How useful is Conjured Barrage at higher levels?

[samcifer]

I'm concerned that CB would be too weak to use at higher levels because of enemy resistance to non magical damage? Is resistance to non magical damage prevailing enough at higher levels of play (pc levels 12+) to make CB not worth using much?

[Chaos Jackal]

Physical damage from spells is considered magical in source. So no, conjure barrage will not have its effectiveness reduced by nonmagical BPS resistance/immunity. It's not even an attack anyway, so it shouldn't matter.

That doesn't change its main issue, of course. Namely, that its damage is absolutely horrendous for a 3rd-level slot.

[heavyfuel]

I disagree with Chaos Jackal that the damage is automatically magical because it's a spell.

The spell is pretty explicit in that "The damage type is the same as that of the weapon or ammunition used as a component"

A regular arrow deals (non-magical) Piercing damage, and so will the spell.

However, since the Material component is not consumed, you only need 1 magical arrow/thrown weapon to make it work forever.

Still, yeah, atrocious damage for a 3rd level spell, made somehow even worse by the fact that it's Ranger exclusive (seems like half-martials can't get nice things either :smalltongue:) so it's only castable at 9th level. 3d8 damage isn't even remotely close to decent at level 9.

I'd never seen this spell before, and I think it's a great contender for worst spell in the game.

[Chaos Jackal]

I disagree with Chaos Jackal that the damage is automatically magical because it's a spell.

The spell is pretty explicit in that "The damage type is the same as that of the weapon or ammunition used as a component"

A regular arrow deals (non-magical) Piercing damage, and so will the spell.

However, since the Material component is not consumed, you only need 1 magical arrow/thrown weapon to make it work forever.

You cannot use conjure barrage with magical weapons or ammunition.

However, that's irrelevant. There is no such thing as magical damage in the game. A nonmagical arrow deals piercing damage. A magical arrow also deals piercing damage. If the source is magical, it bypasses resistance/immunity to BPS from nonmagical sources. The source of the damage in conjure barrage isn't the material component, it's the spell.

But maybe it's better to break it down, because I'm not gonna claim the above as absolute.

So, you've got three ways to go about it.

The first is what I mentioned above, namely that a spell's damage is always considered to be from a magical source. This isn't RAW, but both Jeremy Crawford and Mike Mearls have said (at least as early as 2015) that damage from spells is magical. So it's almost certainly RAI. There's also a rather vague but still existent explanation of what constitutes a magical effect in the Sage Advice Compendium document (which, reminder, is official unlike the tweets) and said explanation explicitly states that, if an effect has a spell as its source, it's magical. Though of course you don't have to follow these.

The second is that conjure barrage is not, in fact, an attack. So it doesn't matter whether it's considered magical or not; it bypasses resistance to nonmagical attacks not by being magical but by not being an attack (same way falling damage affects creatures immune to BPS from nonmagical attacks). That is the most RAW argument you can make, but I'll agree that it's pedantic.

The third is that, since the spell says it creates "identical weapons", and the weapons you use are nonmagical, the damage dealt will also be nonmagical. This is not RAW (because there's no such thing as magical damage, like I mentioned earlier) and it's not RAI either (see JC and MM tweets, also the actual SAC document about what effects are considered magical) but it does make some sense from a logical standpoint.

Under the first and second interpretation, conjure barrage is bad. Its damage is lousy for its slot (it's the same damage as a 2nd-level spell, and the jump between 2nd- and 3rd- level spells is rather significant) and all it has going for it is its big area... but it also has friendly fire, so it can't even take full advantage of this perk. Oh, and it keys off of Wisdom. Which you probably haven't boosted too much, it being secondary and all. Better than no aoe effect at all? Debatable. Rangers don't exactly get many spells known, so while one can argue conjure barrage might have a niche, you've got stuff that are both stronger and don't require your Wisdom to work at their fullest.

Under the third interpretation, the spell is even worse. You might get lucky because it is an anti-mook spell, and mooks might be weaker and not have resistance/immunity, but as levels increase BPS resistance/immunity also increases, so even the mooks might carry it. Not to mention spending one of your 3rd-level slots, which are your strongest for four levels and your most readily available for another two, against mooks isn't necessarily a good idea. And the third interpretation combined with the spell requiring a nonmagical weapon or piece of ammunition means that the attack will never bypass BPS resistance/immunity, so a weak, niche spell becomes even weaker and more niche.

Conjure barrage is quite disappointing.

[Kane0]

I'm concerned that CB would be too weak to use at higher levels because of enemy resistance to non magical damage? Is resistance to non magical damage prevailing enough at higher levels of play (pc levels 12+) to make CB not worth using much?

It's not too weak because of the magic vs nonmagic damage, it's weak because its a 3rd level spell that does 3d8 damage save for half on a half caster with a save DC that isn't usually that high from maxing out your casting stat. You get it the same time full casters get Cone of Cold and have had things like Call Lightning, Erupting Earth, Hunger of Hadar and of course Fireball for 4 levels already.

It's still worth considering in the sense that it's better than having no AoE spells at all, but as a spell compared against other spells it's not very good.

Edit: Conjure Animals/Summon Fey are usually a better use of a 3rd level spell slot, but if you need something that doesn't use concentration try Plant Growth or maybe something from your subclass if you're lucky. Man, the Ranger list really loves its concentration spells.

[LudicSavant]

I'm concerned that CB would be too weak to use at higher levels because of enemy resistance to non magical damage? Is resistance to non magical damage prevailing enough at higher levels of play (pc levels 12+) to make CB not worth using much?

The way the Resistance you're thinking of is written is "bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from nonmagical attacks."

Conjure Barrage is neither nonmagical, nor an attack.

As for whether it's a good spell... not really. Pretty much its only virtue is that it has a large area of effect for a level 3 spell.

Here is some further discussion that you may find relevant: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95238/is-the-damage-from-conjure-volley-magical

[sithlordnergal]

I disagree with Chaos Jackal that the damage is automatically magical because it's a spell.

