How would a Permanency spell break the game in 5e ?

[Osuniev]

In 5e, very few spells are permanent until 9th-level spells. If I were to give my players access to a (homebrewed) scroll of Permanency, making ONE spell effect permanent, what game-breaking consequences should I be wary of ?

If I made it a spell a player could LEARN, what limitations should I put on it ?

[GeneralVryth]

I am sure others will have a better idea of the balance implications of this, but I do have a recommendation. Don't make a Permanency spell. Instead, make that either an up-casting or alternative option through other means for spells that you think should be possible to make permanent. I suggest this for 2 reasons, one it leverages the up-casting system (where applicable) which is good, and two, it will give you a much finer grain balance control than you will ever get from a generic spell that can make others permanent.

[Blood of Gaea]

Probably more things than I could come up with. But at the very least you'll be giving people buff spells as permanent features. Movable spells in general will also be pretty dang amazing as well.

if you were to do this, I would consider having it be a specific spell decided ahead of time. Preferably one of the more lackluster options you can put a bit of a spitshine on.

[MoiMagnus]

Does it immune the spell from Dispel magic? If you can still dispel it (with DC at most 19), it's probably not gamebreaking (unless none of your enemies ever have dispel magic ready). The permanent spell not using concentration is quite powerful, though.

Otherwise, permanent Invulnerability or Foresight look quite OP, same for Holy Aura. Permanent Blade of Disaster looks quite powerful too. If you allow the person to learn the spell, permanent Time Stop is quite fun to use (it still stops when you interact with another creature).

[holywhippet]

You would effectively be giving a permanent free concentration spell to the PCs. Spells like bless and haste are concentration spells for a good reason - because they are so strong. Haste is also single target because it's quite strong for fighters.

It would be a lot less game breaking if it only worked on spells with a duration that do not require concentration.

[Onos]

If you have a Wizard, you've just busted the whole thing wide open. Really dodgy if you let concentration spells become permanent or stop "ends on save" riders. Couple of examples of what could get abused;

1st: Bane/Bless for a permanent +1d4 (upcast to hit the whole party), Shield for permanent +5 AC

2nd: Blur to be harder to hit, Branding (or other) Smite for crazy damage and riders on attacks, Flaming Sphere as a better version of a torch, Invisibility for shenanigans, Suggestion for even more shenanigans.

3rd: Fly obviously, Major Image if you let them keep manipulating and moving it, Spirit Guardians to wreck stuff.

4th: Banishment to screw something over, Polymorph to trade in for a better body.

5th: Dominate Person to start running the kingdom, Planar Binding for a solid ally, Telekinesis to throw encounters off cliffs.

6th: Irresistible Dance to screw around, Magic Jar to steal the BBG's body, Mass Suggestion to start a cult, True Seeing to stop you hiding anything, Wind Walk for mobility.

7th: Arcane Sword for damage I guess, Glyph if you let the effect continue indefinitely (reusable javelin of Symbol of Death? Yes please).

8th: Antimagic Field to turn into a mage-killer, Control Weather to really *feel* like an archmage, Dominate Monster to get a pet dragon, Mind Blank if you're using a lot of Illithid/Aboleth.

9th: I can't really pick a favourite here. Storm of Vengeance to run around like Zeus? Shapechange to be a better Moon Druid? Gate to forge a permanent bridge to hell anytime a world pisses you off?

[Wraith]

I think that a spell like Permanence would be one of those spells that requires a severe penalty, much like Wish does.

If you cast it, there's a 1/3 chance that it immediately erases itself from your mind and you can never cast it again. Also, you're 'sickened' for the next 2d4 days wherein some of your stats drop to 3 and you take d10's of unavoidable Necrotic damage if they try to cast another spell in the meantime.

Perhaps not as harsh for Permanence, but it's one of those spells that the PC should be able to do with whatever they want, but should also be encouraged to think very long, hard and carefully about before they use it on something frivolous.

[J-H]

In 3.5, Permanency was limited to certain spells. See this list:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/permanency.htm

Note these are all utility spells, generally revolving around vision, sight, or communication.

[Pex]

In 3.5, Permanency was limited to certain spells. See this list:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/permanency.htm

Note these are all utility spells, generally revolving around vision, sight, or communication.

This.

