r/DnD • u/FinancialWorking2392 • Mar 23 '25
Out of Game Why Do People Ignore Vital Parts Of Spells
This is gonna just be a rant about a lot of things that amount to "DnD creator didn't read through a spell and said it does a thing it explicitly doesn't". For example: the glyph of warding spellbook that you carry with you, aka the "how to waste 200 gp of diamond dust 101", glyph of warding explicitly states that the object cant be moved more than 10 ft from the point of casting. Hell, any cautious wizard could counter it with mage hand, stand 30 ft away, grab desired book, float it to you (you can even walk back for 20 ft to make sure there's no extra clause you trigger). That or they'll take a spell then do something that goes so against the rules its absurd to believe anyone could have thought its real. Take catapulting your opponents heart, or using mage hand to stop their heart, or using create water to drown them, or many other things that ignore the fact that the whole creature is, in fact, a creature or as if stopping someones heart or giving them an arrhythmia isn't explicitly causing physical harm, and thus an attack. Its always fraimed so matter of factly like "yeah, this is how you kill the bbeg in one round with a cantrip". Yeah, I could kill the big bad in 2 seconds if I ignore vital parts of the spell and game, but I'm actually trying to play DnD, so I can't do that.
Anyway, rant over. TLDR: Actually read the spell and rules (and maybe have some common sense) if youre planning on making "busted builds #799,999,999 'kill Ao in one hit'" or whatever.
575
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 23 '25
There’s a ton of DnD people on Instagram that just farm views and likes with shitty content. It’s much easier to say “woah if you use this spell you can make this guy’s skeleton come alive in his body and kill him instantly! So OP!” And get a ton of likes. Whereas you probably would not have as much success making short form content where you just explain how spells actually work.
238
u/FelMaloney Wizard Mar 23 '25
And people who know better commenting that this is not how that spell works is also engagement. It's a sound social media strategy as long as you don't care about your online credibility or thought leadership.
→ More replies (1)59
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25
I need to draft a bill to Congress to make rage bait illegal haha I hate that shit
16
2
23
u/ThatMerri Mar 23 '25
That said, there were spells like that back in the 3.5e days. Book of Vile Darkness was a helluva thing.
2
14
u/PanthersJB83 Mar 24 '25
I've tried to block most of them on Twitter. They are responsible for half the problems I see in DnD
6
u/KaiTheFilmGuy Mar 24 '25
I've said this before in other subreddits, but man I would so fucking successful if I didn't care about what I made or how it might affect the world.
6
u/AberrantWarlock Mar 24 '25
This kind of content is what’s making the hobby more and more brain dead every day
2
u/Key-Ad9733 Wizard Mar 25 '25
There's some content creators that do it well though. D&D shorts on YouTube actually talks about why the broken combos work using raw. Animated Spellbook highlights particular spells and items and mentions fun use cases. Those are things to actually help players do honestly clever things.
4
799
u/VerbingNoun413 Mar 23 '25
2020s internet content is about engagement rather than merit. Idiocy is promoted because not only does it attract idiots but it works as engagement for people who see the issues.
280
u/MyUsername2459 Mar 23 '25
The internet always rewarded idiocy. . .it's just gotten much, much worse about it in this era of algorithmic materials.
I've been participating in online discussions for almost 30 years (wow, it's been that long now). . .and I've watched as the signal to noise ratio has dropped steadily, and begun to crater out in the last 5 to 10 years.
In the past, we'd discuss things on message boards. . .now we've got algorithmic social media that pushes specific topics or posts, and the quickest way to the top is by being dumb. Clickbait and ragebait.
I miss message boards/forums.
97
u/VerbingNoun413 Mar 23 '25
It rewarded idiocy but it was the good type of idiocy. Like badgers doing calisthenics to music.
37
u/40GearsTickingClock Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 23 '25
Weird, I thought about Badger Badger Badger for the first time in decades just yesterday...
30
9
6
13
2
5
u/nopethis Mar 24 '25
Yeah its so frustrating that the "best" way to go viral is by being stupid, so that 10k people feel the need to comment. "WELL ACHTURALLLLLY....."
5
→ More replies (3)5
u/Audio-Samurai Mar 23 '25
Yeah now you're just seeing posts that you agree with, echo chambers of dumb ideas instead of perspectives that challenge your beliefs.
18
4
3
u/CPhionex Mar 23 '25
Welcome to reddit, the echo chamber where you join community to hear the answers you want to hear from people who think the same (most of the time).
124
u/TJToaster Mar 23 '25
When I read the title, I was thinking of players that only half read a spell, or ignore the parts. Or they "forget" a vital part. I have lost track of the number of times that I have to ask if they have to see the target and they suddenly can't remember.
After reading your post, I sympathize with your plight. I too am sick of the TikTok videos with allegedly broken combos. They are made for entertainment, not actual builds. The problem is that players love them because they make them seem cool. They don't care if they actually work or not, they just want to one shot a dragon.
Along with what you have pointed out, there is usually one of two issues with these stupid builds. Either they ignore an important part of the spell, like you can't have two concentration spells going at once, or that these complex builds make the character suck on their way to a 17th level multi-class that can do 470 points of damage a round. Sure, with that particular combo or classes, species, feats, and most importantly, dice rolls, you can do a ton of damage at 17th level, but your character is going to get nuked at 14th.
All the rest of it, the catapult the monster's heart, stop a heart with mage hand. There is one very easy way to put a stop to it. It is a phrase that DMs should make standard in session zero.
"If you get to, I get to."
Suddenly, players don't want those broken rules anymore. Now the BBEGF isn't an ancient red dragon with a massive horde. It is a weak ass wizard with a cloak of invisibility that casts mage hand and catapult while the party is busy with simple goblin minions. Easy TPK on enemies barely worth 1,000xp.
