New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 254
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Telok's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    61.2° N, 149.9° W
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    Having put a certain amount of thought into uses for this spell, I can confidently say... You're very close to correct. But the spell isn't completely useless in all situations.

    Fundamentally it's a way to have your stuff in multiple places. You can have it where you have it, or have it where you have a sapphire. It's Find My Phone for D&D.

    If you're a 20th level wizard who's acquired enough spells for a backup spellbook to take several thousand gp and weeks of effort to create, even with the backup discount, it's not totally foolish to invest another 1000 gp in a summoning ritual for it. Then instead of carrying multiple spellbooks on your adventures, you just carry one spellbook and a couple of sapphires linked to spellbooks.

    You might also want to cast it on important possessions like Robe of the Archmagi or Staff of the Magi, especially if there's any chance your Clone might someday need to retrieve them from your corpse. (Scry first if possible to make sure they're not being held, and have a backup sapphire just in case the first one goes wrong.)

    So for a filthy-rich high-level wizard it's not useless. No wonder said wizard didn't bother to research it down below 6th level.
    It's a spell from ad&d, if you think of the way that version of d&d was run at higher levels you can see the benefit. The wizard should have gotten a tower around 10th level as the game moved towards high power politics, securing a realm, and planar adventuring. That would include apprentices, men-at-arms, and loyal henchmen. The wizard's spells wouldn't all fit in one book and you didn't want to carry all your spellbooks with you. Item saving throws and equipment loss were things that happened if you made enough mistakes or had bad enough luck. So carrying literally all your magic items and spell books in a bag of holding wasn't a good idea. Lastly you could literally be unable to bring everything with you. With random treasure you weren't certain to have extra-dimensional storage and may not want to have lower level henchmen carry all your wealth around all the time.

    Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Telok View Post
    Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.
    The game doesn't have to be murderheros hoboing from place to place with all their worldly possessions on them. And indestructible and un-stealable to boot.

    It just usually is.

  3. - Top - End - #63

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Telok View Post
    It's a spell from ad&d, if you think of the way that version of d&d was run at higher levels you can see the benefit. The wizard should have gotten a tower around 10th level as the game moved towards high power politics, securing a realm, and planar adventuring. That would include apprentices, men-at-arms, and loyal henchmen. The wizard's spells wouldn't all fit in one book and you didn't want to carry all your spellbooks with you. Item saving throws and equipment loss were things that happened if you made enough mistakes or had bad enough luck. So carrying literally all your magic items and spell books in a bag of holding wasn't a good idea. Lastly you could literally be unable to bring everything with you. With random treasure you weren't certain to have extra-dimensional storage and may not want to have lower level henchmen carry all your wealth around all the time.

    Under those circumstances it's potentially quite useful. But 5e doesn't play that way. Item loss and damage is verboten, having a home base isn't a thing. You have one spellbook that's never allowed to be threatened, and a wizard doesn't even need their spellbook to regain spells any ways. Your wizard probably doesn't have any more stuff than they can carry anyhow. So in 5e, yeah, it's trash because the things that made it useful aren't around any more.
    First of all, AD&D is probably played primarily at levels even lower than 5E. (Just look at level limits for halfling fighters!)

    Secondly, I agree that 5E is rarely played in a logistics-intensive way, and that Drawmij's Instant Summons is useless in almost every circumstance. I just wanted to highlight some circumstances under which it's not useless.

    Third, item loss and damage is definitely not forbidden in 5E per se--the DMG has rules for it, and the PHB has costs for backup spellbooks. There are also ways to lose items, via DMG Disarm, or theft, or capture, or via dying + Clone. Your items do not teleport back to your clone. Especially if your party TPKs, Drawmij's Usually-Useless Summons takes on some value if you had the foresight to cast it. Surely you're not going to argue that high-level TPKs never happen?

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Now I'm wondering if DIS could be used in some incredibly convoluted way by chaining, i.e. the item you summon with the sapphire is the sapphire to summon the actual item you want.

