More Silvery Barbs discussion

[tokek]

Also, Silvery Barbs stacks with disadvantage. The Rune Knight rune (which is 1/SR until 15th so if you have more than one fight between short rests you only get to invoke once, also ends early if you're incapacitated, it's not just "active for 1 minute no complications", as seems to have been made out) imposes disadvantage...which you can then Silvery Barbs if they still pass. Three dice, not two. Or even more, if you get more people to stack their dice on top. Disadvantage ends at two. Silvery Barbs need not end until you run out of people with reactions to spend.

This begins to feel like a sunk cost fallacy. You are pushing more and more abilities and spell slots into trying to make that one spell stick to that one target - still with no certainty of success.

It would have to be an amazing spell to be worth it and on the whole I don't think the choice of such spells is really there. Some good spells for sure but they are concentration spells and I honestly find there are better things to use concentration on. Casting Hold Monster instead of Wall of Force is just an edge case for me.

But if you think its that amazing go right ahead and take it. Why not? Everyone is entitled to their own ideas about what's super fantastic in the game. I think its a good spell, I've put it on my new sorcerer character and I'm really interested to see how well it does over a large number of sessions. So far its been mediocre.

[stoutstien]

Its Bard, Sorcerer and Wizard. Clerics, Druids and Warlocks don't get it.

Fey touched is a cheap way to nab it excluding the strixhaven feats and backgrounds.

[Amnestic]

Casting Hold Monster instead of Wall of Force is just an edge case for me.

Well I guess you must only be playing Wizards (and maybe a bard if they drop their magical secret on it) since WoF is only on the wizard list and not sorcerers. Do you think it's a total edge case for a party of four to never have a wizard in the group?

[tokek]

Well I guess you must only be playing Wizards (and maybe a bard if they drop their magical secret on it) since WoF is only on the wizard list and not sorcerers. Do you think it's a total edge case for a party of four to never have a wizard in the group?

I would always take that spell as one of my magical secrets. Its literally the auto-pick spell at 5th level for me.

I was just thinking my warlock used it all the time but then I remembered - magic item. Of course. But you did just remind me how much WotC don't care about Sorcerers. Dammit even artificers get the spell.

Okay you convinced me of this. That the 2nd class citizens of the caster world really do feel a bit less inferior with this spell and can close the power/capability gap with Wizards.

[Mastikator]

Fey touched is a cheap way to nab it excluding the strixhaven feats and backgrounds.

Feats are cheap now?

[Segev]

Silvery barbs will never see play while shield exists, it is a bad spell that tricks people into bringing their defenses down to reroll a save the target will likely make anyway or to possibly block maybe one attack. This spell will often do nothing in actual play.

I wouldn't go that far. It CAN do nothing in actual play, but because of the timing on when you choose to use it, you can do a lot to judge the likelihood of it making a difference. And sometimes, the clutch failed save is going to be that important. When the hag has to stay down for just one more round to finish her off, and she made her save on her turn, being able to use a reaction to deny that can be quite worth it.

Honestly, what I don't see it being used as often for is negating crits or other hits on attack rolls, unless you simply don't have shield (and I'd agree that most PCs should have shield before they pick up silvery barbs) or you know the hit is going to be unaffected by shield and you're desperate for THIS ONE HIT to miss. (or it's on somebody else)

I see it as a great spell for the "luck diviner" build, because it's very on theme and plays well with the halfling luck, lucky feat, and portent rolls, being one more tool for making those d20s go your way. I am inclined to agree that it is niche enough that, if you're not building around it for a theme, it probably goes on a full caster somewhere after shield as a second "defensive spell" option.

[stoutstien]

Feats are cheap now?

A half feat that comes with two spells known and a free casting of each is very cheap. One that gives you SB and misty step is a steal.

[Segev]

A half feat that comes with two spells known and a free casting of each is very cheap. One that gives you SB and misty step is a steal.

Does that mean a level dip is also cheap, if it comes with multiple spells, including SB? Should literally every build that has an Int of at least 13 dip wizard?

[stoutstien]

Does that mean a level dip is also cheap, if it comes with multiple spells, including SB? Should literally every build that has an Int of at least 13 dip wizard?

Can and often is but with different pros and cons. We aren't talking about absolutism here. If someone want SB it costing 1/4 of a feat is cheap. A dip is also cheap but comes with delaying class progression and falls under different variant rules.
In the end the class list restriction will have little impact on who picks this up. Just like AE, shield, find familiar, and so on.

