D&D 5E Zone spells and amazing damage potential

Warmaster Horus · Mar 17, 2015

Moonbeam says you move the beam in any direction, 60'. Nothing says it sweeps a 60' path in doing so.

As a DM I'd allow it to be moved, RAW, but it would appear at the new location without illuminating the intervening space.

Tormyr · Mar 17, 2015

Cloudkill shines as an area control spell in a dungeon, where cone of cold is not necessarily able to hit multiple enemies. It does reduced damage partially because it also heavily obscures the area. Cone of Cold also is difficult to use without friendly fire unless the caster is an evoker or sorcerer. Spirit Guardians has no friendly fire possibility, and it makes the aura difficult terrain (that is why it does less damage; I can't believe I forgot that).

Having them fire only once a round does not make them useless because actions can still be taken (except in the case of Moonbeam). My players have used both Spirit Guardians and Moonbeam to great effect. Spirit Guardians has saved the party multiple times. It is a great spell in general and especially when the party is ambushed from all sides.

I'm A Banana · Mar 17, 2015

I ADORE JC's reasoning on why it's not actually a big deal.

Jeremy Crawford said:
"The distinction I often make is between the potential and actual abuse of a rule. I'm far more concerned about actual abuse."

Especially great with the caveat of "if you've got a bigger concern about potential abuse as a DM, you should definitely change it."

From conjuring a skeleton army to charging through an army with Spirit Guardians up, the designers are more concerned about what actually happens at the table than they are about what might happen during message board theorycrafting.

That is immensely reassuring, and really shows proudly some of 5e's play-centric design.

Yesssssssssssssss.

Chocolategravy · Mar 17, 2015

Spirit Guardians works well with a Battlemaster's Maneuvering Attack. If you don't like it change turn to round.

FormerlyHemlock · Mar 18, 2015

Tormyr said:
Making so that the damage only occurs when the target enters the spell or starts its turn already there brings the damage potential in line with the other spells in the PHB. Moving the spell means the damage kicks in at the start of the target creature's next turn. Shoving a creature into the area of effect causes the damage to take effect at the start of the creature's next turn. If the creature moves into it If I had not ruled this way, then Spirit Guardians and Moonbeam would have come out almost all the time because they are then Too Good (tm) compared to other spells of the same level.

From the simulationist POV, even more important than game balance is the fact that the "movement = entering = spell triggers immediately" ruling is the fact that it leads to scenarios that make no sense. Consider the cleric who casts Spirit Guardians, then runs within 10' of an ogre to damage him, then retreats back to 20'. Then a warlock hits the ogre with a Repelling Blast, causing it to re-enter the spell radius on a fresh turn, triggering damage again. Finally, the ogre gets to hit back, but he's within the radius so he takes damage at the start of his turn. He's taken damage three times, and worse, he took MORE damage for being in the spell radius PART of the round than he would have taken for being in the radius for the ENTIRE round. He took 3x as much damage as if he'd just been standing in the radius all along when the spell was cast! That makes no sense.

I'm exercising my veto over Crawford's ruling in this case. No.

Saeviomagy · Mar 18, 2015

Paraxis said:
In all fairness Crawfords rulings are the strict interpretation of RAW, that is his role on sage advice. As written it seems "entering" is anytime the area of effect moves into a creatures area or when a creature moves into the area itself, I can see that.

As written, the rule is as clear as mud. Crawford had two ways he could choose to interpret the rule and he chose the one that distorts spell balance and encourages halflings in wheelbarrows.

The Crimson Binome · Mar 18, 2015

Saeviomagy said:
As written, the rule is as clear as mud. Crawford had two ways he could choose to interpret the rule and he chose the one that distorts spell balance and encourages halflings in wheelbarrows.

It's more complicated than that, because his interpretation is concerned with actual abuse rather than theoretical abuse.

The ruling encourages halflings-in-wheelbarrows unless it actually results in halflings-in-wheelbarrows, at which point it doesn't anymore.

PnPgamer · Mar 18, 2015

Guys guys, at the first glance this thing may be intrepreted to be a sweeplike thing. However if you try to look crawfrords side, to him it just may be just that first question is about that you can move your spell area with you and make enemies save on their turns, and second may be purely a question of voluntary vs forced movement into the spells area, making everything function as they were before.

To me both questions and their answers may be intrpeted in many ways.

Ricochet · Mar 18, 2015

I'm not on Twitter, but perhaps directing Crawford to this thread would provide a more thorough ruling? It's an interesting discussion.

PnPgamer · Mar 18, 2015

I agree that crawford should take a more thorough look on this. Moonlaser thing seems way overpowered for a 2nd level spell.

We dont need druids to have Doctorates in evil and use "laser" to conquer lands.