    If you use the sapphire to summon the item, can you reuse the sapphire that would have summoned the sapphire you just crushed?

  5. - Top - End - #65

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Adventurer View Post
    Now I'm wondering if DIS could be used in some incredibly convoluted way by chaining, i.e. the item you summon with the sapphire is the sapphire to summon the actual item you want.

    If you use the sapphire to summon the item, can you reuse the sapphire that would have summoned the sapphire you just crushed?
    No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

    It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

    It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.
    When the DM gives the cleric a level 9 spell scroll for True Resurrection (or any legendary item/artifact you don't want stolen/looted), you can put the item somewhere where even a caster with Gate can't get to, like hidden with your Patron as a safe keeping in the Nine Hells. Your almighty Archdevil friend keeps it guarded and when you need it back, it's only the cost of a sapphire, which is probably F-you money at that point.

    It isn't something I'd pick up, but I can see this usage as useful with the wish spell. Gate isn't a high priority 9th-level spell and it might be much more trouble than it's worth just to get to where you need to be using planeshift so having instant access to the item can be a life saver.
    Last edited by Asisreo1; 2020-05-30 at 11:42 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    GreataxeFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Boulder Creek
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    Find Traps is as useful as the traps are deadly. In a normal game it's pretty useless. In a hypothetical game where you often wind up invading archmages' towers and uber-secure vaults (ancient or modern), and where the traps are designed to actually kill you instead of tickle (e.g. Glyph: Wall of Force + Glyph: Conjure Earth Elemental + Glyph: Cloudkill), Find Trap could speed up your raids by quite a bit by letting you know when you DON'T have to be paranoid. It also combos well with Augury/Divination, to get details once you know a trap is there.

    It also potentially makes you better at dealing with the traps. "You don’t learn the location of each trap, but you do learn the general nature of the danger posed by a trap you sense." If you sense that hypothetical Force Dome of Poisony Death trap, maybe you have the Shadow Monk cautiously check out the room first, because she's immune to poison and can teleport.

    Find Traps is a spell for certain genres of play that aren't common among 5E players, but it's not an inherently terrible spell.


    You are right in these regards. It grants PCs meta knowledge. However, I have experiences where anything that is still up to any interpretation can be argued and invalidated, like the various divinations like Speak with Dead. It isn't terrible on paper, but extremely difficult in practice, as a lot of spells on this thread cover.
    ==================================



    True Strike is still bad in the Plane Shift scenario unless you're playing a solo adventure--by essentially forcing you to Help yourself, the other PCs are delaying nuking whatever bad guy you're about to Plane Shift. Why don't they just Help?


    I have been told repeatedly the answer to this question, and it was the party are not responsible to do anything for you. I disagree with this answer, since sometimes you gotta Help yourself.
    ==================================



    One interesting difference between Mordenkainen's Sword and Bigby's Hand is: Bigby's Hand can be killed. Sometimes that's good (it can tank), sometimes it's bad. (BTW, I never thought of it before, but how are monsters supposed to know which spells/effects are killable and which are not? I've never had a bad guy attack an invulnerable Spiritual Weapon before, but... does it look any different from a Flying Sword monster or a Bigby's Hand force construct?)

    Anyway, if it weren't for Spiritual Weapon you'd have to say, "Well, Mordenkainen's Sword has some advantages." But it's much, much worse than Spiritual Weapon (because of concentration and action economy and even damage!).


    You got the right stuff here. No one without Arcana knowledge or practical experience should really instantly know what limits are on certain spells, which contributes a lot to some spells being labeled "useless". I think the Hand being destructable is it's check on power, but since it's not known, probably a minor check. And yeah, the Sword looks like it was converted as an afterthought.
    ===========================================

    Drawmij's Instant Summons is an almost-completely-useless spell.
    Clearly, this spell is what crushes the sapphire. Otherwise, how does the wizard crush perhaps the 2nd hardest gem short of diamond? The price is wayyyyy steep, but being able to mark your entire catalog of stuff for instant retrieval can be huge. Just figure a contract with a dwarven gem mining operation or a Earthen Planar being and you will possibly negate it's main downfall.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    That does not follow at all.
    In the context of someone on an "adventure" or expedition where they've prepared for a journey or series of events (i.e. the majority of what PCs do in d&d), considering that extradimensional storage exists, considering that teleportation magic also exists...yes it does. If you have decided to leave something behind, it almost certainly means that it is either too valuable and/or not useful for whatever it is that you're doing.

