While maybe not the most egregious power creep (that would be Twilight and Peace Clerics), Silvery Barbs is just another example of how casters are always the ones benefitting from the power creep. Martials have not gotten any worthwhile new material since the PHB, while casters, already more powerful to begin with, have gotten new option after new option. Linear fighter, quadratic wizard doesn't just describe the general leveling curve, it also describes how the power difference between the two grows wider with every rules supplement.
Twilight and Peace were exactly the examples I was thinking of when I said this wasn't the biggest example of power creep we've seen. Ugh, hate those subclasses, and the more I play with them, the more I hate them.
@@TreantmonksTemple having play Twilight cleric more than once, I absolutely agree, it is broken. And yet I am addicted to them. Fortunately, I like trying concept builds so I don't become a munchkin player when I play clerics. But I hear the dark side calling. Always.
Having played with both casters with silvery barbs and martials with Gift of Chromatic and Metallic Dragon I think this is highly off base. Giving pseudo shield and absorb elements to already tanky characters and a damage boost that scales with 4 attacks has been fantastic in flavor and power levels.
It's a bit early to tell how strong it is. Reaction spells are already in high demand with Absorb Elements and Shield so unrestrained use will burn through spell slots quickly. Plus, this does require some level of knowledge about an enemy's chance to succeed on a save. If a creature has a +6 to save against a DC 13 spell, then they have a really high chance to succeed on the reroll regardless if they have to use the lower dice roll (as an example).
"Reaction spells are in high demand on Wizards and Sorcerers. Bards don't have Shield, Absorb Elements or Counterspell, and Silvery Barbs is also available to anyone who picks up the very very powerful feat Fey Touched, and Clerics/Paladins have no reaction spells while the other casters only have one of the decent ones.
@@nilsjonsson4446 While anyone can get this with Fey Touched like you said, not everyone will have the spell slots to power it the way everyone thinks will be game breaking. Rangers and Paladins already have very limited slots and lots of things worth spending those slots on, and non-casters aren’t going to get a whole lot out of a single cast in a day. It’ll be nice, but in no way is this game breaking.
@@jonathanwynes2542 Nothing is gamebreaking in D&D. It's a big and very unnecessary buff to Bards, Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics/Druids with Fey Touched. Will D&D be a slightly better or slightly worse game by its introduction? I think worse.
My Normal Human Eldritch Knight: "Ah yes... More lv1 Spells for me to use that isn't damage." Silvery Barb, when casted as an Action or Bonus Action (Just don't cast it as a Reaction even when you can.) is well suited for an Eldritch Knight since I can stack disadvantage with Eldritch Strike and Heavy Great Sword. However, advantages can be nullified by an equal disadvantage amount, so fighting in the dark without night vision and being flanked is NOT great for Silvery Barb. Most likely, the second effect of the Silvery Barb will be useful when casting Banishing with Action Surge Teleport. Thus, imposing +2 Disadvantage on the target from Silver Bard and Eldritch Strike. Just in case the target had more advantages on them or that they impose their own disadvantages on you.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 You can't cast Silvery Barbs as an action or a bonus action. It is a reaction, you don't get to choose to cast it any other way. And I don't see how it would do anything when cast any other way since there is no triggering attack or save to change. Advantages and disadvantages aren't nullified by equal amounts. As soon as you have at least one of each they do nothing, you can have advantage from 4 sources and disadvantage form 1, you will make a normal roll.
12:45 if we are talking about Save-or-Suck spells here, the enemy won't get the opportunity to attack you if it fails the save. Save-or-Suck spells' effects strong and they are balanced by their fail chance. Silvery Barbs is essentially casting the same spell again after the initial casting failed. Duplicating a spell is powerful which is why Heightened Spell is so expensive (3 sorcery points vs Silvery Barbs 1st level spell slot), and Silvery Barbs doesn't cost anything if the initial casting succeeds. Heightened Spell has a higher chance of not mattering at all (if the enemy fails on their first roll, or succeeds on both) because you use it before the rolls.
