Is is just me, or is the Robe of Scintillating Colors rather weak?

[Segev]

It is a very rare item that requires attunement that has three charges and regain 1d3 charges each day.

So, a maximum of three times per day, you can shine light like a lantern for one round, during which time creatures that can see you have disadvantage on attack rolls against you. It also stuns any creatures within 30 feet that can see you when you activate it for one round, if they fail a DC 15 wisdon save.

It is worded as stunning creatures within the bright light of the robe, but that can't extend the range, only diminish it. It also says it stuns creatures 'while the effect lasts,' but that is always until the end of your next turn after activating it, and no rules say activating it again coints as extending the effect, so they get a new save against the new effect even if you keep spamming it.

I get that an AoE stun is nice, but it is also party-unfriendly, making using it tricky. Is three rounds (maximum) per day of potential stun and lantern light that penetrates darkness spells really worth a Very Rare plus attunement? Even with disadvantage on attacks against you for that round?

The disadvantage is particularly shrug-worthy since it only applies to creatures that can see you (so blindsight negates it) and the Dodge action would have the same effect plus advantage of dex saves and no 'if they can see you' caveat.


It just seems to me like thus is a Rare item with attunement, at best. And, possibly, not too strong as a Rare item without attunement. Am I way underestimating this item, here?

[Sigreid]

Seems to me that it's designed primarily to facilitate escape from a bad situation.

[Dork_Forge]

I think it's more an item for an NPC to use against the party rather than vice versa, the stun is not party friendly at all.

Also on the weak part, general disclaimer that rarity and power are only loosely connected.

[Segev]

Seems to me that it's designed primarily to facilitate escape from a bad situation.

Perhaps, but does that justify its rarity and the attunement requirement? I mean, for the sam action, you can take the Dodge action. It doesn't force the saves vs stun, but it provides the same or better protection from attacks, and doesn't light you up like a beacon.

I was looking at it because one of two things you can do with a flail snail shell is make ONE of these robes. The other is making THREE shields of spell reflection that eventually downgrade to shields that merely give advantage on saves vs magic. And the Robe just seems incredibly disappointing for its Rarity and being the same material cost as three much better-seeming shields.

I am trying to determine if I am just vastly underestimating how potent the Robe is, especially given its action cost, duration, and charge limitations, or if the writers overestimated it.

[Sigreid]

Perhaps, but does that justify its rarity and the attunement requirement? I mean, for the sam action, you can take the Dodge action. It doesn't force the saves vs stun, but it provides the same or better protection from attacks, and doesn't light you up like a beacon.

I was looking at it because one of two things you can do with a flail snail shell is make ONE of these robes. The other is making THREE shields of spell reflection that eventually downgrade to shields that merely give advantage on saves vs magic. And the Robe just seems incredibly disappointing for its Rarity and being the same material cost as three much better-seeming shields.

I am trying to determine if I am just vastly underestimating how potent the Robe is, especially given its action cost, duration, and charge limitations, or if the writers overestimated it.

Rarity is weird in 5e. There are uncommon items that are amazing and very rare items I wouldn't bother to pick up. Maybe it's so rare because people only bother to make one when they're high. 🤔

[Segev]

Looking at the item in 3.5 and Pathfinder, it was priced about the same as XGE prices Very Rare items. And it did take an action to activate. But it worked for up to ten rounds per day, had a one-round warm-up time before it did anything, and was slow to get to the Disadvante-equivalent. However, it dazed creatures for multiple rounds rather than just one, and kept doing so while it was active. Daze was a deceptively powerful condition in 3.PF: weaker than Stun, but next to nothing was immune, and it still denied actions.

If the 5e item were living up to its predecessors and still simplified to 5e standards, I would have it operate for up to ten rounds per day, require an action to activate it and Concentration while it is active. No action to keep it going. The save-or-stun effect happens when a creature enters the area of bright light for the first time on a turn or starts their turn in it, and lasts until the start of their next turn (when, if still in it, they save again against it reapplying).

That, I think, would be worth a Very Rare item with attunement. Maybe give it ten charges and recharge at 1d10 per day rather than ten rounds, spending a charge each round it is active, if it needs limits to its use in that respect.

[Sigreid]

Looking at the item in 3.5 and Pathfinder, it was priced about the same as XGE prices Very Rare items. And it did take an action to activate. But it worked for up to ten rounds per day, had a one-round warm-up time before it did anything, and was slow to get to the Disadvante-equivalent. However, it dazed creatures for multiple rounds rather than just one, and kept doing so while it was active. Daze was a deceptively powerful condition in 3.PF: weaker than Stun, but next to nothing was immune, and it still denied actions.

