D&D (2024) Best fix for conjure minor elemental?

[mellored]

I am not saying the CME is bad, but it is extremely situational

How is damage situational?

at the level you could do this, in a large part due to the short range

Are you saying high level melee is useless?

and the kind of abilities and legendary actions a single boss creature is going to have and that makes it not OP.

Haven't seen the new blocks, but legendary actions are at the end of your turn.

Killing it on your turn means they don't do any.

We were fighting these with a Fighter11/Barbarian6, Paladin6/Sorcerer11 and a Rogue7/Bard5/Warlock5

How are they not "highly situational. due to the short range and the kind of abilities and legendary actions a single boss creature is going to have".

 

[mellored]

But the monster you are fighting can see right through it too.

That's fine.
Darkness is just a bonus. You can kill things without it.

And you have 4 party members in your example and you have to pass it with all of them (or half of them if you use the group check rules)

you just need a scout.

And you need to be obscured to even get a check, which you are not even inside the darkness.

At what range does the dragon spot you if your coming across a wide open field?

Except he is 55 feet away and it costs half your movement to stand up.

No. It never got a chance to move.

It is not a reaction. It can fly as a legendary action between the Monk's turn and your turn

No. "The dragon can take 3 legendary actions, choosing from the options below".
None of those options are moving.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/16782-ancient-red-dragon

Most boss enemies you are going to fight at this level are going to have legendary actions and being within 15 feet is going to hurt even if they can't move away.

Again, dead creatures deal no damage.

The boss I was fighting tonight had a DC23 dex save legendary action that was an AOE that does around 40 damage. That means sure - beat her initiative and get drug by another PC to within 15 feet and then you get to save and get to save again for concentration.

Mind Sharpener
When the wearer fails a Constitution saving throw to maintain concentration on a spell, the wearer can use its reaction to expend 1 of the item's charges to succeed instead.

But that's only for emergencies.

That is why I asked to provide an example of monsters where this will likely to work. There are not many.

If this doesn't work, neither will 1/3 the other classes.

I don't think WotC monsters negate melee build very often.

If the Monk drags you within 15 feet it will damage you.

ok. So the monk drag you within 60", and walk the rest of the way at the start of your turn.

Moreover breathing on the caster will likely end his concentration on CME, even with absorb elements.

Your still assuming it gets a turn.

The Monk used his action to drag you up to the Dragon I thought?

New monk feature lets you drag friends around as a bonus action + dash.

you game and they have a chance of killing the Dragon before its turn, but not before it "goes" because it "goes" with a Legendary action after the first person in initiative regardless of who that is.

Ok fine.
You're level 17 (get that last EB blast).
The scout lets you know there is a dragon up ahead. The party buffs you and waits.
You ride your horse charging into the dragon lair.
With +9 initiative, you likely win, and get first strike.

There is a small chance the dragon survives till round 2.

If you can get within 15 feet of an enemy it will be useful against and manage to hang on to concentration sure .... but that is not going to happen a lot.

60' move speed, 120' with a horse + 180'+ with a monk, +9 and advantage on concentration saves + qbsorb elements + auto-succed on concentration checks.

I prepared. Also, not the only way of doing it.

Ready a Scorching Ray and have someone use Dimension Door. For instance.


Against the Tarrasque this won't work. But that's a rare case. And you can just cast fly on the Gloomstalker and let him take care of it.

 

[mellored]

Why blow all your higher level slots on only damage vs updating hold person, monster or whatever?

Hold person can't win a fight by itself. You still need damage.

That said, CME is very happy to crit. If we assume hold monster we might beak 2000 damage in a round.

Oh.. Divine Intervention Hallow, now we got 4000 damage in a round.

And it's only good theoretically at very high levels.

Yes.

It's how CME scales that's the issue. Not a problem for most games.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Interesting interpretation, I think you are wrong but I am not certain.

Facts:

• Page 15 (and Page 361) defines Attack Action (does not include spells).
• Page 361 defines Attack Roll, which DOES include spells.
• Conjure Minor Elementals refers to "any attack".

Open to interpretation:

• Does "any attack" mean any Attack Action, or any Attack Roll? I would interpret "any attack" to mean Attack Roll, which does include spells. I am not positive that this is correct though.

this is a major thought process... something that effects a few spells and conditions. "What counts as an attack?"
If you have an item that casts magic missile without you casting a spell would it break invisibility? what about fireball?

Is an attack, the attack action, the attack roll, or the act of dealing damage?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I asked to provide any example where it was OP. What I originally said was:

Is it powerful? It can be. It can be the exact right spell that makes a particular encounter trivial by using your 2 highest level slots at 17+ level, but then other 8th and 9th level spells will do that too in the right situation. To make this discussion a bit more realistic - can we bring some monsters into the White Room? Can you list some of the monsters from official content that you plan to use a 9th level CME against?

