacrum, Planar Binding and True Polymorph really break how the party can interact with the world. In general, 5e doesn't handle army building, buying pets and minionmancy terribly will. Other stuff like magic mouth can also have a campaign crashing effect at a lower level.


Certainly not, but, to be fair, neither is CAW a proper standard. It's not just a matter of AL. Plenty of games follow some general story which throws PCs into new situations with little to no chance of preparing beforehand. There are very few, if any, recurring enemies to study and scry upon, your information is something along the lines of "X kind of creature sighted there", and any hooks you might be given are red herrings, lead to nowhere, or are purposefully vague with no way to clear them.

I like CAW. I enjoy it a lot more than CAS. But experience has shown that for the game to be CAW, you need both sides of the table playing like that. If the players see CAS and the DM sees CAW, the players are dead. If the DM sees CAS and the players see CAW, then the players are likely to roll over most of the campaign, but the vast majority of their strategies will be invalidated because the DM hasn't made a game suited to that. They will limit the intelligence game on purpose to keep a surprise factor, focus a lot more on spontaneous encounters and face-offs rather than letting the party plan meticulously, and employ plot devices to explain or advance situations, plot devices which the PCs, limited in their own mechanics as they are, have no way to account for. They also generally won't build against the PCs because the overall lack of the intelligence game works both ways, which is why even with general preparations and measures you can survive what they're throwing at you. But that's all you can count on doing in regards to CAW. Sensible preparation, general tactics and defenses, a good plan in the fight. But nothing more specific. You can rarely truly plan for a specific encounter. In fact, more often than not, you shouldn't, because your information is almost always going to be lacking and you'll commonly find yourself doing something completely irrelevant than what you expected over the course of the day, because another plot device kicked in and you're fighting rogue celestials rather than the devils you were told to expect.

CAS, on the other hand, needs only one side of the table to establish itself. If the players are doing CAS and the DM is doing CAW, the game will be over very quickly, or the DM will end up doing CAS. If the DM is doing CAS and the players are doing CAW, the players will quickly find out that most of their planning and preparation is irrelevant or can't even happen, and the game will either be over or fully turn to CAS.

However, even when that is taken into account, there's a difference between CAS and flat-out making mistakes. An archmage with Time Stop or, I don't know, Weird, is still silly even in CAS. A player group doesn't need to treat CAW in order to not walk into a room side by side and invite whatever is in there to fireball them. CAS often eliminates strategy, but tactics can still apply.

So yeah, CAS games are a lot better as a standard if you want to evaluate a "normal" campaign, but there's a difference between CAS and making mistakes like having the whole party grouped together inside a lich's lair, or a sorcerer picking up Hold Person in a game full of elementals. Likewise, there's a difference between CAS and just throwing together a bunch of spells and calling the end result an archmage.
I'm more of a CAW player with a CAS and my party also has CAF (combat as filler(c)) players. I find you can easily be that CAW player, but you have to prepare differently:
A) assume you can't get perfect scouting
B) assume ninja dragons, etc.: No matter what you do combat will sometimes start at a 150 feet range.
C) be good at informing the DM where you were close to death even if hp didn't say so (to avoid rocket tag and having encounters scale beyond the none-CAW players)


I never put Time Stop on the Lich's battle plan. Archmages have Time Stop, Lich's don't.

He can't raise the cleric like the plan, but he can raise the wizard with a Finger of Death. Though he'd probably still PWK the cleric just to kick him out the fight.

Globe of invulnerability existed to buy him some time until the martial arrived. Hopefully, it took 2-3 turns for him to reach anyways, and he can use his cantrip legendary action to benefit from that. Once the Martial engages, He can still cast PWS or Plane Shift, those aren't concentration. Though the martial might be threatening enough to risk Dominate Monster, The Lich will want to fall back on not dropping Globe until after the wizard has died.

