Why I Don't Ban Spells (With One Exception...) | Worldbreaking

[@SupergeekMike]

Do you ban any spells in your games? Thank you so much to the Luminous Lore Kickstarter for sponsoring this video! Check out the Kickstarter now: www.kickstarter.com/projects/luminousages/luminous-lore-5e-guide?ref=2yypd6

[@thunderflare59]

I mostly work around the spells. I want to know what my players are running so encounters fit their power level.

[@Lurklen]

I'd been thinking about banning silvery barbs, but instead I just go with a stricter interpretation of the requirement for casting it "1 reaction, which you take when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself succeeds on an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw." I essentially say that you have to actually see them succeed on the saving throw or ability check or attack, as I don't actually *have* to tell a player when that occurs. Dm's usually do, but their character shouldn't know these things if they are not _visible_ to the character, even if the creature is. (How do you _know_ the creature succeeded vs your charm person spell? Or that the creature succeeded on its perception/deception/arcana check? Etc.) It sounds harsh, but personally I find the language of the spell's requirement really annoying, because it requires a character to be close enough to see a creature succeed on mechanics that ostensibly don't exist for them, but not actually see that mechanic, and the dm to tell the player of something their character wouldn't in a way that's a little weird in action at the table. This change means the spell is good for obvious physical things, like undoing a crit, or someone beating some kind of visible physical save like dex or strength, but less useful for less obvious things like wisdom or charisma that the character shouldn't be aware of. I didn't outright ban it, because I don't mind a spell being able to undo something through distraction, but it also felt like for a 1st level spell it was working outside its power to just undo saves and checks with no limitation. (I mind less for attacks, because a lot of enemies get a ton of those, and missing one is a good save for a PC, but doesn't hurt the creature overmuch. A failed save however, especially of certain types, can totally undo an encounter.) But otherwise, I don't ban anything. (I do mod other stuff, like good berry, I make it cause a save or non-casters of it (or druids and rangers) so that it requires a save, or you fall into delirium and get hooked on it. So it's useful in an emergency, but there's a risk it might make some people less useful.)

[@HorizonOfHope]

CORRECTION: Conjure spells do NOT say the DM pick, it says they have the stats. Some spells, like find familiar, tell you to find the stats in the PHB. Conjure spells are just telling you who has the stats, not who chooses them. In fact, it says “choose one of the following...”

[@Lurklen]

@@HorizonOfHope It says "choose one of the following options for what appears." and in conjure animals for example it lists the following: *One beast of challenge rating 2 or lower *Two beasts of challenge rating 1 or lower *Four beasts of challenge rating 1/2 or lower *Eight beasts of challenge rating 1/4 or lower Those are what you get to choose. There's no mention of choosing specific creatures. The DM has the statistics for creatures that meet those requirements. So you don't choose which creature, cause you don't have the stats. You tell the DM "I want one beast of Cr 2 (or lower)" then they have the stats for that and give you a beast of Cr 2. Otherwise it would tell you to consult the MM for those creatures. Find familiar lists the animals for you to choose from, they could have done the same, or created a list for you to consult if they wanted you to choose, but instead you choose from those options. It's pretty clear. (Whether that's a good way to do it or not is debatable.)

[@PjotrV1971]

@@HorizonOfHope Yes, but that strictly only says the player chooses the CR/number of creatures. The spell descriptions do not give any definite word on who decides the exact creature summoned.

[@fakjbf3129]

In a game where “Disguise Self” exists it’s crazy how many players would innately trust a victim who says they were murdered by the butler when they cast “Speak With Dead”.

[@yogsothoth7594]

Also there are a lot of more mundane ways that a corpse would be unable to correctly answer the question. 1) "I was poisoned, I don't know who slipped it into my wine but" [insert some less direct information which narrows down the suspects to a manageable number but doesn't instantly reveal the killer] 2) As you kneel to touch the corpse you see a hole in the neck roll a medicine or investigation check, [on a success] you see that there's a lack of blood around the wound suggesting a post mortem mutilation and the cut is placed around the voice box, looking inside the mouth and you'd also see the tongue has been removed. (spell literally says the creature needs to have a map but i think a reasonable DM ruling is that they also need to have the other equipment for speaking to) this doesn't instantly spoil that element of the mystery, does still let players use mechanical skills, and gives them important information that the killer is probably someone with the education in medical and magical matters to understand both that a spell like speak with dead exists and enough medical knowledge to precisely disable the ability of the corpse to speak. 3) "I didn't recognise my killer but...." give a description of some elements of appearance and description, the players have to at least do the work of matching it to the pictures and/or descriptions i gave. Although maybe not this one as the time I did this once and repeated the a certain detail on the boots with a living witness, both victims they used speak with dead on and use the same line specifically when they met that character both before the murder and later on after the speak with dead and players never caught on and actually ended up helping the killer.

[@burgernthemomrailer]

True. Just wait 2 more levels to learn Divination.

[@FuzzyKayna]

Also that's assuming it WANTS to tell you. Maybe they were a rival or enemy or they died as part of some scheme. The caster gets five questions but the corpse could lie or refuse to answer. It's not compelled to be truthful or cooperative.

[@Kardfogu]

Yup, being able to deal with powerful spells is a DM skill that nobody mentions. There are many solutions, but to one powerful player tool, the DM can always with an equally powerful, but opposing player tool. Which requires the DM to expect what tools their players will use, but the more you play the better you get at it and even if you fail to counter a tool, it's good. It's actually fine if your players managed to take a shortcut, outsmart you or just cheeze something you prepped. They will explode with happiness when they manage to find just the right way to solve that problem way too early, it will be an accomplishment they will remember fondly.

[@aurtosebaelheim5942]

@@Kardfogu I agree, but I think it's at least partially the DMG's responsibility to highlight world-altering spells so that new DM's aren't constantly blindsided by them. Just simple stuff like "if you need to hide a magic item, putting it in a lead-lined container will block most low-level magical detection", "the following means can be used to detect an invisible creature if you suspect one is present: ..." or "if you want to make something truly secret and mysterious, the following steps will protect it from all but the highest-level divinations". Make sure to include the disclaimer that overusing these tools can be frustrating to players and to remind players that even if a spell is 'countered' it still provides some utility (ie: an enemy has to waste an action to throw flour to negate a player's invisibility). PF1e's Gamemastery Guide has the "Villain's escape kit" section, which highlights a bunch of spells that can be used to evacuate a plot-important character, which I think is a generally helpful resource to include.

[@RS3isRealscape]

I think they way they handles Speak with Dead in the latest DND movie was hillarious as others ask questions to the caster and the corpse answers them directly wasting a question

[@VelociraptorsOfSkyrim]

Honestly, I've always seen Speak with Dead handled in similar ways. 😂

[@Holycrapitschad]

I love seeing the spell run like that because so often players dont plan out what they’re going to ask and what should be 5 pretty simple questions turns into a round table discussion about what they should ask and takes 30 minutes while a corpse is just floating in suspended animation waiting for them to make up their minds

[@RS3isRealscape]

@@Holycrapitschad see also spell duration which runs out as they argue about what to ask the corpse the spell specifically says it works once per corpse opportunity lost

[@Holycrapitschad]

@@RS3isRealscape this is also an option but I’d prefer to not give a hard time limit to my players just because of the logistics of the game in action. Sometimes they decide to cast the spell without really thinking about the questions beforehand and I’d much rather nitpick them about what constitutes a question so they have to self correct and act in character than say “oops time’s up guys better luck never”. If they’re taking way too long sure but that would be a last resort for me

[@NicolaeHolley]

You can have curses that require Remove Curse with a higher level spell slot, rather than just "cannot be removed by remove curse", so it can afflict your characters for a few levels or until they go find a powerful allied high priest.