[Segev]

Can and often is but with different pros and cons. We aren't talking about absolutism here. If someone want SB it costing 1/4 of a feat is cheap. A dip is also cheap but comes with delaying class progression and falls under different variant rules.
In the end the class list restriction will have little impact on who picks this up. Just like AE, shield, find familiar, and so on.

More like 3/4 of a feat if you're not already a caster, since it can only improve your mental stats. This is a much narrower build type than "anyone."

[stoutstien]

More like 3/4 of a feat if you're not already a caster, since it can only improve your mental stats. This is a much narrower build type than "anyone."

We are still talking about someone who want SB correct?

[Segev]

We are still talking about someone who want SB correct?

If "You want what you paid for" means that you don't consider the cost, does that mean that somebody who wants +2 Charisma didn't pay anything at all for it when he took it at level 4, instead of a feat (when he might ALSO have wanted, say, Silvery Barbs and Misty Step and +1 Wisdom)?

[stoutstien]

If "You want what you paid for" means that you don't consider the cost, does that mean that somebody who wants +2 Charisma didn't pay anything at all for it when he took it at level 4, instead of a feat (when he might ALSO have wanted, say, Silvery Barbs and Misty Step and +1 Wisdom)?

I never said it was free. I said it's cheap. Fey touched is in the running for being one of the best feat even before SB is added on it.

[Segev]

I never said it was free. I said it's cheap. Fey touched is in the running for being one of the best feat even before SB is added on it.

You still count the cost of what you pick up.

So, yes, 3/4.

1/2 for the +1 to a stat you may not have much use for, and 1/4 for Silvery Barbs itself. Because yes, you count the cost of Silvery Barbs in there, as it's what you took it to get. The "free" part is anything you also might've wanted that happened to be along for the ride. Which would be misty step in this case.

[HPisBS]

If we look at Heighten, we see a subclass feature that almost no one takes. In order to be "good," I argue, Silvery Barbs needs to beat the bar set by Heighten, which is generally seen as a pretty subpar feature.

That's just because a flat 3 sp is relatively expensive when you only get to choose a few metamagics, and because Twinned tends to overshadow it.

There is a point of diminishing returns. How many reactions and slots are we wasting to make one spell stick? Is it really worth that? Is that actually a thing that is happening at tables, and if it does, is it that big a deal that the entire team just wasted a pile of spells and reactions to make one roll go the way they want it to?
...
Silvery Barbs is a good, versatile spell. People are hyper fixating on the absolute best use it could possibly have. That's not going to be the norm.

This begins to feel like a sunk cost fallacy. You are pushing more and more abilities and spell slots into trying to make that one spell stick to that one target - still with no certainty of success.

It would have to be an amazing spell to be worth it and on the whole I don't think the choice of such spells is really there. Some good spells for sure but they are concentration spells and I honestly find there are better things to use concentration on. Casting Hold Monster instead of Wall of Force is just an edge case for me.

Aside from being a relatively cheap and rare way to help allies' debuffs stick (stunning fist, anyone?), there are plenty of encounter-changing and even encounter-ending spells to use it with. Suggestion, Banishment, Polymorph, Dominate __, Feeblemind, True Polymorph, or Imprisonment landing can absolutely trivialize an encounter -- even with the bbeg.

It's also one of the only - if not the only - ways [for a caster] to "disadvantage" recurring saves, like with Contagion or Flesh to Stone.


But, all of that said, I think Silvery Barbs' main selling point is that it can make you feel better about, more secure in, casting your big spell. With Heightened, Portent, etc, you're betting it all, all at once. But with SB, it feels more like an extra layer of assurance that you only have to spend when you actually need it. Just kinda feels better, ya know?

[tokek]

Aside from being a relatively cheap and rare way to help allies' debuffs stick (stunning fist, anyone?), there are plenty of encounter-changing and even encounter-ending spells to use it with. Suggestion, Banishment, Polymorph, Dominate __, Feeblemind, True Polymorph, or Imprisonment landing can absolutely trivialize an encounter -- even with the bbeg.

It's also one of the only - if not the only - ways to "disadvantage" recurring saves, like with Contagion or Flesh to Stone.

There are other ways to force save rerolls we have discussed earlier here.

