Whats the point of mordaikens sword?

[Psyren]

Well, I can't speak for how authentic the "iconics" have been to their prior incarnations. All I can really say is that I found the notes from Tasha, Mordenkainen and Fizban to be fun to read while thumbing through the material, and distinctive in style.

But I'll stop derailing now.

[Dork_Forge]

By Tier 3+ though, you're likely to have combats with differing elevation or even aerial combat and the like. The low movement it gets matters, especially when you only have one 7th-level slot until 20th.

None of that necessarily changes anything I said and no spell design protects the spell from being used in poor circumstances by the player.

At "native level" for BH you don't have MS at all I'm not sure what the point of a comparison then would be.

I didn't start that comparison, I was addressing it.

You were assuming a 3 round combat earlier - if you're up against something capable of deleting the hand in 3 rounds, that's still damage that would have put you or possibly your party in serious danger. And if it's sufficiently large AoE to wipe you both out in that time, then neither spell is helpful, so at best they're equally poor choices for that fight.

I really don't get the first point, yes fight you are willing to use your 7th level spell in is dangerous.

You made a large leap there to put the caster in the AOE, to try and nullify it. The caster not only need not be in the AOE path, but the caster also has the option of defenses... Absorb Elements, Warding Bond, Peace Cleric, Temp HP etc. The hand is nothing like a PC just because it has the same HP.

120ft range and no concentration, so your chances of being in melee are much less than with MS or BH. And if the monster goes prone to try and avoid your 4d12 I'd call that a win, especially since you have a much higher chance of either being able to target something else, or negate their defense with something like Web/Faerie Fire, or just hold on to the spell until the next fight entirely.

Not convinced that the range is a meaningful difference for melee risk. That would assume that you're starting at long range, and are happy to stay there/maintain it depsite the fact that most spells don't have that range and your party aren't likely to stay with you.

Seriously, you bring up Faerie Fire and Web in this reply in conjunction with Crown of Stars, both have the much more common range of 60 feet.


And I didn't assume the monsters going prone, which is fairly uncommon/unrealistic in most cases, more like your party making them prone. This is just a net loss for the caster compared to either MS or BH.

No concentration also means that if you really run into a stealth problem between fights you have multiple options there too, including the mundane solution of holding your cloak up over your head while the motes orbit it and letting your party lead you.

You brought up concentration like it matters, then just kind of left it dangling there. Without any example that's just a meaningless statement that doesn't demonstrate anything.

As for the cloak thing, the fact that you consider blinding the caster a perfectly normal/acceptable trade off is telling, but you didn't even seem to consider that it wouldn't work? Why would anything you put over your star-orbited head be good enough to entirely block the light?

I never said it has to be "S tier", nor did I say MS is "worthless."

Never said that you did, I was saying my actual position to make clear what I'm saying. You instead seem to have just taken this as something else to argue instead of accepting it as context.

Reminder of my position - it's not nearly as simple as saying "in reality over a 3 round combat, MS does more damage." Even in a completely blank whiteroom that's unlikely to be the case by 13+, never mind anything more complex, and Tier 3 means complexity is the norm rather than the exception.

I run two Tier 3 games a week, well aware. One of which has a combination of a Sorcadin and a Stars Druid. One uses Spiritual Weapon, close enough to MS for this, the other makes heavy use of a ranged, radiant, spell attack.

The Druid has more trouble than the Spiritual Weapon when it comes to cover and disadvantage.

My encounters frequently feature changes in elevation, flying/climbing enemies, cover and what not. No white rooms here.

[Segev]

I agree with the premise...



...but certainly not with the conclusion.

Mordenkainen *thinks* he's better than everyone, but he's very much wrong about that, as he is about many other things.

Mordenkainen's Sword should *not* attack twice when activated, or be usable as a weapon (to attack twice or otherwise), or be moved further than the PHB spell let you, specifically because Mordenkainen is dismissive of other people's skillset and overconfident in his own capacities.

Fair enough. That doesn't mean that Mordenkainen is an incompetent. If he's even half as good as he thinks he is, he's pretty darned amazing, and the lore seems to agree he IS pretty darned amazing.

So, then, where should his eponymous sword be sitting?

[Psyren]

I mean, I'm not going to list every single concentration spell that would be helpful alongside CoS just to prove the point My larger point is that concentration can be used to gain advantage or negate disadvantage readily (or lock down multiple targets etc), so even comparing point for point CoS comes out well ahead.

And my point regarding the "poor circumstances" is that they are fairly common at 13+. Again, all it takes is one round where your sword is more than 20ft away from an enemy and the double attack benefit is negated, any more than that and it gets progressively worse. Heck, even if you can keep it hitting something every round in those circumstances, it may not be the target your party is trying to focus down. With triple the movement, the hand is much less susceptible to such situations - that's all I'm saying there.

