D&D 5E Balancing a Homebrew AoE Stun Spell

Esker · Feb 27, 2019

Blue said:
Already put together my comments on the monk in an earlier post, will reiterate here.

I did see them, but I don't feel like you've addressed the resource cost difference. You say that this spell makes a caster outdo the monk at one of their defining class features, but do you think casters also outdo battlemaster fighters with GWF/GWM at doing damage in tier 2 because the wizard can sometimes cause 8d6 damage to a bunch of creatures at a time by hurling a fireball, whereas the fighter can do about that much to three creatures tops only if they invest in a feat, manage to hit multiple times with a -5 penalty, and spend superiority dice? I wouldn't say that. A third level spell slot is a burst resource in a way that a single ki point, or a superiority die (both of which you only have to spend at all if you hit in most cases), isn't. Of course a 3rd level spell is going to have a bigger impact than something you can do almost every round.

Consider a hypothetical character that has access to both stunning strike and this spell, with the same DC for each (I don't know why you'd ever build such a MAD abomination as a Wizard 5 / Monk 5, but it's a theoretical exercise). You're concentrating on... I don't know... Blur, say. What do you do on your turn? Do you take your two attacks and spend a couple of ki points attempting to stun one or two targets, plus a bonus action unarmed strike? Or do you take your whole action and use a third level slot to try to stun two creatures (maybe three if you get really lucky)? In most situations it feels like no contest: I'd almost always attack and do stunning strike. And then again on my next turn. Maybe if I know that I'm up against high AC, high CON, low INT enemies I'd cast the spell instead, since maybe in that circumstance it's worth sacrificing three attacks worth of potential damage this turn, a use of hypnotic pattern or a fireball later in the day, the chance of granting myself advantage on my next turn's attacks, and potentially reducing the number of my allies' attacks that have advantage as well, in order to increase the chances that the stun sticks now. But generally speaking, it seems like stunning strike is a more efficient use of resources.

Esker · Feb 27, 2019

MonkeezOnFire said:
So I think our closes points of comparison are Command and Blindness/Deafness which are pseudo versions of what we're looking for. Comparing to concentration spells will get wonky because I think it's harder to determine how much value you should get by removing the restriction. So at 3rd level command can affect 3 creatures to essentially skip one turn and go prone which is a buff for melee and debuff for ranged attackers. However, Command also has a pretty glaring restriction that the target must understand your language, which rules out a lot of monsters. You currently have the Int < 2 restriction but my gut feeling would be that Command's restriction is harsher. There is the potential for exotic intelligent enemies that don't speak common (like genies for example). So to balance this out you could put in a stricter drawback, which I'd also argue would have to be harsher than Command's as stunned is better than prone. Being tied to a specific creature type or maybe being tied to a condition like Charmed or Poisoned which monsters a pretty commonly immune to.

I hadn't considered the language restriction on command. I like the idea of restricting the types of creatures this can affect. Creatures that lack minds as we usually think of them probably ought to be immune: constructs and undead, for example, and anyone immune to psychic damage. Maybe charm immunity grants advantage. That said, this spell shouldn't be balanced against command at 3rd level, since a 3rd level spell ought to be stronger than a 1st level spell cast at 3rd level.

We could also depower it in a different direction. The spell creation guidelines say that a wide area can make up for a lesser effect, we can infer that the inverse is true. So you could balance it with a small area:
-5 ft radius circle typically only hits 1-2 targets
-15 ft cone requires the caster to get in close

Yeah, I've been operating for most of this thread (albeit not in the OP) that the AoE would really have to be small, such as a 5' radius sphere, to give the spell any hope of being balanced. The cone is also a nice idea; makes this a bit like a psionic version of thunderwave. (On the other hand, larger AoEs do not always make a spell more powerful, since they make it harder to avoid friendly fire)

I think another tweak that I could be happy with would be to just make it target a single creature and increase the duration to "the end of your next turn". Basically make it a higher level version of Blindness/Deafness.

The Crimson Binome · Feb 27, 2019

Esker said:
Yeah, that's a good point. What if it were WIS or CON instead of INT?

That's worth at least one spell level, just by itself. In terms of actual damage dealt, that might put it on par with a fireball, but it's still a show-stopper. One side of the battle gets to sit around while the other side goes through their entire rotation again. Even if it's balanced, it might not make for a fun and engaging encounter.

That being said, the least-engaging encounter I've ever seen involved the party getting a Hypnotic Pattern to mez like five giants at once. The party focused fire on one at a time, dropping it before it could act, and then moved on to the next one. Nobody took any damage, or expended any other resources. So it's not like you're adding anything new to the game, from that perspective.

Esker said:
Yeah that's a fair worry. Ancient Red Dragon vs. a party with a couple high level casters that have this spell; just try to survive until you blow through its legendary resistance, then keep casting this spell while your archers and blasters go to work. The INT save is also a big part of that being a problem, since WIS and CON save modifiers tend to scale along with the wizard's DC.

A monk can already force those scenarios, by forcing an enemy to spend all of their legendary saves at once, so spending an entire action to force one legendary save is hardly game-breaking. It's much more devastating when a lich pulls this spell against the party, which again, can lead to boring encounters.

Thurmas · Feb 27, 2019

I'm not sure why a spell like this would need concentration, having it only last for one round. Seems like no issue to me. Other spells that follow a similar model don't require concentration, such as Color Spray, Pyrotechnics, or Ray of Sickness.

If you are concerned about it being too powerful for a level 3, no concentration spell, how about just imposing the Incapacitated condition instead of the entire Stunned condition? Or even adding an extra rider or two if really need it? To make up for the reduction from Stunned, you could remove the save everything time it takes damage effect. You still cause those affected to miss their entire turn. You just aren't as great at doing damage to them.

Debilitating Blast
Level 3
1 Action
Range 120'
Each creature in a 20' radius sphere makes an Intelligence saving throw. A creature with an intelligence of 2 or lower can't be affected by this spell. On a failure the creature is incapacitated until the beginning of your next turn.

If you think it needs more, reduce their speed to 0 or give attacks against them advantage. Either way, I think you're fine making a control spell that doesn't require concentration at level 3, as long as it only lasts for one round.

D&D 5E Balancing a Homebrew AoE Stun Spell

Esker

Hero

Esker

Hero

The Crimson Binome

Hero

Thurmas

Explorer

Similar Threads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Recent & Upcoming Releases