D&D 5E Silvery Barbs, how would you fix it? Does it need fixing?

[Captain Panda]

Now, I have found LR to be so punative that when faced with it, most casters switch to damage mode; so maybe this isn't a bad thing.

Yeah, you read my mind. Typically I find that bosses run out of hp way before they run out of legendary resistances. High CR stuff doesn't have enough durability, in my experience.

 

[billd91]

No you can't force disadvantage. You force a reroll to a roll that already suceeded. There is a HUGE difference between the two statistically. The two dice combination of disadvantage has 4 possible outcomes and three of them are failures. SB has 2 possible outcomes and only 1 is a failure.

.... you do realize that says nothing about the relative frequency of those results... which is going to be kind of important... right?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

.... you do realize that says nothing about the relative frequency of those results... which is going to be kind of important... right?

I'm sure they do, @ECMO3 displays extensive knowledge of statistics.

But if we assume a roll of 11 is required to save - 50% chance, then disadvantage makes the chance of a failed save (and therefore potentially one use of legendary resistance) equal to 75%. SB has three potential outcomes: 50% save fails and SB not needed, 25% SB used and makes no difference, 25% SB is used and consumes one LR.

Where SB really does help is when the target has both spell resistance and legendary resistance. Although a monk is still way better.

 

[ECMO3]

.... you do realize that says nothing about the relative frequency of those results... which is going to be kind of important... right?

You are right and this makes my position even stronger.

Statistically, the opportunities to use SB will present themselves most often when the roll is easy to make. This is important and it is lost on people saying "use it to make them fail a save". Most of the time they succeed in a save it will be an easy save and an easy reroll.

On the other hand in terms of statistical power SB is most powerful when the save is hard to make. It is a more useful spell when the roll is hard to make. However, that does not happen nearly as often as making an easy save. Most of the time a hard save will be failed and you will not have the opportunity to use SB.

Disadvantage turns this upside down - For example if someone needs a 7 to save, disadvantage will give them a 51% chance of failure. If you could impose disadvantage before the roll you could make that enemy fail slightly more than half the time. In this resepct something that straight up caused disadvantage would "work" more than half the time.

Against the same enemy if someone need a 7 to save, the chance you will get to use SB is 70% (assuming you have a reaction and are within 60 feet). If you keep attacking these enemies with the same save or suck you will have a lot of opportunities. Unfortunately when you get a chance to use it, the chance it will work is only 30%. 70% of the time it will be a wasted reaction and slot (the advantage not withstanding).

Due to the way the reaction is triggered, this kind of thing is the most common opportunity you will have to cast SB and force another save. When an enemy miraculously makes a needed 18 for a save, SB is going to be HUGE, but those opportunities are not going to come up often enough to be a game-breaking spell. Without metagaming or some sort of insight into the adversaries abilities, not only will the easy cases occur more often, they will gobble up more of the uses too.

 

[ECMO3]

Also you can't use it while dead, unconscious, silenced, or a bunch of other obvious and irrelivant reasons to add to your irrelivant nit picks above.

They are not irrlevant. If you have played wizards you know how hard it is to position yourself for counterspell and you are handwaving this like it is nothing. It isn't nothing.

No, you have already spent the slot and failed to land the hold person. That is not part of the economy of using silcery barbs. That happens even if you don't use silvery barbs.

Your argument here is like going to the casino with $360k to play roulette and if you lose the first $350k you are going to bet 00 with the last $10k and then you only lost $10k if it fails.

If casting hold person with an action and a 2nd level slot was worth it before you knew if it would fail, you are getting the same "payout" here for a reaction+1st level slot.

But the save already suceeded by the time you choose to cast Barbs. That is what you are missing.

You use it to force the first use of LR, not a 2nd use. A successful save doesn;t burn a LR; this lets you convert "natural" successes into more chances to bait LR uses.