As for the hand being passively destructible, I can see that being a negative sometimes. Personally I find the situations where passive AoE can wipe out something that has all your HP to be a black swan event in the grand scheme of things, but sure, it could happen.

Apologies on confusing your context for an attempt to say I said something that I didn't, consider that bit withdrawn.

[Dork_Forge]

I mean, I'm not going to list every single concentration spell that would be helpful alongside CoS just to prove the point My larger point is that concentration can be used to gain advantage or negate disadvantage readily (or lock down multiple targets etc), so even comparing point for point CoS comes out well ahead.

It doesn't really matter what you list, the fact remains that most spells that you'd put into that space don't have that kind of extreme range.

So you're just saying that concentration can be used, which is almost as vague as saying you can use your action to negate it.

And my point regarding the "poor circumstances" is that they are fairly common at 13+. Again, all it takes is one round where your sword is more than 20ft away from an enemy and the double attack benefit is negated, any more than that and it gets progressively worse. Heck, even if you can keep it hitting something every round in those circumstances, it may not be the target your party is trying to focus down. With triple the movement, the hand is much less susceptible to such situations - that's all I'm saying there.

On the bolded part.... what? The double attack is on the first turn. You're summoning the sword next to what you're hitting. The only way that what you're saying is a thing is if you one shot the monster or it can move as a reaction when hit... which is a very rare monster ability.

Yes the hand is less likely to get caught out because it has a higher speed, I just don't think that will be relevant enough to really be make or break.

As for the hand being passively destructible, I can see that being a negative sometimes. Personally I find the situations where passive AoE can wipe out something that has all your HP to be a black swan event in the grand scheme of things, but sure, it could happen.

I have no idea what a black swan event is, I'm going to assume bad though. Though I will say that the nature of it likely being a Wizard using it makes this more likely given at 13th a Wizard likely has 67-80HP. A Behir averages 66, an adult dragon's breath is in the same region and depending on what you're dealing with you run the risk of reduced maximums (Undead, Exhaustion, Create Homunculus, Create Magen etc.)

Not saying it's super likely, but I could see it getting destroyed at my table every now and then.

Apologies on confusing your context for an attempt to say I said something that I didn't, consider that bit withdrawn.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

[Psyren]

It doesn't really matter what you list, the fact remains that most spells that you'd put into that space don't have that kind of extreme range.

Greater Invisibility, done.

On the bolded part.... what? The double attack is on the first turn.

You said 3 round combat:

Round 1, you cast it and hit twice. On their turn, they move 30ft away or more.
Round 2, you move it towards them and fail to reach. Zero damage.
Round 3, you reach them again (assuming they didn't move again) and hit once.

Total, 3 hits in 3 rounds, just like the Hand gets. Assuming they don't just play keep away after the first round.

I have no idea what a black swan event is, I'm going to assume bad though.

Very rare occurrence (usually negative).

Not saying it's super likely, but I could see it getting destroyed at my table every now and then.

That matches what I said, yes. Though since you have freedom to place it and 60ft move on top of that, it's not that hard to get a monster to waste their AoE on it in a way that is advantageous to the party, or else needing to ignore it. For example, you could put it behind that Behir so it's forced to choose between zapping your Hand or your Fighter. MS meanwhile doesn't provide that opportunity.

[kazaryu]

If they did that in OneD&D, I'd be willing to overlook a lot of other jank. But it looks like instead they'll make random edits to particular spells, mostly the inoffensive ones (seriously, spiritual weapon was fine the way it was) and call it a day.

idk, adding concentration in exchange for better scaling isn't a terrible change.

i mean, its not much more explicitly a damage cleric spell, since you can't also concentrate on a support spell. but still. the onednd version does scale way better.

[JNAProductions]

80 is the MINIMUM I’d expect a Wizard to have in HP at level 13.

They get 54 base, so with a mere +2 Con mod, they’d have 80.

[Unoriginal]

The idea that because it's poorly rendered in fifth edition that we should interpret Mordenkainen as some kind of incompetent buffoon is just absurd.

Absolutely.

However, since Mordenkainen is unarguably portrayed as some kind of buffoon whose arrogance frequently leads into incompetence in all the 5e books in which he appears personally (or near), I think that the spell fits.

Of note, his appearances/mentions have him:

Spoiler: Spoilers for books and official modules

Show

-Nearly turn himself into Demogorgon's brainwashed slave by experimenting on the Demon Prince's symbol witjout precautions.

-Lose to Strahd and get his mind scrambled.

-Get made fun of by Tasha, with the implication she is a better wizard or at least smarter than him not challenged.

-Go on about the Balance when it's implied his interventions are at best of little consequences and at worse only self-serving.

-Confidently declare that Halflings are not lucky.

