D&D 5E (2014) Moonbeam, Am I reading it right?

Roger · Dec 31, 2014

This thread makes it sound like people are using Moonbeam for purposes other than cosplaying Sailor Moon.

That can't be right.

Cheers,
Roger

KarinsDad · Dec 31, 2014

Pauper said:
I think that's the kicker for me -- if moonbeam wasn't intended to allow for damage to occur when it is moved on the caster's turn, then there's no reason for the spell to require the caster's action to be able to move it. Contrast with flaming sphere, which allows the caster to move the sphere as a bonus action.

Apples and Oranges.

Flaming Sphere:

1) Damage on end of turn. This means that a foe only has to move away to avoid damage.
2) 2D6 damage.
3) Bonus action to attack one foe.
4) Multi-foe damage, but only on end of turn.
5) Can move 30 feet.

Moonbeam:

1) Damage on start of turn. This means that a foe will take damage if targeted.
2) 2D10 damage.
3) Action to attack one foe.
4) Single foe damage (typically, but it can be used against a horse and rider, or an enemy and it's familiar, etc.).
5) Can move 60 feet.

Wizards are supposed to do more damage than Druids with spells. Druids have better AC, hit points, healing and shape changing.

Sure, Flaming Sphere sounds better than Moonbeam and it does typically do more damage, but it's a bonus 7 average points of damage at best per round over what the wizard is already doing. The difference between 30 feet and 60 feet is actually pretty huge. The difference between doing 2D10 and 2D6 is not insignificant.

You cannot use the utility of the one spell to argue how the other spell is used.

Pauper said:
If moonbeam doesn't damage enemies when the caster moves it on top of them, then you're saying that on the caster's turn after casting the spell, he's basically just messing with his opponents' next turns. A legendary monster could easily defeat this spell, at any level, by simply readying an action to move when the caster parks the beam over them and relying on its legendary actions to defeat the party.

Seriously? If a ready action is the solution to stopping the spell, then the spell is doing GREAT. The creature readies, the Druid does something else. The foe using up an action to bypass one spell is huge in action economy.

Sacrosanct · Dec 31, 2014

Pauper said:
I think that's the kicker for me -- if moonbeam wasn't intended to allow for damage to occur when it is moved on the caster's turn, then there's no reason for the spell to require the caster's action to be able to move it. Contrast with flaming sphere, which allows the caster to move the sphere as a bonus action.

If moonbeam doesn't damage enemies when the caster moves it on top of them, then you're saying that on the caster's turn after casting the spell, he's basically just messing with his opponents' next turns. A legendary monster could easily defeat this spell, at any level, by simply readying an action to move when the caster parks the beam over them and relying on its legendary actions to defeat the party.

I have no problem with legendary creatures being able to reduce the effectiveness of a low level spell. I also don't have much of a problem with a creature spending it's reaction to mitigate the spell either.

I'll also repeat my earlier post. While it can be considered literally true about "moving into the area" if it's actually the area that moves, that's now how we use that language. If you're sitting in the shade and the sun has moved, we don't typically say that you moved into the sun. We say the sun has moved, not you. So by how language is used, it seems the implication is that the target has to be the one to move into the beam, not the beam moving onto the creature. This is reinforced by simply looking at the spell in greater context of how everything else works in the game. If you did allow the beam to be a sweeping laser, does it make sense in the context of all other similar level spells? Of course not. It would be way too powerful.

That's why for me personally, while I can admit some level of ambiguity in the wording if that's all you're looking devoid of anything else, I think that when you do look at the entire context, it's meaning is pretty clear.

Tormyr · Dec 31, 2014

PnPgamer said:
Question is, is it sensible for paladin to use it? Would you, a frontliner, risk on losing the spell constantly by being hit?

Absolutely. It is great compared to other ranged attacks normally available to the Paladin. It is not always viable or prudent to get to the front line.

