When to cast Summon Greater Demon?

[Merudo]

Most everyone agrees that Summon Greater Demon is an excellent spell, however I never seem to be in a situation where casting it is my best choice.

If the party is already engaged in melee with the enemy, casting it is quite dangerous as the demon is likely to turn against us.

If the enemy is far apart, other options such as Hypnotic Pattern, Fireball, or Sleet Storm are typically a lot more reliable.

When is it a good idea to cast Summon Greater Demon?

[Zhorn]

I've always viewed it as a 'cast this to fight while you're getting away' type spell, so

against a single target that you want to keep occupied,

or

against enemies with an investment in the area you summon it, where if they don't stop it the demon will do things they don't want (destroying the lair, killing their allies etc)

[diplomancer]

On a recent discussion about the spell, someone pointed out to me that it can be quite good in parties that have a lot of "positioning power". For instance, a grappler can make sure that there's always an enemy closer to the Demon, so even if you lose control of it, it's not a bad thing; can even be a good thing, as it frees up your concentration.

[Chronos]

Huh. I had always assumed it was meant as an enemy spell, for use by DMs. Because, well, you're summoning demons. And the DM doesn't have to worry about what happens after the party dies, and having ways for the DM's plans to go horribly wrong is part of the fun of the game.

[da newt]

It's also a nice spell for casting into a room and closing the door while you set up an ambush for anyone who runs out OR a great distraction - pop a demon over there left of the bad guys while y'all sneak around to the right to grab the McGuffin. It's a first round of the fight kinda spell - shape the battle space, create multiple fronts for the bad guys sort of thing.

[No brains]

Good times to cast Summon Greater Demon are contingent upon which demons you want to summon. Most of the time, it is better for an enemy spell that can initiate plots for the PCs to face, but depending on the campaign, there's some good uses for a few demons. Charisma saves and Magic Resistance can make big differences.

For the basic 4th-level casting:

CR 2 Rutterkin (saves at -2, cannot be charmed) can turn creatures into more demons. Drop one in a chicken coop and run away. No need to concentrate, just get out of there. Although you can have your concentration broken at the end of the duration to cheese out a few more rounds of demon spawning.

CR 4 Babau (saves at +1) is weirdly good for utility. It has Dispel Magic at-will. Even without a strong modifier, you can potentially use this to brute force a magical obstacle that needs to be dispelled. Also at-will levitate can help you get your party and several items up to 500lbs up to somewhere they need to go in a hurry.

CR 4 Shadow Demon (Saves at +4) is incorporeal, sentient, and has 120 ft. telepathy. With +7 stealth and the ability to hide as a bonus action, it can make a great scout if you can maintain control. Otherwise, it's a shock trooper you can send through solid walls.

CR 4 Dybbuk (saves at +2 with Magic Resistance, cannot be charmed) can possess the body of a slain humanoid, allowing you to Weekend At-Bernie's your way through an awkward situation, steal an identity, or temporarily bring back a bad guy to fight for you. Beware that it won't have 'class features' and that's poorly defined on NPC statblocks, except for most spellcasting.

CR5 Barlgura (saves at -1) can cast Disguise Self as a large creature. It's a niche use, but it can be effective for false-flag attacks using 'ogres', 'trolls', or 'oni'.

For some more costly upcasts:

6th
Chasme (saves at +0 with Magic Resistance) can knock out entire rooms of people just by standing there. Sure, Hypnotic Pattern can do that, but this happens every round with no action required. Quell an army, put a town to sleep, or spread other disruption.

Maurezhi (saves at +2 with Magic Resistance, cannot be charmed) can work like a Rutterkin, except it can create a delayed plague of ghouls.

If you want the spell to last longer, you can instantly charm your demon to get it to divulge its true name. Enchantment Wizard can work for this along with Fey Wanderer Ranger and any effect that can inflict charm without checking creature type.

Naturally, another good use for Summon Demon is with a Glyph of Warding holding a Planar Binding. It will take a pile of gems and some setup time, but success here will stop any more Charisma saves to control the demon for a while.

[Oerlaf]

The best way is to use it is if you’re a warlock and have a rod of pact keeper +3. In this case you will find a demon that will fail its saving throw no matter what, so you only have to think about maintaining concentration.

[Sigreid]

I'd only cast it as a final punishment for an area before I leave. For example, I've decided that I don't like a village or it's people, cast Summon Greater Demon and teleport away letting it do to the village what it pleases.

Definitively an evil act to be sure.

More practically, it's one most of my characters would never prepare. Learn, sure, prepare and use, no.

Edit: Similarly, I had a wizard that was all excited to have found instructions on how to make animated scarecrows. After reading what was involved, he shut the book and said "well, we're not doing that." and stuffed the book in his backpack.

[JackPhoenix]

If you want the spell to last longer, you can instantly charm your demon to get it to divulge its true name. Enchantment Wizard can work for this along with Fey Wanderer Ranger and any effect that can inflict charm without checking creature type.

One thing to note is that technically, none of the demons outside PHB have true names: "every demon lord and every demon of type 1 through 6 has a true name that it keeps secret." Neither is a demon lord, and the table in the MM mentions what falls under the 6 numbered types of demons... and non-MM demons naturally aren't on the list.