If you frequently have encounters that can be ended by one dice roll then I can see why you might think this is super-powerful. I'd guess lots of those encounters end very suddenly anyway - typically over half the time if the DC / save ratio is normal. I would definitely want to play a Divination Wizard in a game like that - forcing a definite fail is vastly better than a reroll.

[Elves]

The point I made earlier isn't affected by comparisons to other abilities, because it's about the balance of spell slots vs. other spell slots.

That this spell messes with the basic design of 5e by stacking with advantage, and with itself if multiple people cast it, is also a strong point.

[Captain Panda]

Well I guess you must only be playing Wizards (and maybe a bard if they drop their magical secret on it) since WoF is only on the wizard list and not sorcerers. Do you think it's a total edge case for a party of four to never have a wizard in the group?

Oi! Clockwork Soul gets it, too. :D

[Captain Panda]

That's just because a flat 3 sp is relatively expensive when you only get to choose a few metamagics, and because Twinned tends to overshadow it.

Totally true! And Quicken overshadows both.

Aside from being a relatively cheap and rare way to help allies' debuffs stick (stunning fist, anyone?), there are plenty of encounter-changing and even encounter-ending spells to use it with. Suggestion, Banishment, Polymorph, Dominate __, Feeblemind, True Polymorph, or Imprisonment landing can absolutely trivialize an encounter -- even with the bbeg.

Okay, this might be a hot take, but here it is: a DM has goofed if the combat is ended by a single saving throw being failed. The big bad should have had legendary resistance, and backup. Even if it's just a normal encounter, taking one creature out of the fight should not be enough to "end" it unless you truly are doing the 6-8 encounter marathon days. If you're doing 6-8 (which some people continually insist is what the game expects, though I am dubious), you can't just throw Silvery Barbs out willy nilly. Hell, at that point you can't throw out single target spells willy nilly either, very inefficient!

Also, some of those spells listed... if you have True Polymorph? You win. If you know what you're doing, if you're playing a Wizard or Bard? You win. Congratulations. Most DMs cannot handle a player who is using that spell in anything resembling an effective way, because it is the best 9th level spell. Second hot take: True Poly>Wish, fight me! I've played at high level (and DMed at high level) for both spells. Wish is iconic, but in terms of raw mechanical power? You just can't beat True Polymorph.

But, all of that said, I think Silvery Barbs' main selling point is that it can make you feel better about, more secure in, casting your big spell. With Heightened, Portent, etc, you're betting it all, all at once. But with SB, it feels more like an extra layer of assurance that you only have to spend when you actually need it. Just kinda feels better, ya know?

Agreed. I actually think it might make single target spells go from pretty bad to an okay choice. Considering people seem to like those spells as much as or more than the optimal ones, I see that as a good thing. But those people don't seem to realize they're not optimal already, so they think this spell that makes them "okay" is broken.

[stoutstien]

You still count the cost of what you pick up.

So, yes, 3/4.

1/2 for the +1 to a stat you may not have much use for, and 1/4 for Silvery Barbs itself. Because yes, you count the cost of Silvery Barbs in there, as it's what you took it to get. The "free" part is anything you also might've wanted that happened to be along for the ride. Which would be misty step in this case.

Doesn't really matter if it's valued at 1/4 or 3/4 a feat. The point was the class list restrictions with the spell have little impact on others in regards to excess to it. so if we are talking about it impact then we should include clerics and such. Especially if they don't usually have any serious competition for that action and can be applied to low level features like the order domain's VoA.

[Kane0]

Agreed. I actually think it might make single target spells go from pretty bad to an okay choice. Considering people seem to like those spells as much as or more than the optimal ones, I see that as a good thing. But those people don't seem to realize they're not optimal already, so they think this spell that makes them "okay" is broken.

So in that case take away affecting attacks and the extra advantage from barbs, still serves the same function of enhancing save and ability check spells, single target or no.

[PhoenixPhyre]

So in that case take away affecting attacks and the extra advantage from barbs, still serves the same function of enhancing save and ability check spells, single target or no.

And that's my core issue with the spell. Sure, any one of its functions isn't that much different than other abilities. But it's a single-stop-shop to do a good chunk of multiple different abilities, most of which come online at higher levels and are (in a sane build) mutually exclusive. If you're a Rune Knight 7, it's hard(er) to have the ability to cast shield a lot. Or use any of the other mentioned abilities. Three levels in Lore Bard (ok more, if you actually want to use it frequently) gets you a weaker Cutting Words (since dice scales with class level) and requires a decent CHA, which is expensive. And bards don't get (natively) shield.