Permanency was never for every spell possible. People here will tell you the obvious spells not to allow for Permanency, but that doesn’t mean Permanency shouldn’t exist at all. If you want to do this you will ultimately have to do the work yourself to go over every spell to determine if you’re ok with that being a Permanent spell. That it would bypass Concentration is a feature, not a bug. It might be prudent for the Permanent spell to declare a creature may only ever have one Permanent spell on itself at a time. Another Permanent spell replaces the previous one.

[clash]

I added permanency to 5e as a spell here.

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?549603-Permanency-Spell

It went through a few iterations but the final product works very well in 5e in my experience.

[Ionathus]

In 3.5, Permanency was limited to certain spells. See this list:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/permanency.htm

Note these are all utility spells, generally revolving around vision, sight, or communication.

Came here to say this. You don't have to exclusively use the 5e counterparts to these specific spells, but a Permanency effect on ANY spell would open the game up to so many significant game-breaking opportunities that you'd go crazy trying to account for all of them. Look at that linked list and figure out what makes each spell qualify, and devise your own list based around similar criteria for 5e.

Or if you wanted to get a BIT of the flavor off of Permanency without going too drastic, try a scroll that upgrades the duration to the next category. Spell durations are already pretty subdivided:

Instantaneous > 1 round ("End of Target's Next Turn") > 10 rounds (1 minute) > 10 minutes > 1 hour > 8 hours > 24 hours > 1 week > 1 month > etc.

Outside of extremely specific circumstances, I can't imagine giving a one-time duration "upgrade" to a single casting of a spell would catastrophically break things. You could even go 2 or 3 categories higher for an extremely powerful version of the scroll. But fully Permanent? Tread lightly.

[KorvinStarmast]

If I made it a spell a player could LEARN, what limitations should I put on it ? 1. I grin at the idea of a Life cleric who has had the permanent Spiritual Guardins cast upon him. The visuals would be kind of cool. :smallbiggrin: But I think all of those swirling radiant beings might be off putting for certain intimate non combat encounters ... :smalleek:
2. here's an idea: Permanent Cat's Grace from Enhance Ability: advantage on all Dexterity checks. Cast that on my rogue or my monk or my fighter ... advantage on initiative, add the Alert feat, and then profit.
3. Permanent Foresight: heck yeah! :smallwink:

I think that a spell like Permanence would be one of those spells that requires a severe penalty, much like Wish does.

If you cast it, there's a 1/3 chance that it immediately erases itself from your mind and you can never cast it again. Also, you're 'sickened' for the next 2d4 days wherein some of your stats drop to 3 and you take d10's of unavoidable Necrotic damage if they try to cast another spell in the meantime. And lose a constitution point. :smallwink: (AD&D IIRC did this, will check)

[Hytheter]

I am sure others will have a better idea of the balance implications of this, but I do have a recommendation. Don't make a Permanency spell. Instead, make that either an up-casting or alternative option through other means for spells that you think should be possible to make permanent. I suggest this for 2 reasons, one it leverages the up-casting system (where applicable) which is good, and two, it will give you a much finer grain balance control than you will ever get from a generic spell that can make others permanent.

Yep. As others have mentioned, Permanency did not and should not apply to every spell, and by the time you're combing the list looking for those to which it could you might as well just make it an upcasting option.

I happen to think upcasting is under-utilised in general, though, so maybe I'm biased. :P

[Ionathus]

Yep. As others have mentioned, Permanency did not and should not apply to every spell, and by the time you're combing the list looking for those to which it could you might as well just make it an upcasting option.

I happen to think upcasting is under-utilised in general, though, so maybe I'm biased. :P

Agreed. It's such an elegant mechanic, and it rarely gets the time to shine that it deserves!

[Anymage]

There is no 5e Permanency spell with an exclusive whitelist of spell effects that it can make permanent. But a lot of spells that are cast on a location do explicitly mention that casting them daily for a year does make the effects permanent. (e.g: Guards and Wards) so there is a mechanic in place for specific effects.

As a general thing? Bypassing concentration does some very tricky things to the game. Some spells are based off of being one shot reactions, and having a permanent +5 ac from a permanent Shield spell is gamebreaking. I don't mind the idea of bound spells as de facto magic items without the physical item part, or special situations allowing more location effects to become permanent. Those need to be adjudicated on a case by case basis, and creating a broad Permanency umbrella means either doing a ton of whitelisting work upfront or leaving the door open for stupid op options to slip through.