I haven't even gotten into his lair options which would involve tethering the wizard, a DC18 con save or half the damage the martial does to the lich. He would target the frontliner with his 15d6 spirit attack which still does at least half damage on a success. If he used a spellslot, he's going to try to roll high on his spell slot recovery.
As has been pointed out: won't work. Also the hp of a lich you encounter at least than 120 feet (there's a couple of those in the pre-written campaigns) just isn't up for that long a plan.

This statement probably needs some evidence because it's not obvious that it's actually true. Taking the Psychic Scream Archmage as one example: you thought it was insanely difficult as a CAS challenge and you asked how it could have been dealt with via CAW preparation, and I showed you in detail--it turns out to be very doable, yes? Now instead of asking Max on the Internet, what if you'd gotten that same information in-game from spies, NPC sages, and the archmage's rivals and defeated enemies (maybe via Speak With Dead)? That makes it functionally a mystery/puzzle that can *optionally* be solved via brute force--if you're confident in your party you can just attack the archmage without doing any prep work and hope for the best, but if you want to "solve the mystery" you can travel around gathering info/allies and maybe some spell scrolls.

Mysteries are popular in RPGs. I personally feel that CAW-based puzzle/mystery adventures are more fun than linear CAS adventures, including and maybe even especially for Cha 12 Elemonks who are optimized for something other than raw combat. If you invested in Cha 12 presumably you want to use it to talk to people, gain info, and make allies, no? CAW is all about making that kind of activity matter.

But some people just aren't into CAW and that's okay too. I don't think there's a great way to accommodate both CAS and CAW in the same adventure because they don't agree on what the game is about.
I have a strong preference for having to get my Intel and being ready to run. It makes it much easier to RP when I don't have to have cognitive dissonance of doing things that would get me killed for the sake of the DM's pace.

If anything, that character would be more viable in CaW than in CaS. CaW style accepts that the sides of conflict aren't balanced, and leave it up to the players how to deal with that imbalance through their own ingenuity. Some of that imbalance being player-induced rather than the result of the set scenario won't change much.

In CaS, it is assumed the sides are roughly balanced for the expected difficulty. If one character doesn't fit that expected balance (either by under- or overperforming), well... that's where many of the "x is broken!" threads originate from (not all of them, of course... few things genuinely *are* broken).

I find both sides to have "X is broken", but for very different reasons. CAW players frequently dislike a bunch of options (especially a lot of martials) due to their inability to accumulate power over time/with prepetration (there's no mechanically supported Barbarian answer to Planar Binding). Also having a Champion in your party can feel really lackluster in a high difficulty CAW campaign.

[Chaos Jackal]

I'm more of a CAW player with a CAS and my party also has CAF (combat as filler(c)) players. I find you can easily be that CAW player, but you have to prepare differently:
A) assume you can't get perfect scouting
B) assume ninja dragons, etc.: No matter what you do combat will sometimes start at a 150 feet range.
C) be good at informing the DM where you were close to death even if hp didn't say so (to avoid rocket tag and having encounters scale beyond the none-CAW players)

Seems we are mostly in agreement. It's not that you can't be the one CAW player in a CAS group, it's just that a big part of strategy gets thrown out of the window. That's where the biggest disconnect is. Tactics are always tactics, but planning beforehand scales from bare bones (maybe you know general things about the nature of the enemy and can prepare more specialized spells than just "generally good in most situations" picks) to actually counterproductive (wasted two hours of game time to assault the lair of the dragon and the dragon was a ninja and still managed to somehow start the fight in an 150ft, roll initiative face-off).

In regards to the actual thread, this disconnect is what can cause numerous spells on both sides of the spectrum to become nigh useless.

Such as how PW:K is of little use to players or DMs if the table goes CAW, as has already been said (personally, I think it sucks for CAS too).