[@Team_Orchid]

Pathfinder 1st Ed does something similar to this. Some curses just need Remove Curse, others need Break Enchantment or Heal (1st Ed Heal is a big deal) and the big stuff might even need Wish or Miracle.

[@floofzykitty5072]

Fun fact: The curse of Euryale from The Deck of Many Things specifies that it can only be removed by the power of a god or the Wish spell, meaning that Remove Curse does not work on it.

[@harrisjones2190]

yeah I tend to treat remove curse as written for most cursed items (ie it allows the cursed creature to unattune from or relinquish the item), but for other curses I treat it like counterspell/dispel magic. That is, have the caster roll a check with their spellcasting ability modifier against a DC based on the curse's power, or auto-succeed if it was cast at a high enough level

[@garwynrosser8907]

Do something similar to what bg2 did. Casting a high level healing spell causes the tired or fatigue condition if it's not cast as a ritual spell.

[@xolotltolox7626]

They should really just call it "remove lesser curse"

[@flandomaltrizian4603]

34:10 You put up the spell card for True Resurrection, not Transport via Plants. That said, you can technically use True Resurrection to fast travel if you kill a party member, go somewhere, and then True Resurrect them to the new location. I should find a way to use that at some point

[@RottenRogerDM]

Sounds like an 80s movie involving a spell caster and dragon.

[@seeker38]

True Res costs 25000gp of diamonds. That's a pricey teleport.

[@RottenRogerDM]

@@seeker38 Lucy in the sky with diamonds. You can travel in style or not at all.

[@egorignatiev2090]

True resurrect also could work as a time machine. Just imagine a legend about it used that way: An elf and a human fell in love, but their relationship were not meant to let them die together holding each other. The human decided to give their whole world (and die multiple times in the process, depending on how long elves live in particular setting) to have a chance to grow old together. Many years the elf has to live with that knowledge, resurrecting their loved one once every 200 years for a brief moment, and then killing them. All of that just for the elf once they grow old enough resurrect their loved one for the last time (about 50 years before they expect to die, I imagine). Or maybe the elf resurrects their loved one once every 100-200 years for 10-20 years, to be able to spend time with them.

[@andyenglish4303]

@@RottenRogerDM plus the new body forms butt naked with no equipment or weapons.

[@Dremen]

You could use Remove Curse sort of like Revivify for Curses. It can remove a curse if it's cast within a certain time frame, sort of like a setting in period. If the players don't know they have lycanthropy, and don't find out until the first full moon after they contract it, it will be far too late for remove curse to work. But the next time they fight a werewolf, they'll know to treat that bite fast.

[@Arkylie]

ooooh that sounds like a great solution

[@MagileineTopDeckToFullField]

Ah yes, my favorite transportation spell, True Resurrection. Our table has a small check to Counterspell, where you don't have the Meet it to Beat it feature, the cast always requires the DC roll, upcasting doesn't provide any benefit.

[@Wolfpaxrunning]

​@@TheGreatDanishI hate DMs with this mindset, you already have ask the tools at your disposal, and the ability to bend or break rules at will, but instead choose to be petty about a powerful, but not broken, spell. It's a very simple spell to deal with as a dm, without trying to scare your players from using their kits.

[@Nebukanezzer]

That method of counterspell would make for a very different kind of setting. Wizards would be much more weary of each other, and Lore Bards would be preferred in courts, able to debuff magic attack rolls, buff saving throws, or have better counterspells with peerless talent and glibness. It's like Frieren, where humans spent 80 years dissecting and innovating on Zoltraak, but you are playing in a setting before Wizards figured out True Counterspell. It has potential to be interesting! As long as you don't just treat everything the same.

[@Zixor_]

24:41 The advice to have Conjure Animals conjure a mix of different animal types would tune down the spell’s power but keep in mind that also means there are even more creature stat blocks in play! Probably better to keep all conjured animals the same type but add a random element to what animals get conjured.

[@Archeantus_]

Depending on my prep, I've actually had cyphered a message/handout for the characters. If they have the comprehend languages, I'd give them a key to break it, and they'd still have to long hand translate it. Or it gives them a word for word translation, but not the metaphorical meanings if it's hidden behind that.

[@UnkillableMrStake]

I remember when silvery barbs came bursting onto the scene I also remember the immediate backlash and hatred that it got. Frankly speaking Mike, I think your way of handling it is the best. Don't outright ban it but give it a cost and make it difficult to acquire

[@abcrasshadow9341]

What if remove curse worked to give you leads / rules for breaking it, and maybe it helps with one ingredient so the players get 1 agency (they get to choose which ingredient they dont want to get), 2 the spell helps clear the curse (it provides the clear conditions and 1 ingredient of the players choice) and 3 the dm still get to make removing the curse harder and more interesting.

[@Arkylie]

When I was introducing some newbies to gaming, I actually made some little cards (from card stock, a little smaller than average playing cards) with envelopes with windows in them. The window showed what the item looked like, and if they rolled well on a check they could slide the card up to see a couple lines (I forget how exactly I managed it, but there were like two or three levels of detail they could get). It gave a little extra mystery and engagement with items that would eventually become background details (like a healing potion or a sunrod). I certainly wouldn't do that for experienced players... except it strikes me that it might indeed be the way to go for specific cool items that they need to explore over time. Hand over the partially disguised card and when they get to whatever mechanic allows them to learn more, tell them just how much they can uncover -- and I don't need to keep track of the details myself.

[@maxrbmc]

1) I feel like the discussion around Silvery Barbs ignores the fact that it does in fact take your reaction. No more Shield, no more Opportunity Attacks for you 2) I think a DM that wants to ban resurrection or Remove Curse wants to play a different game than I want to

[@Veelofar]

Something I enjoy doing with Comprehend Languages is having it work just like you said, like a translation app. And the programmers of it (an ancient morally dubious empire that are responsible for many of the artifacts in the world) wouldn’t have every single language in it. Most are in there, but there are three groups of exceptions. 1. Ancient languages that were forgotten before that empire came into power 2. A language from beyond the normal bounds of the setting 3. The language of the nobles of that particular empire, since they didn’t want the lower class to listen in on them. The spell is still useful at all times, because even if it doesn’t give them what the language is, it tells them it is either massively ancient or from beyond the stars. It always gives information of some kind.

[@Olfan]

I allow casting summoning spells anytime but at a cost. Needing ingredients to cast certain spells isn't new, so my summons cost a special potion prepared in a ritual which only works for the caster who prepared it. Since you can't meditate, chant or dance for hours while in combat, the preparation takes place in camp before sleep. It also costs ingredients like a bottle, a handful of matter from the home plane of the beings to be summoned, a fluid (oil, holy water, brandy, …) and powdered money-sinks like pearls or lesser gems, the more and bigger creatures in the summon, the greater the quantity. This makes for a number of effects: a) the DM doesn't get each and every encounter trampled by raptors while b) summons stay a viable option, but c) the casters now have to manage their sleep. d) High-level characters who already have everything find a use for all their money outside of inns - their livers will be happy. Weighing whether to lose half a night's sleep and be unfocused and grumpy the next day, or preparing only a little goop every night and saving it up becomes a tactical mini-game for the players. A character relying on summons will quickly burn a hole in the party's purse, crave coffee, be irritable and may even fumble spells. Someone powdering and meditating just a little every night may fill up their bottle only slowly but be well rested and able to unleash a powerful summon when the need is dire.

