Yeah, the reason a lot of people took spiritual weapon is not because its amazing, its because the rest of the 2nd level spells are just really bad. I mean what else are you going to take if you want a combat spell?
December 1st UA Spell changes
- Thread starter Gadget
- Start date
Greg Benage
Legend
There are some good 2nd level spells, but they're often situational (e.g. silence) or good in a boring way (e.g. aid). I would agree that there is even more design space now in 5.5e for 2nd-level combat spells that are broadly useful and aren't bad.
Spiritual weapon sees regular use in my campaign where there are lots of enemies spread out but both my players view it as rather dull and lacklustre. They like Toll the Dead more, which I find thematically problematic. Of course, an extra 1d8 radiant damage to spell attacks does beef it up slightly but I think it would die a death in my game as concentration.
I think the 10' for Guidance feels counter intuitive. I like resistance but it feels must have. I'd want it for my Tome Warlock.
I think the 10' for Guidance feels counter intuitive. I like resistance but it feels must have. I'd want it for my Tome Warlock.
Any divine cantrip caster can take it, as can magic initiate:divine & some races like the new aardling. Given the ranger being a cantrip caster it's reasonable to assume decent odds paladins will have the same & even better reason to choose one like guidance or resistance over attack cantrips. In the case of aardlings & other races the same pressure will apply if they are not a wisdom charisma or int based class.
Plus the divine spell list has 6 cantrips & by level ten the cleric can prepare 5 cantrips. It's not really a lower level concern either since levels one & four have 3 & 4 cantrips prepared,
That kinda makes it even worse. May as well cut them from the game and just give everyone +d4 on everything whatever.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
There are some good 2nd level spells, but they're often situational (e.g. silence) or good in a boring way (e.g. aid). I would agree that there is even more design space now in 5.5e for 2nd-level combat spells that are broadly useful and aren't bad.
It is some kind of tradition, that the relative good damage spells are 1st, 3rd and 6th level. In between it is more utility, defense and buffs.
Wait, you wouldn't be suspicious if a guy was trying to convince you to give him your SSN for a security check while his priest buddy was furiously praying over a rosary right next to him?
Disadvantage with +1d4. A worthy trade off.
OB1
Jedi Master
I never had an issue with PCs spamming Guidance, but still love this change.
The Spiritual Weapon update is fascinating in how it changes Cleric tactics. It suddenly makes Cure Wounds a much better option than Healing Word in mid tiers. Drop a 4th level SW, giving you 3d8 damage a round as a bonus, then run around the back line hitting your allies with 2nd level CWs while still doing decent damage each round. I do think they should up the movement speed of the SW to at least 30, if not 50, though. Otherwise it's too easy for enemies to avoid. The speed wasn't a huge issue when it wasn't concentration (though a bit annoying), but now feels too punitive since you're giving up the ability to concentrate on other things and could end up with multiple rounds where it does nothing.
The Spiritual Weapon update is fascinating in how it changes Cleric tactics. It suddenly makes Cure Wounds a much better option than Healing Word in mid tiers. Drop a 4th level SW, giving you 3d8 damage a round as a bonus, then run around the back line hitting your allies with 2nd level CWs while still doing decent damage each round. I do think they should up the movement speed of the SW to at least 30, if not 50, though. Otherwise it's too easy for enemies to avoid. The speed wasn't a huge issue when it wasn't concentration (though a bit annoying), but now feels too punitive since you're giving up the ability to concentrate on other things and could end up with multiple rounds where it does nothing.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
Guidance was never a problem at our tables as written in 2014 so I am not sure how this fix is needed, but I trust people saw it spamed out of combat even if I didn't... BUT
how is this less spam? Just every time someone talks, searches, tracks ect they have to tie the cleric to there hip...
Resistance I have seen taken only 1 or 2 times, and never seen used well, so this MAY get it used, but again the same fear of the tie the cleric to the fighter spam...
Spiritual Weapon I really think SHOULD have been concentration, but every person playing a cleric right now in my group is complaining so I don't know how it will go over.
Aid ANOYS me... as a cleric bard or artificer it was a good 2nd level spell not broken and not a gurantee but a good one, I can't see me taking it ever as a mass barksin/heroism.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
the only thing is the LAST one i didn't like the 1/day per person thing on a cantrip... it turned an at will into 2-4/day
I think that the range helps there. Guidance only works ten feet so hammerspace follower PCs are just going to be "nope out of range" & encouraged to be proactively involved. shifting that to 5ft would work better in not painting the GM doing that as adversarial because it's a spell primarily used out of combat when ToTM quantum distances kick i Resistance having the 10ft has similar but it's primarily useful in combat so I don't think a drop to 5ft is appropriate.