Likewise, in a long-running campaign I'm currently in, I was heavily contemplating Scrying on my warlock when I was first making him. By the time I was lv9, I had almost dropped it from my options, because, after a year of playing, there was one, maybe two instances where Scrying could've been useful due to one enemy actually returning a couple times; otherwise, it was always unknown enemies, unknown territory, no intel. In that same game, I've long dropped the detect magic invocation despite being the only person in the party who could cast it, because the DM did away with schools of magic, often had me roll arcana to glean whatever little information I could after using the spell, and even asked for arcana rolls to notice magic in the air and stuff like that from me and other people in the party. He pretty much turned arcana into lesser detect magic and nerfed the spell to match, to the point where it was borderline irrelevant which of the two I was using, because I nearly always got to roll, I nearly always got vague feelings instead of actual info, and even for the basic "Is there magic here?" question I was asked for arcana checks.

Come to think of it, in that long list I made many pages back, I should've probably included "most divinations" alongside "most illusions" when talking of honorable mentions that rely heavily on the DM.

[Yora]

I find both sides to have "X is broken", but for very different reasons. CAW players frequently dislike a bunch of options (especially a lot of martials) due to their inability to accumulate power over time/with prepetration (there's no mechanically supported Barbarian answer to Planar Binding). Also having a Champion in your party can feel really lackluster in a high difficulty CAW campaign.

That really sounds like a Sport issue. Not being provided abilities that serve as counters to other abilities.
War gameplay is about situations always being inherently unfair and making use of solutions that go around the established rules.

[Skylivedk]

That really sounds like a Sport issue. Not being provided abilities that serve as counters to other abilities.
War gameplay is about situations always being inherently unfair and making use of solutions that go around the established rules.

Maybe I was unclear: I find (most) Barbarians and a much of other martials to lose relative power due to their lack of tools for long term play. I don't have that issue in my CaS games since Scrying, Planar Binding etc are not as useful. You are of course free to disagree :)

[MaxWilson]

I'm more of a CAW player with a CAS and my party also has CAF (combat as filler(c)) players. I find you can easily be that CAW player, but you have to prepare differently:
A) assume you can't get perfect scouting
B) assume ninja dragons, etc.: No matter what you do combat will sometimes start at a 150 feet range.
C) be good at informing the DM where you were close to death even if hp didn't say so (to avoid rocket tag and having encounters scale beyond the none-CAW players)

I have a strong preference for having to get my Intel and being ready to run. It makes it much easier to RP when I don't have to have cognitive dissonance of doing things that would get me killed for the sake of the DM's pace.

If you're a CAW player at a CAS table you can also get frustrated when most monsters turn out to be ninjas who commonly attack not just from 150' but from 20', because that's what it takes to make a "balanced combat", even though there's no logical way for all of these monsters to time their movements so exquisitely that they just happen to pop out of the walls/Ethereal plane right when you're passing even if you've scouted ahead somehow and didn't see any such monsters.

It sounds like your DM doesn't do this, which is awesome and a nice concession to CAW, but could be frustrating if I were a CAS-minded Paladin or Barbarian playing at the same table.

A CAW player will want to treat getting ambushed at 30' range by a dragon diving out of the sun as a recon failure of some sort, something that was at least theoretically preventable or at least mitigatable, and will get frustrated by a DM who treats it as a common scenario "hook" that happens through DM fiat--just like the CAS player would likely get frustrated if the monsters started rolling natural 20s on all their attacks in combat through DM fiat.

It's difficult to accommodate a CAS-minded smitey Paladin or PAM/GWM Barbarian and a CAW-minded Scrying/Planar Binding Diviner or Spell Sniper/Scrying Chainlock in the same adventure structure.

"CAF" is an amusing term, nice.

[Tanarii]

You guys have a weird idea of what CaW means,

It doesn't mean perfect information against known enemies and always picking the battlefield. That's a white room, even if it's a white room with specific terrain., so to speak.

It doesn't mean you can't be going into an unknown situation with little intel. It means you go into the unknown situation with little intel trying to get as much as you can along the way. And utilizing it as best you can.

It doesn't mean ambush situations will never happen to the PCs. It means they'll be cautious, and have a plan to withdraw if they assume they are outmatched.