[@kayn9651]

For identification, I like to break it down two ways. For more common magic items, players who are skilled in magic may simply recognize that they do certain things, or they're the kind of items that you put on and you get a sensation that tells you what the weapon does. - It's a sword with a wicked blade and runes etched into it that look like blood flows through them, that spell out "Devourer" in infernal, well it's probably a sword with a life-draining property. Or you put on the ring and feel smarter. Then for more rare and powerful items that are like treasures of times past or powerful relics, legendary items, they may need to trace that item's history. - Is it an elven blade? Then we should bring it to an elder elf who may remember a poem or have a book that details the history of that blade. - Is it an amulet carved of stone with a large diamond set in it? Perhaps try bringing it to a dwarf or something. Or a pair of huge gauntlets, perhaps visit a library to study books about the lore of giants. This would also be there to allow them to find out "this item of legend is told to bear a curse", or it could just be a belt of giant's strength that the players recognize immediately, but implement a rule that requires them to learn HOW the belt is activated or attuned to, so they can't just be like "I equip it, even if my character has no idea what it does". - Maybe to activate its latent powers, one needs to climb a mountain wearing nothing but said belt. - Or a magical elven sword only accepts you as its master if you perform a ceremony of marriage under the light of a full moon, to symbolize the marriage between blade and swordsman. - Or a crown of intellect needing a spell to be cast for its magic to function. - Or a prestigious looking robe which's magic only activates when it is draped upon your body by another person, as it was meant to be the vestment of a prestigious archmage. - Or a magical ring that only works when worn on a Mage Hand, that makes that spell more powerful. That way finding a magic item is also a quest, and you can hand them out at earlier levels for players to be excited about them, and look forward to unlocking this item's powers. - Hand someone a Vorpal Blade at level 1, it was in the tomb of some warrior in a crypt they explored at level 3, but until they unlock the blade's power at a later point in the campaign, it simply functions as a +1 longsword that deals critical damage with advantage or with a bonus 1d4 of damage.

[@zug-zug]

I've changed Silvery Barbs to be 2nd level. It still gets used, but not as much. I also don't tell people more information when hit, other than "you are hit". I started this a long time ago due to the Shield spell. When I give damage I'll inform them if it was a crit with the description of the damage but it is too late to use a "when hit" reaction. They could still use a "when taking damage" reaction of course. This way these reactions are not only used when most effective. I also like the narrative, especially with Shield of the attack sometimes blowing through their hasty defense.

[@gameraven13]

There are enough abilities that are used in responses to crits like the Grave Cleric's Sentinel at Death's Door, so I'd at least let them know the crit. I agree on the not telling them the number rolled though (unless it's comically high, I have to keep up the DM meme of "does a 28 hit?" against someone with like 17 or less AC) as it adds to the making an important choice factor. But yeah my typical levels of info are "welp that was a nat 1" "that'll miss" "that'll hit" and "oooh ok nat 20" when enemies are rolling to hit. Granted, I guess if no one has abilities where the crit is actually important, a simple hit/miss is fine, but idk. I personally think it just feels bad to be like "it hit" "ok no reactions" "alright well that was a crit so."

[@zug-zug]

@@gameraven13 Yeah if there is a mechanical reason to tell them I will, but I view reactions are reflexes, they don't have time to carefully analyze cost/benefits. So they get the minimum information. Of course for the example you gave, since I do inform there is a crit when damage is relayed, it would work fine. I've never had a player play a Grave Cleric though, so no experience there. ;) I also combine everything together if there is no reason to keep them separate. Depends on the party. I'm not trying to penalize people, I'm trying to immerse them and help them stop treating everything like a wargame

[@luketfer]

Funnily enough thats explicitly how the Shield spell is suppose to work...which works great inperson behind a DM screen but a lot of online DMs roll in the open to show they're being fair/its just their playstyle. The DM rolls, tells you that your character has been hit, you say you use shield and announce your new AC, DM checks the roll and says whether it still hits or not is how the shield spell is MEANT to be used.

[@Majiger]

Players are always upset at counterspell because they don't understand what their options as a spellcaster are. Learn to prepare your spells behind cover instead of in full view of the enemy spellcaster. Have people bait out reactions from the spellcaster before blowing your load. Target the spellcaster first before using powerful magic. Silence the spellcaster. Block line of sight of the spellcaster. BLIND the spellcaster. You think a martial has a bad time? No, they simply have disadvantage. Casters simply are not allowed to cast most spell due to the wonderful words "A target/spot you can see". Players like to complain about GMs treating NPCs as if they have more computing power than 90s AI but refuse to open the player's handbook and read how spells/abilities work beyond RAW.

[@seansimons1257]

idea for spell fixes: comprehend languages: perhaps comprehend languages isn't perfect (especially for ancient or alien languages) for example it might translate words literally, and the players would still have to find the context behind the word choice. like imagine how someone who doesn't know English phrases would take "this injury has been a thorn in my side" maybe they'd take it literally and assume the injury is literally from a thorn in your side speak with dead: honestly there are tons of ways to hide info from speak with dead 1. the dead person hate's the party and refuses to tell the truth 2. the answers are cryptic or obfuscating 3. the answers are misleading or inconclusive 4. the dead person has a secret and will lie to protect it 5. the dead person simply doesn't know the answer to your question 6. the dead person was mistaken in life and shares false information 7. the dead person only spoke a little-known language (in which case you'd also need a way to speak that language) 8. the corpse had its mouth damaged to the point where it can't speak 9. the speak with dead spell was already cast on it in the last 10 days remove curse: alter it maybe in one of the following ways: 1. it only suppresses the curse, not removes it 2. it has to be upcast to match the severity of the curse 3. it's actually just the final step of removing a curse, for example to cure lycanthropy you need a creature to ingest a wolfbane which temporarily suppresses the curse, and if you target them with remove curse while lycanthropy is suppressed, they are cured

[@CrazyTasteyPi]

On the issue of Remove Curse, it's worth mentioning, since apparently 5e hasn't examined this, but it was elaborated on in 3.5. Namely in the supplementary, Book of Vile Darkness (yes it's an actual game Manuel in 3.5) where it made it clear that Remove Curse only works on "weak curses". Namely, anything Bestow Curse is capable of doing, but there are significantly more powerful curses that a simple casting of a spell won't get rid of. Examples were things like a Dying Curse, that involves afflicting someone with a curse powered by the rage that could be in someone's dying breaths. A hex woven by a hag or a full coven that is so intricate and empowered by fell magics that it can't be lifted by a mere wave of the hand, and other such situations where truly "Dire Curses" would require more than a PC to just cast a spell to end it... if it could be ended at all. Keeping this in mind, and how such curses follow how we understand these types of magics to work in folk lore, can go a long way to not actually needing to modify how Remove Curse works, let alone banning the spell out right.

[@tideoftime]

In Re: Silvery Barbs -- I haven't had any issue with SB. Relative to its "must-have" value, that's no different than, for example, Shield, or a mass-damage spell (Fireball or Lightning Bolt, et al) being key/clutch and "must-have" spells, if albeit for different reasons. Some spells/effects are, indeed, "must-haves" and _should be_ as a matter of course relative to many schools of mystical thought/teachings, just as with the other above noted spells.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

Comparing Comprehend Languages to translation apps is a great metaphor. Because the translation will be flawed. The translation app will translate things wrong or at least miss details someone who actually speaks the language will pick up on.

[@Echiewel]

For Goodberry I think the 3.5 version can be an alternative. It gives 2d4 enchanted berries instead of 10, so it's a bit harder to know how many spell slots to save. It also limits the healing the spell can do to 8 points per person per day, which, meh, that just adds paperwork. But the important one is: the spell requires freshly picked berries to enchant. So if you're traveling through the wilderness with no towns in sight and your rations were eaten by an owlbear Goodberry now gives you an extra option for how to obtain your meal for today, as well as good in-combat healing, but you shouldn't treat it as your only option. If you pass a river you're going to go fishing rather than marching on confident there will surely be a berry patch ahead. For Conjure Animals my DM decided based on I think a sage advice somewhere to create a random animal table. I can ask the spirits for 8 wolves (or yaks, or giant bats, or giant frogs, or...), but I'm going to get 8 of one random creature of CR 1/4 or lower. Could be yakals, could be camels, could be fish. It does not solve the action imbalance. In fact I'm making extra rolls now. But it does solve me abusing this spell all the time coming from the philosophy that every problem has a solution that starts with "I summon 8 ..." The other summoning spells do let the caster pick their summons, because those are only used by NPCs so far.

