Contingency - what conditions can be used as a trigger? [Archive]

DwarfFighter

2020-07-07, 05:37 PM

Nagog

2020-07-07, 05:45 PM

I think it should depend on the complexity of the trigger, and the effect it would have on the game. In the case of the assassin, I'd rule that the attack lands, and then the spell releases. You're still gonna take damage, but the spell will likely protect you from any follow up attack.
In terms of the Alignment and Red Dragon stipulations, I'd rule that the character needs to believe the conditions are met for it to trigger. I guess this would apply to the assassin as well, as taking a knife to the back and suspecting its a Drow doing it (followed by immediately obscured vision) would trigger, but if the character doesn't believe the conditions have been met (in situations regarding meta stuff like that) I'd rule it as not triggering.

Chronos

2020-07-08, 08:19 AM

Then you get into things like skill checks. "Cast a spell if anything sneaks up behind me": Well, you might know when something sneaks up behind you-- Roll a perception check. Now, what happens if the sneaking is while you're asleep: Is the spell also asleep? Does it roll its own perception check instead of you? Just how good is the spell's perception, anyway?

LudicSavant

2020-07-08, 08:30 AM

Ok, so the Contingency spell description doesn't really set any limits to the trigger. The suggested trigger "being engulfed in liquid" for casting Waterbreathing kinda sets the bar at something the caster experiences and understands, but most usages of the spell I see relies on meta gaming, using game mechanic circumstance like being subject to a named condition or having ones hit-points reduce to a certain level.

What sort of limits do you set?

I find it hard to accept that any condition the player can specify must be accepted.

"A character of Evil alignment approaches to within 10 ft." Sure, if a Lich steps into the casters personal space, this trigger is fine. But what if the character is an Evil doppelgänger posing as a close friend, or an Good-aligned innocent suspected of murder? Is it the absolute or the perceived circumstance that triggers the Contingency?

If it the absolute circumstance, then that opens a Pandora's box of exploits. "Cast Fairy Fire when the King's advisor is a Red Dragon in disguise!" +++ fireworks +++ "Suspicion confirmed."

If it is subject to perceived circumstance, you may need to preempt what the character will learn, and it also allows for weird paradoxes. "Cast Fog Cloud on my location right before a Drow Assassin attacks me from hiding!" If the Contingency triggers, the caster may never see the assassin and asserts in his nature with certainty, but if the spell is not cast then he will know and the spell should have been cast, and... Well, you get the idea.

It's often been observed that unlike many similar mechanics (like Magic Mouth, which explicitly says that the trigger must be visual or auditory event within 30 feet -- though the caster needn't be able to actually perceive it themselves), Contingency conspicuously lacks pretty much any mention of limitations on what kind of conditions can trigger it... which if taken to its logical extreme, can make this property even more valuable than the Contingent spell itself ('if X is a true statement, do Y' is just... beyond the potency of any divination spell and would completely and utterly change the entire game world by allowing a culture the ability to test and confirm any hypothesis).

That is, of course, silly, so you should probably expect your DM to intervene. But yeah, as far as I know, there's nothing against any of those exploits in RAW.

Man_Over_Game

2020-07-08, 08:48 AM

Ok, so the Contingency spell description doesn't really set any limits to the trigger. The suggested trigger "being engulfed in liquid" for casting Waterbreathing kinda sets the bar at something the caster experiences and understands, but most usages of the spell I see relies on meta gaming, using game mechanic circumstance like being subject to a named condition or having ones hit-points reduce to a certain level.

What sort of limits do you set?

I find it hard to accept that any condition the player can specify must be accepted.

"A character of Evil alignment approaches to within 10 ft." Sure, if a Lich steps into the casters personal space, this trigger is fine. But what if the character is an Evil doppelgänger posing as a close friend, or an Good-aligned innocent suspected of murder? Is it the absolute or the perceived circumstance that triggers the Contingency?

If it the absolute circumstance, then that opens a Pandora's box of exploits. "Cast Fairy Fire when the King's advisor is a Red Dragon in disguise!" +++ fireworks +++ "Suspicion confirmed."