The spell is pretty explicit in that "The damage type is the same as that of the weapon or ammunition used as a component"

A regular arrow deals (non-magical) Piercing damage, and so will the spell.

However, since the Material component is not consumed, you only need 1 magical arrow/thrown weapon to make it work forever.

Still, yeah, atrocious damage for a 3rd level spell, made somehow even worse by the fact that it's Ranger exclusive (seems like half-martials can't get nice things either :smalltongue:) so it's only castable at 9th level. 3d8 damage isn't even remotely close to decent at level 9.

I'd never seen this spell before, and I think it's a great contender for worst spell in the game.

Sage Advice disagrees with you there


Determining whether a game feature is
magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions
about the feature:
• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell
that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
• Does its description say it’s magical?
If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature
is magical


Conjure Barrage is a spell, and its fueled by spell slots. While the spell component is non-magical, the 60ft cone that deals 3d8 is magical.

That said OP, despite it being magical, its still a pretty terrible spell. Its a 3rd level spell that Rangers get at level 9 that only deals 3d8 damage. Now, I will admit, most 3rd level spells have a much smaller area, for example, Fireball is only a 20ft radius, Lightning Bolt is a line, and Pulse Wave is a 30ft cone, but they do far more damage. And its that lack of damage which is the real issue. By level 9, full casters have spells like Cone of Cold, which deals 8d8 damage in a 60ft cone, literally double what Conjure Barrage deals.

Meanwhile Paladins have Blinding Smite. Now, Blinding Smite only deals 3d8 damage too, but it also blinds, and is a raider on a melee attack, meaning the Paladin can smite on top of using Blinding Smite.

[samcifer]

Battlesmith artificers get this at lvl 9 and
I'm playing one as a hand crossbow sharpshooter and it's s spell that's auto added to their spell list, which makes me wonder about it. I'm currently lvl 14 on that as a bloodhunter 4/battlesmith 10.

[Kane0]

That said OP, despite it being magical, its still a pretty terrible spell. Its a 3rd level spell that Rangers get at level 9 that only deals 3d8 damage. Now, I will admit, most 3rd level spells have a much smaller area, for example, Fireball is only a 20ft radius, Lightning Bolt is a line, and Pulse Wave is a 30ft cone, but they do far more damage. And its that lack of damage which is the real issue. By level 9, full casters have spells like Cone of Cold, which deals 8d8 damage in a 60ft cone, literally double what Conjure Barrage deals.

Oh wow I didn't even notice Pulse Wave was a thing. Neat!

[TyGuy]

How much damage would it need to do to be considered good? Should it be an attack roll instead of save?

[Kane0]

How much damage would it need to do to be considered good? Should it be an attack roll instead of save?

I up it to 6d8.

[ImproperJustice]

I compare to Tidal Wave which is another 3rd level spell that is “lower tier”, but it does 4d8 and can knock targets prone with a 120’ range where you then designate a 30’ long and 10’ wide line.

This is easy to aim, can hit aerial targets, has a nice status effect and does more damage than CB.

Given how awkward it is to aim it should do like 5d8 damage imo, or maybe 6d6.

[heavyfuel]

You cannot use conjure barrage with magical weapons or ammunition.

The way the Resistance you're thinking of is written is "bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing from nonmagical attacks."

Conjure Barrage is neither nonmagical, nor an attack.

Fair enough. I stand corrected.

[stoutstien]

Battlesmith artificers get this at lvl 9 and
I'm playing one as a hand crossbow sharpshooter and it's s spell that's auto added to their spell list, which makes me wonder about it. I'm currently lvl 14 on that as a bloodhunter 4/battlesmith 10.

I would ask your DM nicely if you can replace it with....anything else. If not a guess of you happen to come across a massive horde of low CR targets you have it prepared at no cost. Least you have built in flight options as an artificer so you could end up with a large target area.

[JackPhoenix]

Why are you comparing it with what full casters get? A ranger is not a full caster, and won't be casting Fireballs or Lightning Bolts anyway. Compared it to other options available to ranger. Or a paladin. Ability to apply AoE damage to hordes on a class that otherwise makes 2-3 attacks per turn does have its value. Is it more valuable than Conjure Animals? Maybe, depending on the specific campaign.

[loki_ragnarock]

Why are you comparing it with what full casters get?

They aren't.

They are comparing it to other 3rd level spells.

[PhantomSoul]

Fair enough. I stand corrected.

In your defense, for the "nonmagical attacks", that's the game standing corrected ("nonmagical weapons" was replaced through errata: https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/MM_Errata.pdf)

[JackPhoenix]

They aren't.

They are comparing it to other 3rd level spells.

Yes. Other spells available to full casters, like Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Erupting Earth or Pulse Wave. None of which rangers get.

[OvisCaedo]

I don't think there's much reason for a Ranger's third level spells to be automatically weaker than the third level spells of full casters; they already get them significantly later as the means by which their spellcasting is weaker. Plenty of their third level spells DO overlap with full casters. I think as far as the game balance/design is generally concerned, spells of the same level are supposed to be... roughly equivalent, regardless of when you're getting them. Though there's certainly no shortage of imbalance on that front, so I can't really say they did a good job of it...

But, I do also see the merit in your point. Class lists are deliberately supposed to highlight things a class is good or bad at dealing with. They don't get good AOE options because it's not meant to be something rangers are good at (I guess???), though I'm not sure that giving them a kind of weak option and going "look, see, it's better than nothing" is the right move in that case.

edit: though of course, maybe the designers did just genuinely place high value on the size of the AOE conjure barrage has!

[Keltest]

I don't think there's much reason for a Ranger's third level spells to be automatically weaker than the third level spells of full casters; they already get them significantly later as the means by which their spellcasting is weaker. Plenty of their third level spells DO overlap with full casters. I think as far as the game balance/design is generally concerned, spells of the same level are supposed to be... roughly equivalent, regardless of when you're getting them. Though there's certainly no shortage of imbalance on that front, so I can't really say they did a good job of it...

