• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

What spells should have had the ritual tag, but don't?

Yaarel

Explorer
And your foes are never out looking for a fight when you're doing something else?
Foes CAN seek you out to attack you. But it doesnt NORMALLY happen every day. Heh, never mind six different sets of enemies seeking you out − all on the same day!

Every day!

It is absurd.
 

Fenris-77

Explorer
Anything with an eight hour duration might as well be a ritual. As a DM who enjoys throwing a spanner in the works of 'system' players, the key engagement will happen at 8 hours and 12 minutes. Oops!
 

Mistwell

Hero
Foes CAN seek you out to attack you. But it doesnt NORMALLY happen every day. Heh, never mind six different sets of enemies seeking you out − all on the same day!

Every day!

It is absurd.
It's not. It's normal for a lot of games. Most games take place in hostile territory. A dungeon, a hostile controlled wilderness area, a hostile city, the underdark, whatever.

At a lot of people's tables, foes are looking to kill you. If you've killed some of them already, they're actively searching you out, rallying alies, coordinating a search, preparing defenses, etc.. In addition, there are foes who randomly may wander by where your party is located. There are entire subsets of rules for both the foes seeking you out, and the wandering monsters, along with a subset of spells intended to deal with those situations. This is part of the game at a lot of tables, on a regular basis.

Resting safely is a challenge. Resting safely for 16 hours every day would be very challenging in a lot of games and is not normal for those games without the protection provided by other spells usually.

If you're finding your adventures are almost always such that you safely stay out of harms way for 16 out of every 24 hours I'd suggest that's not your typical adventure.

I am not saying it's wrong, or bad. I am saying I don't think it's typical, and it would explain why you think mage armor is more powerful than it is - because for your games it lasts "the entire adventuring day".

And if you come to understand many other people's games that's not how it works, maybe you will understand their objection to your position better.
 
Last edited:

doctorbadwolf

Adventurer
Foes CAN seek you out to attack you. But it doesnt NORMALLY happen every day. Heh, never mind six different sets of enemies seeking you out − all on the same day!

Every day!

It is absurd.
You’re talking past the other person.

Mistwell isn't suggesting that an adventuring day of 16 hours is just constant combat. You’re the only one using that concept as part of your posts. What we are suggesting, is that for many or even most tables, you cannot predict when a fight will happen, including while resting.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
You’re talking past the other person.

Mistwell isn't suggesting that an adventuring day of 16 hours is just constant combat. You’re the only one using that concept as part of your posts. What we are suggesting, is that for many or even most tables, you cannot predict when a fight will happen, including while resting.
The discussion is clear enough.

Relating to how valuable Mage Armor is, is how frequently useful it is. This depends on the type of story.

If someone is marching thru a city of the dead, there might be frequent combat. If someone is in an urban intrigue or on a ship, there might be infrequent combat.

At low levels, it matters whether a Wizard needs to cast the spell once or twice per day.

If casting it once seems to NORMALLY deal with the threats at hand, then it is moreorless equivalent to always on.

If casting it twice or sometimes three times per day seems NORMAL then it is somewhat less valuable in comparison.

In the latter case, to make Mage Armor a ritual means it is always on, thus the ritual makes it noticeably more powerful.
 

doctorbadwolf

Adventurer
The discussion is clear enough.

Relating to how valuable Mage Armor is, is how frequently useful it is. This depends on the type of story.

If someone is marching thru a city of the dead, there might be frequent combat. If someone is in an urban intrigue or on a ship, there might be infrequent combat.

At low levels, it matters whether a Wizard needs to cast the spell once or twice per day.

If casting it once seems to NORMALLY deal with the threats at hand, then it is moreorless equivalent to always on.

If casting it twice or sometimes three times per day seems NORMAL then it is somewhat less valuable in comparison.

In the latter case, to make Mage Armor a ritual means it is always on, thus the ritual makes it noticeably more powerful.
It isn't about frequency. I don’t know how else to make that clear.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
This sort of nit picky failure to engage with what someone is saying is beneath you.
Heh, perhaps this sentence describes oneself as well.



Anyway, you come across as if there is a misunderstanding. As far as I can tell, there is none.

You want Mage Armor to be a ritual − you argue that to make it always-on is nonbroken.

I agree always-on Mage Armor is nonbroken. (I even feel a low-level Wizard needs such a boost.)

At the same time, all official rituals are less useful for combat applications. I like keeping rituals this way for noncombat.



In a thread about expanding the list of spells that can be used as a ritual, I want the new spells to likewise stay away from combat, and focus on making exploration and social situations more interesting.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
[MENTION=6775477]Shiroiken[/MENTION] mentioned Magnificent Mansion as a ritual. This spell is less useful for combat, but is awesome for social situations. This seems like a great example of a higher level spell that is suitable for a ritual.
 
