D&D 5E (2024) Arcane Eye?

[Zardnaar]

Thoughts on this spell?

Basically one can use it for scouting. Early on it might not be worth your only 4th level slot.

We have a knowledge cleric however. Free arcane eye via channel divinity.

I dont have an issue with the scouting part. More time required with 1 person. Eg if you have to draw a map for them IRL or describe 30-50 rooms in a larger dungeon. Basically anything that isn't a secret door.

Or if the player wants to search for secret doors. In every room. Potentially a table hog spell in terms of real time. I cant really be bothered mapping out every dungeon via this spell let alone the time required. Player could insist I suppose but I would probably just wrap the campaign up if push came to shove.

Quicker way perhaps would be just use it to describe the nearest two or 3 rooms breaking up the monotony and this would let the rest of the players participate planning snd precasting buff spells or things like spirit guardians and conjure Woodland beings.

Do yeah just an unfun ability and its essentially unlimited. I dont want to metagame to heavily eg every dungeon is built from force and airtight doors or requires teleportation to navigate, or lots of wilderness encounters.

Handwavium let PCs know what they can see and assume they've prebuffed each encounter?

 

[Horwath]

I had it once as 7th level aberrant mind, DM asked if I could pick another spell, yeah, it's "unfun" spell, so I picked another spell.

but, dungeon needs not to be air tight, just needs to have doors that have leaks less that 1 in.

and grate on all air vents.

people know about the spell and in construction it's trivial to add those features.

 

[aco175]

It does have concentration even though the spell I clipped just says yes up to 1 hour. I would think that an illusion or hidden doors and such are not seen, but maybe with a Perception check or something. The spell just seems to allow you to see through it and can control it around, but you need to be able to see where the tiny gaps are to fit thorough. This takes time leading me to think about how many rooms you can get a layout for over the hour.

It also lets you see in all directions, but I'm not sure if that is all at once or you would need to think about what direction.

I'm not sure that I would just premake a map to hand out and handwave the whole thing. I do not make maps for the players as they go through a dungeon and it would be up to then to sketch something if it really mattered. I tend to skip a lot of that reasoning that the PCs would perceive and recall more that the players so I would likely help stick line sketch something and make a point to tell them about cool things they see like guards and treasure.

 

[sevenbastard]

Against it.

Yes scouting makes sense and should be done, but it slows the game and makes one player the spotlight as the DM describes room by room of the dungeon.

Part of the social contract of D&D is to take actions that keep the game moving and include everyone.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

I don't have any problems with the spell. It's good for quick basic scouting, but is blocked by really basic stuff like 'ordinary doors' as well as any specially sealed doors. It's not a zero-risk spell to use, as an enemy with truesight will easily spot it and be able to take action against the party.

On specific points:

However mapping is done at the table, this just moves the mapping from 'as we go' to 'in one fell swoop up front' which is probably quicker, it doesn't change the time needed for it.

I don't think that 'you were the source of the map' is much of a spotlight problem, the party is still all going to be involved in doing anything with the map.

It's also got a lot of drawbacks:

Searching for secret doors with it is often going to be pretty ineffective, since it only has darkvision which means disadvantage on visual perception checks if there's no light.

It can't get through regular doors, they don't need to be airtight to block it. You can rule that all doors have 1" gaps in them by default if you really want to, but it's not required. It definitely can't get through things like sealed doors or most secret doors.

If the eye is spotted, it's a dead giveaway that powerful people are planning to invade the area. While it's invisible, there are a lot of enemies that have truesight ranging from things like Kuo-Tua and modrons at the low end, to psionic Druegar, on to a variety of demons and devils, and up to high end enemies like liches and mummy lords. While the default stat block doesn't have it, high level warlocks can get always-on truesight, so it's likely that I'd give any 'stat block for someone who story-wise is a high level warlock' true sight.

 

[500 Toads]

I would add that a lot of searching -- particularly for mechanisms relevant to operating secret doors -- would not be easily seen without actually being able to move objects. Consider levers attached to false books, for instance; or triggered by manipulating a torch sconce.

 

[Stalker0]

It can't get through regular doors, they don't need to be airtight to block it. You can rule that all doors have 1" gaps in them by default if you really want to, but it's not required. It definitely can't get through things like sealed doors or most secret doors.

Yeah I just looked this up. Most doors have .5 - .75 inches of space underneath them, not enough to let the arcane eye through.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's an annoying spell, and in dungeon design I tend to take steps to counter it's use in scouting the dungeon - doors without 1 inch holes, enemies that can see invisible and raise the alarm, etc. I've splatted one with dispel magic several times as well. Do that often enough and the players tend to get the message! Intelligent enemies will know about the spell and take countermeasures.

I would consider searching for secret doors to require physical contact - tapping panels, moving tapestries, feeling for cracks in the stone, etc.

If you know the players are likely to use this and there are no countermeasures, you could prepare a player map in advance showing any details apparent to an eye, and give it to the players when the spell is cast, rather than have them talk you through every little movement the eye makes.

 

[Distracted DM]

I'm always happy when players want to scout rather than run ahead blindly, but I either want an element of risk, or resource expenditure. My biggest and most common annoyance was the warlock's Imp, but we can move on from that.
Arcane Eye I never had an issue with because it was a 4th level spell slot being burned. Either the slot is near the max you can cast, so it's an actual expenditure, or if you're so high level that the slot means little then there are lots of common counters to it at that point.

And anything that I thought should be really hidden was behind closed doors without inch gaps!

I would add that a lot of searching -- particularly for mechanisms relevant to operating secret doors -- would not be easily seen without actually being able to move objects. Consider levers attached to false books, for instance; or triggered by manipulating a torch sconce.

I would consider searching for secret doors to require physical contact - tapping panels, moving tapestries, feeling for cracks in the stone, etc.

I've always run it that Investigation checks to find hidden traps or doors require touching, feeling around, poking, prodding- so Perception would be OK with Arcane Eye, but not Investigation, and that's what's required to find hidden traps... which are going to be most traps outside of tripwires or simple pit traps.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm always happy when players want to scout rather than run ahead blindly, but I either want an element of risk, or resource expenditure. My biggest and most common annoyance was the warlock's Imp, but we can move on from that.
Arcane Eye I never had an issue with because it was a 4th level spell slot being burned. Either the slot is near the max you can cast, so it's an actual expenditure, or if you're so high level that the slot means little then there are lots of common counters to it at that point.

And anything that I thought should be really hidden was behind closed doors without inch gaps!



I've always run it that Investigation checks to find hidden traps or doors require touching, feeling around, poking, prodding- so Perception would be OK with Arcane Eye, but not Investigation, and that's what's required to find hidden traps... which are going to be most traps outside of tripwires or simple pit traps.

Well this is not spell slot required.

Gonna go with no 1 inch gaps and im using dead magic zones.