D&D 5E Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e

[Gadget]

I'm not at all sure I would count "interacting" with the phantasm as an investigation check like I would with the Minor/Silent/Major Image spells. It is a phantasm after all, and only exists in the targets mind. They would need to have something happen to make them very suspicious and have to spend an action to investigate the phantasm (and succeed on an Int check) to free themselves. As such I really don't agree at all with TreantMonk's assessment. It is certainly not a 'two-save-before-any-effect' type spell.

Now, if we were to look at Phantasmal Killer and its big brother Weird, then the criticism applies. It's basically a single target Fear spell that allows the subject to save every round (thus making it worse in every way then the actual Fear spell a level lower) with some damage added in if the target fails two saves in a row, and more damage every round if the target continues to fail saves.

 

[CapnZapp]

I understand why you'd consider ruling this way, but it is contrary to the text of the spell. An action must be chosen to be spent by the target, and the spell provides many reasons why the target shouldn't take that action due to the impact of the spell.

Note that this spell, even under the most liberal of interpretations, still has limits. The phantasm doesn't move to follow the target. If you make an archwizard, the dragon will believe it is real - but that doesn't mean the dragon will stand there and attack it every round and ignore the rest of the party. If you put a bag on a T-rex head (love that idea), the T-rex will be blind, but may attempt to thrash at PCs nearby blindly, anyways. The monster still behaves as intelligently as ever in the face of the phantasm.

The real value of the spell is the wide range of utility. I've created a phantasm and placed it right in front of an enemy - only to have that enemy decide that that it would be wiser to retreat from the phantasmal entity and deal with other foes. My phantasm just sat there. I've used the example straight from the book and made a phantasmal bridge that the enemy feel off of - twice. I've made phantasmal gold, paid someone with it, and then walked away (he was a bad, bad man). I've convinced a guard that he was trapped in a collapsed tunnel. As a DM, I used a phantasm on the party's scout to convince him that the edge of the cliff was 10 feet further out than it really was...

The thing to remember is that you're not just creating an illusion like you do with other illusion spells - you're implanting something into the mind of one target. You're messing with their perceptions *and* beliefs, explicitly. You're explicitly altering what they believe to be real to an extent where they make mental leaps to justify why something that doesn't make sense would make sense.

The thing to remember is that the above is an example of a very liberal interpretation of the spell; granting it much more power than I would ever be comfortable giving to my players.

In other words, when you read Jgsugden's take, it's important to discuss player buy in.

This interpretation might work without getting overpowered *IF* the player is trusted to not continously come up with ever-more specialized (some would say abusive) scenarios for their illusions.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[SpoCk0nd0pe]

Edit: also, I don't think I would rule that the T-Rex is blind.

There is sage advice explicitly stating that creatures can be blinded by the spell.

If you put a bag on a T-rex head (love that idea), the T-rex will be blind, but may attempt to thrash at PCs nearby blindly, anyways. The monster still behaves as intelligently as ever in the face of the phantasm.

I second that. I do think some DMs might argue that the T-Rex might have other things on his mind though. The bag is just a standard catch all idea, there are often more potent ways to hinder creatures. I would replace the bag with glowing hot iron to add the psych damage and cause more panic. Or maybe something suffocating? Other classic ideas are to distract demons with devils and vice versa or good dragons with evil dragons.

 

[jgsugden]

...I see nothing in the spell that restricts the phantasm from moving...

We're at the edge of hijacking this thread into a Phantasmal Force thread, but yes, you're right. This is one of the things they clarified. The confusion started because the spell does not contain the usual language about moving an illusion found in other spells, so many DMs, prior to sage advice, ruled that it did not move. However, the illusion is created by the caster, it has to fit into the 10' space, it is only visible to the target (not the caster) and the caster has no control over it once it is cast - but it does 'move'. It appears as the caster intends it to appear, but the illusion 'interacts' with the target as appropriate.

I wish they'd reworded phantasms as enchantments rather than illusions.

 

[raleel]

I wish they'd reworded phantasms as enchantments rather than illusions.

Or just the term Phantasm. It worked back in the day.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

OK, so lot's of discussion about Phantasmal Force. Rather than respond to everyone individually, I think I'll put everything together.

So, lots of counterpoints have been made to my last post. I'm going to list them, if I've gotten any of the context or intent wrong, please let me know.