I see the debate on guidance continues. It seems to me that the devs may be trying their hand at making many of these cantrips mechanically similar, so it is the same basic design for all of these cantrips. We'll have to wait and see True Strike and Blade Ward to see if I'm right.
I don't think the change to Spiritual Weapon makes it a bad spell, per se, but it will certainly be used less. I'm also not sure I buy that Spiritual Weapon is that iconic, unless by that it is meant that it has been in the cleric repertoire since at least the AD&D/BCMI days. I don't remember it being that much of a "go to" spell for clerics in previous editions, but in 5e has become much more prominent, mostly due to lacking Concentration.
IMHO, the Banishment change is more egregious. It seems that few creatures are going to fail their Save 10 times in a row to actually be banished to their home plane. Granted, PHB Banishment was probably in need of toning down more so than most of the other spells changed, but I don't think this was the way to do it. They could have reigned it in by making it more niche, such that it only worked on extraplanar creatures to begin with. This would have made it powerful, but a universal go to for most situations with a tough opponent that does not have Legendary Resistances. They have a template: a similar concept is in place with the Good & Evil line of spells.
The irony is that outside of 5e, Banishment was somewhat limited, while spells like Protection from Good & Evil were much more universally applicable in play. Now that is reversed. Why not bring it in line by limiting to the creature types in the Good & Evil spells?
I don't think the change to Spiritual Weapon makes it a bad spell, per se, but it will certainly be used less. I'm also not sure I buy that Spiritual Weapon is that iconic, unless by that it is meant that it has been in the cleric repertoire since at least the AD&D/BCMI days. I don't remember it being that much of a "go to" spell for clerics in previous editions, but in 5e has become much more prominent, mostly due to lacking Concentration.
IMHO, the Banishment change is more egregious. It seems that few creatures are going to fail their Save 10 times in a row to actually be banished to their home plane. Granted, PHB Banishment was probably in need of toning down more so than most of the other spells changed, but I don't think this was the way to do it. They could have reigned it in by making it more niche, such that it only worked on extraplanar creatures to begin with. This would have made it powerful, but a universal go to for most situations with a tough opponent that does not have Legendary Resistances. They have a template: a similar concept is in place with the Good & Evil line of spells.
The irony is that outside of 5e, Banishment was somewhat limited, while spells like Protection from Good & Evil were much more universally applicable in play. Now that is reversed. Why not bring it in line by limiting to the creature types in the Good & Evil spells?
Greg Benage
Legend
Oh wow, missed that change. RIP.
Xamnam
Loves Your Favorite Game
Yeah, I understand most of the changes, and even kind of like giving the creature an opportunity to break the banishment more than once, but having it happen every round makes it very unlikely to stick.
OB1
Jedi Master
Maybe a better implementation would be to only give the creature a 2nd save before they are perma-banished at the end of the minute?
Amrûnril
Adventurer
This version of Guidance seems quite a bit stronger than the PHB version. Changing it to a reaction means you no longer need to know in advance when someone is going to make an ability check, which was previously the biggest constraint on usage.
The new version of Resistance is similar in terms of wording, but I think it's actually quite different in practice. Ability checks are most often used out of combat, meaning that using a reaction isn't generally a significant trade-off. Saving throws are more often used in combat, so the action economy acts as a balancing mechanism for Resistance in a way that it doesn't for Guidance.
The new version of Resistance is similar in terms of wording, but I think it's actually quite different in practice. Ability checks are most often used out of combat, meaning that using a reaction isn't generally a significant trade-off. Saving throws are more often used in combat, so the action economy acts as a balancing mechanism for Resistance in a way that it doesn't for Guidance.
mellored
Hero
Guidance only changes a 1 out of 10 rolls.
So you would need to be making 20+ skill checks a day for it to be anything like 'spam'. And, in my experience, characters rarely do more than 5 skill checks a day (unless it's a rogue sneaking).
In a party or 5, that means you benefit twice per day. So not worth the extra paperwork to track who got the benefits.
Also, I'm not put off if everyone keeps asking the cleric to come closer for guidance.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
mid dungeon crawl or in a combat heavy campaign I can see that... in a social or exploration heavey campaign you might make 200 skill checks before your first attack roll. I and a few others on here talk about social based D&D games where there is almost no combat.