[sithlordnergal]

If you can put it behind an enemy line then its always going to be a good time to cast it. If you have a grappler that can keep an enemy between it and your party, then its a good time to cast it

[No brains]

It's also worth noting that some demons are immune to being charmed and so charming them will not work to get their true names so they save at disadvantage (I'll edit my previous post). Although in the case of a Dybbuk, a 14th level Necromancy Wizard could pull off something thematically similar by using Command Undead while the Dybbuk possesses a corpse- potentially obviating the need for saves for the rest of the duration of SGD.

[ATHATH]

It's also worth noting that some demons are immune to being charmed and so charming them will not work to get their true names so they save at disadvantage (I'll edit my previous post). Although in the case of a Dybbuk, a 14th level Necromancy Wizard could pull off something thematically similar by using Command Undead while the Dybbuk possesses a corpse- potentially obviating the need for saves for the rest of the duration of SGD.
Can't you just... order it to tell you its true name?

[ATHATH]

CR 4 Dybbuk (saves at +2 with Magic Resistance, cannot be charmed) can possess the body of a slain humanoid, allowing you to Weekend At-Bernie's your way through an awkward situation, steal an identity, or temporarily bring back a bad guy to fight for you. Beware that it won't have 'class features' and that's poorly defined on NPC statblocks, except for most spellcasting.
It looks like Dybbuks got updated in MPMM, and their corpse possession ability can now no longer copy anything other than the corpse's size:

Possess Corpse (Recharge 6). The dybbuk disappears into an intact corpse within 5 feet of it that belonged to a Large or smaller Beast or Humanoid. The dybbuk gains 20 temporary hit points. While possessing the corpse, the dybbuk adopts the corpse's size and can't use Incorporeal Movement. Its game statistics otherwise remain the same. The possession lasts until the temporary hit points are lost or the dybbuk ends it as a bonus action. When the possession ends, the dybbuk appears in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of the corpse.

Very sad, I was planning on trying to work out how to get a save DC high enough to keep it from breaking free of your control. The other demons all kind of seem... underwhelming outside of a few utility edge cases, considering what you'd need to have to keep them on your leash for the full hour.

[JackPhoenix]

Can't you just... order it to tell you its true name?

You can, but you'll be just wasting a turn of it being under your control, as dybbuk isn't listed as type 1-6 demon, and isn't a demon lord, so it does not have true name:
"Every demon lord and every demon of type 1 through 6 has a true name that it keeps secret."
"Demonologists organize the chaotic distribution of demons into broad categories of power known as types. Most demons fit into one of six major types, with the weakest categorized as Type 1 and the strongest as Type 6. Demons outside the six main types are categorized as minor demons and demon lords.

1 barlgura, shadow demon, vrock
2 chasme, hezrou
3 glabrezu, yochlol
4 nalfeshnee
5 marilith
6 balor, goristro"

Non-MM demons aren't on the list (for obvious reasons, but that's the RAW).


It looks like Dybbuks got updated in MPMM, and their corpse possession ability can now no longer copy anything other than the corpse's size:

One more reason to ignore that waste of paper.

[ATHATH]

1 barlgura, shadow demon, vrock
2 chasme, hezrou
3 glabrezu, yochlol
4 nalfeshnee
5 marilith
6 balor, goristro.
Is it stated anywhere that that list is an exhaustive one?

[JackPhoenix]

Is it stated anywhere that that list is an exhaustive one?

Have you seen any update to the list anywhere else?

[Scarytincan]

If you want the spell to last longer, you can instantly charm your demon to get it to divulge its true name. Enchantment Wizard can work for this along with Fey Wanderer Ranger and any effect that can inflict charm without checking creature type.

Naturally, another good use for Summon Demon is with a Glyph of Warding holding a Planar Binding. It will take a pile of gems and some setup time, but success here will stop any more Charisma saves to control the demon for a while.

You can also just use your first command to get the name. And no you don't want a Glyph to cast planar binding, then the demon will be bound to serve the Glyph not the caster. You use the Glyph to summon the demon into an upcasted magic circle (for 2 hr duration) and YOU cast the binding. More glyphs with bane/curse/polymorph to frog etc are also nice to lower its save, but adds up the cost and gotta be smart about when those glyphs go off for some of them.


The best way is to use it is if you’re a warlock and have a rod of pact keeper +3. In this case you will find a demon that will fail its saving throw no matter what, so you only have to think about maintaining concentration.

Except they will only ever cast it at a 5th level slot, which wastes so much of the spells potential sadly :( a pity since they're such a thematic pick


One thing to note is that technically, none of the demons outside PHB have true names: "every demon lord and every demon of type 1 through 6 has a true name that it keeps secret." Neither is a demon lord, and the table in the MM mentions what falls under the 6 numbered types of demons... and non-MM demons naturally aren't on the list.

Yay RAW. I've never personally met or heard of a DM taking that stance however...

[Segev]

"Crows and ravens have feathers," does not imply that nothing else does, especially when a spell called "summon bird" comments that you can get particular types of birds by using that type of bird's feathers as a material component.

[JackPhoenix]

"Crows and ravens have feathers," does not imply that nothing else does, especially when a spell called "summon bird" comments that you can get particular types of birds by using that type of bird's feathers as a material component.

That's pretty bad comparison. There are no (naturally) featherless birds, and if there were, your "summon bird" spell would be unable to summon them (unless the component was not costly and not consumed, in which case you could summon them using foci).