But, I do also see the merit in your point. Class lists are deliberately supposed to highlight things a class is good or bad at dealing with. They don't get good AOE options because it's not meant to be something rangers are good at (I guess???), though I'm not sure that giving them a kind of weak option and going "look, see, it's better than nothing" is the right move in that case.

edit: though of course, maybe the designers did just genuinely place high value on the size of the AOE conjure barrage has!

Consider also that the ranger has options for killing things besides their spell slots, while full casters generally only have a cantrip or two for that purpose. Conjure Barrage is almost certainly something for a ranger to help deal with a swarm of 15 goblins and similar low-CR masses, given when it comes online, since by that point the ranger is almost certainly going to start seeing overkill if they use their main weapon attack on each goblin at a time.

[Asisreo1]

I always find it an interesting exercise to understand these spells. What exactly were the designers afraid of that they'd give us a severely nerfed spell...

We know how the community views the spell, but how does WoTC view it? How much damage is the spell projected to do and is it enough to justify the heavy cost?

Well, if it's a cone, then it's projected to hit an average of 6 targets with it's 60ft area. That means it would do a total of 18d6 (average 64) damage assuming nothing saves.

But I think we should scrutinize it under the lense of WoTC a little further because I think they have an even more precise way of determining it's usefulness assuming good conditions.

A dragon's breath weapon is effectively an AoE like CB. When WoTC gave guidance on the damage, they assume it hits 2 creatures and both fail their save. But why 2...? And why assume both fail their saves?

I imagine it's because they want to easily model a full party (4 characters) fighting the dragon and account for all the possible scenarios that might be close to what the damage would be given no context about party composition, magic items, tactical competence, positioning, or luck.

Now, I believe the 2 models half of a 4-player party, which is the base assumption of the game. They can't really say "half of the party" because that would actively change the CR based on party composition. Some might think that's fine, but it might add complications due to having a single creature existing in multiple CR's and they might not have wanted to deal with that. With spells, though, we can probably assume we're at least facing the maximum amount of enemies and have the half-fail-save model account for the uncertainties.

So, let's account for all this in the analysis of CB. Let's assume it hits 3 characters (half of its maximum possible) and all 3 fail their save. That means it will do 3x[3d6] (the average is the same as 9d6, but the dice distribution is pretty different). That's 31.5 expected damage in the turn...compare that to fireball which does 2x[8d6] and that's 48 damage. So CB still underperforms compared to fireball. You could argue whether it's tolerable especially since Rangers don't get fireball anyways, but they also don't get this until level 9, in which case it doesn't even project to do more than the base damage a Ranger can do without expending resources because if they're a hunter, they are close to getting multiattack which does better in this situation and if they're beastmaster, they do more damage by attacking alongside their beast.

TL;DR All these words to say CB is still pretty lackluster regardless. Although, I'll investigate further to try to gain insight on it's design and why it's so bad.

[Chaos Jackal]

It's not necessarily a matter of comparing it to full casters. As already indicated by some above, myself included, it's bad even when compared to ranger spells.

At 9th level, when you first gain this, you know six spells. Six. That's very few. By lv13, where you get 4th-level spells, you know eight. You only get an additional one in-between.And you have 2 3rd-level slots; it's not really worth having more than one or two 3rd-level spells at that point. You get three after a couple levels, but then comes the next point...

Because your options include conjure animals/summon fey, plant growth and revivify. At lower levels you have absorb elements, entangle, fog cloud, longstrider. You have aid, healing spirit, lesser restoration, pass without trace, silence, spike growth. A lot of those spells don't even require Wisdom investment from you.

You wanna do aoe? Sic a bunch of beasts at your enemies. Or throw an area control effect. A well-placed spike growth is more damaging, more disruptive and doesn't require any Wisdom to boot. Same with the beasts from conjure animals. Why use something that has pathetic damage, save for half on top of said pathetic damage and keys off your Wisdom? Why spend one of your few, precious spells known on such a weak effect?

Conjure barrage sucks in general, not just because fireball is better. At the levels conjure barrage becomes available, even within the ranger class alone, it is weak. And the sacrifices you don't make or make for it make it weaker (maybe you don't have much Wisdom) and/or are just too high an opportunity cost (a spell known, a 3rd-level slot, potentially Wisdom investment) for something that you could accomplish better with an aoe control spell or summoning. Even in its niche, even in its class, it will generally be outperformed, and you really can't afford a spell that might be barely useful once in a blue moon on a ranger (enough enemies to not just be better off attacking normally or use a subclass ability like Multiattack, potentially with middling-to-bad Dex saves, hopefully with no allies in that big and kinda impractical to position area because cones are worse than circles and with concentration already used on something else).

So yeah. You don't need to look at fireball. There's enough reasons to not bother anyway.

[heavyfuel]

In your defense, for the "nonmagical attacks", that's the game standing corrected ("nonmagical weapons" was replaced through errata: https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/MM_Errata.pdf)

I knew I wasn't going crazy! :smallbiggrin:

Guess I never noticed the different wording in my MM copy and online sources


Why are you comparing it with what full casters get? A ranger is not a full caster, and won't be casting Fireballs or Lightning Bolts anyway. Compared it to other options available to ranger. Or a paladin. Ability to apply AoE damage to hordes on a class that otherwise makes 2-3 attacks per turn does have its value. Is it more valuable than Conjure Animals? Maybe, depending on the specific campaign.

Spells of the same level should be roughly equal. So what that Rangers don't get Fireball? If they are both 3rd level spells, they should be roughly similar in power.

Plus, class unique spells tend to be on the stronger side. Find Greater Steed (which also isn't available to a full caster), Eldritch Blast, Armor of Agathys are top tier spells for their levels. Conjure Barrage isn't even balanced, let alone on the stronger side.

And then there's the fact that this is a Blasting spell, which don't scale all that well even for full-caster, and it's given to half-caster, who'll only be able to use it a couple levels after 3rd level spells have stopped being relevant.

[Asisreo1]

Spells of the same level should be roughly equal. So what that Rangers don't get Fireball? If they are both 3rd level spells, they should be roughly similar in power.

