Silvery Barbs and hidden DM rolls

[yisopo]

Regarding Silvery Barbs I very often read is so powerful because it is "basically free license to turn to the DM and say, «No, actually, you didn't crit.»".

I don't know your table, but at mine the DM rolls his dice behind his screen. So I cannot use Silvery Barbs to deny his crits because I don't know the result of his rolls.


Given that, do you think Silvery Barbs is still so powerful as (almost) everyone think?

Without looking ad DM's dice, how do you decide between using Silvery Barbs or Shield against a successful attack against you?

[da newt]

The spell doesn't state you know the exact roll, just that you know if it is a hit, so you make educated guesses based on the damage amount.

Yes it is still VERY powerful even if your DM doesn't tell you when crits happen. It is especially powerful when used to force rerolls on saves vs significant spells / conditions and legendary resistance.

[Psyren]

My DMs roll behind a screen but they announce enemy crits. Just ask yours to do the same.

[yisopo]

The spell doesn't state you know the exact roll, just that you know if it is a hit, so you make educated guesses based on the damage amount.
Ah, this is new to me. So I can use Silvery Barbs (or Shield...) not only after I know if they hit or not, but I should know the damage amount before using this spell. Is this RAW?


Yes it is still VERY powerful even if your DM doesn't tell you when crits happen. It is especially powerful when used to force rerolls on saves vs significant spells / conditions and legendary resistance.
Yes, I know it is powerful offensively (i.e. forcing a reroll on their saves), but I'm trying to understand if it is worth in defence too.

[Xervous]

The most potent use case I’ve found for SB is brute forcing LR. I ran a few probability calculations on blind vs open saves where you don’t know if LR was even used (in the blind case) and it didn’t really change the efficiency all that much. A dedicated party still lands a status effect in round 2.

In the absence of roll information I’d only whip out SB for defense if I know there’s only one big swing coming my way and it has demonstrated itself to be close to a 50/50

[yisopo]

My DMs roll behind a screen but they announce enemy crits. Just ask yours to do the same.
I will ask! ;-)

[yisopo]

The most potent use case I’ve found for SB is brute forcing LR. I ran a few probability calculations on blind vs open saves where you don’t know if LR was even used (in the blind case) and it didn’t really change the efficiency all that much. A dedicated party still lands a status effect in round 2.
In practice, how do you use SB in order to brute force LR? Just forcing DM to fail as much saves as possible?

[Xervous]

In practice, how do you use SB in order to brute force LR? Just forcing DM to fail as much saves as possible?

More or less. You’re throwing a reaction and a 1st level slot to duplicate any single target save. It’s something of an edge case to have a party with 3+ SB users, but when most everyone can force saves and rerolls you end up breaking the game math assumptions of how many saves you can effectively force in one round.

If you’re the only SB user it’s probably not worthwhile since you’re not likely to catch up to those racing damage. But at the opposite end you have a stun flurrying monk and 3 other save + reroll forcing characters who can force 8+ attempts at consuming LR

[Gignere]

More or less. You’re throwing a reaction and a 1st level slot to duplicate any single target save. It’s something of an edge case to have a party with 3+ SB users, but when most everyone can force saves and rerolls you end up breaking the game math assumptions of how many saves you can effectively force in one round.

If you’re the only SB user it’s probably not worthwhile since you’re not likely to catch up to those racing damage. But at the opposite end you have a stun flurrying monk and 3 other save + reroll forcing characters who can force 8+ attempts at consuming LR

Current DM houseruled SB doesn’t work on LR, because of exactly what you outlined.

[Xervous]

Current DM houseruled SB doesn’t work on LR, because of exactly what you outlined.

Allow me to elaborate. You are not forcing a reroll after LR has been used, you are using SB to increase the likelihood of a given status-save-effect forcing a LR consumption. The goal is simply to force 3 LR uses as soon as possible, then land an encounter ending save backed up by chained SB.

Monk stuns and Tasha’s Hideous Laughter are fine examples of such effects to burn through with because the monster can rarely afford to skip using LR on them when a save goes poorly, as such effects are functionally giving the party extra turns.

[Gignere]

Allow me to elaborate. You are not forcing a reroll after LR has been used, you are using SB to increase the likelihood of a given status-save-effect forcing a LR consumption. The goal is simply to force 3 LR uses as soon as possible, then land an encounter ending save backed up by chained SB.