    Sure, you might need your Boots of the Winterland when you're going to the Elemental Plane of Fire...but probably not. If you do need them, for whatever reason, if you're high enough level to cast DIS, then you're also high enough level to just pop home and get them, if you haven't already got them tucked away somewhere in a Bag of Holding.

    Yes. There are certain things, like a spare spellbook; redundancies, powerful one-shot items and the like, that you might want to keep somewhere safe until needed. The use is niche (I never said otherwise). This does not, IMO, justify the cost.

    Like I said, if it was a Cantrip, it would by no means break the game or engender massive abuse because the utility itself is so extremely limited. Hell, if it was a Cantrip I'd be all over it as a fun and fluffy spell; it'd be great on assassin/charlatan/entertainer style characters to highlight their profession in a magical context. As one of the most powerful spells in the game, limited only to Tier 3 play, on the other hand? No.
    I apologise if I come across daft. I'm a bit like that. I also like a good argument, so please don't take offence if I'm somewhat...forthright.

    Please be aware; when it comes to 5ed D&D, I own Core (1st printing) and SCAG only. All my opinions and rulings are based solely on those, unless otherwise stated. I reserve the right of ignorance of errata or any other source.

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BlueWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    I am not a fan of identify this gen. Identify looks good until it is known that magic items can be identified over a short rest. making it redundant. And it doesn't work on cursed items.

    Call lightning and confusion(on non-clerics) are (dis?)honorable mentions, they are not bad spells so much as better spells exist at lower levels
    hypnotic pattern > confusion.
    Moonbeam > Call lightning.
    My sig is something witty.

    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    First, an honorable mention to suggestions and most illusions. Can be among the most powerful spells in the game, or can be the worst, depending on the DM. Good thing I've convinced most of mine so far, I like these spells.
    Second, most 8th-level spells aren't outright useless, but are quite underwhelming. Especially in the case of a warlock. I'd much, much rather pick another one from Crown of Stars, Forcecage and Plane Shift than any 8th-level warlock spell.

    Now, let's make a list.

