D&D 5E Booming Blade seems a bit powerful

[KarinsDad]

As long as it means multiple booms on the same target is not optimal, I'm good.

Even if that were the case (which I agree it isn't), why would that matter or why would that be overpowering? (I have not read this entire thread)

 

[Arceliar]

Spells don't stack with themselves.

I think maybe I wasn't clear about my reasoning.

From the PHB:

The effects of different spells add together while the durations of thos spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect--such as the highest bonus--from those castings applies while their durations overlap.

Booming Blade has a Duration of 1 round, and the description of the spell's effect states:

On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and it becomes sheathed in booming energy until the start of your next turn. If the terget willingly moves before then, it immediately takes 1d8 thunder damage, and the spell ends.

If a target has two instances of Booming Blade on them, then only one instance is in effect. The first time the target moves, the most potent instance of the spell will deal damage and end itself early. While this is happening, the effect of the second instance is suppressed, so it cannot deal damage or end itself early. After the first instance of the spell ends, the second instance of the spell remains on the target, so subsequent movement would trigger it as normal.

 

[Arial Black]

I think maybe I wasn't clear about my reasoning.

From the PHB:



Booming Blade has a Duration of 1 round, and the description of the spell's effect states:



If a target has two instances of Booming Blade on them, then only one instance is in effect. The first time the target moves, the most potent instance of the spell will deal damage and end itself early. While this is happening, the effect of the second instance is suppressed, so it cannot deal damage or end itself early. After the first instance of the spell ends, the second instance of the spell remains on the target, so subsequent movement would trigger it as normal.

I was going to post my disagreement. After all, spells are not aware of other spells! They cannot choose not to activate if they somehow 'know' that they will be 'wasted'. So the movement causes the spell to trigger, so both spells will trigger simultaneously, and the damage does not stack, so a second casting would be wasted. The second casting cannot 'choose' not to activate because it somehow 'knows' that another casting of the spell is in place and it doesn't want to waste itself!

However, you make a good point. If the second spell is suppressed while the first exists, then ALL of it is suppressed, including the trigger conditions. And when the first spell ends, the second NOW begins to work, and works as normal.

You've changed my mind. A rare thing on the Internet.

 

[cmad1977]

Thanks!
I'm not sure if I want to remind my group about that. The DM does seem to think that we are overpowered (and the initial extra damage should still come from each person, right?), so "nerfing" by remembering an actual rule might be good.

Sent from my Huawei P10 plus

Please do bring it up. I recently appreciated it when a player 'nerfed' himself by remembering/learning a rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Caliban]

After all, spells are not aware of other spells! They cannot choose not to activate if they somehow 'know' that they will be 'wasted'.

You are also forgetting that the Booming Blade spell is sentient. It can tell the different between a target moving voluntarily and involuntarily, for example. So it's not surprising that it will also choose not to activate if another casting of the spell is active on the target.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

If a target has two instances of Booming Blade on them, then only one instance is in effect. The first time the target moves, the most potent instance of the spell will deal damage and end itself early. While this is happening, the effect of the second instance is suppressed, so it cannot deal damage or end itself early. After the first instance of the spell ends, the second instance of the spell remains on the target, so subsequent movement would trigger it as normal.

Cogently argued. You've convinced me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

My warlock has Eldritch Blast without Agonizing Blast. He gets stabby with a pact rapier and the Mobile feat, reserving Eldritch Blast for occasions when he's out of reach of the foe.

My warlock has the cold damage invocation from UA instead of AB, but he isn't focused on ranged dpr.

 

[Ganymede81]

If a target has two instances of Booming Blade on them, then only one instance is in effect. The first time the target moves, the most potent instance of the spell will deal damage and end itself early. While this is happening, the effect of the second instance is suppressed, so it cannot deal damage or end itself early. After the first instance of the spell ends, the second instance of the spell remains on the target, so subsequent movement would trigger it as normal.

Stacking two of the same spell does not cause the second instance to be "suppressed." Every duplicative instance of the spell remains 100% active, with the lone exception being that their effects do not combine. Having multiple instances of this spell end on a hit is simply not combining their effects.

With Booming Blade, the only relevant effect is the additional thunder damage. The trigger for this effect is not an effect, nor is the end of its duration an effect.