Plus, class unique spells tend to be on the stronger side. Find Greater Steed (which also isn't available to a full caster), Eldritch Blast, Armor of Agathys are top tier spells for their levels. Conjure Barrage isn't even balanced, let alone on the stronger side.

And then there's the fact that this is a Blasting spell, which don't scale all that well even for full-caster, and it's given to half-caster, who'll only be able to use it a couple levels after 3rd level spells have stopped being relevant.
I don't agree with the notion that spells, especially class-exclusive spells, should be roughly the same potency just because of its level.

Mechanically, spells are just a dressing for a type of long-rest resource, excluding warlocks. If you remove the flavor, you get a set of abilities that recharge on long rest. Some are shared between classes, some are not. It wouldn't be fair to say "Cure Wounds is a bad spell for the Druid because the Bard gets Healing Word which is a better spell." It's irrelevant because the druid isn't trying to replace the bard, he's just wondering if it's worth taking a healing spell just in case someone gets downed in combat and the party doesn't have a Bard or cleric.

Likewise, the Ranger isn't trying to replace or substitute Blaster Casters, they're just wondering if the AoE is worth the spells known for their class, since that's the only relevant thing for a 10th-level Ranger.

Still, I'd say it's not worth it. I haven't played artificer and I'm not familiar with it, but it almost certainly isn't worth it on them either unless there's some synergy that allows it to increase power dramatically.

[heavyfuel]

I don't agree with the notion that spells, especially class-exclusive spells, should be roughly the same potency just because of its level.

Then why have spell levels in the first place?

If the game designers can just put any spell at any level with complete disregard for their relative power, then spell levels are meaningless. Had the designers made Fireball a 1st level spell, then what is the point of having Burning Hands as a spell?

If you were talking only about class-exclusive spells (instead of "especially" them), then it still doesn't make much sense. Armor of Agathys would be a terrible 3rd level spell, to the point where no one would ever pick it. Same goes for Conjure Barrage. It's absolute garbage for its level, and thus, no one picks it. The PHB's been out for nearly 8 years now, and this is the first time I've ever seen someone considering picking this spell. Is this a ridiculously small sample size? Sure. Doesn't invalidate the point, though.

Spell levels are a rough indication of that spell's power. Spells of roughly the same power should be of the same level. Otherwise there's no point to having spell levels in the first place

[loki_ragnarock]

Yes. Other spells available to full casters, like Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Erupting Earth or Pulse Wave. None of which rangers get.

No, they don't. But to say they're comparing it to what fullcasters get is disingenuous.

Making the comparison Ranger's get a spell at 9th level that does 3d8 damage, no rider, over a large area. If making a comparison to fullcasters, you'd have to look at what they get at 9th level as a point of comparison... which is 5th level spells, or Cone of Cold doing 8d8 over a similar area. Assume the full caster will have higher spell DCs is pretty reasonable, as they don't suffer from MADness in the same way that rangers do, and they'll be doing more damage still.

Does it have to be the equal of Cone of Cold? No, that'd be ludicrous. It's a third level spell compared to a fifth level spell, and rangers have additional tools in their kit to deal damage.

But as a comparison to other 3rd level spells... eh, there's a case to be made that the huge area of effect is a boon, and trading some damage for that makes sense. The damage type - magical piercing or maybe bludgeoning - might also be worth factoring in, as those are highly unlikely to be resisted. Fireball, on the hand, is pretty widely resisted. Damage range 3-24 fixed vs 8-48 upcastable. 13.5 average vs. 28 average.
Against a creature with fire resistance that makes the save, Conjure Barrage does between 6-7 damage (ew) vs 7 damage for the fireball.

So... slightly less damage on average than a fireball cast at something resistant to fire. That's... not a great showing on a spell level comparison.

But it's even worse on a compare with class assumptions. For a 9th level party 13.5 damage to the 4 Water Weirds the party is fighting as a medium encounter, those 13.5 average damage represent something like 23% of the 58 hp of the creatures in question... if they all fail their save against what's probably an off stat. Success means you burnt your action for 11-12%. While the failed save is actually not too shabby an outcome, the successful save is pretty bleck. But considering that the other class would have been doing significantly more damage against opponents with ostensibly fewer hp to bring to bear?
A fifth level wizard throwing out a fireball at 4 Orc Eye of Gruumsh would be in a hard encounter. At 45hp each, his average 28 damage is 62% of the hp on the board. If they all save, it's 31% of the hp on the board. If one of them isn't targeted at all (CB does have a larger area of effect, so lets run with it), with two saves and one fail, that's still 31% of the hp on the board; significantly better than even the best case scenario for Conjure Barrage.

So... yeah, I'd still maintain no one was comparing full casters to rangers. Conjure Barrage *really* plummets when taken out of the context of other 3rd level spells and into the context of overall efficacy, even when comparing a medium encounter to a hard one. Jeeze.

EDIT
Which is to say, Conjure Barrage really needs a rider to be worthwhile.

Even something like "The area of effect is considered difficult terrain as arrows/darts fill the space" would make it a much more appealing option.

[Dark.Revenant]

Conjure Barrage approximately breaks even with Fireball if you can hit twice the number of targets. However, that’s just in pure damage; Fireball actually has a decent chance of killing low-level minions outright, while Conjure Barrage doesn’t do enough damage to make that a realistic possibility.

At 5th level, as with full casters gaining access to Fireball, you might be facing groups of enemies with low-20s HP, which means a death for every failed save. By 9th level, as with Rangers gaining access to Conjure Barrage, you’ll almost never face significant numbers of enemies with 10 or fewer HP. Most of the time if you’re facing swarms of very weak enemies, it’s either a trivial fight, or they’ve been combined into “Swarm” units, which would take pitiful damage from Conjure Barrage because swarms are resistant to all physical damage (magic or not).

I just can’t see much of an use-case for Conjure Barrage. It’s only useful in a situation where you can meaningfully damage tons of enemies bunched together in roughly the same area at the same time, and that’s just not a common scenario. Conjure Barrage doesn’t even break even with basic attacks unless you can catch three creatures in the AOE, and breaking even with a resourceless option is a very low bar.