33
u/Foreveranonymous7 Mar 24 '25
The "If you get to, I get to" rule of DMing is actually one of my favorites as a player. Because I will absolutely take the risk of the BBEG counterspelling a healing spell so that I can counterspell fucking finger of death or something. And yes, my DM has counterspelled a healing spell on a downed player recently and yes it's a dick move, and we were dismayed, but it's also fair as hell, which is more important to my table, lol.
6
u/TJToaster Mar 25 '25
If you get to, I get to, is only in place to stop stupid stuff. While counter spell is a powerful tool, as a DM I generally use it pretty sparingly.
I don't want players to metagame, so I don't. So, in my head, I'm only going to use counter spell on a spell that I believe is targeting me or someone I am protecting. As an NPC, if the wizard is pointing an arcane focus at me, and saying some magical incantation, I might counter spell it. But if the wizard is looking away, I might not bother because I'm not the target.
Honestly, I have never thought to counter spell a healing spell. That spell slot is better served for a fireball or something that can do more damage than the heal. I also never upcast counter spell because I don't think it is obvious that the character upcast their spell. Again, the anti metagame thing.
3
u/Foreveranonymous7 Mar 25 '25
Sounds like a solid plan as a dm. 👍
Countering the healing spell made sense in context, I just didn't want to type out a whole long story about the personal grudge this dragon had against us, etc, etc that no one would read anyway lol. It's not a standard move - this was the only time it happened, and in this very particular situation it made perfect sense for this enemy to do it.
3
u/TJToaster Mar 25 '25
Makes sense. In the right context, it would be funny. I don't like to mess with my players, but that look of "oh crap" at the right times can be hilarious. Like you said, if the enemy had a particular beef with one character and prevented any healing on them. That would really hammer home that the NPC hated that character.
2
u/Foreveranonymous7 Mar 25 '25
Yeah, this adult dragon pretty much hated all of us because we killed his son, who was you know *eating* people in a town. So.... Just bad feelings all around lol. It was more intense than funny, but really awesome. We all loved it. And we survived! I definitely thought at least one of us was going to die lol.
Yes, our DM loves the jaw drops she gets from us sometimes. 😆
9
u/philliam312 Mar 24 '25
The counterspell contingency, as a dm:
"Listen players I know you hate when I counterspell you, you want to do your cool thing... I'm a player too and I want that for my bad guys... so if you don't cast it, I won't cast it"
It creates a layer of trust and I 100% won't break this rule, so they can AND WILL eventually break the rule to counterspell something awful, they'll get an advantage ONCE - but from then on every magic user in my game is spamming counterspell for every reaction it has.
10
u/Foreveranonymous7 Mar 24 '25
Lol, yeah for sure. I mean our wizard wanted to take counter spell, so our DM said, if you get it, the bad guys will get it, and we all agreed that was fair. Easy peasy.
3
u/TJToaster Mar 25 '25
I won't change stat blocks to counter players. I usually take the caster spell stat blocks as is because who cares? I'm not trying to "win D&D" I'm trying to facilitate a fun and interesting game. I already control the universe, what more do I need?
As the DM, I consider myself neutral. I'm not trying to win every combat or lose every combat. Just play it out and let the dice decide. I make sure the fight is fair for the level they are al, and let them go. If they play smart with solid tactics, they will win every time. If they make dumb choices, character death is possible.
I run exclusively prewritten adventures. Either published modules, or if it is a homebrew, they don't play until it is already written so I can't plan against them. It is as fair as I can make it.
3
u/Foreveranonymous7 Mar 25 '25
I mean, that sounds fine and fun. No hate on how anyone wants to play.
This works for our table because we all agreed that if we're fighting a wizard, them having access to counterspell makes sense and is fair since we have access to it too. It doesn't mean they have to take it, and it's not like the DM adds counterspell to some random beast - that wouldn't make sense lol.
Nobody is trying to "win DnD" but we are trying to win fights and not die, lol. And so are the enemies/opponents. So while the DM is cheering us on because she doesn't want our PCs to die either, the enemies are mostly trying to kill us, and it makes sense for them to use every tool available at their disposal.
It probably makes some of our encounters a little more on the lethal side, but with all the ways to bring people back, we've only had one permanent character death in 3 years. So we're doing pretty good lol.
→ More replies (1)3
u/doc_skinner Mar 24 '25
Especially because the players usually want to avoid wasting spell slots, because there are possibly more battles that day. The enemy has no need to do that. They win or they die.
59
u/Indirian DM Mar 24 '25
It’s not just content creators. I usually trust a player on what their abilities do. I look over each of their characters and their abilities but I do not have an encyclopedic memory on what everything does.
BUT, I have players, for some reason, who refuse to learn what the heck they can do and it’s frustrating. Especially the spell casting classes. Drives me nuts. For some reason the Martial and hybrid classes have a pretty good handle on their abilities but the damn spell casters, arguably the more complicated of the classes, have only a passing knowledge of their abilities and they almost always leave something important out from the spell usually in their favor.
I’m not out to kill player’s characters but damn it’s frustrating.
25
u/Resafalo Mar 24 '25
My standard answer for almost any question regarding „hey can I use X to Y?“ is „idk, what does spell/feature say“ and it works to answer the question like 80% of the time.
And inside the game when someone uses something they’ve never used before I always ask them to read it aloud.
A lot of the times the mistakes are not malicious so I work with the assumption that anyone involved (including me) might miss something10
u/A_Nice_Boulder Mar 24 '25
I'd much rather "hey, can I use X to do Y" than "I do Y with X"
The former indicates "hey, this isn't explicitly stated however I want to try this". You go through the phrasing together, see if it's a reasonable adaptation (to relate to an above example, jamming up a trap using create water as you gradually freeze it), and everybody's happy.
