D&D 5E Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e

[Treantmonklvl20]

Glyphs of Warding - both protective and offensive - should be everywhere in a wizard's home so they can be easily activated. Indeed, activating a GoW could be a Lair Action.

Consider also the floor trap: the wizard has a highly flammable carpet. The carpet covers numerous GoW. Burn the carpet and the floor becomes a huge trap. Even better if the ignition of the carpet is initiated by another GoW.

Yep, very useful for all those adventures where you are navigating your own home. That said, it's a bugger to face when an NPC can use them to ignore concentration restrictions. I recently ran a 3rd party adventure where the enemy hag did just that. Players were not impressed with me.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

A rogue/mage could be very nasty indeed if they use their Fast Hands ability to activate a Glyph.

unnecessary, you can determine how the gyph is triggered, but even if it requires touch, interacting with an object is a free action for anyone.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

This is a terrible idea. The people inside the hut can just light them up with ranged weapon attacks while they're trying to work.

In fact, trying to attack people inside of a Tiny Hut is just a terrible idea in general. Unless you're doing a Zerg Rush where the purpose is to prevent the PCs from resting by having waves of disposal minions throw away their lives in wacky schemes, you're just safer waiting outside of ranged weapon range and waiting for the barrier to go away normally.

Leomund's tiny hut is stupidly good. The more I play, the more I recognize how broken it is. This idea that an enemy will "dig under" the hut to successfully attack isn't going to hold up in gameplay unless they have a burrow speed or something (even then, what kind of ground you are on will make a difference). I've houseruled it in my campaigns, and now it functions more like Hearth of Moonlight and Shadow. (The Circle of Dreams Druid ability)

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

The issue, if one exists, is that the first paragraph or thesis of the spell states that it's used to cast harmful effects but then the body of the spell description allows for interpretation as it mentions loading spells into a glyph that effect a target creature or area.

So were I to read this like a writing instructor I'd limit glyph of warding to things that could cause a harmful effect on a target creature or area, but if I was reading this like a DM that wants his players to think outside of boxes to be cool, I'd allow anything that affects a target creature or area, knowing that the majority of spells would be harmful but that some would just be creative.

In my own games I'd not allow the use of a glyph of warding to hold a beneficial effect, nor allow the glyph to be portable in any way, but that's just me. I'm replying to the "tiny hut" statements simply because I always reply to folks who talk about cool things they've done in game that break the rules as written to make sure players are reminded that fast and loose rules interpretation goes both ways.

Be well
KB

The wording was changed to "magical effect". Couldn't say when that happened.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Glyph of Warding has an hour-long cast time. Assuming your party gets short rests, you can cast it while everyone else is resting. Once the rest is done: the fighter touches the Glyph and enjoys a Stoneskin you don't have to concentrate on. You can also use it a day in advance for some of the more long-lasting spells, such as Aid and Nondetection, to save on spell slots. If you really have money and downtime to burn, you can also use Demiplane to create a panic room with Glyphs of Warding attuned to specific buffs. Expect your DM to throw the dice at you if you use the spell in that way.

I would need a shower afterwards. I would also lose my friends. That said, yes, these applications seem legal to me. When the guy vandalizing your house trips and breaks his leg and sues you because the injury occurred on your property - that kind of legal.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Yes, your interpretation is one possibility, but his last reply is not clear

I've lost interest in this exchange, but this rubbed me the wrong way. When Crawford tweets "There's no floor.", then replies to himself saying, "Leomund's tiny hut does have a floor, Mr. Crawford (read your own book)." It's not unclear which interpretation he settled on.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Indeed, we're all just trying to get to the facts here. As that twitter thread showed, sometimes even the lead rules designer isn't sure at first what the lead rules designer meant. Side effect of using a natural language and expecting people to come to the same interpretations. Sometimes I wish the rules sections were more like a programming language, but I think they'd lose a lot of audience that way.

As to the thread at hand, I'm eagerly awaiting the time when Treantmonk can update the document to include thoughts on the Xanathar spells. I know there's a separate thread for that, but it's not wizard-specific and that makes a big difference.

I thought it would make a bigger difference than it did. Note that some ratings did indeed change, and wording changed for several, but overall, most of the ratings stayed the same when I considered them from a "wizard only" perspective. I guess to some degree, I was always looking at them from a wizard-heavy perspective, because I have a bias that I can forget to turn off.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

That would be handy.
For example, knowing a wizard or potential counterspell to your own is out there and moving out of LoS and dropping that fireball on the opposing wizard or his group so they can't counter it...or following big AoE spells with sleep or just how powerful placing a web on an enemy that is invisible can be...

Wizard on Wizard combat isn't going to happen. It will be a party vs a single wizard or party vs wizard + other baddies. The tactic "concentrate on the wizard" is hardly new, but there's a reason we all know it. You get one counterspell a round, if you are being ganged up on, you may need to dimension door out or go down.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

I believe this guide is only based on official material.

This is correct. My group only plays with official material, so I don't even read the UA stuff. When someone says, "Gloomstalker Ranger got seriously nerfed from the UA Ranger", it tells me 2 things:
1) I prefer evaluating the final draft of something without seeing the previous drafts. I don't know if it's better or worse than what it was, I want to know if it's good compared to things we actually use.
2) The UA Ranger was BETTER than the Gloomstalker? This is why I never play with UA material.

 

[Ancalagon]

Hey all, been gone for awhile (health got real and scary for a bit, so I was spending less time having fun). Going to be spending the next couple of days catching up on posts from the past few months. Also, I've (finally) updated my wizard guide with the Xanathar's spells. Better late than never.

I'm sorry to hear you weren't doing well, glad to hear you are better, and lastly I wanted to thank you for your guides. I know that people disagree about some of your findings, complain even, but know that they are *tremendously* appreciated