The section on demon true names is explicit that not all demons have true name (as compared to devils, where it is specifically mentioned all devils except lemur do have true names). And Summon Greater Demon says you can use demon's true name, but not whether any particular type of demon does or does not have true name. MToF (and other non-MM sources) don't mention true names in any demon's description (or maybe they do, I haven't checked everything).

[No brains]

Can't you just... order it to tell you its true name?

This is something you could plausibly do, I admit. But in order to be safe, you can charm the fiend so you can meet the letter of the blurb in the Monster Manual. I like to imagine that being charmed and controlled is necessary, otherwise you get a summon error message or the demon says something like, "Nice try." or "I ain't that stupid." I like to imagine that blurb and the XGtE spells are intended to work together, since Planar Ally/ Binding don't seem to care about truenames at all.


It looks like Dybbuks got updated in MPMM, and their corpse possession ability can now no longer copy anything other than the corpse's size:

I need a little update, what is MPMM? I don't know that acronym.


You can also just use your first command to get the name. And no you don't want a Glyph to cast planar binding, then the demon will be bound to serve the Glyph not the caster. You use the Glyph to summon the demon into an upcasted magic circle (for 2 hr duration) and YOU cast the binding.

I am one who peddles in the absurd, but this idea I keep seeing that a Glyph of Warding being the thing in charge of spell decisions is beyond the ken of even my baffling (lack of) brains. It doesn't make sense to me from a logical, lingual, or even comedic point of view.

On the logical side, I cast Glyph of Warding. I cast Planar Binding as part of Glyph of Warding. The spell text of Glyph of Warding and Planar Binding will regard me as the one benefitting from their casting.

On the lingual side, I can't see a reading where the "you" of Planar Binding ever becomes the Glyph itself. At least in English printings, there is never a passage that says the Glyph controls the spell. There is not even a passage that says the Glyph casts the spell. There are lines that refer to me casting the spell into the Glyph and then the spell being cast. This could mean that the casting is suspended within the Glyph and then completed when the Glyph is activated, or it could point to multiple definitions of 'cast', alternately referring to 'accessing a spell from its resources' and 'a spell taking effect on a target'. Either way, I don't give my power of magical attorney to the Glyph except in that it always makes summoned monsters hostile (more on that later).

On the comedic side, I want to go home to my evil lair and mix up my 4-precious mineral salad of powdered silver, powdered diamond, a 999gp ruby, and any 1000gp gem so I can cook up a devilish dinner date. It isn't even funny to make the 'spare hand' of concentration-based spellcasting ruin ideas like this when it works well with the source material of gathering rare ingredients for a powerful and convoluted ritual. If a DM wants to tell me that they don't want to give the players the resources to play Pokemon with fiends, then that's fine. It's doubly fine when it's considered that gems of that value don't show up on a lot of treasure tables, making this rare even by RAW. But the idea that it just doesn't work for some moon-logical reason of the spell I cast being treated as an independent being that can make decisions violates the rule of fun. (I am aware of the irony of that phrasing when discussing summons. A demon has a list of actions and ways I can convince it to take those actions, a Glyph of Warding is my own inanimate graffiti.)

Finally, using the Glyph to summon the demon guarantees that it is hostile to you, and it appears as close as possible to you. Unless you use Stone Shape to make some custom room where the only spatial outcome is that the demon lands only in the area of an unoccupied Magic Circle within the range of the summoning spell, you are setting yourself up for disaster. Not to mention, if we obey the Glyph-as-caster logic, then the Demon will be saving against a null-field's save DC, potentially leaving it bound to will of the Glyph that is always hostile to me forever.

The only reason I can think of that Planar Binding in a Glyph might not work is because of the clause that the intended target has to be there for the entire casting. Arguably, that means that the creature would have to already be there while the Glyph is being prepared and that just wastes extra time. However, the idea that the spell has no immediate effect while being stored in the Glyph reads to me as a suspension on its own limitation of the creature needing to be present for the casting. Then when the Glyph is triggered, the casting time 'snaps' to the instant activation of the glyph. A DM can also assume whether or not the Glyph uses the casting time of the spell when its stored spell is cast, and that is a matter of theme and taste. A Glyph of Warding giving a weak party 1 minute to escape a room before they fight a Conjured Elemental out of their league could be a memorable encounter.

You can say that me getting salty about this is itself absurd, but if Yu-Gi-Oh taught me anything, it's that enslaving magical creatures in a children's card game is serious business, you guys. I am willing to shuffle in weird ways and get sent to the Shadow Realm for my beliefs.

[Segev]

That's pretty bad comparison. There are no (naturally) featherless birds, and if there were, your "summon bird" spell would be unable to summon them (unless the component was not costly and not consumed, in which case you could summon them using foci).

The section on demon true names is explicit that not all demons have true name (as compared to devils, where it is specifically mentioned all devils except lemur do have true names). And Summon Greater Demon says you can use demon's true name, but not whether any particular type of demon does or does not have true name. MToF (and other non-MM sources) don't mention true names in any demon's description (or maybe they do, I haven't checked everything).
You need to show that it is explicit that only the demons called out as having true names have them in order for you claim to be supported. Otherwise, we have a vast swath of demons whose true name possession is unknown, not "they definitely don't have them," as you have been stating.

[No brains]

Re: True Names: If Onomancy is to be believed, everything has a true name. True namers had to do something right.