All CaW really means is: there's no assumption you can defeat any creature or group of creature you encounter, so behave appropriately.

Components of that can (and traditionally) include: no assumption that all encounters start with initiative; no assumption that all encounters will be combat, that an encounter reaction needs to be determined first ;morale matters for the enemy; morale matters for the PCs, it's just not a rolled score, but they darn well better be prepared to retreat early, because if they wait too long they're all dead; random encounters that range from interrupting rest and a nuisance to definitely lethal if a fight happens; as much effective scouting as you can get; general strategies and preplanned tactics, especially for escape; understanding pursuit and evasion, especially since 5e doesn't have rules for it.

Not all of those are required, but they have reasons to be there, in that they play to the base meaning of CaW, no assumption that if you fight, you will win.

[MaxWilson]

You guys have a weird idea of what CaW means,

It doesn't mean perfect information against known enemies and always picking the battlefield. That's a white room, even if it's a white room with specific terrain., so to speak.

It doesn't mean you can't be going into an unknown situation with little intel. It means you go into the unknown situation with little intel trying to get as much as you can along the way. And utilizing it as best you can.

It doesn't mean ambush situations will never happen to the PCs. It means they'll be cautious, and have a plan to withdraw if they assume they are outmatched.

Yes, but it also means players will be inclined to treat getting frequently ambushed as a failure of some kind, something that is subject to player control: "maybe we should start wearing disguises?" And if it turns out not to be subject to player control, just something the DM frequently establishes through fiat to make the scenario "interesting" in the DM's mind, the CAW players will find that distressing in the same way a CAS player would find it distressing if monsters started rolling 20s on all their attacks through DM fiat. It breaks part of the game that should be fair.

I 100% agree that war is chaos and that plans can fail ("plans are useless, but planning is indispensable"). CAW does not mean always succeeding.

P.S. CAW, simulationism, and open-world sandboxing don't absolutely *need* to go together, but they do go well together.

[AdAstra]

Yes, but it also means players will be inclined to treat getting frequently ambushed as a failure of some kind, something that is subject to player control: "maybe we should start wearing disguises?" And if it turns out not to be subject to player control, just something the DM frequently establishes through fiat to make the scenario "interesting" in the DM's mind, the CAW players will find that distressing in the same way a CAS player would find it distressing if monsters started rolling 20s on all their attacks through DM fiat. It breaks part of the game that should be fair.

I 100% agree that war is chaos and that plans can fail ("plans are useless, but planning is indispensable"). CAW does not mean always succeeding.

P.S. CAW, simulationism, and open-world sandboxing don't absolutely *need* to go together, but they do go well together.

I might be off-base on this, but wouldn't most DMs that are capable of effectively simulating enemy forces of varying competency be able and willing to change up monster stat blocks without much hassle? Like, a crucial part of any CAW encounter setup is going to be "your enemies are not stat blocks, they are living creatures that would prefer for you to no longer be a living creature". Changing up spell lists, giving monsters nonstandard equipment and skills, designing custom monsters to fill certain logical niches, etc.

I may be misinterpreting your point, but I get the feeling that people who are disappointed by the Archmage not getting X spell aren't going to let the stat block stop them.

[Tanarii]

P.S. CAW, simulationism, and open-world sandboxing don't absolutely *need* to go together, but they do go well together.Eh, simulationism I can take or leave as long as I have a basic idea of how to rule on the results of attempted action within the abstracted rules framework. For the specific example of 5e it provides ability checks and DCs* and damage ranges and a bunch of other stuff in the DMG.

Open-world sandboxing isn't necessary but it does mean the DM is either predetermining to put a bunch of out of power band threats in the PCs way intentionally ... or making encounter tables that result in it. Because like I said, the only precondition for CaW instead of CaS is no reasonable guarantee you can win any fight in between you and your goal.

*although I think the provided DCs are too high. Even if you assume proficiency.