If it is subject to perceived circumstance, you may need to preempt what the character will learn, and it also allows for weird paradoxes. "Cast Fog Cloud on my location right before a Drow Assassin attacks me from hiding!" If the Contingency triggers, the caster may never see the assassin and asserts in his nature with certainty, but if the spell is not cast then he will know and the spell should have been cast, and... Well, you get the idea.

I mean, the simple answer is that the Contingency just has to be something that the owner has to be aware of or react to.

Put another way, Contingency is nothing more than a Readied spell that's being held by the amulet. In what circumstances would you allow a player to cast a Readied spell? All the same answers. There's even some evidence to this, as the Contingency is set based on a condition decided by the caster, which seems to me could mean that it first must be true to the Caster first.

Segev

2020-07-08, 10:29 AM

I mean, the simple answer is that the Contingency just has to be something that the owner has to be aware of or react to.

This is close to, but misses an important mark in, how I'd run it. Contingencies MUST be able to trigger on things the caster/owner "misses" or can't react to; that's more or less their whole point. "When I'm attacked, dimension door me to safety," should be a valid concept for a contingency (we can argue on exact wording, but you at least get the idea). This expressly should not require the caster to notice the attack coming, himself, nor the caster to be unSurprised (and thus able to take reactions), because contingency requires no action on the caster's part to activate. (It might be interesting to have a lesser contingency that let you prime a spell that you can release at any time as a Reaction. Or maybe a greater contingency, since that might be more powerful.)

So, the way I run it is: it must be something that the caster or a hypothetical third party observing the caster could become aware of once it has already happened. Conceptually, the hypothetical third party observer is mostly to cover "but the caster wouldn't know about it if he was dead" situations. Put another way: if the player would be made aware of it after it had happened without contingency triggering, contingency can trigger off of it.

Contingency can't garner information for the player, but it can trigger based on information the player would only have after the trigger condition is done. It cannot, however, confirm the trigger condition to the player independently.

So, "Cast minor illusion of a trophy saying 'You're Right!' if my hypothesis written on this piece of paper is correct," wouldn't work. Contingency can't reveal information by triggering, and the caster and player wouldn't learn the truth of the hypothesis without it triggering...at least not right then based on the spell. If some hidden threat triggers a contingency that is meant to move the caster to safety if he's ever in life-threatening danger, however, it can trigger even if the caster (and the player) only knows that he suddenly is in his safe spot and not why. This is because, if the contingency didn't trigger, the player would be informed that his character was killed, and unless the DM is being deliberately mysterious, he'd probably be told by what.

DwarfFighter

2020-07-08, 12:37 PM

Would it be considered fair to limit Contingency to trigger when something has actually happened (i.e. post event) and not something is about to happen (pre event)?

Man_Over_Game

2020-07-08, 01:23 PM

Would it be considered fair to limit Contingency to trigger when something has actually happened (i.e. post event) and not something is about to happen (pre event)?

Depends on whether you value balance or creativity. Both are pretty reasonable answers.

Segev

2020-07-08, 01:25 PM

Would it be considered fair to limit Contingency to trigger when something has actually happened (i.e. post event) and not something is about to happen (pre event)?

That depends on what you want. Should contingency be able to save you from an unexpected arrow, or only trigger after you've been stricken?

Necroanswer

2020-07-08, 02:08 PM

That depends on what you want. Should contingency be able to save you from an unexpected arrow, or only trigger after you've been stricken?

There is an actual small amount of time between when an attack is made and when it hits, so I would say yes contingency should save you from an unexpected arrow.

If my memory is correct 3e did specify contingency triggered on a perceivable event and I thought the 5e version said the same until I reread it just now. I would go with events that would be perceivable to a 3rd party without special magical sensory abilities would be able to trigger the spell.

Man_Over_Game

2020-07-08, 03:17 PM

There is an actual small amount of time between when an attack is made and when it hits, so I would say yes contingency should save you from an unexpected arrow.

If my memory is correct 3e did specify contingency triggered on a perceivable event and I thought the 5e version said the same until I reread it just now. I would go with events that would be perceivable to a 3rd party without special magical sensory abilities would be able to trigger the spell.