The premise is this is an awesome OP ability. Someone should be able to provide at least one example of a Monster it would be so OP against .... and there probably is one or more, but it is not going to work that well against most monsters at that level and in that respect it is not going to be OP in play IMO.

If it works awesome on one or two different monsters great (although I can't think of what those are), but that is fundamentally different than suggesting it is way OP.

This is why powergamers breaking games isn't a good example... Just like my druid problem in 3.5, the problem is if you pick things for fun without knowing combos can it be a problem... and yes this can.

a 10th level bard or wizard or druid (and I HAVE to include bard cause 2/3 of bards will have either wizard or druid lists) can have more then 1 way to make multi attacks... you will also have 5th level spell slots... so twice per day you can cast a spell that for 10 minutes grants +4d8 to multi attacks per round... lets say 2 (so 2 sword swings on a weapon based bard or bladesinger or multi attacking druid) that is already 8d8... on round 1 you cast CME and do 0 and round 2 you deal your normal damage +8d8... about on par if you had cast a fireball, the problem lies in round 3.

I have not seen CME in play yet, BUT I will say I have seen 10 min concentration buffs in dungeons last for 3 fights each of witch is 3+ rounds long... so lets say 10 rounds between the 3 fights, that is 9x 4d8 bonus damage (9 cause 1 of those 10 rounds is casting)

a buff that adds +36d8 to damage that can all be to single boss targets is above the norm and needs to consider some nerfing... this is without power gaming.

 

[FrogReaver]

I’ve told you the basis… a couple of times now.

We have two meanings for the word Attack in D&D. The Attack action (with a weapon or unarmed strike) described on pg 15 and pg 361 (the glossary) and the general process to hit and damage creatures described on pg 25. Therefore there are two possible interpretations of the spell.

In my opinion the attack action is the more common meaning - partly because the glossary entry refers to Attack as the action. I am also of the opinion that IF the spell included spell attacks like Hex and Bless do, it would clarify that by using ‘Attack Roll’ like Hex, Bless and all other spells do apart from this one. It doesn’t. I also have a hard time believing that the spell would add the volume of damage it does to spells that casually spit out multiple attack rolls like scorching ray. All this leads me to conclude it doesn’t apply to all attack rolls. Instead to the attack action - the other meaning for word attack. I totally accept that it isn’t conclusive, I’m choosing one of two possible interpretations until it inevitably gets clarified.

I mean if you want to choose the option that expands the spells remit as far as possible then complain about the effect as being too good that’s up to you. I made my choice and I sleep just fine.

To be blunt. The Conjure Minor Elemental Spell reads ‘any attack you make’. It doesn’t get any clearer than that.

To expand a bit. I agree it’s written differently than hex and such. But being written differently is not evidence it’s intended to work differently. It could just as easily be written by different team members, or be an editing oversight, etc.

To expand further. The section on page 25 specifically decouples attacks from attack actions.

Making an Attack
When you take the Attack action, you make an attack. Some other actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions also let you make an attack. Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure:

How one can have this text pointed out to them, read it and still insist that ‘attack’ in conjure minor elemental is or may be anything other than a reference to this completely baffles my mind.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

To be blunt. The Conjure Minor Elemental Spell reads ‘any attack you make’. It doesn’t get any clearer than that.

To expand a bit. I agree it’s written differently than hex and such. But being written differently is not evidence it’s intended to work differently. It could just as easily be written by different team members, or be an editing oversight, etc.

To expand further. The section on page 25 specifically decouples attacks from attack actions.

Making an Attack
When you take the Attack action, you make an attack. Some other actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions also let you make an attack. Whether you strike with a Melee weapon, fire a Ranged weapon, or make an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has the following structure:

How one can have this text pointed out to them, read it and still insist that ‘attack’ in conjure minor elemental is or may be anything other than a reference to this completely baffles my mind.

yeah any attack is different wording then attack action or attack roll... like so many things it is too open ended...

 

[FrogReaver]

... like so many things it is too open ended...

How so?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The spell has a 10 minute duration. Losing your first round in combat is definitely not going to be required in every fight.
While combining with upcast scorching ray is an extreme demonstration of the issue, I think that the most problematic part is when used by a full caster making weapon attacks.
Valour bards or bladesinger wizards for example can pick up mastery properties with feats and/or a multiclass dip. They already get multiple attacks, and can dual-wield.
The Conjure Minor Elementals spell allows a fairly sustainable way to beat dedicated melee classes at their own game even without using extra resources or warlock dips.

 

[Zardnaar]

I still think you need to see it in combat.

Remember 5E has bloated hit points. On paper it's a lot of damage but is it better tgan say spiritual guardians?

Also you will kinda need to be good at con saves to reliably keep it up.

Spells that just deal damage haven't really been an issue since 2E perhaps pre 1989.