D&D 5E Is stoneskin underpowered?

[Uller]

Oh my. I hadn't even considered the cost. To me that puts it in the unusable category.

100gp....take 2 damage concentration failes and the spell and loot is gone. Nope.

 

[bgbarcus]

For self defense, Shield (reaction) and Misty Step (bonus action) are the go-to spells. They are low level and powerful. Stoneskin is best thought of as a way to send your fighter companion into battle with the ability to stay in the fight longer.

For comparison to prior versions, the original Stoneskin the AD&D 1e Unearthed Arcana gave immunity to weapon damage from only one attack. Allowing the caster to maintain the spell as long as he can maintain concentration could easily make it absorb more damage than the original.

 

[Minigiant]

The spell is a beast master rangers's favorite combat spell.

 

[Gadget]

The cantrip is almost completely irrelevant to discussing whether stoneskin is "worth" a 4th level spell, as the cantrip can't be used on anyone but the caster and "until the end of your next turn" isn't even in the same league, let alone ballpark, as "concentration, up to 1 hour."

Sure, when used the way people are accustomed to using stoneskin that doesn't seem like much - but when you actually embrace the new paradigm, you can squeeze a whole bunch of effective HP out of that 1 hour duration... it just might not be the most exciting thing for the caster to do, though, since it hinges upon the caster putting the spell on someone that is going to be taking repeated attacks of the right sort and then doing their best to avoid being the target of any attacks themselves.

Not in the same League? Well, it is a cantrip after all. You make some good points; as a buff-the-fighter spell, the usefulness goes up in certain situations. I'm still not sure it's worth a 4th level slot, especially when you add in the cost. This would be great for an eldritch knight as well, but the high spell slot and concentration makes it more difficult.

 

[Kalshane]

At 100gp per pop, Concentration and any sort of magic weapons circumventing it, I'm not sure it's worth a 4th level slot. At the very least it's useless for NPCs.

I'm half-tempted to change it back to Adamantine weapons are required to punch through, like in 3.x/PF. (Though I realize Adamantine weapons aren't even really listed as an option in 5E. At least not in the DMG.)

 

[Vael]

Currently, Stoneskin has the following restrictions:

1. Magical weapon damage bypasses resistance.
2. Concentration
3. 100gp cost.

I'd suggest removing one of them. I'm leaning towards the first. Blade Ward, unless it's been errata'd, actually just plain resists the damage, magical weapons do not bypass it. (Spells, however, do, as it says "bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage dealt by weapon attacks")

 

[Jester David]

Maybe an AC boost as well?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

At 100gp per pop, Concentration and any sort of magic weapons circumventing it, I'm not sure it's worth a 4th level slot. At the very least it's useless for NPCs.

I'm half-tempted to change it back to Adamantine weapons are required to punch through, like in 3.x/PF. (Though I realize Adamantine weapons aren't even really listed as an option in 5E. At least not in the DMG.)

Currently, Stoneskin has the following restrictions:

1. Magical weapon damage bypasses resistance.
2. Concentration
3. 100gp cost.

I'd suggest removing one of them. I'm leaning towards the first. Blade Ward, unless it's been errata'd, actually just plain resists the damage, magical weapons do not bypass it. (Spells, however, do, as it says "bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage dealt by weapon attacks")

I would totally house rule that magic doesn't but adamantine does...

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I have yet to see a use for stoneskin. It gives resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, slashing and piercing damage and requires concentration. There are better buffs to cast on allies and casting it on yourself doesn't seem like a great use of a concentration spell.

Last night I had a caster villain that had cast polymorph on a minion (giant ape) and a PC had been turned into a t-rex.

Eventually the t-rex player got the brilliant idea to go chomp on the caster and breaking his con with 30 plus damage. It would have been a great use of stoneskin to have cast it on himself and cut that damage down.

Are others finding it lacking? Or am I missing something?

Maybe there's something wrong with my mind, but the first thing that comes to mind when I read your post is, "Why not Stoneskin a T-Rex?" True, it takes twice as many spellcasters, but it allows you to get twice as much mileage out of every Polymorph and/or Wildshape for the next hour--and whereas PCs usually have good AC and benefit more from buffs to AC, a T-Rex or Giant Crocodile has low AC and relies mostly on HP, so Stoneskin is ideal for eking out their HP.

In short, no, I haven't used it, but now I want to.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Currently, Stoneskin has the following restrictions:

1. Magical weapon damage bypasses resistance.
2. Concentration
3. 100gp cost.

I'd suggest removing one of them. I'm leaning towards the first. Blade Ward, unless it's been errata'd, actually just plain resists the damage, magical weapons do not bypass it. (Spells, however, do, as it says "bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage dealt by weapon attacks")

I think there is a divider among opinions on stoneskin that hasn't quite been expressly mentioned yet: whether the spell is being considered for use by the PCs against monsters, or whether the spell is being considered for use by monsters against PCs.

I, for example, would see basically no change in my campaigns if stoneskin applied even against magical weapons because the vast majority of monsters encountered don't wield magical weapons - and my NPC spellcasters would not be made any more or less likely to use stoneskin rather than some other concentration spell (often something that actually changes their capability, like fly, or that has an influence on action availability, like a conjure spell) because their use of that spell is often predicated upon a) having an ally to cast it on while they can avoid danger, and b) foreknowledge of whether or not the resistance would apply against what their ally needs it against, which is usually an answer of "yes" because magic weapons are rare enough that only very wealthy people and adventurers typically have them, and even combined that means barely more than 1% of the weapon-using things in the world have them.

...and my campaigns typically involve enough wealth in the party to buy land, build castles, requisition ships, employ armies, and so forth, so the monetary cost doesn't really register as prohibitive by the time 4th level spell slots are available.

So in a way, my campaigns functionally already only limit stoneskin by concentration (and that is achieved by no changes other than my choice of interpretation of the printed suggestions for treasure distribution in the DMG).