    Infestation. Bad save, bad damage type, too much competition. No reason to pick it over another damaging cantrip.
    True Strike. For reasons, search "True Strike 5e", for more than half a decade of repetitive disappointment.
    Quite tempted to say Jump, primarily for the very short duration. But it's not entirely pointless. Close, but not entirely.
    Witch Bolt. It doesn't actually do what it's supposed to, which is repeated unavoidable damage. It's very easily avoidable, and its damage scales poorly.
    Aganazzar's Scorcher. A 30ft line isn't gonna work.
    Barkskin. Its increase to AC ranges from "no increase" to "low enough not to justify a 2nd-level slot and concentration". Seriously, even if you're captured and stripped of your armor, it's usually not worth it for anyone in your party, because there are far better things to do with your concentration than this. Yes, it can prove useful sometimes, but I find these times to be quite negligible in the grand scheme.
    Continual Fla- oh wait, there's the magical darkness interaction. Still, you can make it once and forget about it. Commission it from somewhere maybe.
    Crown of Madness. The order in which the affected enemy takes actions ruins it.
    Find Traps. It doesn't find traps. Half the time you don't even need it to tell you there are traps. Even when it tells you it's not worth its slot. There's a lot of ways to search for traps. Using a 2nd-level spell that doesn't really search isn't one.
    Melf's Acid Arrow. Upcast Magic Missile instead.
    Snilloc's Snowball Storm. The area and damage are dreadful.
    Catnap. Extremely niche. There are some cases that it's better than Leomund's Tiny Hut, but Leomund's Tiny Hut is so good that you'll almost never bother with Catnap just for those very few cases.
    Conjure Barrage. I get it, area damage for the ranger. Too bad the damage is pathetic for the level a ranger gets it.
    Erupting Earth. Maybe if it also knocked enemies prone...
    Compulsion. Too high level for what it does.
    Enervation. A more powerful Witch Bolt that heals and has better range. That's still not a great spell. And it's never a good use for a 5th-level slot. If it gave 1d4 negative levels without a save, I'd reconsider.
    Circle of Death. Although to be fair, it has two uses. One is spending a 6th-level slot to murder a village using a huge Con necrotic fireball. The other is to attempt to kill your party with the same method.
    Drawmij's Instant Summons. Crushing that sapphire pains me.
    Find the Path. It's very restrictive. Items from the place, specific locations, concentration... yeah, I don't think you'll ever manage to use this properly.
    Flesh to Stone. It's not gonna work.
    Mordenkainen's Sword. One of the few times a wizard should've looked at a cleric to see how it's done. Wizards don't get Spiritual Weapon, but this would be bad even without that comparison. Low damage, average economy, takes concentration.
    Sequester seems very, very unlikely. I can see its uses, I just don't see the situations coming up in the extreme majority of games. For players, at least. The DM can certainly use it to make a Sleeping Beauty story.
    Imprisonment. That's another Sequester deal. If a player ends up using it, odds are it was plot-forced and likely the last spell to be cast in the campaign.
    Storm of Vengeance. Even a villain using this can't bring down a building block. Might kill a few pedestrians.
    Weird. Phantasmal Killer isn't a good spell. Mass Phantasmal Killer as a 9th-level spell is a crime.
    Last edited by Chaos Jackal; 2020-06-03 at 06:06 AM.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Land of Cleves
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Funny story: Most of the talk in this thread about wizards retrieving their items, folks weren't using the name of the spell. I'm reading through it thinking, "Man, I don't remember the key item for Leomund's Secret Chest costing that much, or being expended". I double-check my book, and indeed it's not.

    Then I finally realize that that's not the spell that's being discussed, it's Jim Ward's Instant Summons. Which is indeed as described.

    So, OK, yeah, you can think of some use cases for Instant Summons. How many of those use cases are not satisfied by the spell that's two levels lower, doesn't use up its components, and can fetch more stuff?
    Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
    As You Like It, III:ii:328

    Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
    Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    As far as I can see, the things it's got going for it are:

    - it's a Ritual
    - it puts the object in your hand

    It could be useful for sneaking delicate or sensitive or secret things into places. Assault Mount Doom and bring the Ring to you at the last possible moment style.

    It could be useful for going into sensitive social situations you're sure are likely to turn violent - use it on a weapon, if you are a martial character with Ritual Caster, like it's an expensive poor man's (rich man's) Blade Pact or Bonded Weapon.

    You could use it to sneak poison into a castle or other items through security in general?

    It could be useful in some heists where you intentionally get captured? Though you need somewhere to hide the sapphire... 😳

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Nifft's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    No. "Each time you cast this spell, you must use a different sapphire."

    It would be kind of interesting though to True Polymorph that sapphire into a CR 0 tiny seahorse, which you True Polymorph into a CR 0 Commoner, whom you name Bob and make your squire, until the time comes for Bob to fulfill his true destiny of getting crushed as an action in order to summon back your Staff of the Magi. I mean, it's a decent hiding place for a sapphire, especially with Nystul's Magic Aura on Bob so he doesn't radiate magic.
    What if you reject Bob's marriage proposal, which leaves Bob emotionally crushed? Do you get your staff teleported?

    If so, perhaps you can build Bob back up again and crush him later. You'd need to change him somehow -- he must count as different for the spell to work -- but you just need to find some way to change the nature of a man, and how hard can that be, right?

