D&D 5E Considering new ritual spells

[I'm A Banana]

I do believe "no cost" is ignoring the time cost of casting the spell and the spell component cost. It also ignores material component cost. Gate, for example, costs a diamond worth 5,000 gp. NOTE: that's not "costs 5,000gp," you have to find a single diamond that large. I don't have time right now to check the DMG, but I don't think those are all that common.

Time isn't a significant barrier to ritual casting most of the time. Gold/material components may or may not be depending on the campaign and the roll of the treasure dice, and so aren't a reliable balancing mechanism. It's comparable to saying, like, "you instantly crit on all your attacks, but, like, all dwarves hate you."

...more stuff...

I'm not really interested in getting into a point-for-point rebuttal here. You asked what the cons were, and I described what was likely. If you don't think they're "actual" or if you're fine with those downsides, go wild, I ain't your daddy, you don't need my permission.

If you do this, you're ramping up the power of spellcasters (and wizards specifically) at your tables. Maybe that's fine! Maybe it is something you want to re-think on that basis. I dunno! Either way, enjoy the game.

 

[Dausuul]

I have some errands to run, but when I return, I'll respond.
I do believe "no cost" is ignoring the time cost of casting the spell and the spell component cost. It also ignores material component cost. Gate, for example, costs a diamond worth 5,000 gp.

That's a one-time cost, which you'd have to pay anyway if you want to be able to cast gate. Spell components are not consumed in casting unless the spell says so. You only need to buy the diamond once, and then you can cast gate as many times as you want.

As for the time cost, 10 minutes is enough to ensure that the spell is not castable in combat, but it's not significant enough to be a major factor for most of these. For example, 10 minutes to cast arcane eye and scout everything is a no-brainer if it doesn't cost a spell slot. That 4th-level slot cost is what forces a mid-level wizard to stop and think before busting out the spell. (And trust me when I say that if you've never had a player with a permanently invisible flying scout, you have no idea how annoying it is. One of my PCs is a Pact of the Chain warlock with an imp familiar. Any time the party enters a dungeon, everything that's not behind a door gets scouted by this freakin' stealth drone. Ritual arcane eye would be twice as bad; at least my player had to spend one of his class features on the imp, and the imp is fairly easy to kill if it does get detected.)

 

[Dausuul]

(on arcane eye): As long as all you want to be scouting is within 30ft. Not really scouting.

No. Once a spell is cast, its effects are not limited by its range unless the spell says so. You can send the eye as far as you like.

(on banishment): You have to know about the creature ahead of time so that you can get something distasteful to it.

No. If a spell's components don't have a gold piece value listed, you don't need them as long as you have a spell focus or a component pouch.

(on etherealness): If you are going to use this to scout, remember that you've got a 60ft visual range. Which means that any enemy you stumble across is likely to see you long before you see them.

"Creatures that aren’t on the Ethereal Plane can’t perceive you and can’t interact with you, unless a special ability or magic has given them the ability to do so."

(on gate): Limited by how many 5000gp diamonds you can find and this is a ninth level spell.

You only need one diamond to cast it all day. Components are not consumed in casting unless the spell says so.

(on trap the soul): I don't have the details of that spell on hand, but I believe most of my responses to your comments on Banishment apply.

Okay, seriously, what the heck? You're considering ritualizing a spell whose text you have never once read. I know that you have never read this text, because it doesn't exist. There's a reason you don't have the details on hand: That spell is nowhere in the PHB. Its name was included on the wizard list by mistake.

I think it's crazy to slap the ritual tag on a bunch of spells whose workings you have paid so little attention to. If you want to do it anyway, knock yourself out. It's your game. But you asked for feedback, and my feedback is, you're opening up the door for a wizard player who knows the rules to stomp all over your adventures.

 

[Leatherhead]

10 minutes is too long for combat, so the damage objection is mostly moot.

I take it you don't recall the paper-ball of death from 3.x? The one where you just cast Explosive Runes over and over, and store them, until you do all the force damage you can possibly need?