[@Kian30398]

My big rule with Counterspell is that a player or NPC MUST be able to understand that the person in question is casting. A player I had was within 60 feet during a level 20 one shot and the enemy used power word kill but they couldn't tell what spell was being used due to the distance and so they asked "can I counterspell" and I simply told them no.

[@futurehistoryarchaeologist4480]

I think putting a time limit on speak with dead is a good compromise if you absolutely want to edit the spell to maintain mystery plots. The show Pushing Daisies is an excellent example to look at for this. The detective only has one minute to ask questions and while the victim not knowing who killed them does happen, they frequently are stuck with incomplete information or answers that raise more questions than they solve. Even something as seemingly simple as "my wife killed me" proves to be insufficient when they find out the victim is a polygamist.

[@hypernova5249]

I think giving remove curse a level would be interesting. Like if your curse has a level, you need to up-cast remove curse to the equivalent level in order to break it.

[@sk8rdman]

In AD&D (2nd edition) Identify was a MUCH more costly and difficult spell to cast. It took 8 uninterrupted hours to cast. For each property or feature of an item the wizard had to roll a % which scaled with their level to a maximum of 90%, with a 5% chance of them getting false information. They could also only do this for a number of properties equal to their wizard level. On a failed check, the wizard could not try again until they had leveled up at least once. The actual information given with a successful check was usually vague. For example, "the sword gives a bonus to attack and damage" rather than, "It's a +2 sword", or "the wand has only a faint amount of magical charge" rather than, "the wand has 4 charges left". And then on top of all of that, the wizard would lose 8 points of Constitution (which might knock him unconscious), and would require 24 hours of rest to recover. The material costs were pretty cool though. They didn't just list a 100gp pearl and an owl feather. Instead they described how you had to steep the feather in wine with the pearl added, and that the wine had to be drunk by the caster. And if you used a luckstone instead of a pearl, then the properties of the item could be learned exactly. (It's unclear if the pearl or luckstone were consumed by the spell, but it would appear so). This is not to say that DM's should adopt this version of the spell in its entirety, but it could inspire some ideas for how you might modify it if you wanted to rebalance it. One simple idea I've used is to say that the 1st level version of the spell only identifies the properties of Common and Uncommon rarity items. For rarer items you need to use a higher level slot, 3rd for rare, 5th for very rare, 7th for legendary, and 9th for artifacts. This means that the spell still is useful, but also that if the party finds some powerful item that you want to retain some mystery, they might not have the level to cast it, and might need to just experiment with it or try to convince a high level wizard to identify it for them. Increasing the casting time and/or inflicting exhaustion could also be applied if you want to restrict the spell to a downtime activity, rather than the sort of thing the players cast immediately on every item they find, removing any mystery or opportunity to experiment.

[@spiritvdc5109]

I tend to nerf spells rather than ban them - a prime example would be when I was designing a campaign around Ancient Egypt, I had a whole homebrew mechanic built up around learning bits and pieces of hieroglyphic symbols, using down time to study ancient texts and improve one's rolls when trying to translate the writing in ancient tombs... and I remembered the spell "Comprehend Languages" exists. But one of my players had already taken it as part of her repertoire as a wizard who studied ancient languages - so I had to have a conversation with her about the potential of this spell to entirely handwave both the mechanic I'd been crafting and the vibe of an Egyptologist trying to translate a dead language. She agreed she'd rather have the experience of struggling to translate the mysteries of an unknown language rather than just handwaving it with a spell, so we agreed that the Comprehend Languages spell only works 100% when used on languages people in the modern day speak, while if you use it on ancient glyphic, it only gives you a vague emotional concept because there's no direct translation in the modern day anymore, thus it aids your research slightly without just handing you the answer.

[@ramuk1933]

7:08 My campaign has a lot of languages that my players wouldn't have any way to speak, so Comprehend Languages is very useful to them, in addition to magic items(?) that give them extra languages.

[@raymondharnack4160]

I rarely use counter spell as a DM for all the reasons you listed. There is just other fun things to use your reaction on as a caster that are really fun if you look for them.

[@fortunatus1]

I don't ban spells but certain spells are problematic. I change the spells to try to balance them. For example, I change Silvery Barbs to be a 2d level spell and I change the trigger of it to: when a creature you can see within 60 ft of you makes an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw. That means that the players must cast it prior to the roll. They do not know ahead of time what the result will be.

[@GeekMasterGames]

For Bestow Curse: For more permanent curses that should have a more effective impact, you suppress the curse temporarily, but not long.

[@SCI-FIWIZARDMAN]

I think cursed in D&D are meant to be more of a ‘common’ affliction than they are in conventional media. Similar to how being poisoned in the game can be easily cured by swigging an antitoxin or via a simple casting of Lesser Resoration (a 2nd-tier spell), curses are meant to be common enough that most can be remedied by a casting of Remove Curse. I imagine curses as a sort of “status” that can be inflicted by certain monsters, or by magical traps, kinda like in video games. These kinds of curses aren’t necessarily crippling or wholly life-changing, they just tend to be temporary debuffs and minor/major inconveniences. Like being cursed with Blindness/Deafness, reduced Intelligence, etc. But then, there are also extremely powerful curses that go well beyond simple debuffs and can’t be magically removed by a wave of the Cleric’s hand. THESE are cursed like lycanthropy, a banshee’s lament, a haunted house, etc.

[@khananiel-joshuashimunov4561]

I've never DM'd for remove curse players, but my plan for it was always scaling levels. It works as written for Bestow Curse curses, but for "custom" or complicated curses, you'd need to cast it at a higher level and maybe some more interesting components. Think of the downtime enchanting rules. I had a similar solution to identify, that you needed more powerful identify to decipher more intricate magics. It led to a really funny moment with my players. I had a nonmagical amulet that was on clearance, and the player botched hidden insight check as to why it was so cheap. Of the various possible reasons I gave to my player, the one that stuck with him the most was that it might be cursed. He went to a wizard to get it identified, and the wizard said it was mundane, or that it had a spell which was beyond his ability to identify. The entire campaign my barbarian went from wizard to wizard, convinced that the next wizard would reveal something which would justify the hundreds of gp he spent on this thing that cost 5gp.

[@blacklisted756]

How i'd deal with Silvery barbs is simple, the spell says "when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself makes an attack, ability check, or saving throw" meaning that as long as the PC does not have line of sight of the enemy, they simply can't use it, its only really OP because there are a lot of DMs and Players unwilling to use the line of sight mechanics of D&D (outside of the obvious stuff) which is fine, but it often does end up making some of these spells like Silvery Barbs a little more powerful than they were meant to be

[@AMRosa10]

Having just gone through the situations where four of the 5th level characters in our party were Cursed by a Rakshasa, and none of the Priests in the city we were in knew how to remove the curse and we were tapped out of healing potions, it took 2 long rests and our Cleric burning through both of his 3rd level spell slots to "cure" all of us, and entering into the next combat encounter without two of us or the Cleric being able to take their next long rest, it would have really been bad if Remove Curse had also been banned.

[@CaseyWilkesmusic]

Guidance can be a ritual, or put a spendable limit on them. It should cost less than a 1st level spell but more than a free cantrip. It could cost a certain amount of gold to cast, it could incur diety disapproval (roll a d20 for each guidance…on a 1 they incur wrath from the god) there are many ways to make it work if the players are on board

[@justinedwards5047]

I think a good way of dealing with the larger groups of conjured creatures and avoiding forever turns is to just let all the players pilot 1 or 2 of the conjured creatures. The rest of the party is generally a lot less annoyed when the spell gives them an extra wolf they get to deal damage with in addition to their own character than when the druid and their critters basically get 6 turns on a row.