Also depending upon how one is meant to read the demon types paragraph, I wonder what is more plausible: that manes, quasits, and dretches don't have true names, or that they don't keep their names secret like types and demon lords do. Mostly it seems like demon typing is an even less accurate diegetic form of CR. Does a Shadow Demon really have more in common with a Barlgura than a Vrock has in common with a Chasme? Or are those demons thought of as relatively similar in threat level?

[Scarytincan]

I need a little update, what is MPMM? I don't know that acronym.



I am one who peddles in the absurd, but this idea I keep seeing that a Glyph of Warding being the thing in charge of spell decisions is beyond the ken of even my baffling (lack of) brains. It doesn't make sense to me from a logical, lingual, or even comedic point of view.

On the logical side, I cast Glyph of Warding. I cast Planar Binding as part of Glyph of Warding. The spell text of Glyph of Warding and Planar Binding will regard me as the one benefitting from their casting.

On the lingual side, I can't see a reading where the "you" of Planar Binding ever becomes the Glyph itself. At least in English printings, there is never a passage that says the Glyph controls the spell. There is not even a passage that says the Glyph casts the spell. There are lines that refer to me casting the spell into the Glyph and then the spell being cast. This could mean that the casting is suspended within the Glyph and then completed when the Glyph is activated, or it could point to multiple definitions of 'cast', alternately referring to 'accessing a spell from its resources' and 'a spell taking effect on a target'. Either way, I don't give my power of magical attorney to the Glyph except in that it always makes summoned monsters hostile (more on that later).



Finally, using the Glyph to summon the demon guarantees that it is hostile to you, and it appears as close as possible to you. Unless you use Stone Shape to make some custom room where the only spatial outcome is that the demon lands only in the area of an unoccupied Magic Circle within the range of the summoning spell, you are setting yourself up for disaster. Not to mention, if we obey the Glyph-as-caster logic, then the Demon will be saving against a null-field's save DC, potentially leaving it bound to will of the Glyph that is always hostile to me forever.

The only reason I can think of that Planar Binding in a Glyph might not work is because of the clause that the intended target has to be there for the entire casting. Arguably, that means that the creature would have to already be there while the Glyph is being prepared and that just wastes extra time. However, the idea that the spell has no immediate effect while being stored in the Glyph reads to me as a suspension on its own limitation of the creature needing to be present for the casting. Then when the Glyph is triggered, the casting time 'snaps' to the instant activation of the glyph. A DM can also assume whether or not the Glyph uses the casting time of the spell when its stored spell is cast, and that is a matter of theme and taste. A Glyph of Warding giving a weak party 1 minute to escape a room before they fight a Conjured Elemental out of their league could be a memorable encounter.

.

Various snips...

The book is mordenkainen presents: monsters of the multiverse

Glyph states "when the glyph is triggered, the spell is cast". The spell does not count as having already been cast by the person that put it in the glyph, it is cast when it is triggered, by the glyph. I feel like I saw a sage advice in the past specifically about this topic but can't find at the moment. But I did find this one that states a glyph can't be used for spells that have a target of self because the glyph is not able to cast onto the caster on the casters behalf. Casting the glyph does not make you the originator of the spell for purposes of targeting for spells the glyph casts.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/can-you-cast-a-spell-with-a-range-of-self-into-a-glyph-of-warding-and-have-it-target-the-person-triggering-it/amp/

Naturally you and your DM can do what seems most reasonable or enjoyable etc to you, but to my understanding at least, this is the RAW. Always open to being convinced otherwise of course.

[Thunderous Mojo]

One thing to note is that technically, none of the demons outside PHB have true names: "every demon lord and every demon of type 1 through 6 has a true name that it keeps secret." Neither is a demon lord, and the table in the MM mentions what falls under the 6 numbered types of demons... and non-MM demons naturally aren't on the list.

Mord's Tome of Foes directly contradicts your line of thinking Jack,
MTF pg 25:
Although sages group demons into types according to their power, the Abyss knows no such categories. Demons are spawned from the stuff of the Abyss in a near-infinite variety ofshapes and abilities. The common forms that are familiar to demonologists represent broad trends, but individual demons defy those tenden- cies..

Essentially, the Class 1-6 demon rating system of the Monster Manual is meaningless.

More importantly...if the Demon Class rating was being, actively, used in 5e, then likely, you will see an update for non Monster Manual Demons, in a future product.

That has been "The Way", since original AD&D.
(Demon Class Rating was a bone thrown to grognards.)

[Eldariel]

At range if you need muscle. Fireball, Hypnotic Pattern, etc. are good but they are not "bodies". If you just need someone to wreck consistent damage turn after turn, get a Barlgura or whatever.. Just be sure to position it behind the enemy; you don't care if it dies (if enemies burn 70 points of damage on it, you win) and this way even your melee guys are in relative safety. There's also the "if you need to nova, SGD, drop Concentration while it wrecks things for 1d6 rounds and follow up with another Concentration spell".

[Scarytincan]

There's also the "if you need to nova, SGD, drop Concentration while it wrecks things for 1d6 rounds and follow up with another Concentration spell".

Dropping concentration unsummons the demon if it's still controlled. Only an uncontrolled demon remains the extra rounds after concentration ends. Which means you can safely do things like summon dybbuk to ddoor your one friend away from the jaws of death and then immediately drop concentration before its turn ends to send it safely away.