Technically the Shield spell goes even beyond that, as the trigger for it is a Reaction that you take when you are hit, yet the AC bonus explicitly states that it can apply to the triggering attack.

So you have had to have been hit, and then are able to stop that hit from ever happening.

Honestly, I'm kinda disappointed there are so few reactive/preventative effects like this in the game.

Nagog

2020-07-09, 07:50 PM

This is close to, but misses an important mark in, how I'd run it. Contingencies MUST be able to trigger on things the caster/owner "misses" or can't react to; that's more or less their whole point. "When I'm attacked, dimension door me to safety," should be a valid concept for a contingency (we can argue on exact wording, but you at least get the idea). This expressly should not require the caster to notice the attack coming, himself, nor the caster to be unSurprised (and thus able to take reactions), because contingency requires no action on the caster's part to activate. (It might be interesting to have a lesser contingency that let you prime a spell that you can release at any time as a Reaction. Or maybe a greater contingency, since that might be more powerful.)

I'd say that they have to perceive the effect happening, as to not use it as the kind of thing like "Cast Minor Illusion when somebody puts a bounty on my head". Using it as an indicator of events happening in the world outside of your perceivable view. Other than that, I'd say that yes, this is more or less how I'd run it. Setting the trigger to "When I am attacked" would likely trigger right as the attack makes contact, so I could be convinced that (in the case of this particular example), you would take half the damage of the triggering attack, then BAMF out. Otherwise, somebody firing in your general direction at nobody in particular could trigger it or could not. Is the trigger then specific enough to warrant that somebody had ill intent towards you and began acting on it? If so, what of the various effects that redirect attacks (Drunken Master and Oath of Treachery both have such effects). Do they trigger it? The attacker did not have ill intent towards you, but towards another and their aggression was misdirected. The hit landing is what triggers the spell, and being whisked away would negate a portion of that damage.

Also as a side note I would say that the best use for Contingency is something like Revivify cast right as you fail your last death save, so you make sure not to waste a 500 GP diamond but also not risk dying if your party can't heal you in time. That said, the only way to have both those spells on your spell list is through Magical Secrets, as Wizards do not have any healing spells on their lists.

Zanos

2020-07-09, 10:44 PM

That depends on what you want. Should contingency be able to save you from an unexpected arrow, or only trigger after you've been stricken?
Yeah, I get where people are coming from, contingency shouldn't be able to tell you there's an invisible guy behind you, but it should be able to teleport you away if someone tries to stab you in your sleep, you'd just wake up somewhere else and probably be rather confused for a bit.

I'm not sure how you would phrase that, rules wise.

jas61292

2020-07-09, 11:10 PM

While I would fully acknowledge it makes Contingency weaker than it might otherwise be, my personal ruling as a DM would be that it is basically like you are reading an action to cast a spell, except that it has no time limit and doesn't use concentration. It can't provide you information by reacting to something you would have no way of knowing, and, like every readied action (and most reactions in general), it is reactionary. That is to say, it goes off in response to something happening, not in response to something that would potentially happen if it didn't activate.

Dimension Dooring away when you take severe damage is ok. Dimension Dooring away when you are about to take severe damage is not. Potentially taking damage is a theoretical event, and not something actually happening. Another way to think of it is that anything that could result in a paradox is a no go. Setting something to go off when you are attacked is fine, but such a thing goes off in response to the attack's resolution, not in response to the attack's initiation, because if it were to go off before the attack, then it is possible it would prevent the attack. But if the attack is prevented and never happens, the spell should never have triggered in the first place.

Ultimately, contingency is a stupidly strong spell on classes that are already stupidly strong themselves. There is no need to make it any better than a free held reaction spell.

kazaryu

2020-07-09, 11:10 PM

I'd say that they have to perceive the effect happening, as to not use it as the kind of thing like "Cast Minor Illusion when somebody puts a bounty on my head". Using it as an indicator of events happening in the world outside of your perceivable view. Other than that, I'd say that yes, this is more or less how I'd run it. Setting the trigger to "When I am attacked" would likely trigger right as the attack makes contact, so I could be convinced that (in the case of this particular example), you would take half the damage of the triggering attack, then BAMF out. Otherwise, somebody firing in your general direction at nobody in particular could trigger it or could not. Is the trigger then specific enough to warrant that somebody had ill intent towards you and began acting on it? If so, what of the various effects that redirect attacks (Drunken Master and Oath of Treachery both have such effects). Do they trigger it? The attacker did not have ill intent towards you, but towards another and their aggression was misdirected. The hit landing is what triggers the spell, and being whisked away would negate a portion of that damage.

