D&D 5E Phantasmal Killer?

[Mouseferatu]

How do you guys read the saving throws on the 5E phantasmal killer?

First, the target makes a Wis save or is frightened.

But the text is not 100% clear if the rest of the spell also only happens if that first save is failed, or if it happens no matter what.

My take on it is that the second half goes off no matter what; otherwise, it's way too weak for a 4th-level spell. (When it was save-or-die, in earlier editions, requiring the target to fail two saves made sense; now it really doesn't.) But I can easily see how other people might read it as "the round-by-round damage doesn't even begin if that first save is successful.)

Thoughts?

 

[mach1.9pants]

I agree with you but it is very poorly worded. Asked the Sage

 

[Fanaelialae]

How do you guys read the saving throws on the 5E phantasmal killer?

First, the target makes a Wis save or is frightened.

But the text is not 100% clear if the rest of the spell also only happens if that first save is failed, or if it happens no matter what.

My take on it is that the second half goes off no matter what; otherwise, it's way too weak for a 4th-level spell. (When it was save-or-die, in earlier editions, requiring the target to fail two saves made sense; now it really doesn't.) But I can easily see how other people might read it as "the round-by-round damage doesn't even begin if that first save is successful.)

Thoughts?

I agree that the spell wouldn't be overpowered if it continued despite the target successfully saving against being frightened. However, it looks to me that the intent is that the spell ends if that save (against being frightened) is successful.

 

[jrowland]

Yeah, the wording is poor, but since a lot of things are "save ends" for multi-round effects, I'd probably say it ends if you make the first save.

 

[Mouseferatu]

See, if that's the case--if making the first save ends the entire spell--then I don't see how phantasmal killer is viable as a 4th-level spell. It only targets one creature, and--if that first save kills it--it does no damage or have any effect on a successful save. That makes it blatantly inferior to many lower-level spells.

My thinking was, if the fear effects and damage effects are separate--if that first save prevents the fear but not the rest of it--then you're guaranteed at least one round of damage. That seems a lot closer to the "half damage on save" spells, and would make this one actually stand up in comparison.

 

[the Jester]

See, if that's the case--if making the first save ends the entire spell--then I don't see how phantasmal killer is viable as a 4th-level spell. It only targets one creature, and--if that first save kills it--it does no damage or have any effect on a successful save. That makes it blatantly inferior to many lower-level spells.

My thinking was, if the fear effects and damage effects are separate--if that first save prevents the fear but not the rest of it--then you're guaranteed at least one round of damage. That seems a lot closer to the "half damage on save" spells, and would make this one actually stand up in comparison.

I agree with your assessment, though the wording seems, to me, to imply the opposite approach- the initial save is all or nothing.

I think I'll run it the way you suggest, though, since even first-level spells deal 3d8 damage to a single target (chromatic orb).

 

[steeldragons]

As written, it seems clear that it is intended to not take effect beyond that first save.

I would never play it that way. But that's how it reads.

At the same time, could see how it could be interpreted, as "frightened" being a separate condition that dictates possible actions, that you have to save or take the damage, regardless of whether you are frightened or not.

Additionally, 5e is rife with the "ongoing saves" to limit effects (e.g., petrification) and stuff that "ends on a save." So that would seem to support the "doesn't work beyond the first save" position as well.

Yes. Poorly worded. But, original and/or written intent, RAW, RAI or not, I would not play it on 1st save negates.

Interestingly, the frightened condition gives disadvantage to "ability checks and attack rolls" but does not expressly call out save rolls. I know save rolls are ability rolls in 5e, but seems odd they would not specify.

So, I suppose it might be intended to be played as: "Make a Wis. roll." If saved: take half of 4d10 and you are not frightened. As long as the spell is maintained, you have to make the save against 4d10 damage again next round...but you won't have disadvantage.

If you fail the first roll, you take full 4d10 damage and are frightened. So then, each following round the spell is maintained, you have to roll the Wis. save thereafter at disadvantage.

But that all took consideration on way too many moving parts. haha. Gimme a save-or-die any day.

PS: On a semi-related note, it would have been super swell if WotC had used, italics, bolding, bolding and italics, a different font, a different color, finger paints, smoke signals or any other mode and combinations thereof to lend emphasis to the reader when specific conditionsare being referenced.

 

[Grazzt]

Agreed. The text says "At the start of each of the target's turns before the spell ends..." If the first save is made, the spell ends, so no damage is taken. Definitely worded oddly though (which seems to be a feature of this edition in a lot of places )

 

[Mouseferatu]

Thing is, it doesn't say that the sell ends if the first save is made. It simply says that the target isn't frightened if the first save is made.

Splitting hairs, I admit, but I really think it's too weak otherwise.

 

[MerricB]

See, if that's the case--if making the first save ends the entire spell--then I don't see how phantasmal killer is viable as a 4th-level spell. It only targets one creature, and--if that first save kills it--it does no damage or have any effect on a successful save. That makes it blatantly inferior to many lower-level spells.

Reading the spell, I see no reason the spell ends after that initial save. That's only to see if the creature is frightened or not. Is the creature frightened of the scary spell dealing damage to it? No? Well, it's still taking damage!

The 3E spell worked in the fashion where the Will save negated the entire spell, then the second save was death or cake. I mean damage. This doesn't read that way.

Cheers!