[Eldariel]

Dropping concentration unsummons the demon if it's still controlled. Only an uncontrolled demon remains the extra rounds after concentration ends. Which means you can safely do things like summon dybbuk to ddoor your one friend away from the jaws of death and then immediately drop concentration before its turn ends to send it safely away.

The spell says:
"If you stop concentrating on the spell before it reaches its full duration, an uncontrolled demon doesn’t disappear for 1d6 rounds if it still has hit points."

I can see your reading but it seems like the sentence just states that the demon is uncontrolled for the next 1d6 rounds.

[Scarytincan]

The spell says:
"If you stop concentrating on the spell before it reaches its full duration, an uncontrolled demon doesn’t disappear for 1d6 rounds if it still has hit points."

I can see your reading but it seems like the sentence just states that the demon is uncontrolled for the next 1d6 rounds.

Literally the next three words after what you bolded though. "an uncontrolled demon "

[Scarytincan]

Also sage advice for conjure elemental

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/is-ending-concentration-willingly-the-same-as-breaking-concentration/amp/

Exact same wording in SGD regarding when spell ends

[Merudo]

Glyph states "when the glyph is triggered, the spell is cast". The spell does not count as having already been cast by the person that put it in the glyph, it is cast when it is triggered, by the glyph.


I think many people (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/113176/who-is-considered-to-be-the-caster-of-the-spell-coming-from-a-triggered-spell-gl) would disagree with you.

What is clear is that the caster is actively casting and storing the spell into the glyph. The glyph is only a container, not a caster.

Beside, what would be the spell DC of a spell cast by a glyph? The glyph has no defined statistics or proficiency bonus...



But I did find this one that states a glyph can't be used for spells that have a target of self because the glyph is not able to cast onto the caster on the casters behalf. Casting the glyph does not make you the originator of the spell for purposes of targeting for spells the glyph casts.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/can-you-cast-a-spell-with-a-range-of-self-into-a-glyph-of-warding-and-have-it-target-the-person-triggering-it/amp/


I don't quite agree with your interpretation of the tweet. Jeremy Crawford said that a spell with a target of "self" can only target the caster, and that the Glyph of Warding can't break that rule.

Jeremy doesn't quite say what happens spells with a range of "self" when cast in a Glyph of Warding. As far as we know, the creator of the glyph could remain the target.

Beside, this is not really relevant to Summon Greater Demon, because the spell doesn't have "self" as a target.

[Scarytincan]

Yes, as usual Crawford answers things in the most painfully vague way possible, sadly.

As to your link, that shows what a number of people believe to be the answer, yes, but that does not constitute an absolute and/or official ruling by any means. I would disagree with a lot of the projected implications of the language used in those answers, and how 'you cast' a spell into a glyph necessarily backs up the claim that 'you' are still the caster when the spell is 'cast' by the glyph. And arguments that 'the spell DC uses your DC' backs up 'you are the caster' completely ignore the precedent of a ring of spell storing. When someone uses a spell from a ring of spell storing releases the spell 'stored' in that 'container', who is the caster? The ring thankfully explicitly clears up that the ring wearer counts as its source, even though it uses the 'original caster's' DC etc. Sadly, glyph itself is not so clear and explicit on a great many interactions that can tie back to it...

[Scarytincan]

On your link, the most popular reply claims that the glyph 'acts as a proxy' but supplies absolutely nothing official to back up or support that claim.

In counter point to that one person's view on that site, here is another person's view on the same site:

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/115540/can-a-spell-with-a-target-of-self-be-stored-in-glyph-of-warding

This person takes the stance that for self range spells, the caster is the one that triggers the glyph. This stance would fall in line with the 'caster' of the spell coming out of a glyph being a variable source, rather than always automatically defaulting to originating from the one that stored the spell in the glyph. If that were the case, self spells would always default onto the original caster, regardless of who triggers the spell.

[Scarytincan]

There is also the matter of concentration, which is also backed up by precedent in the ring of spell storing. For the ring, concentration is required by the 'caster', which is the one who releases the stored spell from the ring. For the glyph, the glyph states that the spell lasts for the full duration, implying that the concentration aspect is being taken care of somewhere, and it ain't by the caster. Again, not a perfect apples to apples comparison, but some precedent is more useful than none at least. Either way though, there is certainly room for debate, so it will ultimately be up to the DM as per usual...

There's also the matter of approaching this debate from the angle of the target has to be present for the entire casting of planar binding which is not met in the stance of you being the caster when you put the spell into the glyph, and having to 'cast the spell' as part of casting glyph of warding to store planar binding in the glyph.

[Scarytincan]

To make matters further maddening, I've found another sage advice where Crawford says a spell with a range of self can't be used to cast the spell on another person who triggers the glyph, but DOESN'T address whether it could be used to buff yourself (as the original caster, which would support your stance), or if self targeting spells would have no effect at all as they would target the glyph (which would support my stance).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/can-you-cast-a-spell-with-a-range-of-self-into-a-glyph-of-warding-and-have-it-target-the-person-triggering-it/amp/

And here we have Perkins unhelpfully asserting that find familiar would not 'fit the criteria' of the glyph spell without expanding on why. I would personally take that to mean that if it originated from the caster always, it would be okay but since it's not okay...but that's just me projecting at this point.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sageadvice.eu/glyph-of-warding-containing-find-familiar/amp/

[JackPhoenix]

You need to show that it is explicit that only the demons called out as having true names have them in order for you claim to be supported. Otherwise, we have a vast swath of demons whose true name possession is unknown, not "they definitely don't have them," as you have been stating.