[zlefin]

Exactly. In CAW influencing the eventual tactical setup (learning that the archmage likes Counterspell, preparing countermeasures, expecting the archmage to have surprises, preparing what you hope are better and more appropriate surprises) is key to the whole adventure. In CAS it's just something that the DM picks for you.

Note the purple text. If you like CAS it's fine, but I only like CAS for CRPGs. I play TTRPGs for the Combat As War, which is impossible in CRPGs.

Why do you think combat as war is impossible in crpgs? While rare, it doesn't seem like it should be impossible, and there should be some niche games at least which feature it. Though they may not have quite as vast the level of flexibility you'd like, there should be more than enough room to have them be combat as war.

[Yora]

But does anyone have any spells you consider to be useless in most situations?

[Asisreo1]

My experience is that (single) liches don't live that long against a good party. Action economy makes them pretty squishy.

Depends on the context. If the Lich's Phylactery is known to be safe, the lich doesn't need to preserve his life as much since he knows he'll return.


As has been pointed out: won't work. Also the hp of a lich you encounter at least than 120 feet (there's a couple of those in the pre-written campaigns) just isn't up for that long a plan.

It could work. Perfectly viable plan. You can't be rigid with it, though. Sometimes, you'll need to improvise. If the Barbarian makes it to you on the first turn, hit him with Plane Shift. If the Wizard is being extraordinarily meddlesome, cast Disintegrate while remaining tethered to him. If the Cleric seems to be forcing turning you way too much and you're getting nervous, cast invisibility on yourself. The cool thing about being a lich is you can stay invisible while using lair actions to put serious hurt on the party from hiding.

[Skylivedk]

Eh, simulationism I can take or leave as long as I have a basic idea of how to rule on the results of attempted action within the abstracted rules framework. For the specific example of 5e it provides ability checks and DCs* and damage ranges and a bunch of other stuff in the DMG.

Open-world sandboxing isn't necessary but it does mean the DM is either predetermining to put a bunch of out of power band threats in the PCs way intentionally ... or making encounter tables that result in it. Because like I said, the only precondition for CaW instead of CaS is no reasonable guarantee you can win any fight in between you and your goal.

*although I think the provided DCs are too high. Even if you assume proficiency.

Your definition of CaW seems to be pretty much mine. I don't presume perfect information in CaW games, I just strive for it way more exactly because not knowing it's a quick way to learn what death is all about.


Depends on the context. If the Lich's Phylactery is known to be safe, the lich doesn't need to preserve his life as much since he knows he'll return.

It could work. Perfectly viable plan. You can't be rigid with it, though. Sometimes, you'll need to improvise. If the Barbarian makes it to you on the first turn, hit him with Plane Shift. If the Wizard is being extraordinarily meddlesome, cast Disintegrate while remaining tethered to him. If the Cleric seems to be forcing turning you way too much and you're getting nervous, cast invisibility on yourself. The cool thing about being a lich is you can stay invisible while using lair actions to put serious hurt on the party from hiding.

I was thinking for the encounter. Not so much the phylactery. And I can see I wrote least instead of less. Anyway, Invisibility won't save a lich. It can still be targeted, grappled and pounded to bone dust. Unfortunately, my main DM is not super strong at playing high level casters (he loves psychic scream though), but I'd also say the printed adventures are not doing him any favours. Most high level casters in the pre-written seem to NBA players with the idiot ball ;)

[MaxWilson]

I might be off-base on this, but wouldn't most DMs that are capable of effectively simulating enemy forces of varying competency be able and willing to change up monster stat blocks without much hassle? Like, a crucial part of any CAW encounter setup is going to be "your enemies are not stat blocks, they are living creatures that would prefer for you to no longer be a living creature". Changing up spell lists, giving monsters nonstandard equipment and skills, designing custom monsters to fill certain logical niches, etc.

I may be misinterpreting your point, but I get the feeling that people who are disappointed by the Archmage not getting X spell aren't going to let the stat block stop them.

My original gripe in this thread is that WotC writes dumb archmages and uses them disrespectfully as combat speedbumps instead of intelligent, veteran NPCs. Discussion of CAW arose as an alternative to how WotC is currently doing it.