This curbs such behavior, which would be the same for any trap or ward spell that does damage. For other direct damage spells, like Fireball, adding a ritual tag would be pointless, so you shouldn't expend time in trying to add the tag.

So yes, it's maximum over-cheese, or useless, and not worth the time in either case.

Mind you, I'm not worried about a Conjure Army, Concentration would make that impossible to begin with.

Healing objection is also iffy at best, because healing outside of combat is easy, ritual cure wounds isn't going to change that.

This is the guy who wants combat healing removed and cure spells ritualized. The process is far more intensive and tricky than you imply. Especially once you consider you are going from an hour rest and spending healing surges to an 11 min downtime with no daily resources spent.

As for the level objection, could you extrapolate your reasoning on that one?

Because high level spells are extremely powerful, and high level spell slots are at a premium. The only class that can convert for multiple high level slots doesn't get ritual casting as a default rule. Also the Devs didn't do it, presumably for the same reasons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I take it you don't recall the paper-ball of death from 3.x? The one where you just cast Explosive Runes over and over, and store them, until you do all the force damage you can possibly need?

This curbs such behavior, which would be the same for any trap or ward spell that does damage. For other direct damage spells, like Fireball, adding a ritual tag would be pointless, so you shouldn't expend time in trying to add the tag.

So yes, it's maximum over-cheese, or useless, and not worth the time in either case.

Mind you, I'm not worried about a Conjure Army, Concentration would make that impossible to begin with.



This is the guy who wants combat healing removed and cure spells ritualized. The process is far more intensive and tricky than you imply. Especially once you consider you are going from an hour rest and spending healing surges to an 11 min downtime with no daily resources spent.



Because high level spells are extremely powerful, and high level spell slots are at a premium. The only class that can convert for multiple high level slots doesn't get ritual casting as a default rule. Also the Devs didn't do it, presumably for the same reasons.

id rather work out exceptions to cover abuses than disallow thematically appropriate stuff. If something could be abused like the paper ball of death, write a rule that eliminates that specific abuse. Also, no bag of rats is always just a good general rule.

There re are plenty of good reasons to shoot fireballs as rituals. Sieges, for one. Clearing flammable obstacles. You get the idea.

There is little genuine, at the table difference between an hour short rest and 20 minutes of casting ritual heals, except for the expenditure of HD. Not using any spell slots is already easy during a short rest, so what, other than HD, changes? Heck, my table can't tell the difference if we change short tests to 10-20 minutes anyway.

 

[fuindordm]

Basically, there are two kinds of costs that you can impose on powerful spells: a valuable component or a spell slot. Any powerful spell should have one or both of these costs.

I could see changing Planar Ally to a ritual, because the price of striking a bargain can introduce an enormous cost in its own right. But for most of the spells in the PH, I agree with the designers when spells that have a long casting time still cost a spell slot.

Ben

 

[Li Shenron]

The biggest mistake you can do is make a spell a ritual because "narratively" you feel like it should be.

The main benefit of a ritual is that it doesn't cost a spell slot to cast, and therefore you can keep cast it as many times as you need it.

The main drawback of a ritual is that you cannot cast in combat, or when in a rush (but this is much more rarely the case).

So you just have to ask yourself for each of those spells, will it be ok for you if the Wizard (or whatever) is free to cast spell X at will (but not in combat?).

 

[bedir than]

The biggest mistake you can do is make a spell a ritual because "narratively" you feel like it should be.

The main benefit of a ritual is that it doesn't cost a spell slot to cast, and therefore you can keep cast it as many times as you need it.

The main drawback of a ritual is that you cannot cast in combat, or when in a rush (but this is much more rarely the case).

So you just have to ask yourself for each of those spells, will it be ok for you if the Wizard (or whatever) is free to cast spell X at will (but not in combat?).

If you want to move them to pseudo-rituals for narrative reasons just multiply their casting time by 10.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also add ritual casting to more classes.

And maybe look through the 4e ritual list for anything that's missing

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Are the concentration spells still concentration if they are a ritual (mostly for the conjure spells)?