D&D 5E Spells with attack rolls, do you avoid them?

[HammerMan]

I have a guy I play with that wont use Save spells because of the "wasted slot" not only can the DM make the save to negate (or fudge as some have pointed out) but legendary resistance can turn even a nat 1 into a successful save.

 

[jmartkdr2]

It's not that I don't like attack roll spells, it's just that those spells are weak.

Guiding Bolt is probably the best one but I don't like playing Clerics. If I was playing a Wild Magic Sorcerer I'd be into them as I can get Advantage to the attack rolls. That's probably the best case for them. High chance to hit and a decent chance to crit with big damage.

There are probably other cases I'd use them but not many.

I have 0 attack roll spells on my top spells lists and only a few direct damage ones. I've got Magic Missile as #7 and Dissonant Whispers as #8 for 1st level spells. Heat Metal at #7 on 2nd level. Fireball at #1, Spirit Guardians at #5, and Hunger of Hadar at #7 for 3rd level spells.

This matches my experience: guiding bolt is a good spell if you're a cleric with maxed wisdom (rather than building up melee options), but the rest just... aren't very good. Not because they use attack rolls, but for other reasons. And there's not many of them anyways.

 

[LordEntrails]

Nope, not avoided. It's a tool in the spell caster's arsenal. Just like selecting some spells that have a dex save, a con save and a wis save. You want different spells for different targets.

 

[Blue]

I don't avoid attack roll spells specifically. But I do avoid a lot of direct instantaneous damage. Leave that for the people who can only do damage. The occasional area of effect has a good return on action economy, as well as damage spells with duration. Some of those, like Spiritual Weapon, have spell attack rolls. But the majority of the spells that fit my criteria are saves. That's not me avoiding attacks, that's a lack of spells that do what I want with attack rolls.

Now, on the rare case where I playing a mostly offensive caster, I will intentionally pick spells to have a variety of saves and also some spell attack so I have a good chance of having a situation-appropriate spell that can go against the foe's weakest defenses. Now, because monsters have 1-3 proficient saves and maybe one non-proficient save that is still good due to a high ability score, that's at most 4 of 6 saves that are good/advance with proficiency, while my spell DC always advances with proficiency. So that weakest defense is more likely a save.

 

[HammerMan]

This matches my experience: guiding bolt is a good spell if you're a cleric with maxed wisdom (rather than building up melee options), but the rest just... aren't very good. Not because they use attack rolls, but for other reasons. And there's not many of them anyways.

I play with a divine soul sorcerer who in and out of game turns red when he misses with it... we joke next level (and have for like 5 levels) he should take a level of barbarian and use rage when he misses.

 

[Stalker0]

So here's a quick chart showing some DPR numbers for various spells, with a comparison to a basic fighter for a baseline.

AC	Modified AC	Fighter	M Missile	C. Orb	S. Ray
11​	6​	11.05​	14​	14.4​	16.8​
12​	7​	10.35​	14​	13.5​	15.75​
13​	8​	9.65​	14​	12.6​	14.7​
14​	9​	8.95​	14​	11.7​	13.65​
15​	10​	8.25​	14​	10.8​	12.6​
16​	11​	7.55​	14​	9.9​	11.55​
17​	12​	6.85​	14​	9​	10.5​
18​	13​	6.15​	14​	8.1​	9.45​
19​	14​	5.45​	14​	7.2​	8.4​
20​	15​	4.75​	14​	6.3​	7.35​

AC: AC of creature
Modified AC: AC - attack bonus (assumed to be +5, aka +2 prof + 3 stat). This is the number of the d20 you have to roll (or higher) to hit the creature.

Magic Missile: Bumped to 2nd level
Chromatic Ob: Bumped to 2nd level
Scorching Ray
Fighter: 3rd level fighter with 16 strength using dueling style and maneuvering attack battlemaster manuever (aka 1d8 + 5 + 1d8)

What the chart shows very quickly, if your fighting pretty much any creature that has any kind of AC at all (and don't have advantage).... don't bother with attack rolls. Magic Missile for the win in terms of damage! And yes this includes crits for those who I know will ask.


Something that I also think is worth noting. So a battlemaster fighter at this level has 4 superiority die. Now looking at the chart, wizard spells do more damage. HOWEVER....fighter maneuvers do not have to be used until after you see the attack result, meaning you only have to commit them once you have hit. That is a BIG advantage versus spells where you have to commit to the slot sight unseen.

 

[ECMO3]

First a bit of a disclaimer. I fully understand that I tend to lean toward a conservative cautious side when dealing with limited resources, so maybe this observation is just me. But one thing I'm noticing after an extended period of playing 5e now is that spells that require an attack roll are generally avoided during game play, and I was wondering if this were true for others as well.

The reason for this is because of the very limited number of spells you can cast, and if you miss, that slot is wasted. In our games, we easily have 3-5 full encounters before even a short rest is done, and 5-8 encounters before we can do a long rest. If you've only got a total of 6 spell slots, you really can't afford to waste them on a spell that requires an attack roll that you have a good chance on missing with. I'm finding that I almost never cast a spell requiring an attack roll unless I have advantage, or I am pretty sure I will hit (or if it's a cantrip of course).

No. As a caster I try to get a mix of offensive spells between hit roll spells and save spells. Save spells are often wasted too if they save.

Overall, if you include cantrips I would say that my characters have more hit roll spells than save spells.

 

[DEFCON 1]

My players never really thought about taking one type over the other (attacks rolls vs saving throws), but I will say that the change I made to the True Strike cantrip certainly pleased the ones that went attack roll.

Spell is still an Action to cast, but the duration of the cantrip is now 1 hour, and can be cast and then held "in reserve" for that hour (not requiring Concentration). The player can then decide when they cast a spell with an attack roll to "activate" the True Strike and roll with advantage.

Players like it because they can cast it out of combat, thereby giving them at least one spell attack roll with advantage without having to lose a round of action to cast True Strike during the fight itself.

 

[iserith]

I don't really care if the spell has an attack roll or a saving throw. I'm more concerned about whether the spell fits my concept. The exception is when, for whatever reason, my spellcasting ability isn't very good in which case I only take spells that have neither attack rolls nor saving throws.

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

I have a DC 19 spell, and a +11 on the attack.

If I see another spellcaster, I don't hesitate to make an attack roll, expecting a low AC (and that's not metagaming if the DM describes what I see). If however I see a big brute in armor then it makes a lot more sense to have him make a Wisdom save.

Avoiding one particular strategy on principle makes little sense to me.