[Osuniev]

I added permanency to 5e as a spell here.

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?549603-Permanency-Spell

It went through a few iterations but the final product works very well in 5e in my experience.

I like it ! It does tread a bit on the Artificer's thing : making magic items becomes less interesting if you can do the same effects with a wizard.

But I would bump it to AT LEAST 4th level. If it wad a 3rd lvl spell, I CANNNOT imagine not picking it at level 5 or 6 - especially because in my campaigns, you DON'T have 3 attuned items at these levels, so it means "free Darkvision or Protection from Poison + free Enhance Ability (probably Cat's Grace) + free Freedom of Movement. ALL THE TIME, for THE WHOLE PARTY. Then you get in the things you give to ONE member of the party : " See Invisibility", "Comprehend Language", "Eagle's splendor", "Warding Bond", "Longstrider", "Pass Without a Trace"...

[RSP]

3rd: Fly obviously, Major Image if you let them keep manipulating and moving it, Spirit Guardians to wreck stuff.


Just wanted to point out permanent Spirit Guardians would be horrible: you only get to omit characters from its damage if you can see them when it’s cast. So no going shopping, walking the streets, etc. without having your spirits start wreaking havoc.

[clash]

I like it ! It does tread a bit on the Artificer's thing : making magic items becomes less interesting if you can do the same effects with a wizard.

But I would bump it to AT LEAST 4th level. If it wad a 3rd lvl spell, I CANNNOT imagine not picking it at level 5 or 6 - especially because in my campaigns, you DON'T have 3 attuned items at these levels, so it means "free Darkvision or Protection from Poison + free Enhance Ability (probably Cat's Grace) + free Freedom of Movement. ALL THE TIME, for THE WHOLE PARTY. Then you get in the things you give to ONE member of the party : " See Invisibility", "Comprehend Language", "Eagle's splendor", "Warding Bond", "Longstrider", "Pass Without a Trace"...

Admittedly it predated the artificer. The cost still keeps it in check at that level in my experience to the point where maybe each party member can afford one permanent spell and the person with permanency also needs to know the desired spells. It worked in my experience but I can see the merit of moving it higher.

[Angelalex242]

Consider this:

An Oath of Devotion Paladin gets permanent protection from Good and Evil as a level 15 Oath Feature.

So a humble level 1 spell, permanent, is worth a level 15 subclass feature.

Balance accordingly from there.

[Chronos]

I think that what 5e already has is a big improvement over the previous editions' Permanency. You obviously need to pay some extra cost to make a spell permanent. Just making it another spell slot isn't enough, because the whole point of Permanency is that it doesn't matter when you cast it, so you can just cast it any time you have a day of downtime and don't need your slots for anything else. In 3rd edition, this was handled with an XP cost, but XP costs were clunky and didn't work very well, and so they justifiably removed them from the game in 5th. And it was always only a specific limited whitelist of spells that could be made permanent, so they just took that list of spells and gave each of them a method of making them permanent. And it's still a meaningful restriction, because now you need a whole year of downtime (for most of them, at least), and that's not something that adventurers often have, but it serves to explain finding such an effect in a dungeon or other stronghold.

You could certainly houserule cast-for-a-year permanency onto a few other spell effects. I think that Reverse Gravity, for instance, should always have been on the list, as well as Antimagic Field. But you don't need any fundamentally different mechanics.

[MoiMagnus]

Just a though, but permanent spells are not that different from magical items.
As such, a permanent spell should probably cost an attunement slot (from the user when it is defined, and from the caster otherwise).

[Maybe also money equivalent to the cost that a magical object with this property would have]

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I am playing in a game where the DM made an homebrew permanency spell.
It is balanced IMO and hard to use like it should be.
For now the only use we have for it is making a homebrew cantrip that make an area into dimlight permanent on our shadow monk.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/225660-permanency

Here is a link to it.

[MrStabby]

Consider this:

An Oath of Devotion Paladin gets permanent protection from Good and Evil as a level 15 Oath Feature.

So a humble level 1 spell, permanent, is worth a level 15 subclass feature.

Balance accordingly from there.