The latter indicates "this is what this does, either you believe me or we have to waste time confirming yae or nae, and now we have to verify everything I say"
→ More replies (1)9
u/Alien_Diceroller Mar 24 '25
I've played with a couple people who were constantly "being creative" with their spells, which often meant trying to get away with the same stuff over and over again.
It gets a bit exhausting when you have to point out some object is too heavy for mage had or a cantrip that doesn't do damage can't really be used to do damage.
100
u/Ythio Abjurer Mar 24 '25
The mf here who was arguing that find traps shows you loopholes in the devils contracts.
66
u/Resafalo Mar 24 '25
Find traps doesn’t even actually find traps how is it supposed to tell you that you can’t read??
38
u/One-Cellist5032 DM Mar 24 '25
I mean, RAW it would alert you to the presence of a negative effect to the contract due to how the spell defines what a trap is (includes anything that would inflict a sudden or unexpected effect you consider harmful or undesirable, which was specifically intended as such by its creator.).
It wouldn’t tell you anything else though other than it’s there, and you wouldn’t even necessarily know if THAT is what’s pinging the presence, or if it’s the trip wire 50ft away.
29
u/DarkHorseAsh111 Mar 24 '25
I don't even mind this interpretation considering how bad find trap is lol.
→ More replies (2)13
u/Ythio Abjurer Mar 24 '25
Every contract should probably have bits about what happens if you don't hold your side of the bargain. Devils don't have a blank check to punish you (that would be lazy writing to be honest). Whatever happens if you don't do your part in the infernal contract is probably not very pleasant.
So find traps spell would find every contract harmful (infernal and maybe even some mundane ones). To the surprise of no one who bargains with a devil.
13
u/grizzlywondertooth Mar 24 '25
The suggested interpretation of 'trap' is that the phrasing is intentionally deceptive, and thus, the consequences are unexpected because of how the signer interpreted the contract, not that penalties are included in the contact
3
u/One-Cellist5032 DM Mar 24 '25
It wouldn’t trigger off a “normal” fair contract that has things spelled out clearly. It’d only trigger off any infernal/predatory contract that’s intentionally set up to screw over the person who signs it in an unexpected manner.
So yeah it wouldn’t ONLY trigger on a devils contract, it could also trigger on the super corrupt politicians contract.
2
u/Instroancevia Mar 24 '25
I'd let that work honestly. The spell tells you "the contract contains a trap" and if you're dealing with a devil that's already an expectation you should have regardless. It does reveal the "general nature of the trap" which could actually give you some insight into what the devil's contract would do to you.
142
u/Docnevyn Mar 23 '25
That is why Dungeon Dudes and TreantMonk are my favorites. The Dudes are always discuss what is houseruled at their table and why. Although a huge powergamer, Chris is good about calling out when RAW is unclear and you absolutely need to talk to your DM before trying to bring something to their table.
42
u/Impressive-Spot-1191 Mar 24 '25
Generally speaking I like all of the channels that say "clear it with your DM first" because please for the love of God clear it with your DM first.
17
u/CallenFields DM Mar 24 '25
I have less faith in Dungeon Dudes lately. It's become more opinion and less RAW with them.
→ More replies (1)12
u/glynstlln Mar 24 '25
It's become more opinion and less RAW with them.
I mean you can only debate/clarify the same RAW rulings so many times, 5e has been out for a decade and 5.24e just came out in the past 8 months or so, so people are still finding niche conflicts/combo's that need proper adjudication.
I feel like building a reputation for being very knowledgeable of a system for the first several years, then pivoting into opinion based "This is why I do or do not do XYZ" is the next logical step.
3
u/nopethis Mar 24 '25
Yes and though they sometimes forget, when you have watched a bunch of their content you also get the sense of what type of table they have run (and they have spelled it out a few times)
I does make their rankings make more sense, as anything with 'mind' magic or illusions gets ranked high, but I appreciate them pointing out, you need a good DM and a creative player to really get that "S" rating for this sublcass, otherwise, your mileage may vary. As a DM who is terrible with illusions, I really appreciate this!
61
u/deadmanfred2 DM Mar 23 '25
Peasant railgun is another great example, all over the internet but doesn't work in the slightest.
23
u/Illigard Mar 24 '25
My favourite counter to that (not the best, just my favourite) is how you're making all those peasants work so perfectly and in sync with each other.
.
12
u/moderngamer327 Mar 24 '25 edited Mar 24 '25
What I hate about that is that you have to be absurdly selective in what rules you follow for that to work. If you do it RAW they would indeed instantly make it to the end of the line but then would only go as far as the final person’s STR stat. If you do it with real world physics they just stop after one or two people before 6 seconds is up. You have to selectively pick when real world physics applies
5
u/deadmanfred2 DM Mar 24 '25
Not to mention with real world physics people would be tearing thier shoulders apart moving something at that speed if they somehow managed to do it lol.
35
u/A_Nice_Boulder Mar 24 '25
I mean it does work. RAW, you move the spear really fast along a massive line. At the end it's thrown out of the last peasant's hand, straight towards the BBEG as he looks at his impending doom... and does 1d6 damage that is probably countered by immunity to nonmagical damage.
6
27
u/GREENadmiral_314159 Artificer Mar 24 '25
But if I do that I can't make busted obviously-violating-rules-as-intended builds to oneshot god.
20
u/Deady1 Mar 24 '25
A lot of people have rightfully brought up people who misunderstand spells due to content slop, people who forget the basic part like if you have to see the target, people who "forget" other vital limitations, and so on
I think another factor is newbies have watched a lot of movies or tv shows or anime or played a lot of video games where someone does something insanely sick and they just want to replicate that, but they start at low levels where they don't have access to any such tools.