Also as a side note I would say that the best use for Contingency is something like Revivify cast right as you fail your last death save, so you make sure not to waste a 500 GP diamond but also not risk dying if your party can't heal you in time. That said, the only way to have both those spells on your spell list is through Magical Secrets, as Wizards do not have any healing spells on their lists.

i mean, with wish, i'd allow a wizard to set up a contingency using non-spell list spells.

Telok

2020-07-09, 11:23 PM

Just use the magic mouth rules. If you make it any more restrictive than that you'll get something like contingency triggering on "mpxhyz" and magic mouth saying "mpxhyz" using it's triggers.

Satori01

2020-07-10, 01:51 AM

It's often been observed that unlike many similar mechanics (like Magic Mouth, which explicitly says that the trigger must be visual or auditory event within 30 feet -- though the caster needn't be able to actually perceive it themselves), Contingency conspicuously lacks pretty much any mention of limitations on what kind of conditions can trigger it... which if taken to its logical extreme, can make this property even more valuable than the Contingent spell itself

This is the RAW ruling. It is also how the spell has been adjudicated, in most games I have played in.

A trigger like "1st thing that sneaks up on me" is way to broad.
Same with the trigger, "Before, I take damage".

Those conditions could be triggered by the cat in the tavern, by a fly looking to land, by a blind fish in an underground stream.

The safest bet is to tie the trigger to either Conditions, narrative conditions, or a password.

I disagree, strenuously, with the ruling that the caster has to be aware of the trigger. The logic of this ruling leads to not being able to have Contingency use a specified Hit Point total as a trigger. No more, "X happens when I reach half of Maximum Hit Points." as a trigger. From a D&D character's in-game perspective, the character has no concept of the concept of Hit Points.

Also, take the case of a Wizard with a Contingency: Feather Fall spell, set to trigger when the Wizard 's body starts falling. If the Wizard in this example were to have their senses based in another creature's body, say through a Magic Jar spell;
the consequence of the "Caster must be aware of the trigger " ruling is the Contingency would fail to trigger if the Wizards body started to fall.

The Wizard not being aware, by this logic, supersedes and cancels the very specific wording of the triggering; namely "When my Real Body starts to fall, cast a Feather Fall spell on it".
This seems a terrible result.😱

Is the spell called: Contingency that I am Aware Of?
.....Of course not, the spell is called: Contingency, period.

Now, I have played in games, where the trigger for Contingency is limited to concepts your character would know in-game. Thus, triggers based off purely abstract, meta-game concepts like Hit Points are excluded. This can be a very fun way to play.

You just have to word your trigger carefully, like as for the dangerous portion of a Wish spell.

MaxWilson

2020-07-10, 02:09 AM

It's often been observed that unlike many similar mechanics (like Magic Mouth, which explicitly says that the trigger must be visual or auditory event within 30 feet -- though the caster needn't be able to actually perceive it themselves), Contingency conspicuously lacks pretty much any mention of limitations on what kind of conditions can trigger it... which if taken to its logical extreme, can make this property even more valuable than the Contingent spell itself ('if X is a true statement, do Y' is just... beyond the potency of any divination spell and would completely and utterly change the entire game world by allowing a culture the ability to test and confirm any hypothesis).

That is, of course, silly, so you should probably expect your DM to intervene. But yeah, as far as I know, there's nothing against any of those exploits in RAW.

It's even worse than that: you could have it trigger on things that not even the DM has a way of knowing, like die rolls. If you have a contingency that's supposed to trigger 24 hours before someone in the party dies, and it hasn't triggered, is the DM now obligated to manipulate events to guarantee that no one in the party will die today?