Monk stuns and Tasha’s Hideous Laughter are fine examples of such effects to burn through with because the monster can rarely afford to skip using LR on them when a save goes poorly, as such effects are functionally giving the party extra turns.

Ah I see, but based on the Silvery Barb wording I believe RAW it can actually force LR rerolls.

[Psyren]

Ah I see, but based on the Silvery Barb wording I believe RAW it can actually force LR rerolls.

You can't negate a LR with SB: (https://dnd.wizards.com/sage-advice/book-updates)


Can the silvery barbs spell in Strixhaven affect Legendary Resistance?

No. When a creature uses Legendary Resistance, the creature turns a failed saving throw into a success, regardless of the number rolled on the d20. Forcing that creature to reroll the d20 afterward doesn’t change the fact that the save succeeded as a result of Legendary Resistance. No amount of rerolling will undo that success.

Forcing additional LRs (i.e. turning successful saves into LR uses) to burn through them faster is something it can do however.

[Xervous]

Ah I see, but based on the Silvery Barb wording I believe RAW it can actually force LR rerolls.

It can’t. Changing the results of the dice does not remove the fact that LR has been applied to the save, so any attempt to reevaluate the result will short out at the LR override.

[yisopo]

More or less. You’re throwing a reaction and a 1st level slot to duplicate any single target save. It’s something of an edge case to have a party with 3+ SB users, but when most everyone can force saves and rerolls you end up breaking the game math assumptions of how many saves you can effectively force in one round.

If you’re the only SB user it’s probably not worthwhile since you’re not likely to catch up to those racing damage. But at the opposite end you have a stun flurrying monk and 3 other save + reroll forcing characters who can force 8+ attempts at consuming LR
Thank you for the explanation. ;-)

I will probably be Chronurgist with the Lucky feat, so this strategy should be available to me. And a member of my party will be a (shadow) monk.

[yisopo]

Anyway, without knowing the result of the DM's dice, it seems to me that Shield is always better that Silvery Barbs defensively.

[Psyren]

Anyway, without knowing the result of the DM's dice, it seems to me that Shield is always better that Silvery Barbs defensively.

I wouldn't say always - for example, SB works on ability checks too, so you can negate a grapple with it whereas Shield can't.

[Xervous]

Thank you for the explanation. ;-)

I will probably be Chronurgist with the Lucky feat, so this strategy should be available to me. And a member of my party will be a (shadow) monk.

Chronurgy hold up, I may have found some terribly nitpicky rules argument for LR being openly declared.


As a reaction, after you or a creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can force the creature to reroll. You make this decision after you see whether the roll succeeds or fails

The bolded text implies player awareness of enemy saving throw results. Given that the triggering conditions for LR are extraordinarily similar there appears to be grounds for the player to be aware of the initial failure state in addition to the following success state after an application of LR.

[MrStabby]

It’s something of an edge case to have a party with 3+ SB users, but when most everyone can force saves and rerolls you end up breaking the game math assumptions of how many saves you can effectively force in one round.


Hmm. Not here. In my latest campaign 4 out of five players have silvery barbs at level 8. One wizard, two fey touched, One Aberant Dragonmark. The fifth player multiclassed and will ge their second ASI in two levels time. We will see if that makes it 5 our of 5.

[Hael]

Anyway, without knowing the result of the DM's dice, it seems to me that Shield is always better that Silvery Barbs defensively.

Completely different use cases. SB is used for many different rolls… Whether its rerolling a disintegrate, or an important stun, or a failed ability check…

Mostly I see casters/support using it on their martial frontliners when they get hit by something that has a nasty CC rider. Like the tail attack of a scorpion or something like that.

Its banned at most of the tables I play it, but imo its fine provided its only allowed once a round. (Its the SB chains with multiple casters present that really slows things down)

[Xervous]

I will put a note in for order cleric with SB being good fun. Give a martial buddy a free swing at advantage. Makes for silliness with rogues.

[yisopo]

Chronurgy hold up, I may have found some terribly nitpicky rules argument for LR being openly declared.