[@ilmari1452]

I don't ban any of these spells, but in my more "realistic" campaign settings, I do amend a lot of the ones you've mentioned - e.g. goodberry can only count as nutrition 1 day in 3, and teleport, plantsport, etc. have a limit of 15 miles - not because I want to limit the players, per se, but because I want the world to plausibly have a fragmented patchwork of countries and trade routes and exploration etc, that teleport circles would realistically transform society to something completely alien. I also limit comprehend languages to only working if someone still living in the world speaks the language... but that's because one of my regular players is an archaeologist, and I enjoy putting in genuine archaeological mysteries for her characters to be properly scholarly over. :p

[@theMifyoo]

So I noticed that when you were talking about transport via plants you put up true resurrection instead.

[@MrGeldhart]

Best way to deal with Silvery Barbs is to have the occasional NPC cast it when it would be funny as hell.

[@starsapart9311]

You know what, it's funny - I never ban silvery barbs and I've played in multiple games (including Strixhaven) where players have it. The reroll often DOESN'T change a hit to a miss, maybe 40% or less of the time, so it often gets used mostly to cancel crits (not unlike the Grave cleric) or just give advantage. It gets spammed early on and then that stops and it gets used more tactically, and NOT everyone takes it. Maybe I play with unusual groups of people?

[@uberculex]

The issue with the spell is also mid-high level where you basically can use it once a turn without consequence since it's a lvl1 spell.

[@kamiitto7574]

So in my homebrew game I run Remove Curse kinda like the channel divinity Turn Undead or a little like counterspell. Curses have spell levels, if the curse is the same level or lower it works as written. If the curse is one or two levels higher, Remove Curse disables it temporarily normally an hour. If the curse is three spell levels or more above the level you cast remove cures it does nothing. I let my players know ahead of time there are a couple "primal curses" that can't be removed normally and need special materials. Lycanthropy and vampirism are the examples I used.

[@azurewraith2585]

for guidance I’ve ruled that it can only be used a number of times per day equal to proficiency bonus. It’s not a crazy limit but it stops players from spamming it For remove curse I’ve made it so if it can’t remove a curse it instead tells you how to lift it. That way it is still useful without it breaking certain plot hooks

[@ChandleRulz]

I really think that with a lot of these, the GM can figure out ways to make these spells sometimes not work, if they break a mystery or something, for example.. like with the Comprehend Languages to understand a letter, you can simply suggest that the letter is enchanted with a protection spell for exactly such instance or that the content is written in code and they still need to go to a certain NPC to decipher it. It might be a lot of work to think of those scenarios and plan ahead for them, but I would prefer a party that can outsmart me with things I overlooked, then just ban stuff outright because I'm too lazy to think about all the ways they can break my intended way

[@resonantinsanity9521]

For remove/bestow curse, identify, and Magical Aura, I chose to just utilize spell levels since I really think should have been integrated in the first place. Curses of a higher level can only be removed or identified by a spell of equal power. For seeing past Aura the spell has to be a higher level.

[@rougenarwhal8378]

most of these like guidance are tools in a player's toolbelt, good for using in specific scenarios, the problem comes when it becomes too applicable to too many situations, or when the benefit gained is much higher than the cost.

[@jj-sc1kq]

I don't play 5e but found this interesting. My biggest issue with comprehend languages is that it takes away from the character that is choosing to learn languages. I feel like any spell that makes a character creation choice irrelevant is one to be looked at cautiously. Polymorph gets banned in every edition is seems. The bit about how mat mercer used Identify was interesting. I've struggled with the same thoughts you mentioned about Remove Curse. I agree that if a spell is the automatic best choice, it should be looked at closely. (I don't know about Silvery Barbs.)

[@tagabundok1]

I'm reminded of a DM who would whine about our party casting Dissonant Whispers on his monsters when they were in melee range of our fighters and rogues. He hated that it gave us Attacks of Opportunity. His argument was, "I don't want to have to use that same spell on you." My response was, "Then don't use it. I've never seen that spell on a monster stat block, so you are never obligated to use it."

[@fluxjoint2388]

A counterpoint to your having remove curse only work on bestow curse. Dispel magic would just remove the effects of the spell anyways, and it's the same level with a much bigger range and the same casting time.

[@SlinkyTWF]

The only spell I banned was Chaos Bolt. Because it was impossible to code in Fantasy Grounds since you don't know the damage type until you have already rolled the damage, which requires backtracking.

[@tom_curtis]

Regarding Counterspell, the spell description says that on a successful use, the spell that is countered fails, and has no effect. Losing a spell slot is an effect! I would interpret the rule such that if your spell is counterspelled, than you have not used the spell slot and can recast the same (or another) spell on the next turn. A mage using counterspell is then burning a resource to delay an effect, not to shut it down entirely. That should take away some of the sting for a player being counterspelled, and at the same time make it less of a go to option for shutting down npc casters.

[@bristowski]

This is a good channel. I like Mike.

[@Melina_Evarblume_Seelie]

It is indeed a good channel. We do like Mike.

[@charlym.7622]

For remove curse I like it to temporarily negate the curses’ effect. Meaning it helps to stabilize a party member while they can resolve their quest for actually removing the curse

[@TGehle]

The "comprehend languages" spell could be altered into "the more living beeings are capable of speaking / writing it, the liklier it is for the spell to work. That way ancient inscriptions in languages no living beeing speaks anymore would be hard to understand. (This does not have to be rocket-science: just estimate that for common and less common languages the spell works as usual, but for very rare languages there are some obstacles. Like you could have the player roll a d20 for every paragraph of text, on 11-19 the player understands the overall meaning of a text, below that the player has to roll several times to decipher the text. A nat 20 explains itself...:)

[@Stephen-Fox]

Ohh I like Dragon Slayer as a genre name. I think it also nicely gets at the difference between pre-WotC era D&D (which tended towards non-heroic fantasy about stealing stuff from tombs - dungeon fantasy) and post-WotC era D&D (which had epic heroes with in depth combat minigames that only sometimes involves traversing dungeons - dragonslayer) I was not expecting a reference to Torchwood in a D&D video today.

[@nargileh1]

In PF2 you don't need to ban, players need GM approval for 'uncommon' and 'rare' spells, same thing for feats & magic items. So for D&D I would recommend you finish WoTC's work and make a list of gm approval items/spells/feats at start of your campaign.

[@Esperologist]