Silvery Barbs? Does a fair chunk of all those abilities...in a 1st level spell that can be gotten via a feat or at most a single-level dip. And you can have shield and silvery barbs.

Plus it does things that the other abilities just flat can't do (you get both the anti-save ability and giving advantage to someone else for a single reaction; shield can't be used on attacks against other people). Oh, and the native access includes classes (cough bard, wizard) who just don't need the extra help.

To me, that doesn't seem reasonable.

[KorvinStarmast]

I get that it's a strong spell, but at least give it a chance before you ban it.

or think through it's impact on game play before you ban it. My DM did.

I'd easily put Silvery Barbs in the same league as Shield, I'm not willing to concede that it's better than Shield. It's better than Absorb Elements though which I consider more situational.

It is more versatile than shield by a lot.

As a table that allows homebrew and also doing homebrew myself, you have to. There isnt enough time in the day to playtest every item out of the vortually endless torrent found online. You need to develop an eye for determining what you want at your table and what you dont, so you can scan something and then decide if its worth playtesting or needs adjustment first.

+100.

And being from a setting/adventure book means absolutely no way. That's -1e999 points right there...Hard no.

I guess if I had read this thread as it was ongiong I'd not have asked to include it in the fey touched feat. All in all, since the other PC took that feat, glad your no was voiced since I ended up taking a different feat, and one that I had never tried before. Sometimes, "no" opens a new door.

How's this as an alternative, changing only the reaction trigger and spell effect:

Instead of when creature passes attack, check or save the reaction triggers when a creature rolls an attack, check or save.

The effect is you choose to apply advantage or disadvantage to that roll. After the roll that same creature gains the opposite (advantage/disadvantage) on the next roll of the same type (attack/check/save) within one hour.

So you can still use it on basically everything, but the reverse takes effect for the roll after that. Still very useful and broadly applicable but it no longer stacks as much with other effects and carries an actual tradeoff to using it.

Interesting idea for a mod.

Generally, things that happen during one player's turn (ie someone doing something on their own turn) aren't disruptive unless they take substantial time to resolve[1]. Interrupts are massive speed bumps no matter how trivial they are to resolve, because you constantly have to check for them. Yes, this includes Legendary Actions and most reaction spells. And the more cases that could trigger an interrupt, the worse the effect even if it isn't actually used much. Because now you have to constantly slow down ...

Unless the players are paying attention. In some groups, they are on time, and in other groups they are not and that's where the real game tempo problem comes up.

[1] prismatic spray...I'm looking at you in many cases.

I only used it twice in seven levels of play. Not that I'd have liked to use it more often, but the martials kept running into my fields of fire ...

Yes, when you go outside the single-PC scenario the spell's value snowballs tremendously,

A half feat that comes with two spells known and a free casting of each is very cheap. One that gives you SB and misty step is a steal.

Yes.

[Captain Panda]

So in that case take away affecting attacks and the extra advantage from barbs, still serves the same function of enhancing save and ability check spells, single target or no.

I don't see the "advantage on next xyz, probably an attack" bonus from Barbs as the main value of the spell, so haven't brought it up much. That's mainly because that's the smaller, secondary impact. I see that like I see the extra d6 from Absorb Elements. It's nice, but I don't think that's the main purpose of the spell and doesn't really factor into my evaluation of its balance. You could take it out and it'd still be (in my opinion) about where it is now: good, not stellar, but good.

The main use of the spell is targeted enough that a skilled player could time it and have a big impact, if it's an important roll they're forcing a reroll on, but the advantage addon is harder to get real value out of. If it's just giving one attack advantage, I don't find that at all impressive. If you have a way of knowing that the next roll the character is going to make (it has to be the next one) is a key saving throw, the addon value grows, but I do not see that coming up often.

Honestly, I'm starting to think this spell isn't even as good as I was initially imagining, because people are overweighting its value and seeming to suggest it should be used all the time. If you use this spell constantly it isn't a good spell, it's a trap option. You aren't going to see key rolls that need to be tweaked at the cost of a reaction/spell every fight like people seem to be suggesting, and if you use it every time it can be used, you're going to bleed out spells really, really fast.

[tokek]

Plus it does things that the other abilities just flat can't do (you get both the anti-save ability and giving advantage to someone else for a single reaction; shield can't be used on attacks against other people). Oh, and the native access includes classes (cough bard, wizard) who just don't need the extra help.