This is the position I find myself taking on Silvery Barbs. I’d think this is a good (but not overpowered) 3rd level spell, but I think it’s too freely available as a 1st level spell.
Generally speaking, slot for slot, most of the best debuff/control spells in the game either have no saving throw involved (e.g. wall of force, forcecage) or the effect that matters about it doesn't care too much about the enemy's saving throw (e.g. transmute rock). The scenarios where you are likely to use silvery barbs offensively are probably with stuff like web and hypnotic pattern. Single target save or suck spells are generally terrible; silvery barbs makes them somewhat less so, but not enough to actually make them worth picking up compared to superior options in the same slot.
@@rayndeon1 SBs can combo with AoE control spells as well to help ensure the most valuable target gets caught by the effect - e.g. a ensure the enemy spellcaster gets caught by the Hypnotic Pattern, or the annoying rogue gets caught in the web. Forcecage is a horribly unfun spell in combats without spellcasters (it's also super high level so most players will have never seen it cast). Wall of Force is ok but has a lot of limitations, it's also a 5th level spell - so you're usually getting it near the end of the campaign. Transmute Rock isn't that good for the difficult terrain and is terrible for a 5th level spell if all you are getting from it is the difficult terrain, if that's what you're casting it for may I suggest you consider Plant Growth or Spike Growth or Erupting Earth or better yet Malestrom. I think you meant spells like Sleep, Spike Growth, Silence or Sleet Storm. But honestly Web, Entangle, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, and Banishment are just way better and they are all saving throw based.
@@agilemind6241 As I stated above, I do agree that it works with valuable multihitting AoE control spells such as hypnotic pattern or web. As for your other points: Fun or not about forcecage aside, it is one of the most effective control spells in the game and does not require a saving throw. Transmute Rock does not create "difficult terrain." It creates where movement through it costs quadruple the normal amount over a huge area, and thus it actually stacks with difficult terrain. The associated saves with it also are repeated upon re-entering the area or ending one's turn there, so it synergizes well with features such as telekinetic or repelling blast.
@@rayndeon1 It is a decently large area but nothing close to Plant Growth which is a 3rd level spell and is equally restricted by the type of terrain required to have it work. So if you are assuming enemies always make the saving throw it isn't a good spell. OTOH if the saving throw is important to its effectiveness then SBs makes it a whole lot better because again you can greatly increase the chance of those enemies you most want to get stuck - i.e. big brutish melee enemies - do get stuck. Arguing that SBs (available from level 1-20) isn't good because it does nothing to enhance a 7th level spell (available only at level 13+) is pretty silly in my books. 95% of all control spells cast by your party during a normal campaign are going to require saving throws, Silvery Barbs is THE most potent way to increase the chance enemies fail those saving throws. So unless you are going to argue that battlefield control is inherently weaker than most other strategies, I find it baffling that you could think SBs isn't the best 1st level spell in the game.
AGAIN, Treantmonk going against the grain, and telling it like it is, with his abundance of knowledge and hard evidence. Thank the D&D gods for your work.