Eh, I'll consider this... a bit. Guidance : I'm generally fine with it. Sometimes it won't make sense for it's use, so those would be denied. But they are giving up other cantrips for this boost effect. Comprehend Languages : It's a full spell. Just take it into account if the party has it. Make it where the direct translation becomes effectively a riddle. However, if they track down someone who knows the language, that person can also localize it for them so the riddle is solved. Goodberry : I've seen some variations on it. Personally, I would just rule that yes they can survive on it... but it isn't filling. I would go with they still feel hungry, and the day after sustaining on Goodberry, they will gain one temporary exhaustion. This exhaustion adds to the stack of regular exhaustion, but cannot cause their death. Thus, if having this exhaustion would be enough to result in death, they do not die unless they gain another regular exhaustion. This exhaustion also goes away the day after they eat at least one proper meal. Identify : This is a useless spell anyway. Because normally a 30 minute rest allows identifying one object. Every character I had with Identify basically never got to use it. Healing Spirit : If it is trivializing their adventuring day... add more encounters. When they run out of castings, give them one more encounter to rough them up. The goal is the game is a challenge... but they survive. Counterspell : It's a spell slot to prevent a spell, they are choosing to give up something for it. NPCs should have requirements before they will cast it... so they might use it against something pointless to counter. But still, I think it is better when PCs have it, because they don't usually know what is being cast... so they have to decide without knowing. Speak With Dead : I don't see the issue. Just know if a character has it, and be ready for that. And for a mystery story, it's easy enough to make it happen without them seeing who done it... attacked from behind, food poisoned, gas suddenly released into the room, etc. Just make it an option to get information that could be gotten with investigation and alchemy. Maybe even stuff that couldn't have gotten... like the attacker had no shadow, or there was the sound of crickets, or some other clue. Summoning : Yeah, better to overhaul them. There are so many ways to make them softer on initiative flooding, and potency... Remove Curse : If one of the players has access to it, throw in a few so they get to use it... but don't try and make plot that requires it to stick around. If they don't have it, then throw them or or two... any more than that can derail the campaign. Not much fun to go gathering enough funds to afford to remove 7 cursed items from a party. And some curses might be mild enough to be fun for the players to leave it alone. Resurrection : In campaigns I have played, I basically never bother with it. The effort to haul the body, find a caster, and afford it... means I've now spent real life months playing a 'fill in' character, which I will probably continue with, relegating my previous character to be a home base guard or running off on their own. Charm Monster : If the boss is a monster, is it really going to change their disposition in the long run? After an hour, it's probably back to what it was doing. Polymorph : Another one to just account for. More encounters so they use it up. Let them have fun. I mean, congrats if they polymorph a dragon into a rabbit and then drop it from high enough that it takes massive overflow fall damage. Teleport : For some events, these are needed. One campaign, it felt like we were just spending months running around the map, always 20 steps behind. And when we did eventually catch up, they would teleport away. It reached a point where it was anxiety to play, because I felt like our 'hero' characters were only showing up well after things happened. The only reason our characters would arrive before the world ending event was that it was a game and of course we would. All the times we received sendings or visions to inform us of an attack... that we would arrive a month or two late for. I either want a campaign that doesn't feel like I need to be teleporting, or be able to teleport. Wish : Once players get access to it, the campaign is probably closing in on over anyway... so if the players use it overhaul the world, then it can just be a way to end the campaign. But it can also contribute something interesting to the campaign. But, most of the time that level 9 slot will probably just be a spell. Silvery Barbs : It's a spell slot for the effect. Again, just build encounters or throw more encounters... so they use up the slots. And each slot they fill with it is a slot not used for something else. I've never actually taken it... because don't see the value of a spell slot to maybe deal with a rare crit, or try and prevent a hit. I'd just have more fun using a different spell. Of course, this doesn't matter. I've been playing Pathfinder 2e for a few years instead. Some aspects feel better, some not. However, I have a few campaigns I want to run... and the amount I would want to change for either D&D or Pathfinder is a bit much. I've looked at several systems, and haven't found one that feels right for what I'm wanting. My conclusion was to build my own system... so I've been working on that.

[@Nomad6763]

I feel like curses should have a level analogous to spell level, and require upcasting remove curse to that level in order to be effective. Either that or require material component specific to the curse which requires an entire quest to acquire.

[@ADT1995]

I hadn't previously banned guidance but I am after the current campaign, we've had table discussions about it, and most of the party is fair about the spell. But there's one player in particular that has made it even more of a problem. His reaction to being told you had to only cast it when it makes sense was to decide it always made sense to be casting it, and when I've asked him not to, or imposed penalties because of it (usually in the form of saves vs exhaustion, because doing a pushup is also a resourceless action but if you do one every six seconds all day you're going to be exhausted) it's just led to hard feelings. So henceforth in campaigns with that player guidance will always be banned.

[@lilbatterwitch7912]

I've seen "Speak with Dead" used by the killers so that it couldn't be used by the investigators, at least not for 10 days which is more than enough time to get away.

[@wesleyjudson599]

Some comments on each spell. You mentioned why some might be banned, but let me go into some more detail for some: 1. Guidance. With effective teamwork and description, the Help actions provides a similar buff. But the Help action with Guidance stacks. So, in many cases, its unclear if a Character can provide both. In addition, from a power balance perspective, Guidance is clearly stronger than other cantrips, like Resistance. This might be a case where those other cantrip should be buffed, but its worth noting. Finally, spells like Guidance make certain DCs at high levels feel problematic. If the DC is 21, some characters can use these stacking bonuses to their skill to reach that DC 95% of the time(or more), whilst others can never reach that DC. This usually encourages teamwork, but can also feel bad in case when the party is split up. 2. Comprehend Languages. I've never heard of anyone being annoyed with comprehend languages, but I can see why it would cause problems with mysteries. There are other methods to gain a similar benefit in the game, and ultimately the fix is to make clear in session 0 that there are some languages that Comprehend Languages doesn't work on. IF that's important for your table, which I doubt it is. 3. Goodberry. Similar to Comprehend Languages, but I've heard complaints about it. The main issue is that it represents a change in gameplay style, one that encourages roleplay rather than wargaming. And some people would prefer one over the other. It also has a problem with the wording, being unclear as to HOW it sustains the person, and what happens when you gobble a bunch of them at once, since to gain the benefits, the character needs to spend an action to eat it. 4. Identify. I think you made a ruling mistake. It takes a short rest to attune to a magic item, which normally tells you what it does. However, the DMG talks about cursed items not always revealing themselves even when attuned/identified as an optional rule. In addition, if it is cursed, then becoming attuned means it becomes very hard to get rid of. ie, your already fallen for the trap. Identify is sometimes seen as a counter to cursed items, but because of the DMG optional rule, its actually a trap pick, tricking the player into thinking they are safe. I would say its should reasonably be banned, if only for its poor design. 5. Healing Spirit. I never had issues with the spell, other than players taking it not realizing it was nerfed. It is very strong healing compared to most healing spells, but most healing spells are too weak. And I'd much prefer they take this spell over Leomund's or Rope Trick, which do similar things, but much more poorly designed. That said, even with the nerf, its still pretty good. It never competes with higher level healing spells, but it scales much better than lower level spells, making it a fair pick for any healing character that wants to prepare other stuff. 6. Counterspell. The main issue with the idea of "don't give it to the bad guys" is that it can ruined the suspension of disbelief. Like giving a magic potion on a intelligent enemy, then not having them use it in the battle, when it would've been very helpful to them. There is a similar problem with including enemies with effects like sneak attack, since it can do so much upfront damage. I guess the main thing to realize is that your table works one of two ways: either the encounters are balanced around the PCs having plot armor, or they aren't. And if they don't have plot armor, banning Counterspell makes a bunch of sense. Especially since readying a cast of Dispel Magic works in a more balanced way. 7. Speak with Dead. Copy-Paste comprehend languages, except its actually more interesting, and less problematic. 8. Conjure Spells. The limitation where the GM needs to have the stat block, and choose the summon creature, can slow the game down. However, its overloading the initiative that really takes the cake. However, D&D is largely an easy game. If you include a timer to make players play their turns quickly, and they make sub-optimal plays, they will probably be fine. Usually, the reason for a party doing poorly involves being split up, or infighting. Less common is bad luck or poor tactics. As such, if you are playing at a table where the players finish their turns quickly, Conjure spells are fine, as long as you as the GM can handle the fast pace as well. (Don't make PCs roll the animals; use the mass combat rules from the DMG.) 9. Remove Curse. There are examples of curses in modules that can't be removed with this spell. In that sense, this is another "trap pick" much like Identify. Weird that curses keep having this issue. That said, you can cause long lasting effects from other sources, like lingering injuries, and generally it doesn't bother players that Remove Curse doesn't help. In that sense, I feel like keeping Remove Curse, despite its "trap", it might be a good idea to keep, because it can deal with some problems but not others. But I understand that some GMs don't like it when the game can feel like it tricks the players, so it depends on the table. 10. Resurrection. Most of these spells do keep stakes in the game. Some require material components that the party can't afford, leading to quest hooks. Some have other negative consequences, like Reincarnate. Some have major limitations, like Revivify. Ultimately, most of these don't need to be banned. However, if you are playing a game where the NPCs have access to spells that the players do, then this becomes much weirder. The idea of burning the bodies should come up at least once, possibly twice when the PCs realize the enemies might try to do the same to them. In addition, a lot of GMs do not pace out rewards/money appropriately, meaning that some spells really do remove the stakes. So some GMs might want to remove these spells, but mostly because its too much work to keep them at their table. 11. Charm Monster. Can end the fight quickly. A ton of spells can do this, depending on circumstances. A fireball can end a fight, and it doesn't have anything specific to it other than damage. Part of the fun of D&D is that some encounters will be easy, and other will be hard. Often, the GM doesn't know which is which, because the players will be weird and zig instead of zag. But, in this case, Legendary Resistance, immunity to charmed condition, and other circumstances limit the spell. This is not the worst offender (Forcecage is). 12. Polymorph. This is a problem that has more to do with exploiting the game, rather than the spell. Concentration spells are usually very powerful, if you don't lose concentration. Most casters will optimize for this. As such, this becomes a problem. You can design encounters so that the terrain forces concentration saves(like stormy weather), or enemies deal enough damage to the hiding spellcaster (like fireball), but it might be annoying to do this. So for the lazy GMs out there like, I understand you. Start giving your enemies the spell, and then you can feel powerful. Or, you know, just let the players have easy encounters. That's fine too. 13. Teleportation Effects. This is mostly a problem with a lot of modules. They are useful for a little while, but often dungeons and regions like Barovia negate these spells, making them "trap picks". They aren't as bad as other options, because they are still useful, just not when it matters, which might be a bit too mean for some GMs. I think most GMs realize the limitations on most of those spells are pretty effective. Like, you can't use the tree teleport to a desert. That said, if a GM is trying to make player choices matter, and refuses to move the plot in front of the players I can understand why trying to create everywhere in the world is too much work, and these spells deserve the ban. 14. Wish. Using this spell to recreate the spells Simulacrum or Clone is the most problematic use of the Wish spell. The other effects are more than reasonable, especially because the GM can use it like a Monkey's Paw, if the player gets too greedy. But copying any 8th level or lower spell, as an action, with no components, is really problematic. That said, for most high level games, its fine. You just can't let the PCs have downtime at all. If you do, you might as well end the campaign due to all the broken stuff Wish can do. But luckily, high level campaigns very rarely let the PCs relax. World-ending threats and all that. But if you want to run a high level campaign for an extend period, I understand why you want to ban the spell. 15. Silvery Barbs. You said what you needed to.