How more explicit than "These types of demons have true names" do you need? There's a list of demon types who do have true name. There's a category of "minor demons" who do not have true names, which does not list types of demons under it. Unless a demon isn't on the list, isn't a demon lord and doesn't specifically says it has a true name in its description, it falls into that category by default.


Re: True Names: If Onomancy is to be believed, everything has a true name. True namers had to do something right.

A what? There's no such thing.


Mord's Tome of Foes directly contradicts your line of thinking Jack,
MTF pg 25:
Although sages group demons into types according to their power, the Abyss knows no such categories. Demons are spawned from the stuff of the Abyss in a near-infinite variety ofshapes and abilities. The common forms that are familiar to demonologists represent broad trends, but individual demons defy those tendencies..

Abyss' ignorance is its own problem, not mine. If an individual demon's description says it's got a true name, then it has a true name even if it isn't on the list.


Essentially, the Class 1-6 demon rating system of the Monster Manual is meaningless.

If it has mechanical implications... which it does, because it determines if a demon has a true name, and there are rules referring to true name of a demon... it's not meaningless.


More importantly...if the Demon Class rating was being, actively, used in 5e, then likely, you will see an update for non Monster Manual Demons, in a future product.

And if we'll see that update, the list of demons with true names will change accordingly.

[Thunderous Mojo]

If it has mechanical implications... which it does, because it determines if a demon has a true name, and there are rules referring to true name of a demon... it's not meaningless..

No, Jack, the DM determines if a particular DM has a Truename or not.

Mord's abandons the classification system, which demonstrates the Rules as Written support varied ways of handling demon truenames.

There is not a single, absolute answer, despite what you are claiming.
The designers, decided, to muddy the waters, and offer differing views in different books.

Also...if a Marilith is a Class V demon and a Goristo and Balor are Class 6....it is not very hard to extrapolate a demon's position on the chart that was published post MM.

[JackPhoenix]

No, Jack, the DM determines if a particular DM has a Truename or not.

Sure, because GM is free to implement or ignore any rule he wants. But RAW, there's a list.


Mord's abandons the classification system, which demonstrates the Rules as Written support varied ways of handling demon truenames.

It did not. All it says that individual demons may have differences from the default statblocks. Well, guess what? That's nothing new.

[Merudo]

Yes, as usual Crawford answers things in the most painfully vague way possible, sadly.


Yes, he does have quite the extensive track record at this point.



And arguments that 'the spell DC uses your DC' backs up 'you are the caster' completely ignore the precedent of a ring of spell storing. When someone uses a spell from a ring of spell storing releases the spell 'stored' in that 'container', who is the caster?

The differences are that (1) the ring says who the new caster is, (2) the caster is a creature, not an ill-defined glyph, (3) the ring explicitly states what happens to the spell DC.

Neither of these are true for your interpretation of the Glyph of Warding spell. All there is, is a mention that "the stored spell is cast", which doesn't tell us who or what casts it - therefore there is no evidence at all that the caster of the spell changed.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Sure, because GM is free to implement or ignore any rule he wants. But RAW, there's a list.


It did not. All it says that individual demons may have differences from the default statblocks. Well, guess what? That's nothing new.

Which all applies to the Truename table, does it not?

Some worlds, such as Eberron, do not have a meaningful split between Demons and Devils....Fiends are the creation of Khyber....the 'Flavor Text' from the Monster Manual does not truly apply to many of the published worlds.

Others may disagree, but the flavor text of the Monster Manual, has never been an ironclad declaration of how the D&D Multiverse operates, even at publication. The Monster Manual describes one way to formulate D&D Metaphysics, not the only way.

The Monster Manual, itself, states this.

The publishing of other books, with a differing vision of D&D Metaphysics, only further erodes whatever pedestal one placed the MM flavor text on.

[Scarytincan]

The differences are that (1) the ring says who the new caster is, (2) the caster is a creature, not an ill-defined glyph, (3) the ring explicitly states what happens to the spell DC.

Neither of these are true for your interpretation of the Glyph of Warding spell. All there is, is a mention that "the stored spell is cast", which doesn't tell us who or what casts it - therefore there is no evidence at all that the caster of the spell changed.

I don't disagree that they do not PROVE my stance. I would also like to politely point out that their absence also does not PROVE your stance either :p

But I would assert that having some sort of similar precedent, even if not a perfect comparison, is a stronger case than having no precedent. Am I wrong?

[Melphizard]

A what? There's no such thing.

Onomancy is a subclass for Wizard that was introduced in UA. It's abilities revolved around using the power of words and language since they have a tapestry of magic around them (like Divine Word, Power Word Kill, ect). It's a pretty cool subclass and I'd suggest checking it out. As for its use in this situation, the subclass can use their ability Extract Name to do the following:

At 2nd level, you can magically compel a creature to divulge its true name. As a bonus action, you target one creature you can see within 60 feet of you. The target must make a Wisdom saving throw against your spell save DC. On a successful save, you discern that this magic failed, and you can’t use this feature on the target again. On a failed save, the target is charmed by you until the end of your next turn, and you mentally learn the charmed target’s name or the fact that the target lacks a name.

Depending on how you run your game if you had this subclass as a player it may allow them to find the true names of creatures even if they have forgotten it themselves. Notably, it does state that the target can lack a name, though I don't know if that's just supposed to be for lower fiends or aberrations who come from beyond the fabric of reality.