So yeah, there _must_ be limits for practical reasons.

My personal ruling is to allow any condition which can be briefly described in a sentence or so, easily remembered by the DM (no weird lawyer clauses), and would be apparent to the spellcaster at the moment when the contingency needs to trigger. ("Would be apparent" instead of "is apparent" because "cure wounds when I'm reduced to zero HP" should be valid even though nothing is apparent to an unconscious wizard. BTW the PC of course would describe zero HP without using the words "zero" or "HP" but I wouldn't make the player and myself suffer through a tortuous discussion of what words to use in-character, I'd just assume the PC can find the right words since player intent is clear.)

In short, it does what you'd expect it to do when you first read the spell, and none of the weird stuff that a rules lawyer would insist that it "doesn't say it can't do."

Satori01

2020-07-10, 02:24 AM

It's even worse than that: you could have it trigger on things that not even the DM has a way of knowing, like die rolls. If you have a contingency that's supposed to trigger 24 hours before someone in the party dies, and it hasn't triggered, is the DM now obligated to manipulate events to guarantee that no one in the party will die today?

Of course not.
The spell says this:
but the contingent spell doesn’t come into effect. Instead, it takes effect when a certain circumstance occurs. You describe that circumstance when you cast the two spells.

The contingent spell effect, happens, takes place, when the trigger takes place.

No time traveling effect nonsense, allowed.

You don't need extra rules....the rules, as is, already have you covered. 😀

Segev

2020-07-10, 11:47 AM

Of course not.
The spell says this:
but the contingent spell doesn’t come into effect. Instead, it takes effect when a certain circumstance occurs. You describe that circumstance when you cast the two spells.

The contingent spell effect, happens, takes place, when the trigger takes place.

No time traveling effect nonsense, allowed.

You don't need extra rules....the rules, as is, already have you covered. 😀

You could torture the argument to the point that, "When a time 24 hours before a party member dies passes," is a trigger that has occurred 24 hours before the death. But I agree that such interpretations are bad.

MaxWilson

2020-07-10, 11:47 AM

Of course not.
The spell says this:
but the contingent spell doesn’t come into effect. Instead, it takes effect when a certain circumstance occurs. You describe that circumstance when you cast the two spells.

The contingent spell effect, happens, takes place, when the trigger takes place.

No time traveling effect nonsense, allowed.

You don't need extra rules....the rules, as is, already have you covered. 😀

But the condition of "when there is less than 24 hours before one of [individuals in party] is going to die" has already been satisfied, so the trigger "should" come into effect--if arbitrary triggers are is allowed.

This leads to absurdity, and illustrates why arbitrary triggers are NOT allowed.

Democratus

2020-07-10, 01:02 PM

It is a lot of fun to be very broad in what the trigger can be.

"Teleport me to Beremore Island if King Philip dies."
"Cast invisibility should an Oridian assassin approach within 60 feet of me."

These can be very fun in the hands of PCs and NPCs.

Edit: I think our current rule is that anything Mystra (goddess of magic) can perceive, the spell can perceive. :smallsmile:

Satori01

2020-07-10, 02:19 PM

You could torture the argument to the point that, "When a time 24 hours before a party member dies passes," is a trigger that has occurred 24 hours before the death. But I agree that such interpretations are bad.

My response to such arguments is: D&D is literally a game where gods play dice.

To put it in Aristotelian terms, the trigger for Contingency, has to be an event that actually happens, which then triggers the contingent spell in real time.

Note, the requirement for the trigger to "actually happen" has to be fulfilled in two levels of reality...the game world, and the "real" world, the level of players and GM.

The extreme trigger that is being bandied about is triggered off a potentiality. Even, Aristotle concedes that in the realm of potential, the law of non-contradiction, breaks down.

In the realm of the real world, the level of DMs and Players, there is no certain knowledge of the players death.

Dice and probability, action and reaction, cause and effect, are the determinations that yield the result.

Simply put no one knows if or when the character will die.

If we in the "real world" lack certainty regarding the metaphysical properties of our own existence, then there is nothing preventing the same for being true for the game world.