You're correct that an experienced DM of any flavor has no real need for WotC adventure modules or WotC stat blocks, but (1) the issues go much deeper than swapping out one spell, they go to fundamental questions like how much of the adventure is structured around acquiring clues and what the consequences are allowed to be for players who are underprepared and fail, (2) the kids would say "Oberoni Fallacy" here but I'll just say "I never said I use WotC's crummy adventures, I'm explaining why I typically don't."


Why do you think combat as war is impossible in crpgs? While rare, it doesn't seem like it should be impossible, and there should be some niche games at least which feature it. Though they may not have quite as vast the level of flexibility you'd like, there should be more than enough room to have them be combat as war.

Mmmmmm. You make me suspect I just haven't thought about it enough.

What I had in mind when I wrote that originally is that I know exactly how to CRPGize the way I'd CAS a WotC adventure like Out of the Abyss, Rise of Tiamat, or Dungeons of a Mad Mage, but I don't know how to CRPGize the way I'd TTRPG one of my sandboxy CAS adventures or pre-program options for all the solutions that players wound up attempting--but that might have more to do with sandboxing than CAW. You're probably right that there are at least some aspects of CAW that can be CRPGed just by having really tough fights that can be made easier if you think strategically (divide and conquer, recon, recruiting allies).


Unfortunately, my main DM is not super strong at playing high level casters (he loves psychic scream though), but I'd also say the printed adventures are not doing him any favours. Most high level casters in the pre-written seem to NBA players with the idiot ball ;)

That description reminds me of the way Ed Greenwood writes Phaerimm archmages, or used to back in the 90's at least. Five-thousand-year-old archmages as bumbling short-lived mooks, really?

In contrast I looove the way Edward Keyes writes Korel the Necromancer and Rary the Traitor. http://www.edkeyes.org/fiction/

[AdAstra]

But does anyone have any spells you consider to be useless in most situations?

Not necessarily useless, but Snilloc’s Snowball Swarm is worse than Shatter in pretty much every way except for the save it uses. Less damage, much smaller area, more commonly resisted damage type. By the time you’re in a situation where you can and really need to consider monster saves, you’ve got Fireball, Vitriolic Sphere, etc.

[Telok]

But does anyone have any spells you consider to be useless in most situations?

With certain DMs (usually the newer ones): all forms of concealment/diatraction illusions other than invisibility and mirror image, all information gathering divinations other than detect magic and true seeing.

But thats more there being no good advice in the books on how to handle vaguely worded spells than the spells themselves.

[J-H]

Not necessarily useless, but Snilloc’s Snowball Swarm is worse than Shatter in pretty much every way except for the save it uses. Less damage, much smaller area, more commonly resisted damage type. By the time you’re in a situation where you can and really need to consider monster saves, you’ve got Fireball, Vitriolic Sphere, etc.

Wow, yes. Using average damage, even for a cold-themed draconic sorcerer, a +3 CHA mod to damage only makes it even with Shatter.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Wow, yes. Using average damage, even for a cold-themed draconic sorcerer, a +3 CHA mod to damage only makes it even with Shatter.

I was going to defend Snowball Swarm as not-totally-useless precisely for a cold-themed blaster Draconic Sorcerer, but then I thought: would I really take it, even then? Even if I also had Elemental Adept (Cold)? Probably not. If it had a 10 ft. radius like Shatter, then it'd be worth having until 7th or 8th level, but as-is it's just too bad a spell. On the other hand, Ice Storm would be okay for such a character, being more on-theme than Fireball and doing comparable damage w/ a little BFC thrown in.

[Tanarii]

Snowball swarm has an extra 30ft of range, and is a Dex save instead of Con. That's potentially a 20% extra chance to do full damage against e.g. 2 Ogres pounding on your Fighter.

There's also times where the reduced AoE size might make avoiding friendly fire easier. Not as many as it would help you catch an extra target of course,