That is not to say he is an idiot who's entirely incompetent (that would be deep flanderization), as he is still a forbidable mage, but 5e does portray him comically, with little to no attempt to give him dignity or show him respect-worthy.

[helgershaw]

The point of Mordenkainen's Sword is, IMO, to showcase that Mordenkainen is a doofus who's not as good as he think he is.

My headcannon is that this spell is the result of Mordenkainen trying to one-up Bigby and failing hard.

I forget where I heard it as it was many years ago. For wizard spells with a material component that the spell consumes, the component is actually a royalty payment to use the spell. With that in mind, Mordenkainen somehow found a way to collect excess arcane energy. As a result, his licensed spells are over costed for the utility or benefit provided. Much like email scammers purposefully using poor wording and grammar to select for gullible marks, Mordenkainen is hoping for wizards too foolish to know Sword is a bad spell.

[Witty Username]

The point of Mordenkienen's sword is rule of funny for DMs, and for being a free use of scribe wizard's not die button.

Mordenkienen's sword is a 1 minute concentration 7th level spell for not quite negative damage.

At 3d10 damage, it is on par with firebolt, so the action cast represents effectively 0 damage, it does win out as you can follow up with the bonus action the turn you cast it.

For fun let's compare this with Finger of Death (the only similarity is does damage really)
7d8+30, average 61.5 damage, 30.75 on a successful save.
Assuming a 50/50 shot
Average about 46 damage
How many rounds of combat does Mordenkienen's sword need to be up to match damage, let's assume 60% accuracy:
3d10, 16.5 average × .6 = 9.9 average
Round 1: 19.8 (action and bonus action)
Round 2: 29.7
Round 3: 39.6
-Round 4: 49.5-

So for a fairly banal damage spell, it takes Mordenkienen's sword a longer than average combat to start wining out.

Furthermore, Mordenkienen's sword takes concentration, for clerics the big draw of spiritual weapon is it is both a bonus action cast (combos with a cantrip/weapon attack) and non-concentration so it can cooperate with your bless/spirit guardians/etc. Mordenkienen's sword doesn't have this boon, so if you need a control spell to survive the long, probably difficult combat, no sword.

And it is not like we don't have other damage effects, forget Bigby's hand, flaming sphere can do more damage than this.
Quick proof
Flaming Sphere 7th level slot
7d6 damage, 24.5 save for half 12.25
Dex save is pretty reliable but let's go 50/50 anyway
Average about 18.3, each turn
So by round 2 (36.6 damage) we are doing more damage than Mordenkienen's sword.
Note if we use the same rate as the sword (60% chance for save miss)
25.6 average damage, we already beat the sword round 1

And we tend to have effects that do damage in addition to other effects, Evard's Black Tentacles for example is a small damage hit (but also a lower level spell and AoE) but also restrains targets.

Mordenkienen's sword is slow, low damage, resource intensive, and only does damage. It is the worst 7th level spell in the game, and one of the worst spells in the game in general.
For the low, low, cost of a 7th level spell slot and your concentration, you can be outdamaged by a 5th level barbarian, so that's something going for it.

[prototype00]

If nobody has mentioned it yet, it’s the only (?) way to get force damage on all your 7th level spells for an Order of Scribes wizard, so that’s useful.

[OracleofWuffing]

So, then, where should his eponymous sword be sitting?

From what I gather? Mounted atop the mantel in his mansion, possibly below a self-portrait.

[Tanarii]

As one of the few attack roll spells, clearly the intended use is to cast True Strike the round before to make sure it hits.

[Witty Username]

Fair enough. That doesn't mean that Mordenkainen is an incompetent. If he's even half as good as he thinks he is, he's pretty darned amazing, and the lore seems to agree he IS pretty darned amazing.

So, then, where should his eponymous sword be sitting?

I have a head canon that Mordenkainen has an arcane focus that is intended to function as an amplifier for the spell, which is why the base spell is as weak as it is. I was homebrewing an item at one point:
Dagger of Mordenkainen; Legendary Magic item (requires attunement by a wizard)
While attuned to this item you gain the following effects:
- You may cast the spell Mordenkainen's Sword, as if the spell was prepared by you, and you may use this dagger as the material component of the spell
- You may copy the spell Mordenkainen's Sword into your spellbook, using the normal costs of coping a spell of 1st level or higher into the book
- when you make an attack with the Mordenkainen's Sword spell, either as part of the casting of the spell or as a bonus action during its duration, you may make 2 attacks instead of 1 as part of that action, additionally the sword deals an extra 1d10 force damage on a hit with its attacks.

That was what I came up with,
I was planning on making a bunch of magic items themed around giving a more powerful version of otherwise lackluster spells, but I never finished the project.

The 60ft initial summoning range for the sword is important too, as that is counterspell range. Bigby's Hand meanwhile can be summoned safely outside of that. And Crown of Stars, the superior option to both if all you want is bonus action damage from that slot, can be reliably cast out of combat entirely.