The points I made in my last post were that Phantasmal Force isn't "Seems like no save, just suck and take" as if the saving throw is made, then nothing happens. Secondly I pointed out that the Int ability check (investigation) allowed after a failed save can also render the spell ineffective, increasing a targets chance of avoiding the bad effects of Phantasmal Force. I gave an example of a 3rd level wizard against an Int score of 10, 8 and 6, showing that in each case, the target was likely (over 50%) to make either the Save or Ability check. Here are a list of the counterpoints:

1) Hemlock made four points, the first of which was that an ability check is worse than a saving throw, as it can be penalized more easily with abilities like cutting words
2) Secondly he points out that even if the ability check is made, it takes an action to perform, meaning that the spell had at least some impact
3) Thirdly, he pointed out that higher level wizards are more difficult to save against because of higher DC's, giving the spell a better chance to succeed, CapnZapp later repeated this point
4) Fourthly, he provides an example of how Phantasmal Force is more effective than another spell (he used slow as an example) that targets wisdom against an adult dragon
5) Jgsugden points out that the ability check may not even happen most of the time because a creature won't know to attempt it as they believe the phantasm to be real, Spok0nd0pe later repeated the point
6) Spok0nd0pe points out that lots of creatures in the MM have Int of 3 or less, and it doesn't seem to improve with higher CR's meaning they have very poor saves against this spell.

OK, I think I summed up the points fairly, if you think your point was summed up incorrectly, please correct me.

Before I respond one by one, I notice one point I made that wasn't disputed was if the saving throw is made, then nothing happens. I think this is important, and I'll come back to this, but first I'll address each point:

1) There are indeed ways to sabatoge an ability check (cutting words is a good example) though I'm not convinced the difference is all that large. To be honest, I can't even think of another ability to sabatoge an ability check that doesn't also affect saving throws off the top of my head. Either way, it's still 2 chances to defeat the spell.

2) This is absolutely true. If the creature makes the ability check, it has still wasted an action. Not a huge impact for a 2nd level spell, but I agree it's better than nothing. Still, I'm sure you would agree that the chance for that ability check to defeat the spell reduces its effectiveness to some extent. Be assured that even if this second chance wasn't offerred, I would not give this spell a great rating for the same reason I don't give spells like Hold Monster a great rating.

3) There is no question that at level 13+, the save DC of Wizards becomes increasingly daunting (though auto-saves through Legendary Actions also become more common. This is why spells like Forcecage make me so happy), though in my guides, I tend not to think about level 13+ when evaluating 2nd level spells. I tend to assume that most players are like me, playing 1-10 level characters much more often than level 11+ characters. This may not be the case, but it is the assumption I make.

4) I do need to point out here that Slow targets up to 6 creatures (I do realize this was just a random example, but this is an important distinction in how I rate spells - I will elaborate further below). Though I realize you could have simply selected Hold Monster (a single target wisdom save spell), then again, I rate Hold Monster poorly - and this is why: Hold Monster does nothing if the target makes its save. My bias against all or nothing spells is well documented, and I spent greater time defending that score than I am defending my position on Phantasmal Force here. I will rant about this more.

5) You likely all know your DM's well (or yourselves if you DM). I can tell you I have one DM that could almost certainly be convinced that a target of Phantasmal Force might not attempt the ability check, and I have another DM who would give them the ability check every time, no question about it (and if they are reading this, each of them knows which one they are). Honestly, if I was DM'ing, I would probably provide the ability check as a matter of course (it was mentioned in a response that "investigating" might involve mere interaction with the phantasm - I'm inclined to rule that way if I was DMing). If your DM is the type that isn't going to provide the target the ability check, please adjust my rating appropriately.

6) I haven't counted up Int 3 or lower creatures in the MM either. What I can tell you, is that in any campaign I can think of, I have come across opponents with 3 or less Int, but I can also tell you that in every case I think of, they represent a very small minority of challenges (and in almost every case, represent non-boss challenges), in fact, if I think of the last few sessions I've played, I don't recall fighting ANY Int 3 or lower creatures. I wouldn't want to prepare a spell that the primary target is unlikely to appear over an entire session. It's like with Druids - are you really likely to prepare Dominate Beast? I mean it's great if you are challenged by a beast, but how certain are you that you will even be challenged by a single beast in a session, or even several sessions?

I would like to sum up. The main problem I have with Phantasmal Force is that if the target of the spell makes their save, nothing happens, while if the target fails their save and ability check, the fight is pretty much over. I tend to like spells like Slow (although I gave slow a medium rating, as there are better spells that fill a similar function) because they target multiple opponents, and as soon as you start adding dice, the law of averages kicks in. If you target 1 creature with a Hold Monster or a Phantasmal Force, it will either save or it won't, but if you target 6 opponents with Slow, all of them saving or all of them failing their save are actually the least likely outcomes. Most likely you are looking at 3-4 slowed creatures - a reliable tactical advantage for your side, congratulations, you are a "god wizard"

Naturally, this is just my subjective opinion, based on my own preferred playstyle for Wizards, which I provide through guides purely to have you consider them, not to have you consider them gospel, and to disregard at your leisure.