As a reaction, after you or a creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw, you can force the creature to reroll. You make this decision after you see whether the roll succeeds or fails

The bolded text implies player awareness of enemy saving throw results. Given that the triggering conditions for LR are extraordinarily similar there appears to be grounds for the player to be aware of the initial failure state in addition to the following success state after an application of LR.
I'm not sure. "you see whether the roll succeeds or fails" means "you know whether the roll succeeds or fails" or "you see the die result knowing whether the roll succeeds or fails"?
If it is the second interpretation, then I have to see every DM's rolls. So I think it have to the first interpretation.

[yisopo]

SB is used for many different rolls… Whether its rerolling a disintegrate, or an important stun, or a failed ability check…
How can you use SB to protect you from Disintegrate or a general failed ability check?


Mostly I see casters/support using it on their martial frontliners when they get hit by something that has a nasty CC rider. Like the tail attack of a scorpion or something like that.
You are right, I should have written: "without knowing the result of the DM's dice, it seems to me that Shield is always better that Silvery Barbs to defend the caster."
With SB you can defend others, while Shield defends only the caster.


Its banned at most of the tables I play it, but imo its fine provided its only allowed once a round. (Its the SB chains with multiple casters present that really slows things down)
I don't see the reson to ban SB neither, since casting SB eats a reaction.

[Xervous]

I'm not sure. "you see whether the roll succeeds or fails" means "you know whether the roll succeeds or fails" or "you see the die result knowing whether the roll succeeds or fails"?
If it is the second interpretation, then I have to see every DM's rolls. So I think it have to the first interpretation.

It’s not about seeing the rolls (which isn’t what I’m saying it entitles you to), it’s about being aware of the success/failure state.

1. Save is rolled

2. Roll is checked against DC, this is where LR, chronurgy, and SB (only on success) check for applicability.

3. Something alters the check resolution

4. New state evaluation triggers another opportunity for LR/chronurgy/SB

Player observation would yield the following.

Pass, SB, LR

Gm “It passes”
Player “I use SB”
Gm “It fails, then it passes”

[yisopo]

It’s not about seeing the rolls (which isn’t what I’m saying it entitles you to), it’s about being aware of the success/failure state.

1. Save is rolled

2. Roll is checked against DC, this is where LR, chronurgy, and SB (only on success) check for applicability.

3. Something alters the check resolution

4. New state evaluation triggers another opportunity for LR/chronurgy/SB

Player observation would yield the following.

Pass, SB, LR

Gm “It passes”
Player “I use SB”
Gm “It fails, then it passes”
Ah, OK, sorry for the misinterpretation. Yes, with both Chronurgy and SB I know the success/failure state before deciding on my next move.

[Keravath]

How can you use SB to protect you from Disintegrate or a general failed ability check?


You are right, I should have written: "without knowing the result of the DM's dice, it seems to me that Shield is always better that Silvery Barbs to defend the caster."
With SB you can defend others, while Shield defends only the caster.


I don't see the reson to ban SB neither, since casting SB eats a reaction.

You can't use SB to protect against either Disintegrate or a failed ability check.
SB is a forced reroll when a die roll succeeds - not when it fails.

"which you take when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself succeeds on an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw."

Usually, this means targeting opponents to try to make them fail.


Ah, this is new to me. So I can use Silvery Barbs (or Shield...) not only after I know if they hit or not, but I should know the damage amount before using this spell. Is this RAW?

Yes, I know it is powerful offensively (i.e. forcing a reroll on their saves), but I'm trying to understand if it is worth in defence too.

No. The only thing you know when you decide to use SB is whether the attack was successful or not. You don't know if it was a crit and you do not know the damage done. A DM might disclose that information if they wish (eg they find it slows the game too much by not rolling in the open) but in general the only information you have to cast either SB or Shield is whether the attack hit or not.


Finally, SB has no effect on Legendary Resistance other than trying to force the creature to use its Legendary Resistance.

LR: "Legendary Resistance (3/Day). If the <creature> fails a saving throw, it can choose to succeed instead."

LR lets the creature succeed instead of fail. No dice roll involved.

SB can be used to force a creature with LR to reroll a successful save. If they subsequently fail then the creature may decide to use LR to pass instead. But SB does NOT work on failed die rolls - it can only force a reroll on a successful ROLL. Using LR converts a failed roll into a success but the ROLL was still a failure so SB isn't applicable.