Point of interest, one of the big advantages of Mordenkainen's Sword is that it is potent CS bait, as basically any attempt to counterspell it is likely to fail, and it is not a significant loss for the sword to be countered. Being able to cast it out of CS range would make it weaker.

[Tanarii]

Point of interest, one of the big advantages of Mordenkainen's Sword is that it is potent CS bait, as basically any attempt to counterspell it is likely to fail, and it is not a significant loss for the sword to be countered. Being able to cast it out of CS range would make it weaker.

Bait it with a cantrip. That doesn't cost you a slot or (if it succeeds) concentration. And you do the same damage.

[Particle_Man]

Absolutely.

However, since Mordenkainen is unarguably portrayed as some kind of buffoon whose arrogance frequently leads into incompetence in all the 5e books in which he appears personally (or near), I think that the spell fits.

Of note, his appearances/mentions have him:

Spoiler: Spoilers for books and official modules

Show

-Nearly turn himself into Demogorgon's brainwashed slave by experimenting on the Demon Prince's symbol witjout precautions.

-Lose to Strahd and get his mind scrambled.

-Get made fun of by Tasha, with the implication she is a better wizard or at least smarter than him not challenged.

-Go on about the Balance when it's implied his interventions are at best of little consequences and at worse only self-serving.

-Confidently declare that Halflings are not lucky.

That is not to say he is an idiot who's entirely incompetent (that would be deep flanderization), as he is still a forbidable mage, but 5e does portray him comically, with little to no attempt to give him dignity or show him respect-worthy.

This theory makes me wonder about the other “Mordenkainen’s” spells. Are all of them substandard?

[Thunderous Mojo]

This theory makes me wonder about the other “Mordenkainen’s” spells. Are all of them substandard?

I would say no. Faithful Hound has it’s uses, (especially when combined with Forcecage).

Magnificent Mansion, is a bit ostentatious, but that is also part of the spell’s charm. In a war theme campaign, I ran a few years back, a player used Magnificent Mansion as a medical hospital and food bank.

(The Mansion prepares a Nine Course meal for up to 100 people.)

The 5e version of Mordenkainen’s Sword is garbage.

The 2e version, let the Wizard use the Fighter Attack matrix like a Fighter half their level, could hit anything regardless of AC on a D20 roll of 19+, could bypass all Magic Resistance, (which was based off the + value of a magic item in AD&D, not just being magical), and had a long duration.

Even with this, I would not say I considered it a great spell back in AD&D.

I would, however, consider it very poor form, indeed, if the D&D Design team created a trap option just to dunk on Mordenkainen.

Mordenkainen, was one of Gary Gygax’s personal characters. Lawyers fees were paid to negotiate if Gary could still use the character, as part of Gygax’s exit from TSR. Mocking a beloved PC of one of the creators of the genre, seems petty.

Re-imaging Mordenkainen as a twit, and Iggwiliv as being Tasha from the eponymous spell, are creative choices I dislike.

[Psyren]

Point of interest, one of the big advantages of Mordenkainen's Sword is that it is potent CS bait, as basically any attempt to counterspell it is likely to fail, and it is not a significant loss for the sword to be countered. Being able to cast it out of CS range would make it weaker.

1) That's not unique to MS though, any 7th-level spell will have the same dubious protection of a counter not being automatic. So personally, I'd rather use that slot on something that might actually turn the tables, than prepare and cast a weak spell in the hopes that they "only" manage to get me to waste my one 7th-level slot and my action, or be left with something underwhelming if it manages to go through.

2) Likeliness to fail depends on the monster - their stats aren't capped like ours are, and they may not even need slots to counter anything.

Bait it with a cantrip. That doesn't cost you a slot or (if it succeeds) concentration. And you do the same damage.

Yeah, that too.

[Segev]

As another point of comparison, draconic transformation from Fizban's Treasury of Dragons allows, as one of three effects, you to breathe a 60- foot cone of 6d8 (save for half) force damage each round for its one minute duration. While there is something to be said for not having to do AoE if you don't want to, the guaranteed half of the damage from the breath weapon is almost as good as the on-hit damage from Mordenkainen's sword.

[Unoriginal]

I would say no. Faithful Hound has itÂ’s uses, (especially when combined with Forcecage).

Magnificent Mansion, is a bit ostentatious, but that is also part of the spellÂ’s charm. In a war theme campaign, I ran a few years back, a player used Magnificent Mansion as a medical hospital and food bank.

(The Mansion prepares a Nine Course meal for up to 100 people.)

I have to agree with this analysis. In particular, Mordenkainen's Magnificient Mansion is a marvel of magic.

However, I would say all of Mordenkainen's spells have a "X spell, but more" feel.The Faithful Hound is Alarm, but it bites. The Magnificient Mansion is Demiplane, but with comfort and food. And the Sword is Bigby's Hand, but bad.

