D&D (2024) Emanation damage point and linked exploits:

[Chaosmancer]

18 is average damage.
22.5 on a failed save, 11.25 on a success.

3 failed saves is 67.5

And he had to hit some of them 4 times.

Was it upcast? Because a 4th level Conjure Woodland beings is 4d8, and you can't deal an average of 22.5 damage with 4d8

In which case, that kind of makes the point WORSE. Because to have a 5th level spell, you need to have a Ninth level party. That means they should have an average hp of around 120 to 140. Four failed saves is 90. So, if your strongest monster against a 9th level party is closer to CR 5 or 6, and the party spent their highest level spell slot, a 3rd level spell slot, a 1st level spell slot, and a wildshape while in the exact perfect environment.... well, what do you EXPECT to happen when level 9 character face CR 6 and weaker opposition?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't think the spell needs to be changed--specially when it was changed to work how players were already using it--just because some are deliberately trying to pull another peasant railgun.

Needs to be? No. But that doesn't mean it isn't useful to do so in a way that preserves what people wanted to use it for.

 

[Ancalagon]

The problem, IMO, is not that they replaced creature summoning with a damage emanation spell.

The problem is that they changed the timing of damage emanation spells. The 2014 rules were a bit weird and clunky, and I had wondered why they weren't written simpler. I realized it was to prevent abuse of such spells.

"and when the creature enters the area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, it must make a Wisdom saving throw..." and take full/half damage

So if you wanted to do damage to a creature, you had to shove it in the area, then move it out of the area, then on another turn move it back in the emanation area. It was doable! but it took work.

It appears that in 2024, in an effort to simplify this clunky wording, they enabled the very abuse this clunky wording was meant to prevent. Now you don't have to move the target, you just have to move the emanation! And that is far, far easier to do, and affects multiple targets at once.

So to me, the fix is "easy" - use the 2014 rules for such spells. Still "abusable" but far, far less so.

 

[Ancalagon]

It is pretty much like the spike growth combo, except you move the caster rather than the monster.

Except with the spike growth cheese grater combo, you have to move the enemy (not a given), and you do it one foe at a time.

With this combo (or spirits guardian) you just move the caster, and by doing so, you move the entire damaging area.

 

[Ancalagon]

Seems this would apply to nonsense like the warcaster "allies trigger opportunity attacks that I use to buff/heal".

The problem with this take on warcaster is that it makes total sense. From a plain logic, how the world works kinda deal.

When a foe triggers an AoO, it's because they moved away from you quickly, they foolishly (or desperately) let their guard down, and you take a stab at them. A warcaster feat-haver is fast enough to blast them with a quick cantrip instead of a sword swipe.

Why would this be harder to do on a friend?

 

[mellored]

Was it upcast? Because a 4th level Conjure Woodland beings is 4d8, and you can't deal an average of 22.5 damage with 4d8

It's 5d8.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/free-rules/spell-descriptions#ConjureWoodlandBeings

 

[Xetheral]

I don't think the spell needs to be changed--specially when it was changed to work how players were already using it--just because some are deliberately trying to pull another peasant railgun.

The issue with the peasant railgun is that it mixed game rules and the real-life concept of kinetic energy to produce a degenerate outcome. By contrast, for damaging emanations, the game rules own their own are enough to produce the degenerate outcome.

Furthermore, with the peasant railgun, stopping the degenerate outcome just required the DM to not invoke notions of kinetic energy. With damaging emanations, the damage potential scales roughly linearly with how fast and frequently the caster can move or be moved, and there's no obvious cutoff beyond which it starts being degenerate. That's a much thornier (not to mention subjective) nut to crack.

 

[James Gasik]

All of this does make the Battle Master's Maneuvering Attack seem like a stronger pick. That or forced movement with things like gust or the Telekinetic Feat.

Thunder Step could be an obnoxious combo for whatever casters can pull it off.

 

[FrogReaver]

The issue with the peasant railgun is that it mixed game rules and the real-life concept of kinetic energy to produce a degenerate outcome. By contrast, for damaging emanations, the game rules own their own are enough to produce the degenerate outcome.

Furthermore, with the peasant railgun, stopping the degenerate outcome just required the DM to not invoke notions of kinetic energy. With damaging emanations, the damage potential scales roughly linearly with how fast and frequently the caster can move or be moved, and there's no obvious cutoff beyond which it starts being degenerate. That's a much thornier (not to mention subjective) nut to crack.

It seems to me like the absolute cutoff is something like party size +1 number of forced spirit guardian applications based on maximum teamwork efforts. That’s actually not as good as the whole party being clerics and each just independently ready action reaction move when an enemy moves or attacks. Providing the whole party is clerics they can apply spirit guardians 2x party size (provided the number of enemies is equal to or greater than the number of PCs).

*off turn movement abilities nearly always if not always take a reaction.

 

[Xetheral]

It seems to me like the absolute cutoff is something like party size +1 number of forced spirit guardian applications based on maximum teamwork efforts. That’s actually not as good as the whole party being clerics and each just independently ready action reaction move when an enemy moves or attacks. Providing the whole party is clerics they can apply spirit guardians 2x party size (provided the number of enemies is equal to or greater than the number of PCs).

*off turn movement abilities nearly always if not always take a reaction.

My personal subjective sense of when it becomes degenerate is long before party size + 1. But even if it does less total damage, I personally feel moving the Cleric around off-turn is more degenerate than multiple Clerics, just due to the fact that multiple Clerics are actually paying for their damage with multiple spell slots.

Note, though, that depending on the method, moving the Cleric might not be less damage than multiple Clerics. One needs to include the value of the rest of the party's own attacks, since with sequentially-controlled-mount (or vehicle) shenanigans moving the Cleric around doesn't require the other party member's actions.

Of course one can go even father by combining actionless off-turn Cleric movement with your multiple-Cleric concept, where each Cleric on their turn hits the enemies with two copies of Spirit Guardians (from themselves and whomever is passenger or riding shotgun), plus an action spell of their own.

Edit: or with a big wagon maybe n Clerics can hit the enemies with n copies of Spirit Guardians on each of their n turns, plus their own actions, simply by rotating drivers using movement to get to the driver position and item interaction to take the reins? That would be n^2 Spirit Guardians activations per round per enemy. If each cleric readies actions to move on and off the wagon and the enemies' geometry is absolutely perfect, one should be able to get up to n^2+n activations per round per enemy.