D&D (2024) Spirt Guardians

[Mistwell]

If its the edge, then why do people in the middle get hit?

The radiation analogy is apt, or simpler, a bonfire. if being in a fire only burns you once, going in and out of the fire won't burn you twice.

The spell is also good enough as is without the cheese.

so what is you stay exactly at the edge of spirits for 6 seconds?
how many instances of damage should you get?

We're just guided by what the spell says. As you enter the field, they attack once forcing you to try and resist with your wisdom or take radiant or necrotic energy damage. If you stay in the field for 6 seconds without leaving, they attack as well. Given it's spirits which appear angelic, fey or fiendish, I just assume these are the orders they're operating under when summoned into such an emanation. Most of the attackers flit on the edge of the emanation, but can dive in briefly if something chooses to stay in the emanation.

There are certainly weirder mechanics in the game which make less sense than that.

 

[mellored]

yes it does, magic has to be consistent within a system in order to system to work.

You use a spell slot and it does whatever the designer thinks is fun.

And then balanced to not overshadow other people's idea of fun stuff.

That's the only consistency.

it's a smart radiation.

Smart radiation that gets more energetic the faster things move.

So.. Cherenkov radiation.
Which means it's a blue glow.

not all teamwork is fun.

Setting up a zone for your allies to push enemies into is fun.


Side note; we really need a Trapper ranger.

 

[Oofta]

As I have stated (and restated), common sense, (or, in other words, a given table's boundary between creativity and ridiculousness, or between fair play and exploits) being the new upper boundary on the effectiveness of Spirit Guardians is indeed my issue with the changes to the spell.

I don't like the changes precisely because trying to use the spell effectively is now an exercise in figuring out where the line is at one's table and being sure not to cross it, rather than a more straightforward tactical challenge. The need to invoke common sense or general rules against exploits in no way rebuts my objection to the changes; indeed, it reinforces them.

DMs have always and will always need to make judgement calls on what works and doesn't now and then. Even if that means house ruling that Spirit Guardians only works 1/round.

 

[Xetheral]

DMs have always and will always need to make judgement calls on what works and doesn't now and then. Even if that means house ruling that Spirit Guardians only works 1/round.

I entirely agree. But I'm still frustrated that they introduced a new (and particularly blatant) such instance in what was ostensibly supposed to be a clean-up pass through the rules.

 

[Shiroiken]

I will honestly wait and see how it plays out. Despite the potential for shenanigans, I just don't see most groups actually doing anything like this. If I had a player discuss it as a tactic, I will politely ask them not to. If it becomes abused, then a houserule might be in order (such as limiting the damage to once per round). Worst case, I can always just ban the spell.

Besides, I think most of the time it's just not going to be a viable tactic anyway. I've used SG as a player and had it used on me as a DM, and it typically the character moves into range of the largest number number of enemies, then sits until the situation changes. Moving the caster might bring 1 or 2 new enemies into the effect, at the cost of an attack and preventing other enemies from suffering difficult terrain. There is also the likelihood of attacks of opportunity on the grappling PC. Not to mention the dog-pile that already happens to the caster (maximum aggro) until concentration is broken.

 

[ECMO3]

Silly looking aside, Has anyone actually tried this?

Because I feel like everyone is assuming you can run around with infinite movement and without opportunity attacks.

For example. There is a monster between you and adjacent to the cleric. So you need to move 15' around them, grab the cleric, and move another 15' to get the enemy out of the zone, and your out of movement.

and even as a monk, is it worth giving up 4 of your 5 attacks?

I'm sure it will be a good tactics on occasion, like against a zombie horde, but I'm not sure it's a go-to tactic.

We have done it.

My big take aways - The immediate damage on casting and the cleric movement piece is nice and makes it way more versatile than it was. The immediate damage on casting means you don't have to worry about losing concentration and doing nothing because it went down before the enemies turn. On the other hand doing damage at the end of the enemies turn instead of the beginning does make it weaker for finishing off enemies before they get a turn. With the old spell if you had an enemy you knew was near death and inside the guardians you could ignore him because he would die at the start of his turn, now you have to finish him off.

Overall I would say more effective now though. We were still using it at 20th level (upcast usually).

As you say there is a lot of complications to someone else moving the Cleric around, and a high opportunity cost as well. Although we did that on occasion, we did not do it a whole lot and it was usually not that effective when we did do it. It was more common that we used Dissonant Whispers to force enemies into it or grappled enemies and moved them into it and held them there.

 

[mellored]

As you say there is a lot of complications to someone else moving the Cleric around, and a high opportunity cost as well. Although we did that on occasion, we did not do it a whole lot and it was usually not that effective when we did do it. It was more common that we used Dissonant Whispers to force enemies into it or grappled enemies and moved them into it and held them there.

Yea. That's what I figured.