 

[raleel]

I will take your guides as gospel and you can't stop me!

I would like to point out that the consideration is dependent on saves, and these fluctuate per creature. Slow is nice because it multitargets, but it's also third level. So is Hypnotic pattern. They have the same save. They have close to the same area. Against creatures of middle to good wisdom saves, hypnotic pattern has a pretty solid chance of doing very little other than deny an action when targeting multiples, because the ones who save can break the effects of the ones who failed. Slow, however, doesn't have this, just another save. Both of these may be worse choices against an INT save - take a frost giant with +3 wis saves and -1 int save vs a D.C. 15. 25% chance to make that single target INT save, can't be broken. The other... not so much, even against a couple

It pays to have a variety of spells here. No save is still better than any save,but if you have to save, pay attention. It can turn a blue spell into mediocre if done poorly

 

[SpoCk0nd0pe]

I would like to sum up. The main problem I have with Phantasmal Force is that if the target of the spell makes their save, nothing happens, while if the target fails their save and ability check, the fight is pretty much over.

Thank you for that input! It changed my own oppinion of the spell from sky blue to green. I think Phantasmal Force is still green because it is only second level and targets a very weak save. Targeting int means it is often more of a 20% risk chance you take that nothing happens, not a coin toss. It also has some damage as icing on the cake.
Yes, the target can get second chances at getting out of the spell (like with all low level save or suck spells) but it is much more costly compared to other spells.

It is a save or suck but if the chance of sucess is around 80%, it is a very good save or suck.

3) There is no question that at level 13+, the save DC of Wizards becomes increasingly daunting[...]

I think you do not necessarily need to look at level 13+. I thought more about level 5 and 9. Phantasmal Force scales very well through mid levels because so few monsters and classes have int save proficiency.

On another topic: I am starting to like Slow more and more as well. The reason being that it has no friendly fire. Friendly fire has become a huge problem for my wizard. My DM doesn't let me target spells like Hypnotic Pattern prcisely once melee ensued (which makes a lot of sense imho).

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

On another topic: I am starting to like Slow more and more as well. The reason being that it has no friendly fire. Friendly fire has become a huge problem for my wizard. My DM doesn't let me target spells like Hypnotic Pattern prcisely once melee ensued (which makes a lot of sense imho).

Me too (for the same reason), in fact I've been considering upgrading it in the guide. I don't think I gave appropriate weight to that when originally assessing the spells.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

I will take your guides as gospel and you can't stop me!

I can, and I will!

I would like to point out that the consideration is dependent on saves, and these fluctuate per creature. Slow is nice because it multitargets, but it's also third level. So is Hypnotic pattern. They have the same save. They have close to the same area. Against creatures of middle to good wisdom saves, hypnotic pattern has a pretty solid chance of doing very little other than deny an action when targeting multiples, because the ones who save can break the effects of the ones who failed. Slow, however, doesn't have this, just another save. Both of these may be worse choices against an INT save - take a frost giant with +3 wis saves and -1 int save vs a D.C. 15. 25% chance to make that single target INT save, can't be broken. The other... not so much, even against a couple

It pays to have a variety of spells here. No save is still better than any save,but if you have to save, pay attention. It can turn a blue spell into mediocre if done poorly

I realize that there is a school of thought that you should prepare many different single target debuff/control spells, many different multiple target debuff/control spells so you always have the right spell for the right job.

I have always considered this school of thought to sound better on a forum post than it is in practicality. Remember that you are gaining 2 spells in your book per level (plus whatever your DM throws your way, but this is not a reliable source of spells - it's not uncommon for me at least to get no spells at all this way), and even then, you are limited in preparations.

Imagine a 6th level Wizard with an 18 Int. That's 10 preparations. You have 4 first level castings, 3 2nd and 3 3rd level castings.

If this is my character, my preparations might look something like this:

1st: Mage armor, Shield, Absorb elements, Silent Image
2nd: Misty step, Levitate, Mirror image
3rd: Counterspell, Fireball, Slow

Now, this may vary somewhat from build to build - but look how many spells I have that actually effect enemy targets:

1: Silent Image - affects multiple or single target - save dependant on situation and DM, use is limited on situation
2: Levitate - affects a single target with a save to resist - also has utility and defensive uses
3: Slow - affects multiple targets with a save to resist, Fireball - my kaboom for fun

This is hardly an armada of spells to choose from. Essentially these could be condensed to 2 "save or suck" spells - one single target and one multi target. It's not like I come across an enemy and then think, "Ah, a green Hipodorm. What save shall I target?"