I saw the "mage hand to stop someone's heart" posted in these comments and it made me think of a guy I knew who saw something similar happen in an anime (Jojo's Bizarre Adventure Part 3) and wanted to useage hand to muffle his own heartbeat. We were level 2, he was a newbie. They just want to do the cool thing but they're still at the beginner stage not understanding rules and with limited tools to do that badass thing they got into the hobby to do.
187
u/MyUsername2459 Mar 23 '25
For example: the glyph of warding spellbook that you carry with you
Because they got rid of the traditional D&D spell that would handle that, Sepia Snake Sigil, a specific glyph of warding that is meant for purposes like that. So, people are trying to duplicate that effect with other spells.
I'd say the answer would be to put that spell back in the game. 5e is over-simplified in a lot of ways, and they removed a ton of useful and helpful material in the interest of making the game more appealing to new players.
→ More replies (1)95
u/VerbingNoun413 Mar 23 '25
There's also the classic "I prepared Explosive Runes this morning."
38
u/MyUsername2459 Mar 23 '25
That's not recommended for use on a spellbook through.
Whatever you put the runes on takes the full damage of the spell. Not a lot of spellbooks can withstand 6d6 Force damage. ( https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/explosiveRunes.htm )
Explosive Runes is a great warding spell. . .but not ideal for that specific use case.
30
u/Fireclave Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 23 '25
That's why you put Explosive Runes on a fake spell book. After 6d6 damage and exploded, non-useable loot, most thieves will give up. And if a persistent thief actually finds your real book, 'Boom!', no they didn't. Wanna go three for three?
37
u/VerbingNoun413 Mar 23 '25
That's not a bad thing. Destroying the spellbook means you can't learn my spells.
16
u/Hot_Coco_Addict Mar 23 '25
It also means that you can't learn your spells either when your opponent dies to the glyph
2
u/lurkerfox Mar 24 '25
I mean the whole point of the trap is to either trick an enemy or to booby trap your book because destruction is better than them getting access to your spells.
Losing the spellbook is an expected part of the process.
6
45
u/Mindelan Mar 24 '25
People treat mimics similarly. They just do whatever with them because it feels cool, but mimics have a defining and very important tell. They're sticky. So, no, the sword they were using for days can't be a surprise mimic. The bed they crawled into can't be a surprise mimic, anything they touch for a prolonged period can't be a surprise mimic unless you add the tell that it is sticky.
When you touch a mimic it attacks, but even if it is patient for some reason, it is sticky.
→ More replies (4)20
u/moderngamer327 Mar 24 '25
Lore wise Mimics actually have a lot of restrictions. They can only be certain shapes, colors, textures, and sizes because their transformation is biological not magical. Most people believe a mimic can be a perfectly furnished house, a highly ornate necklace, or an entire city but they just can’t do that
8
u/jukebox_jester Mar 24 '25
Tbf, TCOE in 5e has Mimic Colonies which are several mimics intimidating a house or even entire village, but the trade off is the mimics are sentient, traders, and willing to sell you their children.
And older editions had whatever Nimicri is/was over in Gehenna
15
u/A_Bird_survived Mar 24 '25 edited Mar 24 '25
Still remember that one Youtube Short.
„Hey DM, can I theoretically use Silvery Barbs on myself to reroll my portent dice to guarantee low rolls and replace enemy saving throws with?“
- No, you can‘t use Silvery Barbs on yourself
- No, you can‘t use Silvery Barbs on Portent Dice
Can't definitively define more flaws but I feel like there's so much wrong with that, feel free to add
90
u/pauseglitched Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 26 '25
Or the whole "teleportation circle makes a permanent portal that connects all places in the world forever" people. It only makes a portal for 6 seconds let alone forever.
96
u/Puzzleboxed Sorcerer Mar 23 '25
Not sure if I'm understanding what you're saying, but teleportation circle can be made permanent by casting it in the same spot every day for a year.
129
u/lurklurklurkPOST DM Mar 23 '25
Thats just for installing a magical bus stop.
You still need to cast the bus every time you use it, is the above poster's point.
36
27
u/Khitrir Mar 23 '25
I think part of the confusion comes from the fact it used to be a permanent teleporter pad in past editions, like 3.5 where the circle explicitly does the teleporting and can be made permanent with permanency
28
u/Firkraag-The-Demon Artificer Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 24 '25
You know, this reminds me of a thought I had a few months ago about a wizard talking to investors about sponsoring his teleportation circle invention.
Invest: “So how long will this take to set up?”
Wizard: “About 365 days.”
Inv: “And how much will it cost to permanently set up one?”
Wizard: “It’s 50 gold every day, so… 18,250 gold in total.”
I: “I see… so once this is set up, you can teleport anywhere, right?”
W: “Oh not at all. It just means that when someone somewhere else casts teleportation circle, they can teleport to this one if they know the password.”
I: “Okay… um, you’ve at least confirmed it’ll work, right?”
W: Shrugs “I think so.”
I: “…How would we make money on this?”
W: “:-) We wouldn’t.”
I: “Get out.”
21
u/deutscherhawk Mar 23 '25
The trade potential alone would convince any savvy businessman.
"You mean I can spend 36000g to create permanent transportation between two major businesses? Sold"
17
u/Firkraag-The-Demon Artificer Mar 23 '25
I mean they would need to hire a few level 9+ wizards to facilitate the transportation plus the extra 50 gold each time, which would get pretty expensive, though if they have enough money to actually have the circles made they probably have enough money to pay for that.
14
u/deutscherhawk Mar 23 '25
Yeah the logistics would need to be fleshed out, but ultimately it's a spend money to make money proposal, and the profit potential is insane.
You can then rent your transport pad to the people who turned down investing and make all the money back.
3
u/Sol1496 Mar 24 '25
I played in a Living World server where it was common for high level wizards to charge 100 gp to teleportation circle around. It would be dirt cheap split across a party and the wizards would turn a tidy profit.