The 2e version, let the Wizard use the Fighter Attack matrix like a Fighter half their level, could hit anything regardless of AC on a D20 roll of 19+, could bypass all Magic Resistance, (which was based off the + value of a magic item in AD&D, not just being magical), and had a long duration.

Even with this, I would not say I considered it a great spell back in AD&D.

Didn't casters level up slower than Fighters, in AD&D? "Like a Fighter half your level" sounds like less than impressive, but I can't judge for sure.

I would, however, consider it very poor form, indeed, if the D&D Design team created a trap option just to dunk on Mordenkainen.

To be 100% clear, I don't think WotC did that intentionally. I'm just saying it's fitting so I imagine that for fun.

Mordenkainen, was one of Gary GygaxÂ’s personal characters. Lawyers fees were paid to negotiate if Gary could still use the character, as part of GygaxÂ’s exit from TSR. Mocking a beloved PC of one of the creators of the genre, seems petty.

Re-imaging Mordenkainen as a twit

From what I've read, Gygax himself was playing Mordenkainen as a twit and liked him that way. I see it more as tongue-in-cheek teasing.

For the Tasha thing, I'm lead to understand it was already the case in past lore. As in, at some point in AD&D or before the two characters were reimagined as one.

[Arkhios]

Who is Mordaiken? I know only of Mordenkainen, Gary Gygax's portmonteau of Mordecai and Lemminkäinen.

Just kidding. As it's one of the oldest spells in the game's almost 50-year history, I believe it's been brought into 5th edition purely for its legacy value. Sure, it could be better, but traditionally it's always been a 7th-level spell.

So, I would insist that the main point of the spell is that it has a long history with the game.

[Scots Dragon]

Absolutely.

However, since Mordenkainen is unarguably portrayed as some kind of buffoon whose arrogance frequently leads into incompetence in all the 5e books in which he appears personally (or near), I think that the spell fits.

Of note, his appearances/mentions have him:

Spoiler: Spoilers for books and official modules

Show

-Nearly turn himself into Demogorgon's brainwashed slave by experimenting on the Demon Prince's symbol witjout precautions.

-Lose to Strahd and get his mind scrambled.

-Get made fun of by Tasha, with the implication she is a better wizard or at least smarter than him not challenged.

-Go on about the Balance when it's implied his interventions are at best of little consequences and at worse only self-serving.

-Confidently declare that Halflings are not lucky.

That is not to say he is an idiot who's entirely incompetent (that would be deep flanderization), as he is still a forbidable mage, but 5e does portray him comically, with little to no attempt to give him dignity or show him respect-worthy.

God I hate this bloody edition so much.

[Unoriginal]

God I hate this bloody edition so much.

Question 1: which edition treated Mordenkainen with dignity? Because I don't recal any.

Question 2: if you hate it that much, why are you on a 5e subforum, discussing high-level spells?

[Thunderous Mojo]

Didn't casters level up slower than Fighters, in AD&D? "Like a Fighter half your level" sounds like less than impressive, but I can't judge for sure.

Magic Users had the most onerous XP requirements to level, until the Barbarian class was introduced in Unearthed Arcana.

A 14th level Magic User had a base THACO of 16, while a 7th level Fighter had a base THACO of 14. In 5e terms, it would be similar to adding a +2 to hit.

As a Magic User Leveled up, the advantage gained by using the Fighter Matrix waned. A 20th level Magic User had a base THACO of 13, while a 10th level Fighter had a base THACO of 12.

For the Tasha thing, I'm lead to understand it was already the case in past lore. As in, at some point in AD&D or before the two characters were reimagined as one.

I believe we can thank Erik Mona for the Tasha= Iggwiliv idea.
When Paizo ran Dragon/Dungeon Magazine back in the days of 3e, Erik Mona included a little blurb that Iggwiliv was a pseudonym for Tasha, in Dragon Magazine.

One of the last books published by WotC for 3e was Expedition to Castle Greyhawk, if I remember correctly. I think, Erik Mona might have possibly also slipped the Iggwiliv=Tasha idea into that product as well.

[Scots Dragon]

Question 1: which edition treated Mordenkainen with dignity? Because I don't recal any.

There's a considerable difference between being treated as the flawed figure with backwards and flawed views about the Balance, and being effectively treated as a punching bag by the rules and lore at large who can't get literally anything right.

Being taken down by someone whose current stats are half your level as an arcane spellcaster is beyond pathetic.

Question 2: if you hate it that much, why are you on a 5e subforum, discussing high-level spells?

Because I saw someone mentioning Mordenkainen's Sword in the little preview pane and I am a woman driven most by morbid curiosity.