[Mostlymad]

Is CB worth it with the poisoner feat? :) BA poison onto an arrow and use with CB. AOE Poison Attack

[sithlordnergal]

Why are you comparing it with what full casters get? A ranger is not a full caster, and won't be casting Fireballs or Lightning Bolts anyway. Compared it to other options available to ranger. Or a paladin. Ability to apply AoE damage to hordes on a class that otherwise makes 2-3 attacks per turn does have its value. Is it more valuable than Conjure Animals? Maybe, depending on the specific campaign.

Alright, lets compare it to other half casters. We have the Paladin, Artificer, and Ranger to choose from. Lets start with the Paladin.



Now, Paladins do lack AoE damage, they tend to focus on single target damage or buffs. That said, here are some notable spells.

- Spirit Shroud: It adds 1d8 your choice of Cold/Necrotic/Radiant to all your attacks against creatures within 10ft of you, is a Bonus Action to let you make an attack after casting it, and lowers one creature of your choice's speed by 10ft.

- Blinding Smite: Adds 3d8 Radiant damage to your next successful attack, that successful is the key word there since it'll never be wasted, blinds the target, and is a Bonus Action.

- Crusader's Mantle: Adds 1d4 Radiant damage to every single ally's attack, as long as they're within 30ft of you

- Aura of Vitality: Lets you use a Bonus Action to heal someone for 2d6 as a Bonus Action, as long as they're within 30ft of you.


Now, while none of those are AoE damage spells, they are a fair bit stronger than Conjure Barrage. Crusader's Mantle and Aura of Vitality are probably the weakest of them, and even then they're extremely powerful buffs. Crusader's Mantle's strength scales with how many martials you have, so even if its just you, a Barbarian, and a Rogue, that's basically adding 5d4 Radiant damage among you all. Meanwhile Aura of Vitality lets you pick anyone up pretty quickly, without having to give up your attack action.

----


Like the Paladin, the Artificer doesn't really focus on damaging spells. Instead, it focuses on buffing, even more than the Paladin does.

- Ashardalon's Stride: Another bonus action spell, adds 20ft of movement, you no longer provoke attacks of opportunity, and it deals 1d6 fire damage whenever you move within 5ft of a creature with no save

- Haste: Probably one of the strongest buff spells in the game, no real need to explain further

- Intellect Fortress: Gives a creature resistance to psychic damage, and advantage on all Wis/Int/Cha saves

- Fly: While not as strong as a buff as Haste, still a pretty dang handy buff. No real need to go in depth.


Again, while these are different kinds of spells, I'd say they're all stronger than 3d8 in a 60ft cone.


Now, before we move onto the Ranger, there is one more thing to be said about Paladin and Artificer spell lists. They get bonus spells based on their subclass. For example, the Artillerist Artificer actually gains Fireball as a third level spell while Armorers gain Lightning Bolt, which means its perfectly fair to compare Conjure Barrage against both of those spells. Meanwhile Watcher and Redemption Paladins have Counterspell, Crown Paladins get Spirit Guardians, Conquests get Fear, and Ancients get Plant Growth. The fact that those half casters DO have access to such powerful spells just makes Conjure Barrage even worse.

---


- Ashardalon's Stride: Already talked about in the Artificer spell list, but probably even more handy in the hands of a melee ranger.

- Lightning Arrow: A psedo-AoE, deals 4d8 lightning damage with an attack roll, or half that on a miss, and deals 2d8 Lightning to each creature within 10ft of the target with a Dex save for half.

- Conjure Animals: Probably one of the most broken summon spells in the game, bar none. Especially if you go with the 8 CR 1/4th creatures.

- Summon Fey: While I wouldn't put it on par with Conjure Animals, its still a pretty dang decent summoning spell. It has a smaller AoE with its effects, but its effects are slightly stronger than 3d8 damage alone.

- Plant Growth: Probably one of the strongest control spells in the game since its a 100ft radius and non-concentration. It also isn't considered Difficult Terrain, so it technically stacks with Difficult Terrain


Sadly the Ranger doesn't gain any extra spells from their subclasses. But even then, you can't honestly look at Conjure Barrage and say that its any good when you compare it to the other spells. The one, and ONLY thing Conjure Barrage has going for it is the fact that its a 60ft Cone...but since the Artificer has access to Fireball, that doesn't really give it many, or any, bonus points. Its just a bad spell that does too little damage. Most of the spells that deal 3d8 damage have some kind of rider, and the ones that deal less have two powerful effects and the damage ends up being the rider.

In order to make Conjure Barrage good, you'd need to give it something outside of "AoE damage". Maybe let it work with magical ammunition, and let the barrage copy the effects of that ammo. That way you could mix it with something like Flame Arrows to improve them both. It could add 1d6 fire damage to the AoE damage, or something like that.

[sithlordnergal]

Is CB worth it with the poisoner feat? :) BA poison onto an arrow and use with CB. AOE Poison Attack

Mmm, I'd say no, simply because too many things are immune to poison.

[Chronos]

OK, let's not compare rangers to fullcasters. Let's look at a 3rd-level ranger spell vs. another 3rd-level ranger spell. Wind Wall does damage to creatures in its area when it's cast. How much? 3d8, the exact same as Conjure Barrage. And you have total control of the shape of a Wind Wall, so you can make it a shape that hits all of the enemies, but none of your allies. At a total length of 50', it'll be a smaller area than Conjure Barrage, but that's still likely to be enough for all you need. And Wind Wall isn't even primarily a blasting spell: It has tons of other uses as well, which is very relevant on a spells-known half-caster.

And also consider that, just two levels after you get access to Conjure Barrage, you get Volley, which lets you make an area-effect attack at will. With attacks, so all of the thing that apply to attacks also apply (magic weapons, Sharpshooter, poisoned arrows, Hunter's Mark, etc.).