This is made clear in the Combining Magic section. There, they explain that the "effect" of a spell is synonymous with the "benefit" of a spell: a "character gains the spell’s benefit only once." The expiration of a spell's duration is not a benefit of a spell. Even if someone were to argue otherwise, how could two copies of a spell ending amount to a "combination" of said benefits?

 

[CapnZapp]

I think maybe I wasn't clear about my reasoning.

From the PHB:



Booming Blade has a Duration of 1 round, and the description of the spell's effect states:



If a target has two instances of Booming Blade on them, then only one instance is in effect. The first time the target moves, the most potent instance of the spell will deal damage and end itself early. While this is happening, the effect of the second instance is suppressed, so it cannot deal damage or end itself early. After the first instance of the spell ends, the second instance of the spell remains on the target, so subsequent movement would trigger it as normal.

Sorry but that's ridiculous. When the target moves, he's boomed once and no magic lingers.

 

[Arceliar]

Stacking two of the same spell does not cause the second instance to be "suppressed." Every duplicative instance of the spell remains 100% active, with the lone exception being that their effects do not combine. Having multiple instances of this spell end on a hit is simply not combining their effects.

With Booming Blade, the only relevant effect is the additional thunder damage. The trigger for this effect is not an effect, nor is the end of its duration an effect.

This is made clear in the Combining Magic section. There, they explain that the "effect" of a spell is synonymous with the "benefit" of a spell: a "character gains the spell’s benefit only once." The expiration of a spell's duration is not a benefit of a spell. Even if someone were to argue otherwise, how could two copies of a spell ending amount to a "combination" of said benefits?

I think maybe the confusion comes from a different RAW interpretation of the word "effect" when it pertains to the spell Booming Blade. To repeat the rule in question (with the example this time):

The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect--such as the highest bonus--from those castings applies while their durations overlap.
For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell's benefit only once; he or she doesn't get to roll two bonus dice.

That's the entirety of this section in the rules, and it doesn't attempt to define what the "effect" of a spell is, it just gives an example. If two copies of Booming Blade are on a target, then I completely agree that only one instance will have an effect "while their durations overlap", it's just a question of precisely what "effect" means for the spell Booming Blade.

For Booming Blade, the spell description states:

On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and it becomes sheathed in booming energy until the start of your next turn. If the target willingly moves before then, it immediately takes 1d8 thunder damage, and the spell ends.

By my reading, the first sentence establishes when the spell is applied to the target and what its duration is. The second sentence, in its entirety, is what I'm interpreting as the spell's "effect". So, when a target with two copies of Booming Blade moves, then the most potent instance of the spell is the only one for which the effect will apply. That effect will be to deal damage and end the spell. But the second instance on the target won't deal damage, and it won't end, because "and the spell ends" is part of the spell's effect by my reading--it's something that a spell does between being placed on the target and the end of its duration, which as I've noted is 1 round (until the start of the caster's next turn).

I don't for a moment claim that this is RAI, but if there's anything RAW to indicate that the "and the spell ends" part of the spell's description is not part of the spell's effect, or if I'm misunderstanding something else about the rules (e.g. the "and the spell ends" is part of the effect, but it doesn't matter because of reasons), then I'd genuinely appreciate it if someone could point me in that direction. There are other cases where it matters, e.g. Death Ward:

The first time the target would drop to 0 hit points as a result of taking damage, the target instead drops to 1 hit point, and the spell ends.
If the spell is still in effect when the target is subjected to an effect that would kill it instantaneously without dealing damage, that effect is instead negated against the target, and the spell ends.

Now suppose you cast it on a target twice, then try to reduce them to 0 HP. The first instance triggers and they drop to 1 HP instead, and that instance of the spell ends. If the second instance is still around, as it would be my my interpretation of a spell's "effect", then the 0 hit points condition can no longer be met. It can only happen "the first time" the target reduces to 0, which has already happened, but the spell was unable to end itself due to the rules for overlapping spell effects, if "and the spell ends" is considered part of the spell's effect. Then by my interpretation, we're left in the curious state where only the second option--canceling a non-damaging instant death effect--remains possible.

The only thing I can think of to get out of this is if the "effect" makes a distinction between what the spell does to the target (damage for Booming Blade, or the stated effects for Death Ward), and modifications to properties of the spell itself ("and the spell ends", even though its duration has not ended yet). The rules for combining effects don't acknowledge any such distinction, so far as I can tell, so I don't acknowledge one either from a RAW perspective, but it's entirely possible that I've missed something.