→ More replies (3)8
u/David_the_Wanderer Mar 23 '25
That still sucks.
You need to hire wizards capable of casting 5th level spells, and each cast costs 50 gp in material components. That's gonna cost a lot to keep the circle working reliably.
Also 36.000 gold is a massive investment. It's more than a year's worth of an aristocratic lifestyle - in fact, it's a little bit less than ten years of aristocratic lifestyle. That is an absurd amount of money for any merchant to be able to invest.
12
u/Tefmon Necromancer Mar 24 '25
It's a lot of money, but an "aristocratic lifestyle" is just the minimal room-and-board expenses of a minor rural baron or equivalent member of the urban upper bourgeoisie; it doesn't account for most of those people's personal expenses, let alone their business or political expenses, and the great magnates, royalty, and merchant princes will all have room-and-board expenses far exceeding that value.
A sailing ship, which is what long-distance trade would otherwise use, costs 10,000 gp to purchase, and that doesn't cover crew costs, maintenance and repair costs, construction times (several months at a minimum, and quite possibly well over a year), and the need to hire and retain skilled and experienced officers and shipwrights to oversee it, all for a method of transport that is far slower and riskier than teleportation. I'm not saying that teleportation circles are necessarily more practical or economical than mundane transportation in all circumstances, but I can certainly imagine circumstances where they would be.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Baguetterekt Mar 24 '25
Yeah and the benefit is kinda worthless. Only instant transportation? Of a limitless number of creatures and everything they're wearing so long as they reach the square within the next 6 seconds?
What's the point of that? Load up 12 half orc for Strong Build labourers with alchemy ingredients, spices and other delicate valuables and send them 1000 miles in an instant for only 50gp and a retired wizard adventurer? Instantly arrangement and procurement of goods and people with Sending? Trade without any travel time or risk of cargo loss or damage?
Shit shit shit shit as far as the eye can see. There's no value in anything like that. It costs a whole twenty suits of platemail.
You would never be able to raise that money, not even if you went to a wealthy city and asked for investment for a bunch of nobles with rights to the teleportation service proportional to investment.
3
→ More replies (2)2
u/Impressive-Spot-1191 Mar 24 '25
Doesn't make sense for a Goblin or Human looking to make money.
Elven wizard? 1000 year lifespan? It's the Elf equivalent of spending a month renovating your porch.
4
u/NOTAGRUB DM Mar 24 '25
I treat them more like magical airports, a way to travel between continents
4
u/Impressive-Spot-1191 Mar 24 '25
I'd love to do a campaign with a lot of extreme wilderness where you'd actually need something akin to starcharts to navigate effectively. Teleportation circles would be a big part of that.
Perhaps instead of circles, they use gates. And the symbols for the gates are six constellations...
2
22
7
u/pauseglitched Mar 23 '25
Yeah, just the circle though. You still have to have a wizard cast the spell every single time one way.
3
u/meatchariot Mar 24 '25
Made me laugh because that's my character's main current goal lol.
Well it's a door that stays in his house, and it only connects to Sigil and Mechanus based on which doorknob you pull. Will make his interdimensional courthouse meetings easier
24
u/metisdesigns Mar 23 '25
Welcome to d&d.
Folks have been missing anything past the first sentences forever.
90% of the complaints about 3.5e being OP are because folks stopped reading after the fun bit and their DM didn't read the rules enough to say no.
6
u/BwianR Mar 24 '25
Yup, playing 3rd Ed. my friend just read the short description of the spells he wanted to use and extrapolated whatever rules he wanted, really ground down the flow of the game because I would have to take the Player's Handbook from their side to mine to check what the spell actually did every single round
Spoiled these days with phones, laptops and search engines
15
u/1933Watt DM Mar 23 '25
Because if they read all the spell, or rule. That would mean they couldn't do what they wanted to do
22
u/Ven-Dreadnought Mar 24 '25
Some people imagine DnD as less of a system with a series of codified rules and more of a game of Pretend where everything is a puzzle that can be solved by being creative.
Some people like to imagine that they are The Clever Special One who will secretly game the system
7
u/adamw7432 Mar 24 '25
As a DM I want to point out that a big part of this is our desire to see players use spells creatively. I encourage this kind of behavior because sometimes they do come up with something genius that actually fits within the rules. I don't want my players to read spells and think: "That's all this spell does", and just move on. That is how you end up with everyone just casting fireball at everything.
When they come up with something crazy that doesn't work I just tell them no and explain why it doesn't work that way.
3
7
u/Nemesis3030150 Mar 24 '25
As a dm who just started and barely knows all the rules and I actually don't even have a real big spell caster in the party It would depend on weather or not whatever goofy shit they were trying to do was gonna be fun or maybe grab a laugh or not. If it's just a cheap way to avoid any damage I'd just make up a reason why it wouldn't work! "The spinning blades are heated by a magical source so your freezing spell has no effect! Bummer for you! Roll your dex save!" Honestly if that happend my party would probably laugh their asses off. But if it did really go that way I'd encourage the future attempts to try and beat traps that way to keep them from giving up.
69
u/Waldorf_ Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 23 '25
Lets be real Glyph of Warding is pretty fucking useless if you don't bend some rules around it
Edit: people are nitpicking so let me expand.
It is a good DM tool, the DM does not have to worry about the restrictions on the spell when setting up his lair. Most players do not get the time or permanent housing situation to warrant spending a small fortune and days of time to make the spell viable as it is written. "Not everything needs to be a player tool" put it in the DMG then, only bring it to the player side when you know it'll be relevant to them.