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by JellyPooga View Post
    In the context of someone on an "adventure" or expedition where they've prepared for a journey or series of events (i.e. the majority of what PCs do in d&d), considering that extradimensional storage exists, considering that teleportation magic also exists...yes it does.
    But that's not what you said. You said "And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it."

    There are lots of reasons you might not have something on you but you need it. What if someone killed you and took your powerful magic item? Once you've been brought back to life, even if they have it on them, it'd be nice to know who has your artifact or whatever and where to go get it back once you've raised a posse.

    I can tell you right now that many of my players would have given up 1000gp to have the ability to do that in upper Tier 2 play. As far as I'm concerned the primary use is not to carry the gem and bring something to you when you are in the field. It's to leave the gem in a safe place so you can get something back or find out who has it.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    But that's not what you said. You said "And with all of that...it still just pops an item that you already own and have probably left behind into your hand. It's a nothing effect. If you haven't got something on you, itxs probably because you don't need it."

    There are lots of reasons you might not have something on you but you need it. What if someone killed you and took your powerful magic item? Once you've been brought back to life, even if they have it on them, it'd be nice to know who has your artifact or whatever and where to go get it back once you've raised a posse.

    I can tell you right now that many of my players would have given up 1000gp to have the ability to do that in upper Tier 2 play. As far as I'm concerned the primary use is not to carry the gem and bring something to you when you are in the field. It's to leave the gem in a safe place so you can get something back or find out who has it.
    But that's not what you said.

    The holes in your scenario include:
    1) You don't usually need your material goods when you're dead.

    2) If you've been dead and recently got better from it, you probably already know who has your best stuff or at least who knows where it is (hint: it'll be whoever it was that made you dead).

    2a) If you were recently dead, it's likely that you're only not dead now because your powerful friends managed not to be dead and managed to keep at least a piece of you in the process. Might want to ask them where your best stuff is first and if the answer isn't "oh, here it is; we brought that back for you", why not.

    3) If someone made you dead when you had all your best stuff, they'll probably be able to make you dead again when you don't. This spell does not change this state of affairs.

    4) Post-humous item retrieval is definitely a niche and limited use (see point 1).

    5) One reason is not "lots".

    If it's useful in "upper tier 2", then it would also be useful in Tier 1. Given the extreme niche use, why restrict it to Tier 3 play? Ressurection magic is rare enough at lower levels that the use you describe isn't likely to come into play very often. Given that it's a ritual, the spell slot cost is negligible, so the only reason to make it level 6 is to gate it's use to Tier 3. Why?

    I don't deny that it has some use; it clearly does (I even said myself that I'd "be all over it" if it was a cantrip). What I can't wrap my head around is why it's such a high level spell with such a high material cost. It'd be like if Knock was a level 6 ritual that had a consumed material component of a diamond lockpick worth 1000gp; yeah, ok, the spell has its uses, beyond that of mundane means, but the effect clearly doesn't match the cost and level. You might get some people using it, but most people are just going to pack some regular thieves tools instead.

    Tl;dr - The spell is trash because of its level and cost, not its utility.
    I apologise if I come across daft. I'm a bit like that. I also like a good argument, so please don't take offence if I'm somewhat...forthright.

    Please be aware; when it comes to 5ed D&D, I own Core (1st printing) and SCAG only. All my opinions and rulings are based solely on those, unless otherwise stated. I reserve the right of ignorance of errata or any other source.

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2016

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.


    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by JellyPooga View Post
    Given the extreme niche use, why restrict it [Instant Summons] to Tier 3 play? Ressurection magic is rare enough at lower levels that the use you describe isn't likely to come into play very often. Given that it's a ritual, the spell slot cost is negligible, so the only reason to make it level 6 is to gate it's use to Tier 3. Why?
    I'd look at its synergy with Clone more than "normal" resurrection.