You have corrected a couple of my misconceptions about the spell, so thank you very much for that, but I have a few concerns nonetheless: 1. Even while Shield gives the +5AC for the rest of the round until it gets back to your turn, Shield is self-cast only. You can use Barbs to save an ally from an attack, not just yourself. 2. It can be used on ANY attack, saving throw, or ability check. Any single one. Shield and similar protective spells only affect attack rolls. Heighten Spell can't be used to ruin, say, a Dex check to break free of a Web's entanglement, or a Strength check to get free of Evard's Black Tentacles. This spell can. 3. As far as I can tell, you completely overlooked the part where you can convert an advantaged roll into a disadvantaged one. Because you get to wait to see the results of the roll, you effectively get to take a roll that had Advantage, and then apply a new roll that they must take the worse result of afterwards. Normally when someone has Advantage and you apply Disadvantage, the two simply cancel each other out. This spell however, OVERRIDES advantage with disadvantage, in other words it BYPASSES and NEGATES standard game mechanics. That is a serious problem, even if advantage and disadvantage are commonly come by in 5e. 4. Silvery Barbs does not allow a save against its effects. Let's take the bard cantrip Vicious Mockery for example, which gives Disadvantage on an enemy roll as well as a very small amount of damage. Vicious Mockery requires a save. Why doesn't Silvery Barbs? 5. You are correct that the Advantage roll only directly applies to an ally's NEXT roll, so it can take some planning and effort to maximize its use, but at the same time there are so many situations where knowing how the Advantage will be used is a no-brainer. Ally bleeding out, or stuck in an Entanglement, or under the influence of a spell where they're making new saves every turn, or completely unhindered and ready to make a single big attack... It's more consistently plannable than you seemed to portray it as. 6. You did briefly acknowledge the crit negation, but seemed to gloss over it rather than give it a proper looking-into. Say you're up against a Giant, which generally only gets 1-2 attack rolls per round but the damage per successful hit is much higher. Getting a crit on 1d12+5 is FAR more potent than doubling, say, a simple 1d8+3 claw attack from a Slaad. It is a fact that there is NOTHING ELSE IN THE GAME that can negate a confirmed Crit, and there are a lot of situations where one crit can have a significant impact - especially when dealing with smaller numbers of stronger foes. The fact remains that this spell is INCREDIBLY powerful by first-tier standards, even taking into account that reactions are not free and never have been free. Do I think it should be banned? No; personally I'd say it sits about perfect as a 2nd-tier spell. It's got too many things going for it as written to be a 1st, plus Wizards and Sorcerers alike can restore their 1st tier slots quite easily either through short rests or through spending sorcery points, but 2nd tier slots take just enough extra resources to balance it out in the long run.
I know this comment is from a while ago, but I feel like a response is necessary given how much I have seen the spell in use as a DM. 1. Yes, this is a strength of the spell, and a good one. It encourages spellcasters to be less selfish and to take risks, since if you use your reaction, the DM may have the monsters turn on your Wizard, who can now not cast Shield or Absorb Elements. 2. In addition to being ephemeral (i.e. it doesn't last until the start of your next turn like Shield or Absorb Elements), it's more flexible. I think that's a fair trade-off, especially when you consider that if it only targeted attack rolls, it would likely only be used to try to prevent critical hits, and that's a very, VERY narrow purpose. 3. The spell does not override advantage with disadvantage, it simply requires a reroll with a straight roll. That's not disadvantage, and if you take a minute to consider how the math works you will see that. The Pack Tactics video on Silvery Barbs explains the math well, so I'm not going to here; you can seek it out if you want to. 4. You just compared a Cantrip to a leveled spell... 5. A DM can ruin your planning as much or as little as they want to. I tend to roleplay my monsters, so while a gnoll won't understand what the spell is doing, you can bet that my Mind Flayer will not use their Mind Blast into it. Again, I think it a good thing that casters have a way to be less selfish and assist their party members out, though it carries the risk of them expending their very precious reaction. 6. Not only did you use a terrible example (an additional 1d12 will add, on average, 6.5 points of damage as compared to an additional 1d8 which will add 4.5; if you want a better example of a devastating critical hit you need something that is rolling multiple dice, like a Giant Poisonous Snake or a Rogue's Sneak Attack), but I feel like negating a critical hit is EXACTLY the best use of Silvery Barbs. It's actually not that great for ruining saving throws or skill checks except in edge cases where those roles are very "do or die", and even then it's just a straight reroll. For example, if a CR 1/4 Giant Poisonous Snake just landed a critical hit against your level 2 Fighter for 2d4+4 piercing plus 6d6(!) poison damage (DC11 CON save to take half, which is still a ton!), Silvery Barbs has a 95% chance of eliminating that critical hit and saving the life of your Fighter, who could possibly just die outright on an unlucky CON save plus high poison damage dice rolls. That's great! As a DM, I'd love to see this happen. It would instantly create a bond between those characters and make for a good "tavern story" about how the frail Sorcerer, through strength of will, saved the burly Fighter from an early grave. Overall, I think it's a perfectly positioned 1st level spell. Like Shield and Absorb Elements, both of which are very powerful in the right situations, it will compete with limited spell selections (especially for Wizards).