You don't use it to force the use of a LR. You force a reroll and if the first suceeded then statistically the second is more likely to succeed than fail. Moreover this is an action, reaction and 1st level slot to attempt to strip an LR.

Using the example of Bell I gave above. If I had silvery barbs and if I had survived long enough to do it without using my reactions for more effective spells; it would have taken me an average of 6 (5.7 mean) rounds using SB and Banishment to land banishment against Bel. This would have required on average 3-4th level slots, 3-5th level slots (since I would be out of 4th level), 3-1st level slots, 6 actions and 3 reactions plus getting myself within 60 feet every turn before it would stick.

In terms of "stripping Legendary reactions" in that 6-turn fight silvery barbs would on average result in ONE (1.0796 mean) lost legendary action. So as a point of fact, on average using this strategy you would trade 3 additional reactions and 3 first level slots, and lost the hps associated with not preparing and using other first level spells and I would have done this to strip ONE legendary action from a legendary enemy in a 6-turn fight.

That is with a 20 intelligence and targeting his weakest save! As noted in my earlier post without the other spells prepared and the reactions to use them, I might not have lasted long enough to see that through.

That is using real numbers and a published CR25 opponent. If you don't like the opponent though we can choose another legendary opponent to illustrate my point.

 

[NotAYakk]

So 3 reactions and 3 first level slots was half as good as 6 actions and 3 4th and 3 5th level slots in effect.

Pretty damn good action economy and slot economy. The marginal benefit of the SB cast was equal to an action and a 4th or 5th level slot.

This isn't "is trying ti banish the foe worth it".

As for Bel, say we use Psychic Lance (int save). 21 DC (+2 DC item!), needs a 14+ (+7 int save). Advantage makes it 60% save chance, but reroll from barbs isn't a save.

So lance is action+4th level slot for (.6 SB * .65 fail buring LR) + .4 fail burning LR.

Over 4 rounds, 3 4th 1 5th 2.4 reactions 2.4 1st level slots and 3.2 LR stripped.

A monk with 20 20 dex wis buring max Ki has +13 to hit (+2 item) and 21 DC (+2 DC boosting item). Bel needs a 5+ to save (80%), or .2 LR per hit.

19 AC so hits on a 6+. 4 swings is 3 hits/round, or 0.6 LR stripped per round, at a cost of 4 Ki/round.

Over 4 rounds burns 16 Ki and strips 2.4 LR.

So for Bel, the SB + Lance caster strips LR faster than a stun chaining monk.

Giving the monk advantage on attacks is worth 0.2 LR/round, closing the gap. Giving the monk haste is worth +20% LR stripping. With both, the monk exceeds the Lance+SB spellcaster at stripping LR by 20%.

With advantage and haste, the monk uses 6 Ki/round, running out part way through turn 4.

Without SB, the caster burned 0.4 LR/round instead of 0.8, a huge difference.

Spellcaster: 0.4 LR/round
Monk 4 Ki/round: 0.6 LR/round
Hasted Monk 4.8 Ki/round: 0.75 LR/round
SB Spellcaster: 0.8 LR/round
Monk 5 Ki/round with Advantage: 0.8 LR/round
Hasted Monk with Advantage: 6 Ki/round, 0.95 LR/round

SB on the spellcaster is 0.4 LR/round, as big of an impact as giving the monk foresight and haste on stripping LRs on Bel.

And a SB caster can also boost other player's LR stripping rate (that don't have SB to boost themselves). Making it a tad better than the model above.

 

[ad_hoc]

You don't know what to say? Well, you could start with why you think otherwise. If I had to pick just one, as a combat-focused caster? It's shield. Every time. Silvery Barbs is nice, it's versatile, you can negate a crit, make something miss a teammate. That's good. It's still one attack negated, and advantage on one swing (which is being WILDLY overstated in value in this thread). At the cost of a spell slot and your reaction, which means you can't do this and shield, absorb elements, or counterspell. Those are all things a caster is probably going to want to do, too.