[ProsecutorGodot]

If nobody has mentioned it yet, it’s the only (?) way to get force damage on all your 7th level spells for an Order of Scribes wizard, so that’s useful.

Radiant is a far superior damage type and its accessible on a spell that you would likely want to use over MS anyway in Crown of Stars.

As of Fizbans, Draconic Transformation also gives you force damage.

To be 100% clear, I don't think WotC did that intentionally. I'm just saying it's fitting so I imagine that for fun.

I'm also a fan of this theory, and just because he's often (clearly unintentionally) making a fool of himself when the players do find him doesn't discredit the numerous actually impressive achievements he's made in the history of D&D.

And he's not always portrayed as someone who puts himself into danger without a thought:

Spoiler: Adventure Spoilers

Show

In Descent into Avernus you can encounter him in his dimension shifting tower addressing an amassment of yugoloth in hopes of becoming his hired hands. I believe this is the encounter you refer to when saying "goes on about balance but is ultimately self serving"

He does understand that this is a dangerous place though, and only presents a Simulacrum of himself to the crowds and is able to leave immediately if he thinks his life would be threatened. He's also "cunning" in that he recognizes that there could be powerful rivals in Avernus that could threaten him and attempts to fool the PC's into removing his competition. I believe he does have genuine beliefs in the "Balance" but his hubris (which is the primary cause of his other failings imo) is what would make him use even his own good intentions (the effectiveness of this philosophy is up for debate of course) for personal gain

Which isn't a trait exclusive to Mordenkainen as an Archmage, he's just the one who most often is seen making mistakes.

Being taken down by someone whose current stats are half your level as an arcane spellcaster is beyond pathetic.

Even when they're a technically undefeatable vampire who has some level of power over the entire demiplane he's locked away in? It's obviously not a good look that Mordenkainen eventually lost in his battle against Strahd but it's certainly misleading to say "he lost to an arcane caster half as skilled as him".

[Dork_Forge]

Greater Invisibility, done.

Thanks for an actual example, I'm not sure if you think you disproved what I said, which was that most spells don't have extreme range for that purpose, but Greater Invis is a good one. Hardly bulletproof with things like Truesight and Blindsight being more common in higher levels, complex encounters more often right? But a good option still.

You said 3 round combat:

Round 1, you cast it and hit twice. On their turn, they move 30ft away or more.
Round 2, you move it towards them and fail to reach. Zero damage.
Round 3, you reach them again (assuming they didn't move again) and hit once.

Total, 3 hits in 3 rounds, just like the Hand gets. Assuming they don't just play keep away after the first round.

Ahh, you meant that it would be cancelled out overall, I thought you meant that the specific additional attack would be shut down. Yeah not getting to make all the attacks would be a negative, though you could also spin that as forcing the the monster to move in certain directions or face those attacks. But again, not getting to make attacks is a minority of circumstances ime.

Very rare occurrence (usually negative).

Learn something new everyday!

That matches what I said, yes. Though since you have freedom to place it and 60ft move on top of that, it's not that hard to get a monster to waste their AoE on it in a way that is advantageous to the party, or else needing to ignore it. For example, you could put it behind that Behir so it's forced to choose between zapping your Hand or your Fighter. MS meanwhile doesn't provide that opportunity.

At no point would I assume that a creature is using their AOE specifically to attack the hand, I don't really think that makes sense either, nor can I really see a case where if I were going to use a big damage AOE, the mosnter would choose a construct of force instead of the living thing it's fighting, maybe hoping to eat. My point was that it can, and is decently likely, to be caught in AOEs from both sides.

80 is the MINIMUM I’d expect a Wizard to have in HP at level 13.

They get 54 base, so with a mere +2 Con mod, they’d have 80.

Different strokes, but I would never assume all Wizards have at least a +2 Con. It's useful for them sure, but it's a tertiary stat that many players ime wouldn't invest that much in for either build reasons or thematic reasons.

In later levels when they've had a surplus of ASIs I think it would be more reasonable to expect a higher Con.

At 3d10 damage, it is on par with firebolt, so the action cast represents effectively 0 damage, it does win out as you can follow up with the bonus action the turn you cast it.

So, do you just not value damage type at all? Or was it overlooked?

For fun let's compare this with Finger of Death (the only similarity is does damage really)
7d8+30, average 61.5 damage, 30.75 on a successful save.
Assuming a 50/50 shot
Average about 46 damage
How many rounds of combat does Mordenkienen's sword need to be up to match damage, let's assume 60% accuracy:
3d10, 16.5 average × .6 = 9.9 average
Round 1: 19.8 (action and bonus action)
Round 2: 29.7
Round 3: 39.6
-Round 4: 49.5-

So for a fairly banal damage spell, it takes Mordenkienen's sword a longer than average combat to start wining out.

I honestly don't know the numbers on this, but '50/50 shot' on a monster's Con save in Tier 3+ seems generous. Besides being a typically strong save, this doesn't take into consideration Magic Resistance and Legendary Resistances. Attacks are generally easier to make stick in higher levels than magical saves. That doesn't even take into consideration it's easier to boost attacks than it is to sap enemy saves.

TBH I don't like accuracy adjusted maths, I find it misleading to the experience, so I don't really practice that form of maths so I'm mostly going to be listing questions for someone with a better maths foundation to address:

- Are you addressing the crit chance of MS? A damage consideration that doesn't apply to FoD

- 60% seems real low, with a +10 to hit that would be a target AC of 20? The quick monster stats table gives an AC of 18 for CR 13-16, with the table not even hitting 20. 70% or higher seems more reasonable here.

Even just changing the accuracy to 70% makes it 3 rounds to surpass FoD. A smaller note, but FoD just seems like straight maths, not D&D maths. Saving on 61 damage is 30, since you round down no matter the decimal. I doubt that would change the result much, but it stood out.

Furthermore, Mordenkienen's sword takes concentration, for clerics the big draw of spiritual weapon is it is both a bonus action cast (combos with a cantrip/weapon attack) and non-concentration so it can cooperate with your bless/spirit guardians/etc. Mordenkienen's sword doesn't have this boon, so if you need a control spell to survive the long, probably difficult combat, no sword.

It being different from SW is a good thing, it's interesting design instead of 'here's arcane SW with a different name.' I'm not really sure what the need to have a control spell at the same time is about, just doing damage is a thing. But sure, why not blind them? No concentration, gives advantage for the sword...

And it is not like we don't have other damage effects, forget Bigby's hand, flaming sphere can do more damage than this.
Quick proof
Flaming Sphere 7th level slot
7d6 damage, 24.5 save for half 12.25
Dex save is pretty reliable but let's go 50/50 anyway
Average about 18.3, each turn
So by round 2 (36.6 damage) we are doing more damage than Mordenkienen's sword.
Note if we use the same rate as the sword (60% chance for save miss)
25.6 average damage, we already beat the sword round 1

So... it being fire damage not a consideration at all? Still nothing about how monsters get save defenses outside their modifier?

But sure, how about the fact that Flaming Sphere is environmentally challenged?

And we tend to have effects that do damage in addition to other effects, Evard's Black Tentacles for example is a small damage hit (but also a lower level spell and AoE) but also restrains targets.

Yes, it's a completely different kind of spell.

Mordenkienen's sword is slow, low damage, resource intensive, and only does damage. It is the worst 7th level spell in the game, and one of the worst spells in the game in general.
For the low, low, cost of a 7th level spell slot and your concentration, you can be outdamaged by a 5th level barbarian, so that's something going for it.

Worst 7th level spell and one of the worst spells in the game? Now that's some mighty lofty labels. I don't think I'd put it below Divine Word, Dream of the Blue Veil, Power Word Pain, Sequester, or Tether Essence. And those are just its fellow 7th level spells...

On the damage front let's also be realistic here, the Wizards most likely to choose this spell are Evocation and Scribes. Evocation changes the damage significantly and Scribes gets to use it to make whatever other 7th level spell force. A War Wizard can also use it well, being able to benefit from pretty much all of their subclass features connected to a single spell.

It's almost as if looking at things in isolation is an incomplete way to evaluate them.

If nobody has mentioned it yet, it’s the only (?) way to get force damage on all your 7th level spells for an Order of Scribes wizard, so that’s useful.

A very good point.

[oogaboogagoblin]

A lot of people are bringing up the lore implications of this spell, but if thats why it sucks that's even more stupid in my opinion. Even if the campaign centers around mordaiken, the lore around this spell will only be a fun fact, and as the spell stands now the only PCs that will take this are very specific gimmick characters, the concept of mordaiken thinking he can one up bigby or bigby improving on mordaikens design is pretty cool, but kind of worthless to the actual game.

[Segev]

Expanding on the comparison to FTD's draconic transformation, we have three spells to compare Mordenkainen's sword to: blade of disaster, crown of stars, and draconic transformation.

Blade of disaster has the same duration as Mordenkainen's sword, the same range and action to use (but better action economy to cast), moves faster to new targets, and attacks twice with a melee spell attack that does 4d12 damage each time. It is also a 9th level conjuration spell.