1. Yes Shield is self cast only, but 9 times out of 10 its going to be more useful for the Eldritch Knight to cast Shield than Silvery Barbs. Further more yes the wizard can use silvery barbs to help the Eldritch Knight, but what about the enemy mage waiting for the right moment to cast his Cone of Cold? What about the Demon Lord with Feeblemind? wouldn't you rather your wizard to save their reaction for counterspell than to use it on silvery barbs to stop one attack or force one creature to potentially fail a save? 2. Thats great, but its still not broken. It has a advantage not covered by other spells which makes it useful in its own way, thats not gamebreaking thats adding more utility to the spell. 3. This also exists in the game too. 4. Why should it? Its a 1st level spell to a cantrip and deals no damage. It just affects a save which the creature is simply rerolling a save immeadiately if it passes great then silvery barbs did nothing if not well then silvery barbs reaction affect mattered. This seems overcomplicated a rather simple matter here. 5. If you can plan it out, great, but again all it takes is something you arent expecting to happen for this all to go out the window. The slaad instead of attacking the eldritch knight who has shield, goes over and smacks the unconscious rogue. Youve already used your reaction, and advantage doesnt help on a automatic failed death save. 6. Clerics have features that can negate crits. Adamantine armor blocks crits completely. Crit negation exist in D&D 5e, albeit it not insanely common. Ultimately again its a powerful 1st level spell, but I fail to see how these things make it more powerful than shield, or absorb elements, let alone counterspell.
Whole argument changed when a DM starts using silvery barbs. In a campaign I am in now I have had to hold reaction several times because of the examples you gave we had a swarm of harpies attack us (30+) I’m a low level wizard and silvery barbs is great for single interactions but if I think I am about to be attacked by several hits between turns then shield is the better reaction.
With a swarm of 30-plus harpies and a low-level party, I think running away is the better action, assuming that they are all up in the air and not going to get attacks of opportunity. But I hope you all survived!
@@joshuacr we were on an airship so part of us were under cover and they had to come to us in small packs until a smaller group found a way in, but our group was able to kill 18 of them, we have lots of control with myself casting sleep and having bless from the lorehold background and the Druid thorn whip enemies, our group is pretty balanced as far as melee goes and our cleric does more damage than me so we kept the swarm under control.
RAW Split enchantment doesn't work on Silvery barbs because your not targeting 1 creature with that spell your targeting 2 so it works like the Twinned spell metamagic
You can Split it if you choose not to confer the advantage, as the spell when cast would only affect one creature. Twinned Spell is different in that it requires the spell to be incapable of targeting more than one creature, not just that it is the case that the spell is targeting only one creature on a given cast.
@@rayndeon1 I'd agree.Split Enchantment is worded closer to War Caster's replacement of an Opportunity Attack than to Twin Spell, War Caster's can be capable of targeting multiple (Level 5+ Eldritch Blast, Magic Missile, etc) as long as it doesn't that particular time and only focuses down the one that triggered
I don't necessarily believe this spell is broken, but it's inclusion annoys me, because it is undeniable it broadens the options and potency of any caster that takes it. A lot of casters just got access to a way to make their spells more likely to land. The problem with this is they *did not need it*. Casters did not need the buff, at all. We continue to see this, casters getting broadening of their options and potency through magic items and spells, while we have barely seen anything for martials. Even among new subclasses, which I generally don't consider because they are mutually exclusive, casters have gotten some amazing subclasses recently. Martials have gotten... crusher, slasher and piercer. I guess crusher is good, but it is competing with the feats martials are already using as a crutch to be relevant.
Eldritch Knight: "Ah yes... Silvery Barb at lv1... But then it becomes redundant at higher levels for me. At least, I can use it at range and directly at targets. Unlike casting my usual Spells to trigger disadvantage against my next Spell."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 the real power for the eldrich knight is they can use it to avoid the enemy to make the save against your full casters high level spells, gives you a way to protect an allie from a crit hit, etc.
this doesn't mean we should not have silvery barbas This means we should have gamechanging mechanics for martials besides I can't understand this mindset, because dnd is not a competitive game. Yes, my fighter is not as versatile as my friend's bard, what gives? We are on the same side, we do different things.