    I'd also look at using it to steal a mcguffin away from the bbeg before he can raise hell with it (whether you're trying to steal it from him or steal it back from him after he stole it from you.) Or maybe to yoink it off of a booby-trapped pedestal from a safe distance.

    But mostly for retrieving your main gear after you wake up in your Demiplane of Clones. Otherwise, the spell may be Dispelled before you can trigger it.


    It's niche, but as with most other niche spells, when you need it, nothing else will really do quite so well.


    That said, I'd definitely prefer a much, much lower cost so that it could be used in more situations. The problem with that, though, is all the implications a cheap Yoink spell could have for the game world. Not only could it virtually invalidate Secret Chest, it could let wizards supplant rogues as the ultimate thieves. So, I guess expensive casting is relatively understandable. 500 gp should do it.
    Last edited by HPisBS; 2020-05-31 at 12:55 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by HPisBS View Post
    There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.


    Edit:


    I'd look at its synergy with Clone more than "normal" resurrection.

    I'd also look at using it to steal a mcguffin away from the bbeg before he can raise hell with it (whether you're trying to steal it from him or steal it back from him after he stole it from you.) Or maybe to yoink it off of a booby-trapped pedestal from a safe distance.

    But mostly for retrieving your main gear after you wake up in your Demiplane of Clones. Otherwise, the spell may be Dispelled before you can trigger it.


    It's niche, but as with most other niche spells, when you need it, nothing else will really do quite so well.


    That said, I'd definitely prefer a much, much lower cost so that it could be used in more situations. The problem with that, though, is all the implications a cheap Yoink spell could have for the game world. Not only could it virtually invalidate Secret Chest, it could let wizards supplant rogues as the ultimate thieves. So, I guess expensive casting is relatively understandable. 500 gp should do it.
    As a "yoink" or thieving spell, it's pretty useless; you have to be able to touch the object during the spells 1 minute casting time. So unless all you want is to put distance between you and the location before stealing it, whilst having the time to cast the spell without anyone interrupting you, it's a major factor in why it's such a limited spell. If you have the opportunity to cast the spell, you also have the opportunity to just take it (and have a 1 minute head-start).
    I apologise if I come across daft. I'm a bit like that. I also like a good argument, so please don't take offence if I'm somewhat...forthright.

    Please be aware; when it comes to 5ed D&D, I own Core (1st printing) and SCAG only. All my opinions and rulings are based solely on those, unless otherwise stated. I reserve the right of ignorance of errata or any other source.

  18. - Top - End - #78

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
    So, OK, yeah, you can think of some use cases for Instant Summons. How many of those use cases are not satisfied by the spell that's two levels lower, doesn't use up its components, and can fetch more stuff?
    All of them. Leomund's Secret Chest is useless for anything important because it can destroy your items. "After 60 days, there is a cumulative 5 percent chance per day that the spell’s effect ends. This effect ends if you cast this spell again, if the smaller replica chest is destroyed, or if you choose to end the spell as an action. If the spell ends and the larger chest is on the Ethereal Plane, it is irretrievably lost."

    There's no overlap between items you'd want to Drawmij and items you'd want to Secret Chest. Secret Chest is for cheap, disposable stuff that you don't mind losing.
    Last edited by MaxWilson; 2020-05-31 at 02:28 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    iTreeby's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.
    avatar by Elrond

    "You should just homebrew the world's tiniest violin for your bard."

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by HPisBS View Post
    There's been a lot of ragging on Find Traps, but none yet for Locate Object / Locate Creature. The range is just so short that it only ever helps pinpoint something that you've already almost found.
    IMO they are mostly for finding mid- or low-level enemies or targets that have just escaped you. Works especially well if you are already on their home territory and so are unlikely to have gone miles away, since even if they arrive out of range of the spell, you can zip about a bit to triangulate back in on them.

  21. - Top - End - #81

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by iTreeby View Post
    One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.
    Heh. That is demented but awesome.