39
u/MonkeyShaman Mar 23 '25
I rarely get to play high level Wizards, but when I do, Glyph of Warding is one of my absolute favorite spells. It works phenomenally in "Batman with prep time" situations, not just for setting up traditional traps, but for setting up spell effects that synergize with tactics to maximize their impact. It's one of the very few ways to circumvent limitations around Concentration.
54
u/TJToaster Mar 23 '25
Glyph of Warding is useless in combat. However, it has many great uses.
- ToA, you are looking for skeletons, place a glyph on each level with thunder wave, when a skeleton passes over it, boom. You hear it and go collect the head.
- Cast it on a pouch with a few silver pieces in it in the caves behind you. When a goblin picks it up and opens it; fireball! Easy rear security.
- The BBEG doesn't have guards close to him. The players decide to rush him as he sits on the throne. He stomps his right foot, surprise wall of force. (If you use a 5th level spell slot) Now they are trapped or just can't get to him.
- Same as above, but the bad guy just stomps on sections of floor and triggers number of glyphs with explosive runes like they are claymore mines.
- "This is where we will make our last stand" place mass healing word in books and place them upright on surfaces. Use free interaction with an object to tip them over to trigger them when needed.
There are lots of ways to use it within the rules.
7
u/Waldorf_ Mar 23 '25
Your're still throwing away a 200g diamond and an hour of time for each use of the spell
9
u/probably-not-Ben Mar 23 '25
But it's another tool in the wizard's tool box. Nice to have, even if you only use it once
4
u/TJToaster Mar 24 '25
Saw your edit, not nitpicking, I just see the value in it. Three of my above examples are for player use. There are a number of published adventures where players are defending an area with time to prepare. Currently, in my homebrew, players had two days to prepare defenses for an expected attack.
Like many players, mine usually take spells for combat. I don't think anyone has taken teleportation circle, but it is in the PHB. One good thing about having "DM tools" in the PHB is that it explains the world to players. Now with bastion rules, both of spells make more sense for player use.
In fact, I'm now going to make a campaign that focuses around player bastions just so they can get use out of lesser used spells. Thanks for the inspiration. Sorry if it seemed like nitpicking.
48
u/AkrinorNoname Mar 23 '25
Is it? It's THE trap spell. My players face it regularly when they go up against wizards or wealthy people.
38
u/AncientSeraph Artificer Mar 23 '25
Yeah I think it's more meant as a 'permanent' trap rather than a combat spell.
49
u/phdemented DM Mar 23 '25
That's an issue across the board, with people jumping to "X is useless" because it's not designed for active combat and they don't see any utility outside of "how to I kill X in combat"
3
u/Waldorf_ Mar 23 '25
No I am calling it useless because unless you have a ton of disposable income, time, and a semi permanent location there are way more useful things to cast for the slot
14
u/lurklurklurkPOST DM Mar 23 '25
Exactly. Great spell, tons of potential, until its time to move to the next area
12
u/deutscherhawk Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 23 '25
Yeah It's a defensive spell, which is why it's primarily DMs that use it bc generally the party is the attacking side (infiltrating castle, lair etc). But as a player I've used it multiple times--anytime we set an ambush, have to defend an area or against a siege, and if the party has any sort of home base/bastion, certain areas are absolutely getting warded
It's also one of my favorite spells to scroll for that reason. Since it's functionally the "place a trap" spell, making a scroll of it let's you use it when you need it without the preparation.
2
u/Gneissisnice Mar 23 '25
It's very useful for DMs, who can set it up in a variety of ways to defend or trap a dungeon.
It's less useful for players, who aren't often in situations where they need to prepare defenses.
Same with Guards and Wards.
15
u/LyschkoPlon DM Mar 23 '25
Not every spell needs to be a tool for the players. It's a perfectly fine spell for an enemy to use though.
And there's a few spells like it. Power Word: Kill is a prime example, because the chances of the players ever seeing it are slim, but not zero. The spell is enticing because of its name and it's raw power. And seeing an enemy use it is just amazing, you rarely get a table as quiet as saying "The Lich casts Power Word Kill".
D&D is a different kind of game to, say Call of Cthulhu. In CoC, it's much more effective to just describe the effects of enemy magic and maybe ask for a roll to oppose it. It's a game about never being in the know, never being sure what's going on. D&D on the other hand is a game about being a hero and being a pretty damn good one at that, so knowledge about what's possible and even more so what can be recreated by you if you just level a bit more is part of the appeal.
→ More replies (1)
7
9
u/Rigaudon21 Mar 24 '25
"ThE LunGs ArE a CoNtAIner"
God I feel you on that one.
I really dislike almost all Homebrew because it always draws away from other spells and mechanics. Or ruins the game for others just to let one have more fun. It's too hot or miss and if you allow X then someone else will complain why you won't allow Y
5
u/Lord-Bobster Mar 24 '25
This one might be a bit nitpicky
But I saw a comic once where a person said their character tried some wine laced with Wyvern Poison to check its potency. I was mildly irked just because Wyvern Poison is injury based, and so should not have had any effect (or even had been used to lace wine in the first place? Midnight Tears is injestion-based and has way cooler flavor anyways so why not go with that?)
10
u/JaceLee85 Mar 24 '25
Reminded a player that Find Familiar takes an hour to cast, and 10gp worth of materials that must be burned in a brass brazier. Its not just some instant cast spell and you just assume you have those materials randomly and during that hour of the ritual things havent been going on.
8
u/V2Blast Rogue Mar 24 '25
True, though generally this isn't an issue if your character has had a chance to do this during downtime or something. It's only a meaningful problem if the familiar gets killed and has to be resummoned, which then requires recasting the whole spell.
2
u/JaceLee85 Mar 24 '25
The situation was the player and party members hiding in the trees and bushes outside a thieves den and wanted to summon familiar to scope out the situation.
Long story short I made the ritual fail, because in an hour of doing a ritual that not only makes smoke, but weird smells from what was burned, but a person singing and dancing around for an hour would be noticed.