@@adriel8498 Yeap... But I would use Silvery Barb as an Action or Bonus Action since the effect lasts until the end of my next turn, as the Eldritch Knight. And I can affect two targets at once. Although, with a Heavy Great Sword, one of the thunder spells, and Eldritch Strike. Silvery Barb is kind of redundant as an Action/Bonus Action by that level.
I started DMing recently and was sorta worried about this spell coming up w the various examples the band wagon ppl have said, this video is perfect for greater insight into why it’s not broken and leaves me feeling better about players who take this, so thanks Chris :)
My recommendation would be, that if you're uneasy about the spell, tell players you are tenatively allowing it for now, but if you find it's problematic, you may ban or adjust it later. Then you get a chance to see it in action, and make a judgement based on experience.
The one thing I'd say is try your players depending on experience is to try not to meta game with using it. Also, early levels I feel like this spell isn't as strong. It's at mid tier where it really shines for big saving throws. Good luck with your campaign.
Lv20 Eldritch Knight with a Heavy Great Sword: "I impose disadvantage on the Goblin with my Heavy Great Sword as I attack him. But before I do, I cast Silvery Barb as an Action on the Hobgoblin and invoke Eldritch Strike on the Hobgoblin. If he fails to roll against Silvery Barb, then I empower myself with this Spell's second effect. Finally, I use Action Surge to Shove the Goblin near the Hobgoblin then to Extra Attack 3x... Move 5ft near both targets, Prone the Goblin, Prone the Hobgoblin, then use "variant combat rules when fighting multiple mobs at once" in order to deal damage to both targets in a circular sweeping Heavy Great Sword slash, thus affecting both targets with disadvantage from my Heavy Great Sword... But wait, There's more... I also use my Bonus Action to cast Thunder Clap to only affect/keep Silvery Bard on the Hobgoblin, but to also apply a new Eldritch Strike on the Goblin and end the Eldritch Strike on the Hobgoblin... Once done, I walk away using the rest of my Move of 25 Feet." Lv20 Rogue: "Oh... I sneak attack the Goblin King... He dies." Lv20 Wizard: "I cast Fire Ball as a Bonus Action then I cast Minor Illusion to make my Fire Ball even more louder... Why?... Because the Cleric got CC'd in the first round of this battle, so no one was being healed... And how dare the Eldritch Knight copy my Fire Ball with better stats and proficiencies in everything under the sun while I take 1d4 of stress damage from the Warlock who never wakes up after he uses Eldritch Blast." Paladin: "Can I use Smite with my fists?"
Don't thank him, his arguments weren't good and the spell is 100% busted in the mid game. I guess if you don't think you'll make it to the point where they have 4th level slots it's not ban-able but still very broken.
I dislike that it takes Grave cleric's anti crit, Lore bard's Cutting Words, and a bit of Eloquence's Unsettling Words into a first level spell. This takes three great features and just hands them to the already overpowered Wizard. While Sorcerer would enjoy some more power they just don't have the spell count for it outside of Tasha's subclasses. I believe its an example of bad power creep and I'm banning it outside of Strixhaven.
Keep in mind those characters can take this spell too, giving them even more options. I'm doing this with my Lore bard currently. Power creep is real, and limiting setting-specific material to games in those settings is totally understandable. But I don't think that players of the mentioned class archetypes should feel slighted by this spells existence since they can also benefit from it.
@@larstollefsen1236 Grave cleric ability is way more amped than this spell it stops a crit where silvery barbs does not. Unsettling words works different and great with this added on top of it which is especially on point because this is a very bard eloquent flavored spell.
@@regaleagle6533 Silvery Barbs has 95% chance to stop a crit, and a good chance to turn a crit into a miss, whereas grave cleric only turns a crit into a normal hit. Plus Silvery Barbs gives Adv to an ally at the same time. Thus Silvery Barbs is generally better than the grave cleric ability and if I was a grave cleric I'd probably use SBs instead of the cleric ability as long as I had lots of 1st level slots left.