[sithlordnergal]

OK, let's not compare rangers to fullcasters. Let's look at a 3rd-level ranger spell vs. another 3rd-level ranger spell. Wind Wall does damage to creatures in its area when it's cast. How much? 3d8, the exact same as Conjure Barrage. And you have total control of the shape of a Wind Wall, so you can make it a shape that hits all of the enemies, but none of your allies. At a total length of 50', it'll be a smaller area than Conjure Barrage, but that's still likely to be enough for all you need. And Wind Wall isn't even primarily a blasting spell: It has tons of other uses as well, which is very relevant on a spells-known half-caster.

And also consider that, just two levels after you get access to Conjure Barrage, you get Volley, which lets you make an area-effect attack at will. With attacks, so all of the thing that apply to attacks also apply (magic weapons, Sharpshooter, poisoned arrows, Hunter's Mark, etc.).

To be fair, Artificers get access to Fireball, Conjure Barrage, and Lightningbolt through their subclass. Sooo...its fair to compare Conjure Barrage to those two spells. But you make an excellent point. Wind Wall deals the same damage, can be shaped to avoid allies, and protects you from most projectiles, Small and Smaller flying creatures, and all fogs/gasses, including gaseous creatures. Its far better than Conjure Barrage in pretty much every way. The only thing CB has is a larger AoE.

[Kane0]

I think most of us missed that he's playing a Battlesmith Artificer and not a Ranger.

In which case... Artificers have the some of the same problems as Rangers here. They're half casters that don't get access to better AoE spells but at least a Battlesmith is more likely to have high save DC from only needing Int thanks to their Battle Ready feature. At least its a freebie not costing you a spell preparation, but I'd rarely actually use it compared to other options for those slots like Dispel Magic, Fly, Haste, Tiny Servant, Revivify or even upcast Aid or Web.

[Witty Username]

How much damage would it need to do to be considered good? Should it be an attack roll instead of save?
Triple it.

[LudicSavant]

Triple it.

Uhm...? That would be a level 3 spell with the gigantic AoE size of Cone of Cold, 150% of the damage of Fireball, and one of the best damage types. A spell that, I might add, isn't just on the Ranger list (I know of at least 5 ways to get).

Heck, it'd be a level 3 spell that has the gigantic AoE size of Cone of Cold, a better damage type than Cone of Cold, and more damage than Cone of Cold.

[Witty Username]

Uhm...? That would be a level 3 spell with the gigantic AoE size of Cone of Cold, 150% of the damage of Fireball, and one of the best damage types. A spell that, I might add, isn't just on the Ranger list (I know of at least 5 ways to get).

Heck, it'd be a level 3 spell that has the gigantic AoE size of Cone of Cold, a better damage type than Cone of Cold, and more damage than Cone of Cold.

Fair, 5d8. Add a sentence that it deals an extra 4d8 damage when cast by a Ranger of at least 9th level.

[Sorinth]

I'm probably one of the few who don't mind it. It's not a great spell by any means but it's worth noting the mediocre damage also means that it doesn't matter all that much if a friendly gets caught. It's best feature beyond the large AoE is probably being able to switch between B/P (Not sure there's a S ammunition type). So if your facing hordes of skeletons it can be very impressive.

It does fit one of the themes that they were going for with Ranger which is to AoE damage, but yeah for the most part it's just not enough damage to really be considered a good spell.

[Witty Username]

Real quick, the 5 ways to get conjure barrage? So sorcerer, bard, Artificer, what are the other 2?

[LudicSavant]

Real quick, the 5 ways to get conjure barrage? So sorcerer, bard, Artificer, what are the other 2?

There's a GGtR background with it and an Eberron race with it.

[Witty Username]

There's a GGtR background with it and an Eberron race with it.

Oh, neat. I will stash that thought.

Hm. Trying to be more constructive, I feel like 4-6d8 would be about right. The DMG would recommend 5d6 save for nill. So 4d8 would be in line with that. I feel like a damage spell expected late should be more potent than that. 5d8 for half is probably what I would go for trying to not make it too Bard friendly. The issue is that it is also competing with some potent Ranger spells like Conjure Animals, Plant growth and Spike growth. I feel like it may still not be a particularly exciting option on the Ranger list, but more than that and we are past fireball damage, which isn't really an option for other balance reasons.

In short, it is not in a good spot for a damage spell from the get go.

Maybe 6d8 damage, but modify lightning arrow instead. That way we have a smaller AoE so it is less loot friendly, and works with classes that get extra attack better. So the looters at least have to make some build considerations.

[Asisreo1]

If you were talking only about class-exclusive spells (instead of "especially" them), then it still doesn't make much sense. Armor of Agathys would be a terrible 3rd level spell, to the point where no one would ever pick it. Same goes for Conjure Barrage. It's absolute garbage for its level, and thus, no one picks it. The PHB's been out for nearly 8 years now, and this is the first time I've ever seen someone considering picking this spell. Is this a ridiculously small sample size? Sure. Doesn't invalidate the point, though.

Well, Armor of Agathys would be bad as a third level spell compared to its peers that are available to the warlock. If all available warlock spells of third level and lower were worse than AoA, then Armor of Agathys would be the best option by definition. It would only mean that Warlocks would then have a bad spell selection in general.

For a real example, look at blight. It's a fourth level spell that generally does what the third level spell fireball does but not AoE. The max damage plant life is basically flavor. From that perspective, it sucks. But Druids, especially Land Druids, can have problems doing decent burst damage at all since their combat niche is more battlefield control and DoT effects, and with that concentration can be tight so having something that will guarantee an extra push could be useful, especially since its only a spell prepared and not known, so it's less commitment.


Spell levels are a rough indication of that spell's power. Spells of roughly the same power should be of the same level. Otherwise there's no point to having spell levels in the first place
I mean, class-exclusive spells can follow their own rules. Eldritch Blast is the best damage cantrip regardless of invocations. Maze is great for a no-costly material, no-save spell. There has been lengthy discussions to this day about how good Tiny Hut is. Yet many smite spells are underwhelming. Tsunami is only decent. Aura of Life is an amazing spell at all times while Aura of Purity is only situationally useful.