The advantage is limited, because its on the next applicable roll the recipient makes. If they have advantage already, tough luck its used up. If you want to save it for a save, better not make any ability checks or attack rolls until you think you might need it.

I have found in play that this really limits its value.

[PhoenixPhyre]

The advantage is limited, because its on the next applicable roll the recipient makes. If they have advantage already, tough luck its used up. If you want to save it for a save, better not make any ability checks or attack rolls until you think you might need it.

I have found in play that this really limits its value.

Sure. That one feature isn't game breaking.

But it has other features. So you're getting multiple half-features for the price of one spell prep. And that's a binding constraint elsewhere, so things that give you two for the price of one are more valuable than the individual components suggest.

In this case, you can do a decent emulation of 3-4 different, higher-level features, plus some (small) unique things. All in one 1st-level spell, available through a bunch of different, low-cost ways. To me that's a design smell. Especially since (personal bias alert) I dislike "swiss army spells" already. I believe spellcasters should get versatility by having a lot of single-purpose (or low-purpose-count) spells, not by having a lot of spells and having widely multifunctional spells. So any spell that serves more than one purpose is already on the watch list for me. Not forbidden, but to be watched.

[Kane0]

That's mainly because that's the smaller, secondary impact-
-doesn't really factor into my evaluation of its balance. You could take it out and it'd still be (in my opinion) about where it is now: good, not stellar, but good.

Yep, so that secondary benefit can be safely removed in order to keep the primary function intact.

Now removing affecting attacks on top of ability checks and saves does tale out the crit negation, what're your thoughts there?

[tokek]

Sure. That one feature isn't game breaking.

But it has other features. So you're getting multiple half-features for the price of one spell prep. And that's a binding constraint elsewhere, so things that give you two for the price of one are more valuable than the individual components suggest.

In this case, you can do a decent emulation of 3-4 different, higher-level features, plus some (small) unique things. All in one 1st-level spell, available through a bunch of different, low-cost ways. To me that's a design smell. Especially since (personal bias alert) I dislike "swiss army spells" already. I believe spellcasters should get versatility by having a lot of single-purpose (or low-purpose-count) spells, not by having a lot of spells and having widely multifunctional spells. So any spell that serves more than one purpose is already on the watch list for me. Not forbidden, but to be watched.

Spells with multiple effects are pretty common. Guiding Bolt, Mind Sliver, Dissonant Whispers etc. Pretty standard design. If you think that's a design smell then its a really quite common one even on these low level spells.

My point is that the advantage is not freely applicable to what you want to apply it to, it applies to the next roll you make which could even be one you have advantage on anyway.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Spells with multiple effects are pretty common. Guiding Bolt, Mind Sliver, Dissonant Whispers etc. Pretty standard design. If you think that's a design smell then its a really quite common one even on these low level spells.

My point is that the advantage is not freely applicable to what you want to apply it to, it applies to the next roll you make which could even be one you have advantage on anyway.

I don't consider "damage + rider" as a significant multiple effect. And it's not effects, it's uses. That is, a spell that can be used
a) defensively to stop an attack against you (or your allies)
b) offensively to make a save-based spell more likely to land
c) and also gives an unrelated ally a bonus (even if minor)

is very different (and more worrying) than one that can only be used offensively, even if that offensive nature has more than one effect. Because the first can be used to cover ground that would otherwise take multiple spells more effectively than one that can only cover one role.

It's the same reason I'm not particularly happy with polymorph--it has both the offensive use (turning someone into a frog) and a "defensive" use (turn someone friendly into a big combat beast) AND a utility use (transform someone into something that can, for instance, get somewhere), all compounded by being able to dive through all the available books looking for fodder. Any one of those effects would be worth having; all 3 makes for a spell that has balance issues.

[loki_ragnarock]

I don't consider "damage + rider" as a significant multiple effect. And it's not effects, it's uses. That is, a spell that can be used
a) defensively to stop an attack against you (or your allies)
b) offensively to make a save-based spell more likely to land
c) and also gives an unrelated ally a bonus (even if minor)

It's also - for a subtle sorcerer - potentially quite useful as in the exploration/social pillars, beyond the combat uses.

Sheild's great for what it does, but it can't give disadvantage to a guard rolling a sense motive to see if you're bluffing, or to a Nazgul Ringwraith generic undead seeky guy making a perception check to notice hobbits halflings hiding under the log.