@@agilemind6241 Grave clerics ability can be used AFTER you find out it is a crit. Silvery barbs cannot be used after you find out you got crit. The spell doesn't do what you want it to.
I mostly find it interesting that it's available through Fey Touched, whereas the other reaction spells usually are more onerous to acquire. Since misty step and free spell slots are really great already, it makes the spell very available to all classes combined with the rest of an already great feat.
If setting specific spells were already allowed at your table through Fey Touched, then Gift of Alacrity was an option. I'm not sure this is a better spell than GoA
That is really my only complaint personally about this spell. It should not have been a part of the Enchantment school. It should have been a part of the Abjuration school. The reason it is available only available through the Fey Touched feat because it is an enchantment spell.
It's also available for Arcane Tricksters. They have problems with picking effective lvl 1 spells; most of the wizard's Enchantment and Illusion spells are utility, and the spell from any school is often taken by some other option (Find Familiar), so in combat 1-st lvl slots may end up not used at all. Silvery Barbs give a good way of spending resources. And that not mentioning how advantage is good for Rogues.
@@LordMorin It should be a 2nd or 3rd level spell so that it isn't available through feats, and requires a minimum 3 level MC to get it beyond the 'intended' classes.
@@TreantmonksTemple I suppose, though they do rather different things and probably are wanted on somewhat different builds. GoA is a reasonable choice on anyone, but seems best on like a full caster that has lower level slots to burn just giving the whole party better initiative, or on a non caster who doesn't have any slots to make use of the cast with your slots feature of the feat. Especially if you already have good initiative or your party is covering this, barbs seems like a good always in your back pocket kind of spell. It's something where one or two uses can overturn critical situations throughout the day. I'm not even saying it's a bad thing necessarily that it is available this way, just interesting that if you wanted, say, shield or absorb elements on your tank paladin, you have to multiclass or do spell storage rings or something. But now you can just pick up a pretty good feat now and have a defensive reaction option, which wasn't an option before.
For me the problem is that this is yet another example of power creep. While it may not be the only example, or even the worst, it is one that can be motivated with no negative effect on players.
Have to say I disagree on the fact that it gives advantage on top of the reroll not being too strong. It's a reaction spell. Level 1. Gives a reroll PLUS advantage. A second chance at a spell saving throw which is the mechanical equivalent of casting an X-level spell as a reaction AND you can give your Rouge/GWM Fighter/whoever another likely success. As a reaction. Yes reactions aren't free, but spellcasters with access to this spell now have an overwhelmingly strong option for their reaction. It's not game breaking, but it is certainly centralizing and IMO unhealthy for the game. Wouldn't judge anyone for banning it.
I totally agree. Just because the secondary feature is weaker than the primary feature doesn’t make the secondary feature obsolete. For a sorcerer, Silvery Barbs gives disadvantage for two sorcery points, while heightened spell costs three. To _add_ advantage on top of that is just mind-boggling.
@@ellewong137 I mean I think that more so sheds light on how poorly designed sorcerer and the over emphasis on mostly subpar metamagics is than how strong silvery barbs is. Short of niche dual buffs there's no reason to choose a sorcerer over a wizard, cleric, or bard. Multiclassing ability score considerations aside. Sorcerers pay for features most classes either always have on or have easier to get back resources for them while sorc is religated to needing long rests to get anything back.
@@ellewong137 Since you're talking about using sorcery points in combat, it also costs that Sorcerer a bonus action. Reactions and bonus actions are not free. Heightened spell costs neither. Unless they are Aberrant Mind, then they can cast it for 1 sorcery point directly without the bonus action.