[@andreweisenberg5770]

Recently, I’m running a campaign where I banned a lot of spells. But not because I felt they were broken, just because I’m telling a story where reviving the dead and creating undead isn’t something that happens (unless you’re the main antagonists.) It’s all in service of the story I’m trying to tell, and the moment I run a normal campaign, I’m probably unbanning them. As a Y-Gi-Oh player, I’ve learned over the years that a game with lots of bans doesn’t necessarily make it *good.* If anything, too many bans can homogenize and make formats/games less fun.

[@abrilvonbunny6205]

Healing spirit was the only spell that I had to ban immediately after reading it when my player brought it without asking me about it... it was so broken... I was so scared for my balance, saw my life and campaign cross my eyes ...

[@BroKenYaKnow]

Healing Spirit isn't really that crazy tho, it takes up your concentration. Can only heal a *maximum* of 6d6 and takes consecutive bonus actions to change where it is on the field. Your party has to conga line if they want to all get a piece, otherwise they only get 1d6 a time each round. And biggest of all, only druids and rangers get it. 2nd lvl spells for Rangers are big and druids have so many better things they can be doing with their concentration. Upcasting can get a little crazier, but it's really only for casting it at third lvl. Beyond that it's actually way better to cast *out* of combat than in. Aura of Vitality is the same thing, but way better.

[@thunderflare59]

All the Ryan George fans just became the Leonardo DeCaprio pointing meme.

[@maeror1022]

We had a chat about banning spells in the group I'm a player in, and ultimately we decided the only spell that needs to be banned is Silvery Barbs. In the duet campaign I DM for, we've not talked about banning spells, and I don't think we need to. The dynamics of a duet campaign are very different (am I really going to counterspell my only player? I'd better have a good narrative reason)

[@TheeManLion]

If there was any spell that might be worth banning to me would be Tasha's Mind Whip. The efficiency on up casting the spell to hit one additional target per spell slot above 2nd and the amount of restriction it places on whatever the target is greatly reduces the threat of said target. Everyone just gets to move away from any melee target affected then its only option is to move closer or run away. I also only say might cause the player I've played with intentionally take options to make their characters weaker. (mostly the ones that are extremely efficient with the game itself)

[@tableslam]

In a similar way to Taliesin's tongue-in-cheek interpretation of his role as "the hacker" in Honey Heist by physically hacking at things, it's fun to interpret Remove Curse as magical censorship of naughty words

[@arcturuslight_]

XD

[@Arkylie]

So... there's a problem if the wizard in town is high level and you need to go to her for Identify. But it makes *more* sense if the wizard in town is *low* level and you still need to go to her for Identify... even if one of your player characters is a wizard??

[@sardonic7727]

My DM had me buy Silvery Barbs for more expensive than a normal first level spell scroll and then I had to roll to keep it. I won't abuse it because I'm grateful to me DM for allowing me to get it. (I play a follower of Beshaba and I really like the badluck feel to it)

[@AquaLunaDesigns]

My DM buffed Comprehend Languages by combining that and Tongues as a reward for my character who tries to befriend every enemy.

[@louiseah7662]

Silvery Barbs is way powerful, but I think the reason it is taken so much is because there are so few ‘reaction’ options for players with magic.

[@MegaBendex]

I think we need to collectively "get over" this idea that taking away player agency with paralysis or stuns or counterspells is the worst. If you think about it, they are actually great ways to limit the incredible power of a player character without going to far as to kill them or knock them unconscious. It shows a monster or villain to be extra strategically tough, that they can remove threats with effects rather than trying to brute force something. Interesting that being unconscious or dead also "takes away your turn and the your agency" but no-one has suggested to remove those from the game yet, and being stunned is 1000 times better than being dead!

[@TonkarzOfSolSystem]

It's seems to me that changing a spell or "just don't use it" are both forms of ban.

[@TeamDragoonX]

Guys, don't ban spells, just learn to adapt. If its becoming a problem in an edge case just talk to the player and come to a compromise for the sake of everyone having fun. Don't like reaction spells? Make the situation one where the player has to really judge when to use their reaction, because it might have consequences immediately after if they're reckless with them.

[@simonboyle4459]

I've also given my players a ring of 3 wishes, with a single charge, it was a gift from a great Marid. The party used it when an allied spellcaster used his final action to cast sending to the party. They wished the caster was with them. So now they had a stone statue of their friend.

[@WhammeWhamme]

Problem with the "obvious solution" of "don't have NPCs cast Counterspell" is that that can feel like the DM is going easy on you - if Counterspell is a spell that exists in the world, and it has a powerful impact, why are the PCs the only ones who bother using it (particularly when it's specifically most useful when you're more powerful than your enemies but outnumbered)? So it can be frustrating when used and immersion-breaking when not used and there's 4+ players at the table so the players as a whole may be split between those two camps.

[@koboldqueen3055]

This vid has reminded the importance of question for spells from earlier editions. I like the idea of sending players on quests for wish and silverly barbs. And require things like having access to a teleportation circle. I'm also into make material components quests to some level of another. Particularly plane shift tuning forks. I think it brings a interesting challenge to being the most powerful classes at your table. You need to quest to use that power

[@RottenRogerDM]

I wish more people would recognize and use the material component cost for certain spells. Total Cash cost of all the Adventure League spells is 96,742 gp 8 sp 2 cp.