Shield doesn't negate just one attack, if you have five or six things swinging at you twice each, adding +5 to your AC for a round can very well be the difference between getting spanked half a dozen times or getting spanked not at all. +5 AC can't negate crits, but it can dramatically increase your chance of avoiding attacks, and for more than just one attack. Silvery Barbs doesn't even compete if you're talking about spells for your own defense. It has a niche in that it can be used offensively, or used to help you with a saving throw or help an ally, but in its own domain shield is objectively a better spell. As it should be, since it's more limited.

People in this thread are why Wizards of the Coast should be really careful when they listen to feedback, because people genuinely do bandwagon and overreact. This spell is fine. You see people in this thread making wild, zany claims like not only is it the best first level spell (a dubious claim), but it's the best second level spell too?! That's just wrong. And the way people are arriving at this conclusion can make any spell look broken. If you come up with the case where the spell is at its very strongest and just assume it works (it doesn't automatically make something fail, mind, just raises the odds), you can make anything look super strong.

Look, I can do this for any half decent spell using the same style of argument. Example, the sleep spell: "Most fights at level one and two are against things with low hp. Sleep doesn't even allow a saving throw! If you're fighting five kobolds and cast sleep, the fight ends, no saving throw! How is that balanced?! It just ENDS the fight! This spell should just be banned."

Or, since according to some Silvery Barbs is the greatest level two spell as well, how about web? "So you're telling me you can just create difficult terrain and restrain everything in a 20 foot cube?! That's up to SIXTEEN creatures! If they fail their save, they can't move and have to use their ACTION to get out of the web! And they have disadvantage on all attack rolls, and your group has ADVANTAGE on all attacks against them? All attacks! ALL OF THEM! It's ridiculous. How did this make it through playtesting?"

I'm not trying to be an naughty word or erect strawmen, here. But would the above be convincing to you if you hate Silvery Barbs? And isn't the above obviously a dramatically better use of a spell slot? And it's not like web is even the spell everyone talks about when they talk about busted second level spells. Silvery Barbs has a function, sure. It can, for example, encourage a boss to fail a saving throw against Banishment (as an example used earlier in the thread). But in that case, it's Banishment that's doing the heavy lifting, not Silvery Barbs.

The spell just came out, guys. Calm down and actually wait to see it in play for a bit before you start talking about nerfs or bans.

You've just barely touched on what makes the spell broken and then dismissed it off hand by saying that it could be even better than it currently is but isn't.

You've chosen to focus on attack rolls because that is the part that is balanced.

There aren't 'very specific' circumstances, it's just anything that has a saving throw for a very good effect. And it can be from your own spells or abilities or from another person in the party.

If the enemy creature saves against your Banishment you can cast Silvery Barbs to duplicate the spell at only the cost of a 1st level slot plus reaction. And then on top of that you can grant you or an ally advantage on a saving throw (which can be used to help maintain concentration on that spell you just duplicated).

By 7th level some characters can cast it over 10 times per adventuring day. That's the first 2 rounds of every combat. Get 2 of these characters in a party and they're going to easily overwhelm enemy creatures while protecting themselves from those creatures' most dangerous attacks.

You say that you have extensive optimizing experience but do you have actual competitive game experience? D&D is designed as a cooperative storytelling game. Your experience at your table(s) tells me nothing about how well you understand game strategy. I've played competitive games against people who were convinced they were at the top of the game because they were the best of their play group.

Unless you've played a competitive game at a very high level you're going to have a hard time gauging your own and others' skills.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Why DMs Are Banning Silvery Barbs

Find out why DMs are banning Silvery Barbs before its even released in D&D’s new Strixhaven book.

www.google.com

Silvery Barbs is a spell from Strixhaven that is a reaction to cast, forces a reroll, and then grants advantage.

ThinkDM says he’d ban the spell.

I’d rather find a way to fix it.

But how?