[Psyren]

You can protect against a failed ability check with SB if it is opposed - i.e. if you failed an opposed check, it means they succeeded.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Regarding Silvery Barbs I very often read is so powerful because it is "basically free license to turn to the DM and say, «No, actually, you didn't crit.»".

I don't know your table, but at mine the DM rolls his dice behind his screen. So I cannot use Silvery Barbs to deny his crits because I don't know the result of his rolls.


Given that, do you think Silvery Barbs is still so powerful as (almost) everyone think?

Without looking ad DM's dice, how do you decide between using Silvery Barbs or Shield against a successful attack against you?

What you're describing at your table is what we do... and yes I think it mitigates the power of both spells somewhat. My personal view is that 'not knowing' too much as a player by DMs rolling behind a screen is not only realistic but good for suspense. However, not all share this view.

[yisopo]

You can't use SB to protect against either Disintegrate or a failed ability check.
SB is a forced reroll when a die roll succeeds - not when it fails.

"which you take when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself succeeds on an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw."

Usually, this means targeting opponents to try to make them fail.
Yeah, basically we can give a disadvantage to an enemy.



No. The only thing you know when you decide to use SB is whether the attack was successful or not. You don't know if it was a crit and you do not know the damage done. A DM might disclose that information if they wish (eg they find it slows the game too much by not rolling in the open) but in general the only information you have to cast either SB or Shield is whether the attack hit or not.


Finally, SB has no effect on Legendary Resistance other than trying to force the creature to use its Legendary Resistance.

LR: "Legendary Resistance (3/Day). If the <creature> fails a saving throw, it can choose to succeed instead."

LR lets the creature succeed instead of fail. No dice roll involved.

SB can be used to force a creature with LR to reroll a successful save. If they subsequently fail then the creature may decide to use LR to pass instead. But SB does NOT work on failed die rolls - it can only force a reroll on a successful ROLL. Using LR converts a failed roll into a success but the ROLL was still a failure so SB isn't applicable.
Crystal clear. That is my interpretation too.

[yisopo]

What you're describing at your table is what we do... and yes I think it mitigates the power of both spells somewhat. My personal view is that 'not knowing' too much as a player by DMs rolling behind a screen is not only realistic but good for suspense. However, not all share this view.
If I have to choose, I would prefer not to know the die results, but knowing crits. I think it is the perfect balance between suspense, realism and fun.

[Psyren]

@ those who hide all die rolls from their players - how do you adjudicate things like the Valor Bard's Combat Inspiration, which is core? Do those abilities just not work?

[Dualight]

I can't speak for anyone else, but the way I handle it is that I keep the dice themselves hidden, not the results if the players know that the check was made (so the players won't find out about a stealth check that exceeded all of their character's passive Perception scores, but an attack roll always gets its result announced to confirm if the player's AC protects them or not). The players will need to figure out the bonus by paying attention themselves.

I haven't had to adjudicate a Valor bard yet, but I suppose that the way I handle things actually buffs it slightly, as the player is the one to determine the hit, making the timing nearly impossible if the player is not exceptionally terrible at maths (I do not think that I have ever even met anyone capable of playing D&D so bad at maths that they wouldn't be able to tell if they were hit the moment they hear the result of the roll).

[5eNeedsDarksun]

If I have to choose, I would prefer not to know the die results, but knowing crits. I think it is the perfect balance between suspense, realism and fun.

Fair enough, but that in itself is a significant boost v. not knowing. Crits against characters are one of the things that could cause an encounter to go sideways. If a character has SB and Shield they'd likely use Shield against most attacks; against a crit it would likely be a waste, while SB would at minimum (95% of the time) reduce the damage.

[yisopo]

Fair enough, but that in itself is a significant boost v. not knowing. Crits against characters are one of the things that could cause an encounter to go sideways. If a character has SB and Shield they'd likely use Shield against most attacks; against a crit it would likely be a waste, while SB would at minimum (95% of the time) reduce the damage.
I totally agree it would be a big boost. Without knowing anything, Shield would be the default defence spell. Knowing when crits occur, SB is the best defence spell against crits, whereas Shield is for non-crit defence.

[animorte]

Basically the outcome of the decision is learning how your DM prefers to roll and reveal the dice. This can greatly assist your decision for defensive option. Actually, it reveals choices in many areas I think. Adapt to the situation.