D&D 5E Sanctuary useless?

[Ganders]

Clearly, it works best when switching to another target won't work. Maybe they lack ranged weapons and don't want to get backstabbed. Or they were trying to force concentration saves. Or the person with sanctuary blocks a hallway or cliff edge or somesuch.

Not long ago my group was charged with guarding a bridge -- which a whole army of orcs wanted to cross. We cast sanctuary on the fighter who just stood in the middle of the bridge, with a cleric behind him for heals. With their low wisdom they got very few attacks in; he lasted quite a while.

 

[Iry]

I really enjoy Sanctuary as a foil for readied actions.

There have been many times where the alarms in an enemy region have been sounded, and the bad guys have readied actions to shoot the first enemy combatant they see. The Sanctuary Tank walks around the corner with Dodge and triggers all their readied actions, with nobody else as a visible target.

Obviously doesn't help as much if the enemy readies something like "Shoot the robed guy as soon as I see him", but enemies readying actions to shoot the first person to come around a corner or burst into a room are really common in our games.

 

[Mistwell]

Rogue with Sentinel and Sanctuary standing next to a fighter. The enemy can try to attack the rogue, but if it fails the saving throw, it would have to attack the fighter. Or it could just choose to attack the fighter and not worry about it.
Once the enemy attacks the fighter, Sentinel activates and lets the Rogue use his OA to hit the enemy with sneak attack.

Somewhat situational and I'm not sure it's the best use of the spell, but it could work.

I agree with you there are many situations where sentinel works well with sanctuary.

 

[5ekyu]

I really enjoy Sanctuary as a foil for readied actions.

There have been many times where the alarms in an enemy region have been sounded, and the bad guys have readied actions to shoot the first enemy combatant they see. The Sanctuary Tank walks around the corner with Dodge and triggers all their readied actions, with nobody else as a visible target.

Obviously doesn't help as much if the enemy readies something like "Shoot the robed guy as soon as I see him", but enemies readying actions to shoot the first person to come around a corner or burst into a room are really common in our games.

Agree with you but want to point out ready is not committed. You can choose to ready to attack enemies as they come into range/sight and still not shoot at the dodging guy - waiting for someone not dodging.

Ready to shoot at only one target seems a bad choice since you are just eliminating your options. I mean, what if the first enemy combatant is a dog that gets KOed? You have lost the ability to shoot the second guy, the ranger who was right behind him.

Ready to shoot at enemies as they come into range leaves options open, including yo not shoot the dodging tank.

 

[Iry]

Agree with you but want to point out ready is not committed. You can choose to ready to attack enemies as they come into range/sight and still not shoot at the dodging guy - waiting for someone not dodging.

Ready to shoot at enemies as they come into range leaves options open, including yo not shoot the dodging tank.

Oh definitely! But when the bad guys don’t shoot, the rest of your team doesn’t have to come around the corner. And they can’t take that decision back and decide to fire on the dodging guy after all. Now your dodger knows the enemy numbers and position (as far as he can see) and free action barks that to the team (if he keeps it short).

Most bad guys don’t know you’re Dodging either, they just see someone rushing up to them with a deadly weapon in hand. How they react to that depends on their training, organization, morale, knowledge about your party, etc. But in most situations, the safe best is that a good chunk of them are going to take a shot at your guy.

 

[5ekyu]

Oh definitely! But when the bad guys don’t shoot, the rest of your team doesn’t have to come around the corner. And they can’t take that decision back and decide to fire on the dodging guy after all. Now your dodger knows the enemy numbers and position (as far as he can see) and free action barks that to the team (if he keeps it short).

Most bad guys don’t know you’re Dodging either, they just see someone rushing up to them with a deadly weapon in hand. How they react to that depends on their training, organization, morale, knowledge about your party, etc. But in most situations, the safe best is that a good chunk of them are going to take a shot at your guy.

Hmmm... In my games taking physical actions to provide enough trouble to shooters to cause them disadvantage is condidered obvious and would be clearly narrated differently enough to make it so. Much the same way i narrate incapacitate different from just "took no action" or "readied action."

But hey, GMs rule differently and as long as players are fine with their own character being utterly clueless about the difference in an aggressive stance and dodging when they pick targets, its likely fine.

 

[Iry]

But hey, GMs rule differently and as long as players are fine with their own character being utterly clueless about the difference in an aggressive stance and dodging when they pick targets, its likely fine.

I try to base it on the knowledge and skills of the monster. A dark elven blade master with raiding experience definitely knows when an advancing humanoid is paying more attention to covering himself than finding an opening in his opponent’s guard. A giant troll that battles for territory with other trolls, but mostly eats unarmed villagers would recognize what an enemy troll is doing, but not what the avenging paladin might be doing (besides being an obvious threat). A black pudding doesn’t know squat.

Player characters have it a little easier since they encounter similar monsters with some frequency, but I definitely make them roll when they are trying to figure out a strange new enemy.

 

[5ekyu]

I try to base it on the knowledge and skills of the monster. A dark elven blade master with raiding experience definitely knows when an advancing humanoid is paying more attention to covering himself than finding an opening in his opponent’s guard. A giant troll that battles for territory with other trolls, but mostly eats unarmed villagers would recognize what an enemy troll is doing, but not what the avenging paladin might be doing (besides being an obvious threat). A black pudding doesn’t know squat.

Player characters have it a little easier since they encounter similar monsters with some frequency, but I definitely make them roll when they are trying to figure out a strange new enemy.

Ok, well, to each his own of course, but for me most actions that are being actively taken dont really require rolls to figure out.

Disadvantage on your attack is the same degree of impediment gained by shooting at a target you cannot see or trying to shoot a bow while being mauled at in melee and i would not require a character to make a check to "recognize" those when its affecting them.

To me, the "i look and am moving normal but will dodge" is more of ready action to dodge which is a different thing. In thst case, sure insight checks for intentions may need to be made.

 

[Iry]

To me, the "i look and am moving normal but will dodge" is more of ready action to dodge which is a different thing. In thst case, sure insight checks for intentions may need to be made.

It’s mostly an abstraction for me. A round might be a series of canny feints and prods at your defenses, before one slips past your guard and makes you frantically scramble to block. Or it might be a great bellow that makes you flinch, and suddenly a mighty axe is crashing through your shield.

One attack mechanically, but a theatre of action in those 6 seconds. Every monster and PC will have their own style.

 

[5ekyu]

It’s mostly an abstraction for me. A round might be a series of canny feints and prods at your defenses, before one slips past your guard and makes you frantically scramble to block. Or it might be a great bellow that makes you flinch, and suddenly a mighty axe is crashing through your shield.

One attack mechanically, but a theatre of action in those 6 seconds. Every monster and PC will have their own style.

No argument there but I dont normally let style and flourish turn into checks to identify.

For example, that series of feints and prods, if a players wanted to hide whether or not it made an attack during those fronts and prods, I typically would not be inclined to say do, just as I wouldnt describe thrir foes' turn as "series of feints and prods" and not tell them if an attack had occurred.

But I can see where that kind of thing could be right for other tables.

Adds a bit of tension if some, lot or all of the actual actions taken are "unknown" so you are guessing what is really going on. Maybe one of those pros was a failed attack or maybe that was a healing word he bellowed or maybe it upped its defense so much that I get disadvantage but not in any way that I get a clue about it until I make an attack.