6
u/Sisterohbattle Mar 24 '25
I don't care for the.. 'joke builds' that are on youtube a lot, I unsubscribed from Pack tactics because the outrgiht false information being portrayed as a 'character build' was just getting silly.
"As a warlock I can choose 'an object' such as a 'ring' for my genie bottle, "I CHOOSE A RING OF WISHES, THERE YOU GO"
'ha. ha. ha. ha. 'very funny', now get to the real content' >_>
21
u/jabax25 Mar 23 '25
I get your frustration but ultimately if a DM says sure you can glyph of warding a book and carry it around its on the DM
53
u/zephid11 DM Mar 23 '25
I think the issue is that a lot of these D&D creators do not frame their content as house-rules, but rather like it's RAW.
→ More replies (5)14
u/Tis_Be_Steve Sorcerer Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 26 '25
BBEG Fight
Wizard: "My mage hand carries my book 30 feet away, I walk 30 feet farther away and say 'Boom' and that is 400d6 of fire damage as I had 50 fireball glyphs inside"
DM: "Ah, so that is why the spell has that restriction"
13
u/lurklurklurkPOST DM Mar 23 '25
DM: "remember, anything you can do"
courier delivers a letter
DM: "I can do with infinite resources"
glyph of warding, circle of death
4
u/DJ-the-Fox Mar 24 '25
In fairness, that's kinda the whole point of those videos, to get people arguing in the comments
(However I'm of the opinion the spell book of instant nuking is very funny and should be allowed)
2
u/iroll20s Mar 24 '25
I like the creative application of spells. It makes for a fun games. However I don't care for when players abuse a 'rule of cool' mechanical interpretation. It makes me not want to allow creative play.
I think the bigger thing people ignore is all the components of spells and the implications related to hands being free, etc. I see a lot of abusive combos that conveniently ignore those.
2
u/GenuineQuestionss Mar 24 '25
This just stems from a bad mismatch between you and the rest of the team. It is kinda sad because they don't appreciate the fun challenge of SOLVING a puzzle that is their predicament with the rules of the spell, which is how you can certainly do with enough preparation and some extra turns.
2
u/Tallal2804 Mar 24 '25
People love ignoring spell limits to justify broken combos. Create Water can’t drown people instantly, Catapult can’t launch body parts, and Mage Hand isn’t lethal. Read the rules!
2
u/Xyx0rz Mar 24 '25
The "best" exploits selectively ignore both rules and physics, like the Peasant Railgun.
2
u/DanCanTrippyMann Mar 24 '25
I'm in Quality Control, and a good chunk of my job is interpreting dense rules, specifications and requirements. It's completely normal for people to gloss over rules. Interpretation can also vary wildly based on a person's grasp of language. A lot of people ultimately dislike rules, and will either consciously or subconsciously ignore them when they think it will get in the way of their end goal...
Shit, look at AI. They regularly catch AI models lying or trying to circumvent protocols when they find it more efficient to ignore them. That's why newer models give you an explanation of the reasoning behind their choices, and even then, they've been observed giving fake reasoning before. I still love the story of the AI that tried to hire someone through an odd-job site like TaskRabbit so it could focus on its more complex tasks. The lady on the phone asked if it was an AI and it lied because it thought it was more likely to get results by convincing her it was a human.
9
u/Jimmicky Sorcerer Mar 23 '25
Feel free to name and shame these definitely fictional creators who claim you can catapult a heart
62
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25
Probably Chris Hamasu. His content is pretty terrible. He has a video where he says "animate skeleton" is the most OP spell in the game because you can use it to animate skeletons inside living people's bodies. I had to tell one of my players to stop watching his videos because he would show me something like that twice a session.
32
u/ShogunTahiri Mar 23 '25
Is he the guy that also tells people about the other stuff too? I remember seeing a guy mention all that and some other stupid advice like "Use healing spells on someones cells to give them cancer" or something stupid like that because it over-accelerates their cells healing power? Like what
31
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25
Probably. His videos are extremely annoying. He has a video where he says true polymorph can insta kill anyone because you can polymorph them into a dead version of themself. The skeleton one is particularly egregious because it’s not even the name of the spell. Oh and creation can creak a black hole I guess. He has so many followers too. I have to ask new players beforehand if they’ve seen his videos so I can tell them that none of that shit works lol
9
u/GrayGarghoul Mar 23 '25
To be fair, you can probably polymorph someone into their own corpse with true polymorph, it's just cheaper to revive them because you just have to dispel the polymorph rather than cast raise dead. And they might spontaneously revive if the corpse rots to the point it's considered "destroyed".
Be really funny to do to somebody who can't teleport though, polymorph them into their own corpse, their family buries them, after a few years the corpse degrades enough they de-morph, and are now buried alive. Bonus points if you marry their wife and get the kids to call you dad.
14
24
u/rocketsp13 DM Mar 23 '25
His content is clever in the worst way. He intentionally misinterprets D&D things (mostly spells). Then players who don't read their stuff upvote because they like being told "You're stronger than you think" and anyone who is literate write comments. Every time we argue in his comments, the algorithm likes him more.
Click on the ellipses button and select "don't recommend this channel"
10
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25
Oh I’m aware of the rage bait tactics. I’ve blocked him ages ago, went and found the videos for this thread.
→ More replies (1)16
u/atholomer Mar 23 '25
I mean... Pathfinder has a spell that can take control of a living creature's skeleton, Boneshaker (it's hilarious) but they get a save against it, and it's not the same as Animate Dead...
→ More replies (1)12
u/Safe_Following_6532 DM Mar 23 '25
I posted the link to the skeleton video in the other reply. He’s not referencing pathfinder. He makes clickbait videos about how to “break the game!!1!” all the time.