[animorte]

Well, Armor of Agathys would be bad as a third level spell compared to its peers that are available to the warlock. If all available warlock spells of third level and lower were worse than AoA, then Armor of Agathys would be the best option by definition. It would only mean that Warlocks would then have a bad spell selection in general.

Way off topic, but speaking of Armor of Agathys, I wonder if that would pair with other forms of Temp HP? Since it states that it lasts an hour and doesn't necessarily say that it ends when the Temp HP runs out...
Twilight Cleric's Twilight Sanctuary or the feat Inspiring Leader or Fiendish Vigor invocation for unlimited False Life (1st level)?

Probably not because it does also specifically state "these hit points."

[stoutstien]

Honestly if you just added the base weapon damage to the AoE I think it would bring it into line. Alternatively just remove the save and make it like cloud of daggers.

[PhantomSoul]

Way off topic, but speaking of Armor of Agathys, I wonder if that would pair with other forms of Temp HP? Since it states that it lasts an hour and doesn't necessarily say that it ends when the Temp HP runs out...
Twilight Cleric's Twilight Sanctuary or the feat Inspiring Leader or Fiendish Vigor invocation for unlimited False Life (1st level)?

Probably not because it does also specifically state "these hit points."

You got it! (It requires the specific Temporary Hit Points it gives to still be present.) When the THP are gone, though, you could Cast the Spell again; the new Casting is pretty clearly the winner in the non-stacking rules. :)

[Yakk]

Change Conjure Barrage to a Reaction casting time spell you take after making a ranged or thrown weapon attack on a creature within 60' and it gets better.

(The creature must be within the cone of the spell).

Now it at least has good action economy.

[Amnestic]

Way off topic, but speaking of Armor of Agathys, I wonder if that would pair with other forms of Temp HP? Since it states that it lasts an hour and doesn't necessarily say that it ends when the Temp HP runs out...
Twilight Cleric's Twilight Sanctuary or the feat Inspiring Leader or Fiendish Vigor invocation for unlimited False Life (1st level)?

Probably not because it does also specifically state "these hit points."

It does however work with Abjurer wizard's Arcane Ward, since they're not 'temporary hit points', the ward takes the damage for you - but since you were still hit, the Armour of Agathys damage activates regardless. This can combo with the warlock invocation for at-will mage armour to keep your ward recharged between fights.

[Chronos]

Quoth Sorinth:

I'm probably one of the few who don't mind it. It's not a great spell by any means but it's worth noting the mediocre damage also means that it doesn't matter all that much if a friendly gets caught.
When the best thing you can say about a spell is "it's so weak that it doesn't matter if you accidentally hit an ally", that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

[animorte]

When the best thing you can say about a spell is "it's so weak that it doesn't matter if you accidentally hit an ally", that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

While I do agree, several allies that would be in the danger zone easily reduce (or ignore) the damage anyway: Barbarian/Monk/Rogue.

[Sorinth]

When the best thing you can say about a spell is "it's so weak that it doesn't matter if you accidentally hit an ally", that's not exactly a ringing endorsement.

My endorsement of Conjured Barrage is for sure lukewarm at best. But there are situations where this can still be valuable, for example your tank ally gets swarmed by Kobolds, they would probably deal more damage then 3d8 to the tank so being able to clear the swarm and only minor injure your ally is useful even if Evoker does it better. But by far the best situation is facing off against skeletons since they have a vulnerability you can exploit by simply carrying around and cast with a sling shot even if you regularly use a bow. And in a similar vein, if you face off against multiple spellcasters concentrating on effects it can be useful to force everyone to make concentration checks. So there are times it's useful, it's just not really often enough to justify most of the time.

So I'm all in favour of improving this spell because it is a cool looking spell. Maybe concentration for 1min and when taking the Attack action you can replace your regular attacks with a Barrage. Then you still benefit from extra attack, but it doesn't go overboard with XBE or Volley.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I never bothered with it. If I wanted a 3rd level damage spell I'd use Lightning Arrow which
A) Could be pre-cast
B) Only took one of (for my Gloomstalker 3) attacks
C) Allowed a BA to be used on another spell to help remaining attacks if pre-cast
D) Did reliable (based on Dex stat + archery + magic bow) Single Target damage that you're there for, and
E) Had comparable 2d8 vs 3d8 AOE damage, though in fairness less area, which is the single advantage for CB.

Or you can just cast Plant Growth, which when it works is way, way better... movement / 4 in a 200 foot diameter: yes please.

Edit: The only possible way I can see it being worthwhile for a Ranger to learn this, given their low # of spells would be if:
1) They were in a party with no full casters with good AOE spells and the DM was fond of hordes, and:
2) Most adventuring was done in desert type areas with no plants, thus rendering Plant Growth useless.

[loki_ragnarock]

I decided to use cr 2 creatures for a 9th level Ranger(Artificer) for comparison last time, and that might have been a mistake because four creatures making up an encounter doesn't play to the strengths of the spell. Conjure Barrage is about hitting as many things as possible, given the huge AOE for the level.

So 9 suits of CR 1 Animated Armor as a medium encounter might work a little better. Or, perhaps, 15 CR 1/2 black bears. Or, maybe, 22 CR 1/4 Acolytes.

Against the suits of Animated Armor it's not the worst idea ever; you're trading a very high AC for a very low dex save, so that's sort of cool. And the 13.5 average damage against the 33hp of the AA would represent a whopping 40% of the hp of the creature; way better than Water Weirds. Meanwhile, the 28 damage of a fireball would represent about 85% of the hp of the creature. Fireball might hit fewer targets, but it also leaves them in the tap to kill territory that's most useful.

Against the 15 Black Bears, the 13.5 average damage is pretty significant against the creature's 19hp; 71%, which is rather alot. The bears are also likely to fail the save because of their low dexterity. This is the likely the best (most ludicrous) case for conjure barrage. A huge number of relatively low hp enemies. Meanwhile, fireball will likely cover fewer of the 15 black bears, but the ones it hits will likely be deleted from the board... which is a significantly better outcome, all in all.