[@diegomountin585]

Perfect use of a Pitch Meeting clip lol😂

[@SapphWolf]

I try to only take Silvery Barbs when I'm playing a trickster character or a primarily support character since it makes thematic sense. Hell, my Tabaxi sorc with that and subtle spell used it to mess with the party as often as they used it in combat.

[@SheBeast-OG]

I don’t ban it, but I do give the DM caveat that I reserve the right to say Dispel Magic will not work on certain powerful magical effects. I don’t abuse it, I’ve just had to cut enough sessions short because someone dispels an entire dungeons worth of content. There’s a reason the spell isn’t in Baldur’s Gate 3. It’s a lot of work to try to account for everything that could potentially happen in a high magic world if something is dispelled. Dispel Prepared Content.

[@Hauke-ph5ui]

Yes, I do ban some spells in my D&D games regardless of edition: I want the danger to be more real and I really dislike the constant reviving which is the reason why all the revive the dead versions like Raise Dead or Resurrection are banned. That doesn't mean that reviving the dead cannot happen, but that is up for the gods to decide - and they don't grant this without a very, very good reason. Let alone just because a 9th level cleric feels like "oh I'm going to learn Raise Dead today". And no - an adventurer dying in battle is not a good reason. Some spells like Wish are simply too powerfull to belong in player character hands, not to mention that this spell in particular can literally break the game if the DM isn't carefull. That's why I ban Wish for players. Doesn't mean a small handfull of the most powerfull centuries old archmages of the world (who are always NPCs) don't have access to it, but even these powerfull entities usually don't use this spell because in my worlds its use always draws the attention of others of their kind - or even the gods. Playing with fate is dangerous. All forms of time magic (like Timestop) are also problematic. A friend of mine usually bans all forms of teleportation because he dislikes players simply skipping the worlds he created by simply teleporting to another city. 26:28 That can be avoided by simply introducing different forms of curses. It should be possible to reverse the most simple forms that simply put a negative number on a character sheet. These are not the curses that can drive stories forward anyway. The other category of curses is way more interesting. Players should never see any dice rolls or numbers influenced by the curse, they should only be able to see the effects. Maybe all plants in an area around the cursed character start to wither and die over a period of time. Maybe the curse brings bad luck to a town, all second children are born with a snake head....whatever you can come up with. These are the curses that matter in a story - or carry the entire story - and cannot be broken by using Remove Curse. This spell is not per se a problem. The problem arises if the GM isn't nuanced enough with his worldbuilding and forms of curses.

[@prasiolite]

I'm sad that people sleep on Vortex Warp from Strixhaven. It's SO much fun and so useful for repositioning your party. My Sorcerer took VW but I passed on Silvery Barbs because our Bard had it and it feels like a "Bard" spell to me.

[@featherbaal5791]

Counterspell is great for generating heat for your villains. You don't want your jobbers using it, just the main heel.

[@cotton1983]

Lycanthropy used to only be able to have remove curse done by a certain time

[@fred_derf]

if you're experiencing a spell (or other ability) that is causing your players to be overly powerful, simply give the same spell to an opponent or two before discussing the idea of nerfing it with your players. Your players will be much more receptive to the downgrade in their abilities if it means their opponents will face the same downgrade.

[@connerblank5069]

I find it wild that people ban information gathering spells. Your players are literally telling you, _to your face,_ "Please Mr. DM, can I have a plot hook dispenser" and you _think this is a bad thing?_ We are not the same.

[@zamba136]

Counterspell is a special case of players banning the DM from using it. As a Magic player, this sounds a lot like the people that hate to play against blue decks. I am much more likely to ban a player if they are whining like this. BUT, there is one allowance I will make for the players here. NPC spellcasters should be very rare. Like, 3 in every 1000 people they meet, rare...so if they are getting counterspelled by an army of Abjuration wizards...maybe the DM is just power tripping. That being said, counterspell takes valuable spell slots from a magical opponent, and are a real gamble unless the opponent in an Abjuration Wizard or Bard. Players should recognize that resource management is an aspect of facing a magical enemy.

[@floofzykitty5072]

Identify can be fooled by Nystul's Magic Aura. I feel like a lot of these spells are only problems if the DM has (no offense) low creativity or low levels of knowledge of the rules. For example, any special magic item that is meant to be protected would obviously have Nystul's Magic Aura cast on it in case it fell into the wrong hands. The Magic Aura can even mislead Identify and lead the PCs into a trap. DMs have gotten so used to creating problems for their players their skills in solving them have atrophied. My current party has a Twilight Cleric in it and I haven't had any trouble challenging my players by adding different ways of challenging them and also just adjusting the damage creatures inflict. Editing a creature's stat block is so simple, you just add a little note in person or online you just edit the stat block. You would only have trouble challenging a powerful party if you can't figure out how to creatively solve the problem of challenging players. I make martials feel useful in my games by adding different objectives in fights that they would be best at handling. For example, a fight might have an environmental hazard that requires an Athletics check to push something heavy out of the way. One of my boss fights they summoned constructs that would emanate an antimagic field, so the martials got to be useful by holding back and destroying the constructs to let the spellcasters do their thing. If all your fights are a DPR race between the PCs and the Boss with some added status conditions in then obviously it will feel like martials suck, spellcasters are OP and water is wet.

[@thor7af3]

Force cage. As a GM It has ruined prep for encounters. I also hate the thought of imposing an hour long wait time on my players from a spellcasting enemy

[@PsylarSaveUs]

I tend to let my players take silvery barbs if they have some sort of fey themed aspect to their character such as being a fairy, elf, or gnome or being an arch-fey warlock.

[@thor7af3]

What are your thoughts on Forcecage?

[@doomhippie6673]

I truely try to ban magic. But it's a losing battle. I forget which ones, people try to sneak some in after a while. It's hard work and I just don't have the energy.

[@kelpiekit4002]

Comprehend languages can be fun in it giving literal translations. Any figurative language, nuance, or cultural sayings can get joyfully butchered by it, equivalent to trying to navigate a foreign country by using Google translate.

[@katiehusband1505]

The fix to comprehend languages might just be to run any text through Google translate a bunch of times!

[@Fatespinner]

The only thing I ban is specific combos of spells. One exactly (forcecage/sickening radiance)

[@gsuaveyt]

I have comprehend languages banned just because language barrier is a decent part of my current game

[@blockhead134]

My current DM has said that Identify doesnt work onhidden enchantments or anything beyond the most basic of curses... so Identify is worthless and a waste of time He also doesnt let attunement tell us what the magic item does

[@stevenalexander6033]

Heard people banning Tasha's Mind Whip because it's like Barbs... Too good not to take

[@darkness_visible7227]

I wouldn't ban Remove Curse for the same reason I wouldn't ban Identify: it's a cool thing certain characters can do that makes them feel special, I say it's far better to lean into that. Besides, in a world where you can heal wounds, bring back the dead and plum the very secrets of the universe with magic having it NOT be available for curses - things that are inherently magical in nature - feels odd. Pre-level 5, everything you said about having an npc ally required to do it applies. It's a quest starter. Post level 5...well, if you want to make curses a bigger thing in your campaign there are a couple tweaks you could do to it. Give curses an effective spell level to represent their strength and demand an upcast to clear the nastier ones. Or give the spell required material components relevant to the curse in question: this opens up a quest avenue to find the reagents and in some cases an investigation to even work out what they might be. Or both! Like I say, if you're wanting to play with curses lean in to the mechanics the players have to interact with them rather than just shutting it down. EDIT: and of course make it clear to your players whatever changes you're making beforehand

[@foolishsparky]

I don't ban shit. I want my players to feel powerful, I want them to have fun, I want them to feel like they got one over on me. And besides, it gives me an excuse to throw tougher, more exciting encounters.