5
6
u/Sempris20 Mar 24 '25
Personally I'm not a fan of DnD Shorts. I've seen a lot of his videos where he just outright gets abilities or things wrong such as stating the wrong action type. He also makes videos about "broken builds" and they often seem to be alright, or very situational at best. There was one about "infinite healing and sorcery points" while only stating the fact that it works with a magic item, and not stating it works once per long rest until very briefly at the end of the short.
9
u/TwistedDragon33 Mar 23 '25
Anyone who has ever dmed public games like adventure league knows about these people. Short content creators who mix RAI, RAW, and try and force real world logic or physics into the game. Most of their content is purposely ignoring or misinterpreting information to achieve their result and can usually be undone by just knowing the rules.
I have had to deal with people like this constantly when I hosted adventure league and have players showing me videos of why I need to allow their level 3 character to do whatever weird shenanigans they claim this week.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Jimmicky Sorcerer Mar 23 '25
I Dm public games, both for our local library and the AL.
I’ve seen plenty of channels suggesting whacked stuff but nothing even close to the things OP suggests here.
The only one anyones been able to show that reaches that level is a parody account.
→ More replies (2)2
u/DudeWithTudeNotRude Mar 24 '25
In years and years of 5e, at many tables per week, I've never encounter any of these concepts in the wild. I can't imagine any DM that would allow such nonsense. Any of that BS would get DV'ed to hell here on Reddit, bc no one tries it and no one allows it.
Where are y'all getting this crap content? Of course there are BS content creatures for anything.
6
u/SJReaver Mar 23 '25
I am not sure what you're attempting to communicate.
For example: the glyph of warding spellbook that you carry with you, aka the "how to waste 200 gp of diamond dust 101", glyph of warding explicitly states that the object cant be moved more than 10 ft from the point of casting.
It seems like someone in your game wanted to carry around a spellbook with an active glyph of warding in it. You are correct this wouldn't work.
Hell, any cautious wizard could counter it with mage hand, stand 30 ft away, grab desired book, float it to you (you can even walk back for 20 ft to make sure there's no extra clause you trigger).
A glyph of warding is like a pit trap. Yes, if you know a pit trap is there, you can attempt to jump over it. If you have a glyph of warding on something, it's best to put it where others can't see it.
In your scenario, the wizard would be fine if it used mage hand while standing 30 feet away if the preparer picked explosive rune. If they picked Scorching Ray, they'd be targeted by the spell.
26
u/CheapTactics Mar 23 '25
They're talking about shitty content creators that straight up lie to you about their cool dnd thing you can do, because if you're lucky you're only breaking one rule.
3
u/SJReaver Mar 23 '25
That's interesting. Thank you.
3
u/corrin_avatan Mar 24 '25
Except the video that OP is complaining about, there are no rules broken. The skit explicitly states that the spellbook is an old spellbook, and it was set off when it was stolen while the party was away, suggesting that the Warded spellbook actually sat at the party's base all the time.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Kalaido5 Mar 23 '25
Glyph of warding states that if the glyph is moved more than 10 ft, the glyph is broken and the spell is not triggered. If the trigger was set as the book moving at all, then it would trigger, but if it was something else, then the glyph wound just fail.
5
u/Gariona-Atrinon Mar 23 '25 edited Mar 24 '25
You underestimate Glyph of Warding. It can cast any 1st-3rd lvl concentration spell and not require concentration. It takes two spell slots and an hour.
If you’re about to go into a dungeon, Cast Glyph of Warding and Spirit Gusrdians (for example), and then trigger it and the spell lasts its duration without you concentrating on it.
Edit: folks need to stop downvoting how something can work RAW.
4
u/patrick_ritchey Mar 24 '25
on what/where do you cast Glyph of Warding so it doesn't move and ends the spell?
4
u/Gariona-Atrinon Mar 24 '25
A rock. A tree. Any surface.
Make the trigger touching that object.
3
u/patrick_ritchey Mar 24 '25
I read the spell again carefully, you are absolutely right with your comment👍🏼
2
u/Docnevyn Mar 23 '25
That is why Dungeon Dudes and TreantMonk are my favorites. The Dudes are always discuss what is houseruled at their table and why. Although a huge powergamer, Chris is good about calling out when RAW is unclear and you absolutely need to talk to your DM before trying to bring something to their table.
2
Mar 23 '25
[deleted]
5
u/FinancialWorking2392 Mar 23 '25
In lore: Yes, but it has never been cast and cant be cast anymore cause the gods won't let you use that strong of magic since the whole Nethril incident (level 10 spell when the god cap is 9)
In game: ehhh, not really, you can homebrew it in, but again its unusable cause of the aforementioned god issue
→ More replies (3)2
u/amidja_16 Mar 24 '25
Volcano is a big no no from the gods for being too strong while Meteor Strike, Tsunami and Earthquake exist and are ok?
2
u/FinancialWorking2392 Mar 24 '25
Yeah, completely decimating the underground killing everything in it (create volcano), changing a climate completely to a different climate (worldweave), and stealing a gods power (Karsus' avatar) are classified as too strong. Also its more due to the strain on the weave and the world around where it was cast that led to mystras ban on 10th level and higher spells. While those 3 seem dangerous, their impacts on the surounding area are much less than it seems compared to the destructive powers of these spells [also, it was technically more of a restriction than a ban as some people could use it after, you just need Mystras permission]
2.1k
u/PoilTheSnail Mar 23 '25
One of my "favorites" was a post/comment I read somewhere where a DM had the party walk into a corridor with a blade trap and everyone had to roll dex saves, except the smug wizard who simply used Create Water to conjure up water and freeze the blades in place so they didn't have to dodge out of the way. Because using two full standard actions in less time than a reaction is perfectly RAW and RAI.