    Still doesn't help against Dispel Magic but still awesome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Adventurer View Post
    IMO they are mostly for finding mid- or low-level enemies or targets that have just escaped you. Works especially well if you are already on their home territory and so are unlikely to have gone miles away, since even if they arrive out of range of the spell, you can zip about a bit to triangulate back in on them.
    I would totally leverage Locate Creature (Mind Flayer) and Locate Creature (Intellect Devourer) during an assault on a mind flayer bastion to avoid running into one unexpectedly. Knowledge is power.
    Last edited by MaxWilson; 2020-05-31 at 04:37 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Nifft's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by iTreeby View Post
    One thing of note about imprisonment (minimums containment) is that it makes the gem indestructible, the only shenanigan I have found with it is that you can make a magic jar unbreakable by imprisoning a squirrel in it.
    Some settings have big crystal swords.

    If weapon destruction is ever an issue, then having a Sacred Squirrel Soul Sword might be a big deal.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Presumably you could then make said sword into a magical weapon? That has interesting potential.

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Adventurer View Post
    Presumably you could then make said sword into a magical weapon? That has interesting potential.
    Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"
    I might attack your points aggressively: nothing personal. If I call out a fallacy in your argumentation, it doesn't mean I think you are arguing in bad faith. I invite you to call out if I somehow fail to live by the Twelve Virtues of Rationality.

    My favourite D&D session had 3 dice rolls. I'm currently curious to any system that has a higher amount of choices in and out of combat than 5e from the beginning of the game; especially for non-spellcasters. Please PM any recommendations.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Nifft's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skylivedk View Post
    Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"
    This is now the canonical origin for several artifacts.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    biggrin Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skylivedk View Post
    Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"
    I endorse your statements and wish to subscribe to your newsletter!

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skylivedk View Post
    Would it count as a sentient sword then? And if yes, can we do the same with a horn and a (miniature giant space) hamster? The Horn of Boo is a worthy artifact. Causes blinding on hit and every swing from the sword sounds like: "Go for the eyes!"
    As a DM I would say that the process of making intelligent items is more involved than and distinct from the process of entrapping a creature permanently. Though there may be overlap, it's not just casting one spell before starting enchanting.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ElfRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2016

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bardon View Post
    I endorse your statements and wish to subscribe to your newsletter!
    I'm happy to hear that! Unfortunately, my newsletter is more about saving people with tech than with d20s.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Adventurer View Post
    As a DM I would say that the process of making intelligent items is more involved than and distinct from the process of entrapping a creature permanently. Though there may be overlap, it's not just casting one spell before starting enchanting.
    Boo boos! ;)
    I might attack your points aggressively: nothing personal. If I call out a fallacy in your argumentation, it doesn't mean I think you are arguing in bad faith. I invite you to call out if I somehow fail to live by the Twelve Virtues of Rationality.

    My favourite D&D session had 3 dice rolls. I'm currently curious to any system that has a higher amount of choices in and out of combat than 5e from the beginning of the game; especially for non-spellcasters. Please PM any recommendations.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by elyktsorb View Post
    Blindness/Deafness seems pretty garbage, since it's the same level as hold person and arguably is just a ****tier version of it. I mean sure it has less target restrictions but it also targets CON. I think this spell would be way better if it both Blinded and Deafened at the same time instead of you choosing just 1 effect.
    Ok but did you miss that doesn't take concentration?

    That's the main appeal since a lot of classes, such as Bard, often don't have much they can do with their spell slots when they concentration up on something. Blindness is also one of the most debilitating conditions you can inflict on another creature.

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: What spells do you consider useless?

    Quote Originally Posted by ImproperJustice View Post
    Speak with Dead: Not being able to compel the dead for truthful answers really limits this spell’s usefulness IMO. Soul Cage is much better, but 6th level.
    As someone who played a warlock with at-will speak with dead, I strongly disagree.

    Step 1: Look around the battlefield
    Step 2: Cast disguise self to appear like one of the other dead enemy combatants
    Step 3: Cast Speak with Dead and pretend to be their former ally
    Step 4: Profit

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •