D&D 5E 'Combo' Spells to increase action economy, bypass cocentration

[CapnZapp]

Now then, about those red spells. While combining Fly and Invisibility is all good and well, it really doesn't add anything to the game - the game already sees characters fly and go invisible (though perhaps not commonly together).

In contrast, let's pick a pair of Concentration spells that Treeantmonk has given red ratings: Crown of Madness and Cloudkill.

(Now please please don't focus on the specific spells. "Crown is not that bad". It's just an example)

Now, what if we could cast a single spell that both manifests the crown (as per the level 2 spell) and "waves of madness" (as per the level 5 spell).

Would this make you use the combo, since you now only need to concentrate on one spell to do both?

Furthermore, what if this was a level 5 spell? If this "Waves from the Madness King" spell would see the usage that neither of the tow original spells enjoy, we will have broadened the spell repertoire and will have genuinely improved the game!


Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[mellored]

The problem with the "Nystuls Approach", that is a generic combiner or off-loader spell...

...is that it is generic. In order to be balanced, it must be priced for its most powerful use case(s).

The problem with making combo spells, is that you need a different spell for each combo.
That's several hundred, if not thousands of different spells to make.

 

[jgsugden]

I wouldn't make a general rule about combining spells. I would homebrew a few of the most common combined spells as there own unique spell and have those as the only combined spells in my game.

GREAT IDEA! That's what I suggested in the first post.

Fly and invisibility would be the most common.
Blur and expedious retreat would be cool too.

Blur + expeditious is a good example I would never have come up with because blur never saw much play in my games, but it is low enough level to combine in a practical way. Other suggestions out there?

The problem with making combo spells, is that you need a different spell for each combo.
That's several hundred, if not thousands of different spells to make.

No. It would either be far, far, far, far more (if you allowed for any possible combination), or just a few. There are about 200 spells floating around out there, and they can combine in an ungodly number of ways (far more than trillions of ways), or you just select the ones that make sense.

For example:

Stalker's Form
Level 5 Transmutation
Material Components: V, S, M (Bottled breath of an Invisible Stalker)
Duration: 1 minute (concentration)

You become invisible and gain a flying speed of 60 until the spell ends. Anything you are wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on your person. When the spell ends you fall if still aloft, unless you can stop the fall.

******

You can tie flight together with invisibility as a flying invisible monster exists (Invisible Stalker). That gives you something to base the concept of the spell around. You have a nice theme, clear mechanics, and you're balancing the spell appropriately - while it still helps wizard use appropriate power levels to bypass some of the concentration limitations that felt too burdensome.

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

So this poses a number of concerns, both as a core mechanic adjustment and as a spell.

As a potential spell, it fails, because it would literally be so useful and game changing that it would absolutely have to be on every spellcasters' list. This creates a number of balance concerns regarding the classes with spells known as an effective "spell tax", and goes against the spirit of some of the casters' fluff, namely sorcerers who don't really have any "named" spells (i.e. Tashas's Hideous Laughter, Mordenkainen's Sword, Tensor's floating disk, etc.). While I find it annoying they don't, the developers chose that for some reason.

More importantly, this sort of "spell tweak" feels more in line with what one would expect from a metamagic sorcerer ability, as every other "game hacking" ability of spells (i.e. not using components via subtle spell, casting a non-cantrip in the same count as another via Quicken spell, casting the same spell on two targets via Twin spell, etc.) in the game thus far is a metamagic option (with the possible exception of the elemental specialist feat). It's kind of supposed to be the sorcerer's thing.

Furthermore, using this as a spell option completely causes issues with warlocks. First, how do you handle it using pact magic? Is that the sort of spell you'd want to autolevel? A "spell slot tax" hurts them a heck of a lot more than other casters in order to have a second concentration spell active and it's arguably a way too useful ability to gate it in such a way.

I would argue that the best way to handle such a potent ability would be either a new metamagic option (sorcerers need the love anyway), or failing that, make it a feat or a core mechanic. I've seen this suggested in the past of giving the caster a cumulative -5 penalty for each spell they are concentrating on any concentration save, and feel it would be fitting if it was a core mechanic. As a feat I'd be inclined to make it require 10th level. I realize it's not really something 5e tends to do with feats, but it really is a POWERFUL ability and frankly makes a caster's progression from a novice to an archemage make more sense.

 

[Stalker0]

I think a generic spell to do this is way too good. Just too many possible combos for abuse.

Specific new spells to combine old spells I think is a good and fun exercise.

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem with making combo spells, is that you need a different spell for each combo.
That's several hundred, if not thousands of different spells to make.

Yes, that's why I suggested to pair up red spells.

That way, you both gain (some) balance and a (great) deal of freedom.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[mellored]

I think a generic spell to do this is way too good. Just too many possible combos for abuse.

Name one.

 

[Quickleaf]

GREAT IDEA! That's what I suggested in the first post.
Blur + expeditious is a good example I would never have come up with because blur never saw much play in my games, but it is low enough level to combine in a practical way. Other suggestions out there?
No. It would either be far, far, far, far more (if you allowed for any possible combination), or just a few. There are about 200 spells floating around out there, and they can combine in an ungodly number of ways (far more than trillions of ways), or you just select the ones that make sense.

For example:

Stalker's Form
Level 5 Transmutation
Material Components: V, S, M (Bottled breath of an Invisible Stalker)
Duration: 1 minute (concentration)

You become invisible and gain a flying speed of 60 until the spell ends. Anything you are wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on your person. When the spell ends you fall if still aloft, unless you can stop the fall.

******

You can tie flight together with invisibility as a flying invisible monster exists (Invisible Stalker). That gives you something to base the concept of the spell around. You have a nice theme, clear mechanics, and you're balancing the spell appropriately - while it still helps wizard use appropriate power levels to bypass some of the concentration limitations that felt too burdensome.

To a player who really enjoyed 3.5e & wants to recreate that play style of uber spell buffing in 5e, that's probably something that would be appreciated.

Not sure how the players of non-magic using classes in your game will feel, but go for it!

Personally, I think of concentration as coming in two forms:

1) Concentrating on magical effects in the world/manipulating others. Walls of fire, detecting thoughts, major image, that sort of thing. I see this form of concentration limited to 1 casting per spellcaster. It would be broken NOT by damaging the caster but with clever ideas (a mirror to distort a major image), skill checks (Deception to fool detect thoughts), or spellcasting (a watery sphere used to extinguish a wall of fire).

2) Concentrating on magical effects on yourself/protecting others. Protection from evil, disguise self, blur, that sort of thing. I see this form of concentration limited to 1 casting per spellcaster, and being broken by damage as per the PHB rules.

I don't see much risk to allowing a spellcaster to concentrate on one spell from each of these categories (e.g. disguise self + detect thoughts, or blur + wall of fire, or major image + protection from evil). I think the potentially game-breaking stuff comes from allowing multiple concentration spells from within one of these categories...such as wall of fire + confusion, or greater invisibility + polymorph.

 

[5ekyu]

As an aside - it would appear the Glyph of Warding Spell Ward would seem to enable some mechanics for casting a concentration spell in a way that avoids the concentration check - at the cost of a (minimum) third level spell slot and 200gp per use. It only applies to single target or AOE spells but no reason it cannot be used for quite a few "get around concentration checks.

if a spell has concentration it says the spell simply runs it full duration (implied no concentration needed.)

using that as a pattern, perhaps some comparisons for some of the "spell options" presented here can have a context to an existing spell.

NOTE did not consult sage compendium to see if the PHB text has been altered.

 

[mellored]

As an aside - it would appear the Glyph of Warding Spell Ward would seem to enable some mechanics for casting a concentration spell in a way that avoids the concentration check

There is also contingency.