Whilst I think that this is a powerful ability and represents something high level, I think we need to be careful about assuming high level is more powerful than low level. Looks at ASIs for example. The level 19 ability is less powerful than the level 4 ability and there are many other examples.


Just a though, but permanent spells are not that different from magical items.
As such, a permanent spell should probably cost an attunement slot (from the user when it is defined, and from the caster otherwise).

[Maybe also money equivalent to the cost that a magical object with this property would have]

Hmm. That is pretty cool. Permanency let's you "attune" to a spell? That could work.

As I guide I would look at a requirement that the spell in its base form last for more than 1 min and not need concentration. As a simple filter it cuts down most of the abusive elements. I would also look for a similar casting time to other effects made permanent like teleportation circle or hallow/forbiance (I sometimes get confused between the two).

Personally, I would make such a thing a sorcerer metamagic. Firstly, it gives them something cool to do and unique to them. Secondly, they have fewer ways to impact the world out of combat than other casters. Giving them a cool tool to help them out in campaigns where this matters would be a nice bone to throw them.

[Chronos]

Making permanency require an item attunement makes sense for some spells, not so much for others. Who's attuned to an ancient dungeon with a Guards and Wards spell on it, for example? The builder of the dungeon? He might have died a century ago.

[Angelalex242]

Presumably, a sorcerer with permanent metamagic is gonna hand out Haste, as a general rule.

[GeneralVryth]

Making permanency require an item attunement makes sense for some spells, not so much for others. Who's attuned to an ancient dungeon with a Guards and Wards spell on it, for example? The builder of the dungeon? He might have died a century ago.

Which is why I think permanency should be an upcast option for the spells it make sense for, and the need for attunement can be handled on a case by case basis.

[MrStabby]

Making permanency require an item attunement makes sense for some spells, not so much for others. Who's attuned to an ancient dungeon with a Guards and Wards spell on it, for example? The builder of the dungeon? He might have died a century ago.

Always just the spell caster.

[Angelalex242]

...For the ancient dungeon, maybe there's an imp locked in a cage somewhere that was once the wizard's familiar. The imp's been stuck there for CENTURIES, and if anything happens to him, the whole guards and wards comes down. Or if the imp is freed and he goes home, the spell also goes down. But, being a stuck where he is immortal...the spell endured all this time.

[Lokishade]

Back when I played a Wizard in 2e, the DM warned me that sticking permanent magical boosts on your person will drive you insane in that edition. That's why magical items exist in the first place.

If Permanency becomes a spell, this penalty should apply on self buffs rendered permanent.

For each effect, think of sinister consequences associated with them. And if they seem benign enough, just make it that the unnatural forces of magic pulsing inside you give you tinnitus, a constant ringing in your ears that slowly drives you insane as it gets progressively louder and unbearable.

As you can tell, I'm a fan of well thought-of Monkey's Paw when it comes to magic.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Just wanted to point out permanent Spirit Guardians would be horrible: you only get to omit characters from its damage if you can see them when it’s cast. So no going shopping, walking the streets, etc. without having your spirits start wreaking havoc.

There was an X-Men comic where basically that was teenagers power. Except it was toxins that made people combust. Permanent spirit guardians would be a fate worse then death.

[quindraco]

Why is everyone assuming a permanent concentration spell is no longer concentration? Presumably, it should work like the Extended Spell metamagic, only infinitely - meaning no interaction with turning concentration on or off.

[Sigreid]

If it's me, I'm creating individual rituals to make spells permanent so I can slowly introduce it to spells I want without greenlighting a lot.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Why is everyone assuming a permanent concentration spell is no longer concentration? Presumably, it should work like the Extended Spell metamagic, only infinitely - meaning no interaction with turning concentration on or off.

I think concentration spells should not be an option for permanency.
Look at this example
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/225660-permanency

[Angelalex242]

I think concentration spells should not be an option for permanency.
Look at this example
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/225660-permanency

As I mentioned earlier...Oath of Devotion Paladin gets a concentration spell, permanent, as a level 15 oath feature.

Therefore, it doesn't break the game to have a concentration spell permanent, as long as it's level 15 or later.

[Hytheter]

As I mentioned earlier...Oath of Devotion Paladin gets a concentration spell, permanent, as a level 15 oath feature.

Therefore, it doesn't break the game to have a concentration spell permanent, as long as it's level 15 or later.