Crown of stars has an hour duration with no concentration, which is pretty amazing if you find the light it sheds to be an advantage or neutral rather than a detriment. Where blade of disaster and Mordenkainen's sword have a range of 60 feet to the initial target and can extend further with time to keep up with a slowly fleeing enemy (or stick around while YOU flee, as long as you stay in line of sight), this has a much better range of 120 feet, but you can't extend that range (which, ultimately, is a pretty small price). It has better action economy than Mordenkainen's sword if it's precast (which is reasonably easy to do with its hour long duration), and is worse if not precast (since you can't launch a star on the action you cast it). It does 4d12 radiant damage on a ranged spell attack up to 7 times (assuming they all hit). This can be spread out throughout the hour. Note that, despite having no limits to number of uses, both Mordenkainen's sword and blade of disaster have a maximum of 10 rounds in which they can be used. Blade of disaster thus has a maximum of 20 hits, and Mordenkainen's sword has a maximum of 11 (because you can use it in the action you cast it, and also as a bonus action on that first round; you can only use it as a bonus action in subsequent rounds).

Draconic transformation has additional effects that recommend it, making it probably the best of these 7th level spells. It is also only a bonus action to cast, and allows its breath weapon as part of that bonus action AND as a bonus action on each subsequent turn. IT also gives you a flying speed, so you can maneuver yourself up to 60 feet per round to position yourself, rather than 20 or 30 feet of movement for the sword spells, or having to keep the enemy within 120 feet using whatever other movement you have for the crown of stars. (Admittedly, with no concentration on the crown, you can have other magics for movement pretty easily.) It does 6d8 force damage to every creature that fails a save in a 60 foot cone, and half that to those that succeed on the save.


Damage-wise, pretending everything always hits and nothing succeeds on a save, the spells have the following DPR and total damage expectations (the formulae for the spell attacks is complex due to the critical chances):

• Blade of disaster:
  
  • [(4d12x[17/20])+(12d12x[3/20])]x2 = 67.6
    
    • This one has an improved critical range of 18-20 and an improved critical damage total of 12d12 rather than the usual doubling to 8d12.
  • 67.6x10 = 676 expected total damage over the full minute if the one fight it's used in lasts that long
  • 67.6x4 = 270.4 expected damage over a 4-round combat
• Crown of stars:
  
  • (4d12 x [19/20])+(8d12 x [1/20]) = 27.3 expected DPR (note: this one does radiant rather than force damage; the others all do force)
  • 27.3 x7 = 191.1 expected damage if all seven stars are used
  • This spell has a reasonable expectation of getting its full damage potential out there because of its duration allowing it to spread over multiple combats.
• Draconic transformation:
  
  • 6d8 = 27 expected DPR (to a single target; with a 60 foot cone, this can hit a lot of targets...but it also can be harder to use when allies are involved)
    
    • Critical hits are impossible here, and we're ignoring miss chance/successful saves.
    • Note that this has an expected DPR of 13 even if we assume everything makes their saves, whereas if everything misses with the other spells, they do 0 damage per round.
  • 27 x10 = 270 expected total damage to a single target hit every round with the breath weapon for the full minute duration.
  • 27 x4 = 108 expected total damage over a 4-round combat
• Mordenkainen's sword:
  
  • (3d10 x [19/20]) + (6d10 x [1/20]) = 16.275 expected DPR
  • 16.275 x11 = 179.025 expected total damage over the full duration
  • 16.725 x 5 = 83.625 expected total damage over a 4-round combat

While the blade of disaster does by far the most single-target damage, it is important to remember that this is also a 9th level spell, so had better be doing a lot more than the others. I am still not sure it's worth the 9th level slot. Its improved crit range and damage adds a fair bit, and probably adds still more when you factor in that the critical hits land every time regardless of AC.

Mordenkainen's sword comes out behind in damage by all measures. It's worth noting that any reduction to damage expectations based on miss chances applies at least as much to Mordenkainen's sword as it does to blade of disaster, and the only way crown of stars comes out behind in that estimation is if your target is within 5 feet of you (because otherwise, the to hit chances are the same). You almost certainly are not concerned with enemies constantly being within 5 feet of you when you attack them; if they are, you probably are using a different spell to get the heck out of their bad touch range. Compared to draconic transformation, every "miss" with it is much less of a loss, since it's still doing half damage. So draconic transformation outperforms both of the other 7th level spells under all conditions save the one where you need specifically single-target damage and can't aim the cone to exclude your allies. It VASTLY out-performs Mordenkainen's sword. If there are even two targets you want to hurt, it keeps up with the 9th level blade of disaster pretty well, too. And all of that is before remembering that draconic transformation does half damage on a "miss" rather than none, and comes with flight and blindsight, too.

And, actually, in a 4-round combat, where we make the most-favorable-to-the-attack-spells assumption that every hit lands and every save fails, draconic transformation keeps up with the single-target damage output of blade of disaster.

If we assume that crown of stars is paying for its long duration without concentration with decreased damage potential, then I would say that draconic transformation is either overpowered at 7th level, given all it does, or should be the benchmark. I'm leaning towards "the benchmark." This means that I think blade of disaster should actually be level 7, itself. Maybe the simplest solution is to replace Mordenkainen's sword's spell text with that of blade of disaster, and keep its name, level, range, components, etc. the same as they currently are.