D&D 5E Let's list the "broken" spells

ZombieRoboNinja · Aug 27, 2014

yakuba said:
Polymorph only allows you to take the form of a beast. This also limits you to CR8 according to kerbarian

He's probably talking about True Polymorph, which is certainly very exploitable but is also a level 9 spell.

Polymorphing an ally is less likely to result in a million concentration saves, and both resilience and war caster are good enough abilities that you'll probably want at least one of them on your spellcaster. But yes, this is a limiting factor. I'm a bit worried about the idea of using the monsters in the MM as a limiting factor, though; all it takes is one cr18 turbo-dinosaur in the Eberron splatbook or whatever and the problem reappears. It's one of few spells in the game that scales up as powerfully as it does without requiring higher spell slots.

variant · Aug 28, 2014

ZombieRoboNinja said:
He's probably talking about True Polymorph, which is certainly very exploitable but is also a level 9 spell. Polymorphing an ally is less likely to result in a million concentration saves, and both resilience and war caster are good enough abilities that you'll probably want at least one of them on your spellcaster. But yes, this is a limiting factor. I'm a bit worried about the idea of using the monsters in the MM as a limiting factor, though; all it takes is one cr18 turbo-dinosaur in the Eberron splatbook or whatever and the problem reappears. It's one of few spells in the game that scales up as powerfully as it does without requiring higher spell slots.

All it takes is one Dispel Magic and both Polymorph and True Polymorph is nullified.

pemerton · Aug 28, 2014

Sadras said:
As for the rest of the "problematic" spells listed on this thread, I think a lot of the posters are forgetting that most of the spells they are commenting on as broken and what not are high level spells which equates to high level play

<snip>

Not all DMs are skilled enough to run high level adventures (I myself have little experience above 10th).

I do not have experience at GMing 5e above 10th level, but have a lot of experience at GMing high level AD&D, 4e and Rolemaster.

In my experience, it is not true that, at those levels, broken wackiness on the GM side cancels out broken wackiness on the player side. Rather, the result of that tends to be either stagnation or rocket tag.

Sound action economy, effect balancing, rock-paper-scissors options, etc, remain as important in high level play as in low level play. The stakes in the fiction change; but the mechanics should still be doing their job, of making the shared fiction (i) possible and (ii) fun.

Elf Witch · Aug 28, 2014

Pickles JG said:
My friend Richard playing 3.5 had consecutive weeks where he was stunned for several rounds, ie most of the evening by a mind flayer, petrified by a basilisk & paralysed (IIRC Hold person). It was not interesting.

That can suck but tell what is the solution no spells that inconvenience characters? What about death. I once had a character die in one session get raised the next and then turn around and die again. I admit it was not really fun and rather frustrating. But death is part of the game as are spells that that kill, paralyze and do other nasty things to PCs.

pemerton · Aug 28, 2014

drjones said:
I would much rather have vague spells that are short, concise and open ended enough to inspire creativity than long, carefully delineated spells with every corner case stamped out to ensure pure mathematical balance. There is a referee at the table, unless your group are young or not well adjusted I don't see why 'no you can't use that power in that way because it would obviously break the game' would not satisfy them.

What I don't get is that we could generalise this to all spells (as some games do, like, say, HeroWars/Quest). Fireball could just be "You create a fiery explosing 20' in diameter" and leave the GM to ajdudicate the effect of that on people caught in the blast, to decide who gets to make DEX/Acro checks to escape the blast, etc.

Presumably there is a reason that, in D&D, instead of a pure descriptor we actually give the fireball spell rules for damage, saving throws etc.

Whatever that reason is (and I'll leave it to others to work out exactly what it might be), why does it not also apply to Forcecage? Reverse Gravity? Etc.

Quartz · Aug 28, 2014

Dausuul said:
Don't have my PHB in front of me, but my recollection is that the spell takes effect instantly. The saving throws are to determine whether you shake off the effect, or whether you're stuck with it for the next week.

I've reread the description, and you're right.

Sadras · Aug 28, 2014

pemerton said:
In my experience, it is not true that, at those levels, broken wackiness on the GM side cancels out broken wackiness on the player side. Rather, the result of that tends to be either stagnation or rocket tag.

That's not what I was implying. Yes spells are powerful at high level but a lot of posters seem to be isolating "powerful" spells without having:
a) Correctly assessed the spells' limitations through play; and
b) The type of adventures that are set for that level of play.

Sound action economy, effect balancing, rock-paper-scissors options, etc, remain as important in high level play as in low level play. The stakes in the fiction change; but the mechanics should still be doing their job, of making the shared fiction (i) possible and (ii) fun.

No disagreement here.

keterys · Aug 28, 2014

Until the DMG comes out (and explains how diseases work), I'd suggest against using contagion (as a PC or monster). That gives plenty of time for an FAQ to clarify, or to find out that it's not an in-combat spell but more of a plot spell, because there are no combat effects until an incubation time (3 saves, or even an hour or whatever) elapses.

Gladius Legis · Aug 28, 2014

Well, for what it's worth, Mearls just said on Twitter here and here that you can't cast spells through a Wall of Force.

I know his ad hoc rules assertions haven't always been ... satisfying, to say the least, but I guess there's that to consider?

MoutonRustique · Aug 28, 2014

The way I read silence means that around 6th or 7th level, you cannot make a significant fight against a level 1000 wizard if there is a cleric in the party w/o special considerations that are in place specifically to neuter the cleric.

That, I interpret as broken in the sense of not being able to play w/o contingency plans specifically in place to counter said spell.

Other way around, around 6th or 7th level, if the party attacks a bunch of cleric types, it means that the party casters can do nothing of value w/o assistance of their non-caster party members (which can be a good thing, depending on situation.) This I interpret as of great concern - anything that can lockout a player type is a serious consideration...

I don't understand how I'm reading this wrong, but, from my understanding, with the typical combat length of 5e, having access to 2-3 silence spells fundamentally changes how the game plays...

D&D 5E Let's list the "broken" spells

ZombieRoboNinja

First Post

variant

Adventurer

pemerton

Legend

Elf Witch

First Post

pemerton

Legend

Quartz

Hero

Sadras

Legend

keterys

First Post

Gladius Legis

Legend

MoutonRustique

Explorer

Similar Threads