Last edited:

WaterRabbit

Villager
Anything with an eight hour duration might as well be a ritual. As a DM who enjoys throwing a spanner in the works of 'system' players, the key engagement will happen at 8 hours and 12 minutes. Oops!
The problem here is that the target is any willing creature instead of just self. If I was just self, then I could see it being a ritual. But with the duration of 8 hours, you could buff the entire party just before going into a heist or something of that nature.
 

Fenris-77

Explorer
Yup, you could. I'm picturing everyone stripping out of armor to be more stealthy. Honestly, that's a cool use of mage armor, and the cost of 4-5 1st level spell slots isn't particularly low either. Can I envision a party that just mages armor's every day rather than wear armor if it were a ritual? Yeah, I guess, but the effectiveness there would depend on the length of the ritual. 10 minutes isn't much a barrier, but something closer to 45 or an hour is, and that would be the way (or one way at least) to balance additional ritual spells
 

WaterRabbit

Villager
Yup, you could. I'm picturing everyone stripping out of armor to be more stealthy. Honestly, that's a cool use of mage armor, and the cost of 4-5 1st level spell slots isn't particularly low either. Can I envision a party that just mages armor's every day rather than wear armor if it were a ritual? Yeah, I guess, but the effectiveness there would depend on the length of the ritual. 10 minutes isn't much a barrier, but something closer to 45 or an hour is, and that would be the way (or one way at least) to balance additional ritual spells
Except there isn't any cost if it is a ritual except the time.
 

doctorbadwolf

Adventurer
Heh, perhaps this sentence describes oneself as well.



Anyway, you come across as if there is a misunderstanding. As far as I can tell, there is none.

You want Mage Armor to be a ritual − you argue that to make it always-on is nonbroken.

I agree always-on Mage Armor is nonbroken. (I even feel a low-level Wizard needs such a boost.)

At the same time, all official rituals are less useful for combat applications. I like keeping rituals this way for noncombat.



In a thread about expanding the list of spells that can be used as a ritual, I want the new spells to likewise stay away from combat, and focus on making exploration and social situations more interesting.
I haven't picked any nits.

And you’ve misunderstood quite resoundingly. This most recent exchange hasn’t been about whether mage Armor is broken, so I don’t know why you’re going back to that. What we have been debating is whether mage Armor can be considered effectively “always on”.

Mistwell and I have been stating that it isn’t because a player doesn’t know when a combat might happen, and you have been countering that argument by saying that constant combat would be wierd. But that is a non sequitor. We aren’t talking about how often combat occur, but when they occur, and the fact that their occurrence is unpredictable.
 

Fenris-77

Explorer
Except there isn't any cost if it is a ritual except the time.
That's my point. If you up the time it becomes an actual cost. If it took 2 or 3 hours to mage armor the whole party it would lose some luster, wouldn't it? That applies generally to ritual spam, and it's a easy way to prevent a bunch of abuse if you decide to make more spells into rituals. i'm comparing that to the non-ritual spell slot cost.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
I haven't picked any nits.

And you’ve misunderstood quite resoundingly. This most recent exchange hasn’t been about whether mage Armor is broken, so I don’t know why you’re going back to that. What we have been debating is whether mage Armor can be considered effectively “always on”.

Mistwell and I have been stating that it isn’t because a player doesn’t know when a combat might happen, and you have been countering that argument by saying that constant combat would be wierd. But that is a non sequitor. We aren’t talking about how often combat occur, but when they occur, and the fact that their occurrence is unpredictable.
I guess you do misunderstand.

You are saying: Mage Armor isnt always on, because whether or not you need to cast it once or twice in a day is unpredictable.

I am saying: The unpredictability itself is negligible if it *SELDOM* happens. If on most days, one only needs to cast it once, then NORMALLY it is equivalent to always-on.



Also, when you argue it is less than always on, you havent commented on how turning Mage Armor into a ritual makes it an even more powerful spell by making it always on.
 

doctorbadwolf

Adventurer
I guess you do misunderstand.

You are saying: Mage Armor isnt always on, because whether or not you need to cast it once or twice in a day is unpredictable.

I am saying: The unpredictability itself is negligible if it *SELDOM* happens. If on most days, one only needs to cast it once, then NORMALLY it is equivalent to always-on.



Also, when you argue it is less than always on, you havent commented on how turning Mage Armor into a ritual makes it an even more powerful spell by making it always on.
Do you have ten minutes to cast a ritual when you are being ambushed in the night? Do you have ten minutes to cast a ritual while pursuing an enemy or searching for clues to why something is happening or who the true enemy is? What about when fleeing from a too powerful foe, or negotiating a peaceful resolution to a tense situation?

We are saying that the only way for something to be always on, is by being always on (or lasting 24 hours). Some days, I’d have plenty of time to ritual cast a second times, other days there’d be no way in hell I’d waste that time, or my companions would allow it/wait for me, or circumstance would let me even complete the ritual uninterrupted.
 

Advertisement

Top