Also...if a Marilith is a Class V demon and a Goristo and Balor are Class 6....it is not very hard to extrapolate a demon's position on the chart that was published post MM.

If I was a demon I'd be pretty annoyed to not have a name if I was as powerful as a Marilith. As for usage my party typically goes with the Magic Circle + Summon Greater Demon -> Planar Binding approach. Seeing as magic circle has one job I'm fine letting to demon be trapped in there for the Magic Circle's duration vs the summoner's because that's its thing. Summoning demons/devils into magical circles is an age-old tradition of casters who wish to either make deals, get possessed, or take control of said fiends. The overall duration stuff is a bit wonky but if you time things right with the casting of the circle while holding down the summoned demon you can buy yourself some time... that or be a caster of magic circle who took Metamagic Adept to extend spells which gives you 2 hours to prepare for your snaring of the demon.

For true names I personally see it as all fiends having one; but, most are too dumb or single-minded to even grasp it. Lemures are a good example of creatures who'd probably not even know about true names to begin with. Same thing with Dretch, Maw demons, and the like for demons because their intelligence is far too low to grasp such a concept let alone remember it when their state of being is indescribable. There are sure to be exceptions since being the one dissident is a common theme in Forgotten Realms lore, mainly in the drow books. Once you start getting to fiends with some degree of power they would be more likely to either grasp the idea or know their true name even if they aren't as intelligent as others.

[Merudo]

But I would assert that having some sort of similar precedent, even if not a perfect comparison, is a stronger case than having no precedent. Am I wrong?

The "precedent" of the Ring of Spell Storing is not really a precedent at all, for the reasons I mentioned. If anything, the precedent of Ring of Spell Storing is that when a spell's caster changes, it is done explicitly with clear indication on what happens to the spell DC and attack bonus.

If anything, the existence of the Ring of Spell Storing weakens your argument instead of strengthening it.

[Merudo]

Good times to cast Summon Greater Demon are contingent upon which demons you want to summon. Most of the time, it is better for an enemy spell that can initiate plots for the PCs to face, but depending on the campaign, there's some good uses for a few demons. Charisma saves and Magic Resistance can make big differences.

For the basic 4th-level casting:

CR 2 Rutterkin (saves at -2, cannot be charmed) can turn creatures into more demons. Drop one in a chicken coop and run away. No need to concentrate, just get out of there. Although you can have your concentration broken at the end of the duration to cheese out a few more rounds of demon spawning.

CR 4 Babau (saves at +1) is weirdly good for utility. It has Dispel Magic at-will. Even without a strong modifier, you can potentially use this to brute force a magical obstacle that needs to be dispelled. Also at-will levitate can help you get your party and several items up to 500lbs up to somewhere they need to go in a hurry.

CR 4 Shadow Demon (Saves at +4) is incorporeal, sentient, and has 120 ft. telepathy. With +7 stealth and the ability to hide as a bonus action, it can make a great scout if you can maintain control. Otherwise, it's a shock trooper you can send through solid walls.

CR 4 Dybbuk (saves at +2 with Magic Resistance, cannot be charmed) can possess the body of a slain humanoid, allowing you to Weekend At-Bernie's your way through an awkward situation, steal an identity, or temporarily bring back a bad guy to fight for you. Beware that it won't have 'class features' and that's poorly defined on NPC statblocks, except for most spellcasting.

CR5 Barlgura (saves at -1) can cast Disguise Self as a large creature. It's a niche use, but it can be effective for false-flag attacks using 'ogres', 'trolls', or 'oni'.

For some more costly upcasts:

6th
Chasme (saves at +0 with Magic Resistance) can knock out entire rooms of people just by standing there. Sure, Hypnotic Pattern can do that, but this happens every round with no action required. Quell an army, put a town to sleep, or spread other disruption.

Maurezhi (saves at +2 with Magic Resistance, cannot be charmed) can work like a Rutterkin, except it can create a delayed plague of ghouls.

If you want the spell to last longer, you can instantly charm your demon to get it to divulge its true name. Enchantment Wizard can work for this along with Fey Wanderer Ranger and any effect that can inflict charm without checking creature type.

Naturally, another good use for Summon Demon is with a Glyph of Warding holding a Planar Binding. It will take a pile of gems and some setup time, but success here will stop any more Charisma saves to control the demon for a while.

I do agree the Summon Greater Demon spell has remarkable utility, and is perhaps best used this way instead of for straight battle prowess.

As has been said, the Dybbuk can Dimension Door at will, which is often better than preparing Dimension Door and which works especially well for small casters who can't otherwise bring a medium creature with them. It can even teleport larger creatures if you find a big enough body for them to possess first. Sadly, the Dybbuk's Possess Corpse ability got significantly nerfed in MPMotM.

[Scarytincan]

The "precedent" of the Ring of Spell Storing is not really a precedent at all, for the reasons I mentioned. If anything, the precedent of Ring of Spell Storing is that when a spell's caster changes, it is done explicitly with clear indication on what happens to the spell DC and attack bonus.

If anything, the existence of the Ring of Spell Storing weakens your argument instead of strengthening it.

Well I'll grant you that you can make a case for it there too then. Agree to disagree I suppose it is.

[No brains]

I do agree the Summon Greater Demon spell has remarkable utility, and is perhaps best used this way instead of for straight battle prowess.