My simple fix is to ban ThinkDM.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

You've just barely touched on what makes the spell broken and then dismissed it off hand by saying that it could be even better than it currently is but isn't.

You've chosen to focus on attack rolls because that is the part that is balanced.

There aren't 'very specific' circumstances, it's just anything that has a saving throw for a very good effect. And it can be from your own spells or abilities or from another person in the party.

If the enemy creature saves against your Banishment you can cast Silvery Barbs to duplicate the spell at only the cost of a 1st level slot plus reaction. And then on top of that you can grant you or an ally advantage on a saving throw (which can be used to help maintain concentration on that spell you just duplicated).

By 7th level some characters can cast it over 10 times per adventuring day. That's the first 2 rounds of every combat. Get 2 of these characters in a party and they're going to easily overwhelm enemy creatures while protecting themselves from those creatures' most dangerous attacks.

You say that you have extensive optimizing experience but do you have actual competitive game experience? D&D is designed as a cooperative storytelling game. Your experience at your table(s) tells me nothing about how well you understand game strategy. I've played competitive games against people who were convinced they were at the top of the game because they were the best of their play group.

Unless you've played a competitive game at a very high level you're going to have a hard time gauging your own and others' skills.

First off a 7th level character can cast Banishment once per adventuring day and I think Confusion or Greater Invisibility might be a better pick.
Burning off 10 spell slots on Silvery Barbs is probably not the best use of resources. If playing a support caster then counterspell or Absorb Elements may be a better use of my reaction and if you bring up the new monster design that is not really a factor. Most tables will have the MM and not the new books. Even with the new monsters counterspell is still useful as they have spells to cast that are pretty potent.
If playing an EK or Bladesinger then shield is probably better.

It is a very good spell but not as good as to justify the fuss.

See for further arguments.
And I would still not ban it until seen in play.

 

[Stalker0]

Look, I can do this for any half decent spell using the same style of argument. Example, the sleep spell: "Most fights at level one and two are against things with low hp. Sleep doesn't even allow a saving throw! If you're fighting five kobolds and cast sleep, the fight ends, no saving throw! How is that balanced?! It just ENDS the fight! This spell should just be banned."

To be fair, if your playing a 1st level wizard.... sleep is one of the strongest spells in the game. The reason it doesn't get more attention is sleep scales very poorly, and 1st to 2nd levels tend to fly by pretty quickly, and so the spell's period of dominance is pretty minor. Frankly if I was running a campaign that going to be 1st level the whole time....I would consider an adjustment to sleep. Meanwhile spells like shield and silvery barbs scale exceptionally well, and are relevant all the way up to 20th level.

Now for those comparing silvery barbs to shield.... clearly shield is the better damage mitigation effect. That is very easy to show in math, the second you put in 2+ attacks in a round, shield tends to reduce more damage. That's really not debatable. What is debatable however, is the assumption on getting attacked. Shield proponents are assuming the wizard will get attacked, and then shows shield's superiority in soaking those attacks. What is missing from that analysis is increased % of the time that the monster will NOT ATTACK AT ALL due to Silvery Barbs. If I cast banishment and it fails, then my wizard takes a full attack, and it sucks. But if my silvery barbs succeeds and activates the banishment, now my wizard takes no attacks. And no defense bonus is equivalent to never getting attacked in the first place.

The point of the controller (or "god") wizard is to prevent damage from happening in the first place, to control the monster's ability to even do damage at all. To a silvery barbs player, if your letting your wizard even take a lot of attacks...your doing it wrong.

Now that does not mean shield has no place, far from it. Sometimes you just have to take the pain, and in those cases shield is the better spell. I would absolutely want both spells prepared on my wizard. But I still say that overall Silvery Barbs makes the wizard superior at its job of control vs shield compensating for a wizard being a bad tank. Dnd generally rewards specialization, and a wizard that specializes in control through silvery barbs is going to perform better overall than a wizard that focused on shield to be some "ok" tank.