You're ignoring important variables, namely the fact that Protection from Evil and Good is a situational spell that does literally nothing in many possible circumstances. It's also only a 1st level spell. You can hardly use this one feature as a basis to assert that all concentration spells would be fine if they were permanent - find me a class that gets permanent Haste and we'll talk.

edit: On second look the spell affects more creature types than I realised, but my point stands.
edit of edit: i meant creature types not damage types oops

[PhantomSoul]

You're ignoring important variables, namely the fact that Protection from Evil and Good is a situational spell that does literally nothing in many possible circumstances. It's also only a 1st level spell. You can hardly use this one feature as a basis to assert that all concentration spells would be fine if they were permanent - find me a class that gets permanent Haste and we'll talk.

edit: On second look the spell affects more damage types than I realised, but my point stands.

And they're getting that instead of another (sub)class feature, not in addition to their features. And they already had immunity to Charm from level 7, with the big draw being that specific Creature Types get Disadvantage to Attack you.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Why is everyone assuming a permanent concentration spell is no longer concentration? Presumably, it should work like the Extended Spell metamagic, only infinitely - meaning no interaction with turning concentration on or off.

Because the spell wouldn’t be permanent if it shut off when you went to bed and permancy in 3.5 removed concentration.

[quindraco]

I think concentration spells should not be an option for permanency.
Look at this example
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/225660-permanency

Wording on that is super awkward. I would expect something like glyph of warding's text, or contingency's text. Here, I'll give an example.

Permanency
Level: 7
School: Transmutation
Casting Time: 1 hour
Range: Self
Components: V, S, M (A statuette of yourself carved from ivory and decorated with gems worth at least 1,500 gp and powdered ruby worth 1,500 gp, sprinkled over yourself and consumed by the spell)
Duration: Until dispelled

Choose a spell of 5th level or lower that you can cast, has a casting time of 1 action or 1 bonus action and a duration of 1 round or more, is not concentration, and can target you. You cast that spell—called the permanent spell—as part of casting permanency, expending spell slots and any necessary components for both. The permanent spell takes effect only on you, even if it can normally target others, and the spell's duration is changed to last until permanency ends on you. You can use only one permanency spell at a time. If you cast this spell again, any other permanency spell on you ends. Also, permanency ends on you if its unconsumed material component is ever not on your person.

At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 8th level, the permanent spell can have a casting time from 1 round to 1 minute instead of an action or bonus action. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 9th level, the permanent spell can have a casting time from 1 round to 1 hour instead of an action or bonus action.

[Chronos]

Why make casting time a limiting factor at all?

If anything, I'd much rather say that the spell has to start off with a duration of at least a minute, or at least an hour. Lots of spells with a one-round duration would be broken with a longer duration.

[Sigreid]

Honestly, I'm liking more and more the idea of it not being a permanency spell but more of enchanting a person or object.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Wording on that is super awkward. I would expect something like glyph of warding's text, or contingency's text. Here, I'll give an example.

Permanency
Level: 7
School: Transmutation
Casting Time: 1 hour
Range: Self
Components: V, S, M (A statuette of yourself carved from ivory and decorated with gems worth at least 1,500 gp and powdered ruby worth 1,500 gp, sprinkled over yourself and consumed by the spell)
Duration: Until dispelled

Choose a spell of 5th level or lower that you can cast, has a casting time of 1 action or 1 bonus action and a duration of 1 round or more, is not concentration, and can target you. You cast that spell—called the permanent spell—as part of casting permanency, expending spell slots and any necessary components for both. The permanent spell takes effect only on you, even if it can normally target others, and the spell's duration is changed to last until permanency ends on you. You can use only one permanency spell at a time. If you cast this spell again, any other permanency spell on you ends. Also, permanency ends on you if its unconsumed material component is ever not on your person.

At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 8th level, the permanent spell can have a casting time from 1 round to 1 minute instead of an action or bonus action. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 9th level, the permanent spell can have a casting time from 1 round to 1 hour instead of an action or bonus action.

I don't like it being self only.
It kind of ruin it usability IMO.

I agree about it need to be a single target.
The one I sent is worded like that so the limiting factors are which spells you can use it with and the spell levels.
The idea of it is making stuff more versatile, not making the caster uberbuff, a wizard can already do that with Glyph of Warding and a Demiplane.