As has been said, the Dybbuk can Dimension Door at will, which is often better than preparing Dimension Door and which works especially well for small casters who can't otherwise bring a medium creature with them. It can even teleport larger creatures if you find a big enough body for them to possess first. Sadly, the Dybbuk's Possess Corpse ability got significantly nerfed in MPMotM.

Good catch with the Dim Door at will, I glossed right over that. Not only does it have incredible utility, it also lets a Dybbuk break from control in an amusing way. Instead of going berserk on the party, it can comply and Dimension Door its next target 500 feet straight up! I feel like the chance to inflict 20d6 damage meets the spirit of the spell's stipulation of 'pursuing and attacking the nearest non-demons to the best of its ability'.

Although on that note, the phrasing of uncontrolled demons 'attacking' 'non-demons' gives some clues on how to make the spell safer. If you summon a demon that will be impotent to attack you, then the spell won't backfire as hard. A literal interpretation means that the demon will not use offensive measures that are not attack rolls. A Glabrezu theoretically won't use Power Word Stun once it has lost control. Although that's potentially shaky ground even by RAW, since a Glabrezu attacking with pincers at advantage from Power Word Stun is arguably to the better of their ability than going for a pincers and claws attack. Few demons are straight spellcasters.

Further, if a caster disguises themselves as a demon, an uncontrolled demon that doesn't realize the deception won't go after them. This might take some work and some acting to pull off, but it could still be feasible. If the caster is disguised as a Manes the entire time, a demon would probably figure out that it's weird that it's been ordered around by a least demon, but rounding a corner and turning into a fleeing Manes might work better. A disguise as a Maurezhi would be a good bet since it's humanoid-shaped, designed for massing forces, and has a native disguise ability that a fast-talker could double-bluff with if caught out of their disguise. "I just ate a new disguise, you fool! Don't ruin this for me!" Alternately for impersonating a Dybbuk, "Dude! I figured out how to steal this mage's spells! MATERIAL PLANE PAAAARRRRTYYY!!!" Knowing Abyssal and having telepathy would also be points toward this bluff.

[diplomancer]

Good catch with the Dim Door at will, I glossed right over that. Not only does it have incredible utility, it also lets a Dybbuk break from control in an amusing way. Instead of going berserk on the party, it can comply and Dimension Door its next target 500 feet straight up! I feel like the chance to inflict 20d6 damage meets the spirit of the spell's stipulation of 'pursuing and attacking the nearest non-demons to the best of its ability'.

Although on that note, the phrasing of uncontrolled demons 'attacking' 'non-demons' gives some clues on how to make the spell safer. If you summon a demon that will be impotent to attack you, then the spell won't backfire as hard. A literal interpretation means that the demon will not use offensive measures that are not attack rolls. A Glabrezu theoretically won't use Power Word Stun once it has lost control. Although that's potentially shaky ground even by RAW, since a Glabrezu attacking with pincers at advantage from Power Word Stun is arguably to the better of their ability than going for a pincers and claws attack. Few demons are straight spellcasters.

Further, if a caster disguises themselves as a demon, an uncontrolled demon that doesn't realize the deception won't go after them. This might take some work and some acting to pull off, but it could still be feasible. If the caster is disguised as a Manes the entire time, a demon would probably figure out that it's weird that it's been ordered around by a least demon, but rounding a corner and turning into a fleeing Manes might work better. A disguise as a Maurezhi would be a good bet since it's humanoid-shaped, designed for massing forces, and has a native disguise ability that a fast-talker could double-bluff with if caught out of their disguise. "I just ate a new disguise, you fool! Don't ruin this for me!" Alternately for impersonating a Dybbuk, "Dude! I figured out how to steal this mage's spells! MATERIAL PLANE PAAAARRRRTYYY!!!" Knowing Abyssal and having telepathy would also be points toward this bluff.

This raises the question; how do Demons even KNOW who's a Demon and who's not? Do they have some sort of innate sense? And can that innate sense be fooled by Nystul's Magic Aura? That might be an interesting way to make the spell safe.

[No brains]

This raises the question; how do Demons even KNOW who's a Demon and who's not? Do they have some sort of innate sense? And can that innate sense be fooled by Nystul's Magic Aura? That might be an interesting way to make the spell safe.

I think it depends on the DM.

In the most restrictive case, the demon goes nuts on everyone that the DM didn't designate as demons beforehand. They can cite the spell having a driving influence on them or something else. A DM might argue that in a case where the PC is the only nearest non-demon, the demon is still driven to pursue and attack anything that it isn't 100% sure is a demon.

In more permissive cases, demons are probably as reliant on their senses in this case as most other creatures in other situations. Looking like a demon can be a step toward fooling them, and that's pretty easy through Disguise Self. Speaking their language might be a good step toward deceiving a demon, especially if you take it a step beyond their literal language of Abyssal and bluff them down telepathically. You may even be able to double-bluff a rampaging demon by convincing it that another real demon is something else in disguise.

Even if a DM decides that the demon can be fooled, it would probably respect the spirit of the spell to make it so the deception only stops them from attacking you. It gives the player a way to get the spell to fail safe rather than going catastrophically wrong. I wouldn't expect this strategy to work like budget Planar Ally where you can direct the demon after it breaks free, especially if you're an Eloquence Bard who can basically ignore Deception DCs.