If the 5e item were living up to its predecessors and still simplified to 5e standards, I would have it operate for up to ten rounds per day, require an action to activate it and Concentration while it is active. No action to keep it going. The save-or-stun effect happens when a creature enters the area of bright light for the first time on a turn or starts their turn in it, and lasts until the start of their next turn (when, if still in it, they save again against it reapplying).

That, I think, would be worth a Very Rare item with attunement. Maybe give it ten charges and recharge at 1d10 per day rather than ten rounds, spending a charge each round it is active, if it needs limits to its use in that respect.
I'd suggest maybe letting it act as a light source equivalent to a lantern as a non charge using effect. That could tip the scales on whether I bother or not.

[JackPhoenix]

It just seems to me like thus is a Rare item with attunement, at best. And, possibly, not too strong as a Rare item without attunement. Am I way underestimating this item, here?

Most of all, you're confusing magic item rarity with power. While there's corelation between the two in most cases, it's not dependence. The ever-popular Broom of Flying is just uncommon, while Universal Solvent is legendary.


I think it's more an item for an NPC to use against the party rather than vice versa, the stun is not party friendly at all.

The stun is dependant on seeing the user. That's pretty party friendly... just tell the rest of your group to close their eyes for a while.

[Sigreid]

Most of all, you're confusing magic item rarity with power. While there's corelation between the two in most cases, it's not dependence. The ever-popular Broom of Flying is just uncommon, while Universal Solvent is legendary.



The stun is dependant on seeing the user. That's pretty party friendly... just tell the rest of your group to close their eyes for a while.

Could be a game changer for a scouting rogue as a panic button that allows for a sneak attack or escape if you get caught.

[Segev]

Most of all, you're confusing magic item rarity with power. While there's corelation between the two in most cases, it's not dependence. The ever-popular Broom of Flying is just uncommon, while Universal Solvent is legendary.While I understand this argument, I point again to the fact that the game seems to think it's pretty powerful, too, given that one Robe of Scintillating Colors is worth THREE spell-reflecting shields.

[JackPhoenix]

While I understand this argument, I point again to the fact that the game seems to think it's pretty powerful, too, given that one Robe of Scintillating Colors is worth THREE spell-reflecting shields.

Permanent magic item vs. 3 shields that lose their power after a month?

[Segev]

Permanent magic item vs. 3 shields that lose their power after a month?

They can be crafted into permanent shields that still grant spell resistance after that. ANd I would argue three of those are STILL better than the Robe.

[Dr.Samurai]

It does strike me as a mediocre item, but that's because it takes an Action to use, and hits party members too.

However, Stunning creatures within 30ft of you is really good. Not only do they lose their actions, but your teammates have Advantage against them and they automatically fail Str/Dex saves.

Ranged party members might not be in the 30ft bright zone and gain advantage on their attack rolls. Casters can extend the debuff (not necessarily Stunned) by casting spells that might Restrain or have some other effect with auto-success.

Melee allies might suffer the most here. I currently have Blindsight on my fighter and generally take it when I can. In that case, if a DM allows the fighter to avert their eyes when the effect goes off, they're fine. Since you're averting your eyes from the ally, you might not even have Disadvantage to attack an enemy. But even if you do, it's cancelled out by Advantage to attack from Stunned. A fine trade-off for the action economy and buffs to your ranged allies.

And Wis save 15 is not an easy save to make for many enemies.

[Dork_Forge]

The stun is dependant on seeing the user. That's pretty party friendly... just tell the rest of your group to close their eyes for a while.

Ime how easily the party can just close their eyes to avoid visual effects is a bit DM dependent, but even assuming they can do it no problems:

Spending an entire round voluntarily blinded doesn't really seem 'party friendly,' it negates advantage attacking stunned monsters, gives advantage to monsters that passed the save, and completely shuts down abilities and spells which require sight (which is a lot of them).

[JackPhoenix]

They can be crafted into permanent shields that still grant spell resistance after that. ANd I would argue three of those are STILL better than the Robe.

Spellguard shield is very rare, just like the robe. That means you'll still have to pay the same amount of gold to craft each of them. So, cool, you've got a base for the item, but that means absolutely nothing by crafting rules. Though arguably, those 2 specific items *may* be the exception to the XGtE's requirement of having to bother CR 13-18 creature to craft very rare magic item, and the shield *may* be the exception to the rule that you have to do the interaction separately for every item crafted. So that's nice. Maybe.

