"Spell attack or suck" spells

[Cikomyr2]

So I was wondering about Contagion, how the new version basically is about doing a spell attack to force a status effect that will bypass legendary resistance.

Is there any other spell like that?

[DwarfFighter]

I'd say no, but being reduced to 0 hp puts a status effect on you as well, so I guess Firebolt?

[Cikomyr2]

I'd say no, but being reduced to 0 hp puts a status effect on you as well, so I guess Firebolt?

That's just damage. You ain't going to reduce the BBEG to 0 hp in the opening round.

[JNAProductions]

That's just damage. You ain't going to reduce the BBEG to 0 hp in the opening round.

Depends how lucky your Paladin rolls... :P

But, more on topic, I do think Contagion is unique in that regard. Plane Shift is kinda similar? Spell attack roll (melee) to teleport your target to a plane of your choice.

[JackPhoenix]

Well, there's Sleep, Color Spray and Power Word whatever. No save, but dependant on HP.

[heavyfuel]

It's a shame that the designers created spell attacks as a uniquely interesting mechanic, but then made it so that pretty much only Cantrips use them.

I'd love if Disintegrate was back to its 3.e version, where it was an attack roll to hit the ray, followed by a Fortitude/Constitution save for half.

[LudicSavant]

That's just damage. You ain't going to reduce the BBEG to 0 hp in the opening round.

Why not? Optimized blaster casters are capable of downing Tiamat in a round with firepower to spare, all by their lonesome. Let alone with a team all kicking in.

[JackPhoenix]

It's a shame that the designers created spell attacks as a uniquely interesting mechanic, but then made it so that pretty much only Cantrips use them.

I'd love if Disintegrate was back to its 3.e version, where it was an attack roll to hit the ray, followed by a Fortitude/Constitution save for half.

Why would you want to make the spell weaker by introducing another point of failure, and slightly more tedious to resolve by adding another unnecessary roll?

There's also nothing "uniquely interesting" about spell attacks. Fighters make attack. Trolls make attack. Commoners make attack. Angry cats make attack. We've had spells that required to make an attack to hit the target since forever, nothing has changed. The only "unique" thing about spell attacks is what ability score you're adding to the roll now.

[heavyfuel]

Why would you want to make the spell weaker by introducing another point of failure, and slightly more tedious to resolve by adding another unnecessary roll?

There's also nothing "uniquely interesting" about spell attacks. Fighters make attack. Trolls make attack. Commoners make attack. Angry cats make attack. We've had spells that required to make an attack to hit the target since forever, nothing has changed. The only "unique" thing about spell attacks is what ability score you're adding to the roll now.

Well, I didn't say I'd keep the spell intact, just that I would add this extra layer. I'd make the damage higher to compensate. As it stands, Disintegrate - a classic spell - is hardly ever used because it's a huge spell level to risk on a Save or "suck" (the damage is actually pretty low for level 13).

Making it an attack roll followed by save for half would allow for easier advantage (it's easier to get advantage on attack rolls as oppose to force disadvantage on saves) followed by still some damage in case the target saves. Plus, with a higher damage, even if it's harder to deal full damage, it's actually impactful when it happens.

Maybe that's just me, but I find the idea of spell attacks to be neat. It's not groundbreaking, never said it was. But it does add another thin layer of complexity to the game, and I'll take more complexity in 5e every time the system allows for it.

[thoroughlyS]

I have to agree with JackPhoenix specifically in regards to disintegrate. All it is meant to do is damage, so any complexity beyond one calculation is just needless. I think it could be cool to make it a spell attack, but that's really the most you can do for a spell that is straight damage. If you do anything else, like add a rider, it fundamentally alters the spell.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The Wand of Viscid Globs from Out of the Abyss makes a spell attack to restrain the target for one hour. It's a drow item so don't bring it out in sunlight. The viscid material can only be removed with an application of alcohol, oil of etherealness, or universal solvent, or if touched by normal sunlight. No other nonmagical method can free the creature from the condition.

[LudicSavant]

I have to agree with JackPhoenix specifically in regards to disintegrate. All it is meant to do is damage

Damage is basically the last thing I'm thinking of when I prepare Disintegrate.

The first thing I'm thinking of is removing a Wall of Force.

The second thing I'm thinking of is bypassing certain "death cheating" effects.

[borg286]

Why would you want to make the spell weaker by introducing another point of failure, and slightly more tedious to resolve by adding another unnecessary roll?

There's also nothing "uniquely interesting" about spell attacks. Fighters make attack. Trolls make attack. Commoners make attack. Angry cats make attack. We've had spells that required to make an attack to hit the target since forever, nothing has changed. The only "unique" thing about spell attacks is what ability score you're adding to the roll now.
I disagree. Back in 4e we had every class use their primary stat as an attack modifier, and everybody then had the better of 2 stats to support one of 4 defense DCs (AC, Fort, Ref, Will). AC was more likely to be high with Will being often the lowest. This similarity made attacks differ only slightly with more controllery ones on the Will end and more damaging ones on the AC side. Thus wizard spells were just another attack that leaned more on effects and zones than damage.

Now we have an asymmetry in the form of Attack bonuses vs a highly variable AC with advantage getting more common with power creep. On the other end we have saving throws with imposing disadvantage very difficult to get and the baseline 8+prof putting casters at a slight disadvantage from the get go. Having this asymmetry enables designers to throw more status effects onto spells, knowing that the chance of imposing said status effect scales with the difficulty of having a +1 DC.

We have even more asymmetry with some spells calling upon an ability check rather than a save (illusion spells, Wrathful smite, Black Tentacles). Imposing disadvantage on ability checks is much easier to come by but doesn't come up that often. I wish that the designers had stuck with saves just to keep things simple.

I wish spell attacks were more common but it would require a spell that makes sense why martial advantage enables your attack to land more effectively. This only seems to be justified when you make a touch attack.

[thoroughlyS]

Damage is basically the last thing I'm thinking of when I prepare Disintegrate.

The first thing I'm thinking of is removing a Wall of Force.

The second thing I'm thinking of is bypassing certain "death cheating" effects.
fair enough, although in those cases, it doesn't really matter whether disintegrate is an attack roll or a saving throw.

I wish spell attacks were more common but it would require a spell that makes sense why martial advantage enables your attack to land more effectively. This only seems to be justified when you make a touch attack.
I would argue it could make sense for any spell that targets a creature/object.