FormerlyHemlock · Dec 31, 2014

Sacrosanct said:
I'll also repeat my earlier post. While it can be considered literally true about "moving into the area" if it's actually the area that moves, that's now how we use that language. If you're sitting in the shade and the sun has moved, we don't typically say that you moved into the sun. We say the sun has moved, not you. So by how language is used, it seems the implication is that the target has to be the one to move into the beam, not the beam moving onto the creature. This is reinforced by simply looking at the spell in greater context of how everything else works in the game. If you did allow the beam to be a sweeping laser, does it make sense in the context of all other similar level spells? Of course not. It would be way too powerful.

A similar spell is Web. If you cast Web on someone, I don't rule that you've "moved into the area" and therefore must make one save now and one when you begin your next turn. You only save when you start your next turn. And yes, this does mean that Legendary Actions can move you out of the webbed area before your turn begins, which is why Web is not an auto-killer of dragons.

ExploderWizard · Dec 31, 2014

Pauper said:
I think that's the kicker for me -- if moonbeam wasn't intended to allow for damage to occur when it is moved on the caster's turn, then there's no reason for the spell to require the caster's action to be able to move it. Contrast with flaming sphere, which allows the caster to move the sphere as a bonus action.

If moonbeam doesn't damage enemies when the caster moves it on top of them, then you're saying that on the caster's turn after casting the spell, he's basically just messing with his opponents' next turns. A legendary monster could easily defeat this spell, at any level, by simply readying an action to move when the caster parks the beam over them and relying on its legendary actions to defeat the party.

Requiring a full regular action to move the beam suggests to me that damage is intended to be dealt to those the beam is moved over.

The "moving" of the beam however, does not to me suggest that all in the path of the beam from point A to point B take damage while the beam makes its journey.

So If you had the beam on a particular spot and moved it to a different spot 50 feet away then those in the new spot would take damage as they started their next turn in the beam but no one between point A and the area of effect from point B would take any damage.

I'm A Banana · Dec 31, 2014

emdw45 said:
A similar spell is Web. If you cast Web on someone, I don't rule that you've "moved into the area" and therefore must make one save now and one when you begin your next turn. You only save when you start your next turn. And yes, this does mean that Legendary Actions can move you out of the webbed area before your turn begins, which is why Web is not an auto-killer of dragons.

Pointing out the similarity to web is useful, because I have absolutely seen DMs rule that web in 5e makes you save when you cast it AND when you start your turn in it. At the very least, DMs should probably be interpreting these two effects consistently with each other.

BryonD · Dec 31, 2014

Kamikaze Midget said:
Pointing out the similarity to web is useful, because I have absolutely seen DMs rule that web in 5e makes you save when you cast it AND when you start your turn in it. At the very least, DMs should probably be interpreting these two effects consistently with each other.

It is a good comparison. I think I'd rule the exact same on both.
The key difference is that Web is not mobile.

On both I would rule an initial save when the spell is cast and those targets making this save do not have to repeat it on the start of their first turn within the area.
IMO this is completely reasonable and the rules as written are intended to streamline the mechanic. This is fine, but I expect it is one of the many areas in which the 5E design approach includes the presumption that experienced DMs will adapt to fit what works for them.

After that Web works exactly as written. But web is NOT mobile.

If Web was a 20' R effect which could be moved 60 feet per turn I would NOT require every target the Web passes across to save. I would only require those upon whom the web ended to save. The AOE remains a 20' R. Obviously that is a little weird. But a rolling ball of Web which gathered targets and dragged them along would be a much stronger spell. It is a 20'R and letting it be a mobile 20'R would not change that.

I, likewise, would not require everyone the beam passes across to save. I WOULD require those in the ending point to save when the spell stopped moving. These targets would be exempt on the start of their next turn. Save DM ruling, same reasoning. Effectively the spell has been recast. It is weird if you view the spell as a constant "ray of death". But if you simply imagine that focused energy is key, then it is not hard to describe an effect that doesn't harm while in motion. For the low level of this spell, this is actually the way I envision it from a narrative point of view. So no problem for me,

fjw70 · Dec 31, 2014

One difference with Web is that Web says a creature that enters the Web on its turn so Web was clear not meant to be an immediate save.

That said with Moonbeam I would rule no immediate save/damage either. Only when a creature starts its turn in the beam or moves into the beam (not the beam moving onto the creature).