[JonBeowulf]

Most of all, you're confusing magic item rarity with power. While there's corelation between the two in most cases, it's not dependence. The ever-popular Broom of Flying is just uncommon, while Universal Solvent is legendary.

The stun is dependant on seeing the user. That's pretty party friendly... just tell the rest of your group to close their eyes for a while.


Ime how easily the party can just close their eyes to avoid visual effects is a bit DM dependent, but even assuming they can do it no problems:

Spending an entire round voluntarily blinded doesn't really seem 'party friendly,' it negates advantage attacking stunned monsters, gives advantage to monsters that passed the save, and completely shuts down abilities and spells which require sight (which is a lot of them).

I've never had to deal with this thing, but I figure the char wearing it is in/near the back of the party and "can see" is not necessarily "does see", so I'd let the party members in facing away from the wearer ignore the stun affect. I can see everything in the room I'm sitting in, but I only do see the stuff in front of me. RAW vs RAI vs Rulings. This probably opens up a dozen edge cases but I'd deal with them as they appear.

[Segev]

Spellguard shield is very rare, just like the robe. That means you'll still have to pay the same amount of gold to craft each of them. So, cool, you've got a base for the item, but that means absolutely nothing by crafting rules. Though arguably, those 2 specific items *may* be the exception to the XGtE's requirement of having to bother CR 13-18 creature to craft very rare magic item, and the shield *may* be the exception to the rule that you have to do the interaction separately for every item crafted. So that's nice. Maybe.

If the shell doesn't count as the exotic material at the very least, then the statement that it can be used to make the shields xor the Robe is a meaningless one.

The point remains that the Robe is seemingly considered as valuable as three spellguard shields, and that seems super weird to me. Is it really that good? It seems less good than even one spellguard shield.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'd suggest maybe letting it act as a light source equivalent to a lantern as a non charge using effect. That could tip the scales on whether I bother or not.
Bonus Action Misty step, and then stun a bunch of enemies away from the party as an action and light up the target area. Attacks against you have disadvantage. Not a bad capability to have.
Agree with the "act as a lantern" option as a non charge costing feature.

[Segev]

Bonus Action Misty step, and then stun a bunch of enemies away from the party as an action and light up the target area. Attacks against you have disadvantage. Not a bad capability to have.
Agree with the "act as a lantern" option as a non charge costing feature.

Ooh, those are neat ideas.

[JackPhoenix]

If the shell doesn't count as the exotic material at the very least, then the statement that it can be used to make the shields xor the Robe is a meaningless one.

The point remains that the Robe is seemingly considered as valuable as three spellguard shields, and that seems super weird to me. Is it really that good? It seems less good than even one spellguard shield.

VGtM was released a year before XGtE and its crafting rules, so the exotic materials and the associated CR requirements weren't a thing back then. With the intact shell being valued at 5000 gp, it would make sense to deduct that from the crafting price (/3 for the shields).

[AdAstra]

One option is for an animal companion character like Beastmaster, Drakewarden, or Battlesmith to put the thing on their critter, assuming your DM lets them use magic items. They're much more disposable so charging them in to stun enemies is a pretty solid thing to do, and it only costs your Bonus Action to order them to do it. Familiars and Tiny Servants would be useful, but seems more likely that a DM would just say the thing's too big for them to really wear it.

Bonus: You can make them look like a very sinister minion when they're actually just like, a dog in a bathrobe sitting up

[MadMusketeer]

Most of all, you're confusing magic item rarity with power. While there's corelation between the two in most cases, it's not dependence. The ever-popular Broom of Flying is just uncommon, while Universal Solvent is legendary.

Rarity is honestly just more of a storytelling/worldbuilding mechanic than anything else. 'Rarity' should be taken at face value, rather than using it as a proxy for power. Like, a lot of the really strong low level items (Bag of Holding, Broom of Flying, maybe Alchemy Jug, et cetera) are items with a lot of mundane, practical uses, so it makes sense that they're fairly common (they're useful, so a lot of them get made). By contrast, a lot of high-level items are unique, one-of-a-kind pieces of equipment wielded by great warriors and archmages and adventurers - it makes sense that there wouldn't be very many of them. Plenty of these are great templates for powerful named items (non-sentient, so not artifacts) - even if some of them are kinda weak or useless, they would still be rare, as not many of them are produced, especially as they're more likely to be combat oriented than lower rarity items.