This yields the following rulings:

If nothing can know, for sure when the PC will die, then it is a poorly conceived trigger, and the contingent spell will not trigger.
You just wasted two spells.

Alternatively, the multiverse is wide and deep, all potentialities are occurring simultaneously, and are connected in ways beyond mortal understanding, thus your contingent spell triggers immediately after casting.
You just wasted two spells.

Yet another possibility, is that The Fates, or The Norns, or whatever determinate force in the in-game reality, exists, and you just pissed them off. The gods don't play dice, that is horrible, for you!🤬

Your contingent spell, immediately goes off, and you are going to unavoidably die in 24 hours..

Make clear to the player, that this unavoidable result is directly due to mucking with forces they do not understand....ala a Poorly worded Contingency Trigger.

Essentially the character just cast themselves in the movie DOA.
You have 24 hours to prepare for your Unavoidable Death.

It is a cool narrative situation to be in, in some ways.

Zeus, whom f@%ked everything, and stole their virtue, would not touch Thetis, the mother of Achilles, because her destiny was set. Even Zeus, tip toed around the Fates.

The TL;DR: If you the player are trying to use the Contingency spell like a cheese grater, and sprinkle cheese on the game, the game world is going to respond by dropping a Tarrasque sized wheel of cheese on you.

Philosophy can be a harsh mistress.

MaxWilson

2020-07-10, 02:28 PM

Simply put no one knows if or when the character will die.

Yes, that's precisely the point. Some information is not known even to the DM, unless you happen to be playing with an omniscient DM, so the most expansive interpretation of Contingency is not only unsupportable but also infeasible. (An even more illogical and infeasible trigger is "Contingency (Invisibility) triggers whenever my Contingency is not going to trigger." Even an omniscient DM can't do anything with that one.)

There have to be restrictions on Contingency that aren't mentioned in the spell text, so you might as well put the restrictions in a place that also makes it fun and easy to run.

Satori01

2020-07-10, 02:30 PM

Yes, that's precisely the point. Some information is not known even to the DM, unless you happen to be playing with an omniscient DM, so the most expansive interpretation of Contingency is not only unsupportable but also infeasible. (An even more illogical and infeasible trigger is "Contingency (Invisibility) triggers whenever my Contingency is not going to trigger." Even an omniscient DM can't do anything with that one.)

There have to be restrictions on Contingency that aren't mentioned in the spell text, so you might as well put the restrictions in a place that also makes it fun and easy to run.
I just provided three adamant ways to precisely stop it.😘

Democratus

2020-07-10, 02:35 PM

There have to be restrictions on Contingency that aren't mentioned in the spell text, so you might as well put the restrictions in a place that also makes it fun and easy to run.

There don't have to be restrictions.

But any table can create them if they like.

Deciding how magic works is a matter of social compact at the table, game world, and rule set.

DwarfFighter

2020-07-10, 03:10 PM

MaxWilson

2020-07-10, 03:14 PM

There don't have to be restrictions.

But any table can create them if they like.

Deciding how magic works is a matter of social compact at the table, game world, and rule set.

No, there literally have to be other restrictions. Contingency says nothing about any restrictions, but if you cast "Contingency (Disguise Self): whenever this contingency is not about to trigger" there is literally no way for even an omniscient DM to avoid imposing a restriction not mentioned in the spell text. And most of us don't play with omniscient DMs :-P so other restrictions arise simply because the DM doesn't know the future.

Satori01

2020-07-10, 05:14 PM

(An even more illogical and infeasible trigger is "Contingency (Invisibility) triggers whenever my Contingency is not going to trigger." Even an omniscient DM can't do anything with that one.)

Max, what you wrote is not very clear.
Are you saying the Trigger for the Invisibility is whenever the caster is not Invisible?

Congratulations, the player just spent at 6th level slot, to cast a 2nd level spell. That happens Right now, as the caster is probably not Invisible when setting up the Contingency.

The limitation is the logic of the statement: "If X happens, then Y occurs".

The further limitation is that X has to be an actual event.

To pull a Wittgenstein, don't let Natural Language confuse the issue, if possible, express the trigger and resulting action into a logical formulation and notation.