Against the 22 Acolytes, the 13.5 average damage is enough to kill the 9hp Acolytes. Huzzah!

From this we can infer that the purpose of Conjure Barrage is to allow Rangers (Artificers) to clear rooms full of basically normal, unthreatening people like a street sweeper.

If you see your character doing an awful lot of that, Conjure Barrage is probably for you. Or if you foresee yourself with other encounters like, oh, 6 Acolytes + a Berserker + a Drow Elite Warrior and think you'll be able to clear the board of Acolytes and tickle the other two, that's fine.
Fireball would still be the better option, 100%.
If your DM likes lots of less threatening moving pieces to their encounters, it might not be totally without merit.

But frankly, it still needs a rider to be worth it. As an artificer, it's totes not worth.

EDIT:
Ah, jeeze. No don't take the spell. It's only particularly meaningful against targets CR 1/4 and lower, and post 9 you'll have CR 1 creatures standing in the same place the CR 1/4ths fill now, at which point it just isn't going to be much more than a wasted action.

For instance, come 12th level your horde loving DM would be throwing 14 Spy's at you, and CB's 13.5 average is going to compare poorly to their 29hp. You'll only actually be effective in a set piece against Acolytes for a *very* short time, after which point you'll be very meh against the hordes that are a-comin' fer ya in later levels.
Not worth. Patently not worth.

Further EDIT:
I mean, it's possible your DM will throw 29 Black Bears at the 12th level party as a medium encounter? I suppose CB will finally have a chance to shine when that happens?

Furthest EDIT:
A 20th level party could have an encounter with 84 Black Bears as a medium encounter.
The image is amusing to me.

[animorte]

2) Most adventuring was done in desert type areas with no plants, thus rendering Plant Growth useless.

This is the exact reason I rarely use that spell or any specific condition prerequisite spells.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

This is the exact reason I rarely use that spell or any specific condition prerequisite spells.

Yeah, Plant Growth is good enough that in the right campaign that it's worth it though. I played through Rise of Tiamat with that one. Lots of outdoor encounters where turning a huge area into an extra slow zone was awesome.

[Asisreo1]

This is the exact reason I rarely use that spell or any specific condition prerequisite spells.
Just bring a potted/enclosed plant with you at all times.

[JackPhoenix]

Just bring a potted/enclosed plant with you at all times.

And what exactly is that one plant supposed to accomplish beyond maybe hindering you?

[strangebloke]

Lightning arrow is easy more reliable and efficient generally, though it's based off a ranged attack roll, which isn't really a good thing if you're a melee ranger. It's very believable that a tortle would prefer conjure barrage.

But for an battle smith the spell is fine. You won't use it much but it's the only aoe blasting spell you have here so sometimes it will be okay.

Honestly if I were to buff this, I would just make it a bonus action. It makes the comparison to lightning arrow way more favorable

[Keltest]

And what exactly is that one plant supposed to accomplish beyond maybe hindering you?

Its a pretty great conversation piece? Lightens up a room? Smells nice?

Really, the question is, why wouldn't you carry a potted plant with you at all times?

[Asisreo1]

And what exactly is that one plant supposed to accomplish beyond maybe hindering you?
It becomes thick and overgrown. Magically there's no reason why one plant can't grow a hundred feet in all directions.

I mean, the plants are kinda just flavor text. It's two separate sentences so the magical effect of slowing the enemy doesn't have to be tied to plant growth.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

It becomes thick and overgrown. Magically there's no reason why one plant can't grow a hundred feet in all directions.

I mean, the plants are kinda just flavor text. It's two separate sentences so the magical effect of slowing the enemy doesn't have to be tied to plant growth.

Goes to that Fluff v. Crunch thread. I think most people are playing the plant thing as crunch, in the sense that there has to be at least some sparce plants for the spell to work.

[Asisreo1]

Goes to that Fluff v. Crunch thread. I think most people are playing the plant thing as crunch, in the sense that there has to be at least some sparce plants for the spell to work.
That's what the potted plant is for. Now you have a plant to become thick and overgrown. If the DM still doesn't allow it, they should have told the player that interaction ahead of time when the player made the character.

[Witty Username]

See, my take is that plant growth would work in a desert fairly well, you would get alot of strange wild flowers and cactus root systems but it would work. Think a desert on its 1 rainy day a year.
But that would be counting dormant seeds as plants.

Caves not so much. Fungi might work because D&D counts as plants in other contexts, so it might still work but I am less sure. Root systems and nearby cave entrances could give you some reach though.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

See, my take is that plant growth would work in a desert fairly well, you would get alot of strange wild flowers and cactus root systems but it would work. Think a desert on its 1 rainy day a year.
But that would be counting dormant seeds as plants.

Caves not so much. Fungi might work because D&D counts as plants in other contexts, so it might still work but I am less sure. Root systems and nearby cave entrances could give you some reach though.

I suppose almost nowhere is truly a moonscape, and even an ocean likely has a few bits of weed floating at the surface. There's certainly an argument for this spell to work almost anywhere.

[Witty Username]

Thick enough plankton to cause double difficult terrain. Choke swimmers to death with the green tides.

[Tvtyrant]

It creates infinite money, so I think pretty decent. The spell literally creates a 60 foot cone filled with nonmagical weapons per casting, the resell value is decent at that rate.

[LudicSavant]

It creates infinite money, so I think pretty decent. The spell literally creates a 60 foot cone filled with nonmagical weapons per casting, the resell value is decent at that rate.

The conjured projectiles disappear once the effect resolves.


You throw a nonmagical weapon or fire a piece of nonmagical ammunition into the air to create a cone of identical weapons that shoot forward and then disappear.

[animorte]

I suppose almost nowhere is truly a moonscape, and even an ocean likely has a few bits of weed floating at the surface. There's certainly an argument for this spell to work almost anywhere.

I've always thought of Plant Growth as extremely useful but not enough of the time to rely on. I have been convinced that I'm not creative enough with the available resources that would require the spell to work so effeciently. Though the details may still fall under the DM's discretion.