Being able to decide whether to expend the resources after the save is made makes this decidedly not equivalent to giving disadvantage on the save. Much of the time, disadvantage on the save is wasted because the creature fails the first die roll anyway. So if we have a spell that has an arbitrary utility on a failed save of 10 units of some sort, and the chance of success is 50%, then we can make these comparisons: The expected value of casting the spell in the first place is 5 units, the expected value of giving a creature disadvantage is 2.5 units, and the expected value of silvery barbs at the time of casting is 0.5 units (plus the advantage, but we'll ignore that). So it's mathematically twice as good as giving the creature disadvantage, making your comparison extremely spurious. It also at its most inefficient effectively costs 2 sorcery points (due to flexible casting) while heightened spell costs 3. Yes heightened spell does not consume your reaction so it's not literally just 3 times better per sorcery point, but it still makes heightened spell look pretty not great in comparison imo. We can also look at things a different way. If silvery barbs is giving us the same expected value as the original spell, then casting it is equivalent to casting the original spell a second time, with its slot cost reduced to a 1st level slot and its action cost reduced to a reaction. Even if you assign a very high value to a reaction, you surely have to admit that it's still lower value than an entire action, so silvery barbs, when cast, seems to be to be very nearly strictly better than the spell it's "copying". At low levels I think this is fine- your save-or-sucks aren't the best spells of those spell levels anyway, so applying a super-quicken and making them a 1st level spell is strong but not insane, especially when we consider the timing restrictions on this super-quickened 1st level version. But once we get into late tier 2, certainly tier 3 and 4? Recasting a 5th level spell with a 1st level slot is some insane spell slot economy. Overall this is a disappointing video for me. It feels like you spent nearly all of your time rebutting some awful strawman arguments, and then against the one actual serious argument you completely misrepresented the spell saying it's literally half as good as it actually is. I get that there are definitely people making those stupid arguments, but why was it necessary to give them 90% of the video's time? Your audience isn't *stupid*, we know advantage on a single roll isn't gamebreaking lol.
I definitely felt that Treeant ignored some stronger arguments for weaker ones. For instance, he talked about 18th level wizards, but not 6th level Aberrant Mind sorcerers. He also used assumed that you would give your advantage to a caster with Warcaster who is concentrating on a spell. On literally anybody else, the advantage would probably be used for an important saving throw or an attack roll. And the assumption that you would give advantage to a teammate that always has advantage is stupid. You have multiple teammates, and you give the advantage to the person who needs it most. I also feel that his dragon example is a white room scenario. It assumes that the dragon is going to ignore all your other teammates and attack you. It also assumes that you aren’t behind cover or giving advantage to yourself for the breath attack saving throw. This video just feels like a jab at other RUclipsrs who, admittedly, made some dumb arguments, while ignoring many people with valid arguments.
@@ellewong137 He’s made a name for himself in part by being contrarian. Usually I dig it, this just feels like he hates the big response more than the actual arguments. Cherry picking bad/hyperbolic criticisms makes it easy to argue.
Terrible comparison. it isn't remotely the same as casting a spell a second time. A second cast nets you another target, a new location, a re-applied effect that became broken, etc. This only increases the chance of a spell landing and ONLY the first saving throws as many of those spells whose saving throws you want to fail allow one every turn. It still costs additional resources to do so and those resources are not unlimited, which was basically the whole point of his video. You don't want to do this on every spell you cast, only a few choice ones here and there. If spending resources to go without defenses to have a bit better success rate on a spell you're already casting is breaking the game, then the spell you're casting in the first place is the part that's game-breaking.
@@tarrickmerdev2324 it's specifically for single target save or suck spells, but for that subset of spells it is just a recast. The targets are inherently the best targets because the game state is identical to before you cast the spell in the first place so if you picked the best targets then they're still the best targets now. At that moment you're expending a first level slot and a reaction to cause the target to make a save and suffer the effects of the spell on a failure, which has exactly the same value as the spell did when you decided to cast it moments ago. Yes it costs resources, but if you determined that casting the spell in the first place was worth expending the resource of, say, a 5th level spell then clearly it's worth the resources to recast it under exactly the same conditions for a 1st level slot (or a higher slot- it's still very good value when upcast).
Currently running Strixhaven and two players have Silvery Barbs (limited access to the Silverquill background) In one battle both players used the spell 4 times (2 spell slots each) at the end of that combat, two players were near 0 hit points, 1 was fairly damage and two others. One which had an advantages position and another could fly took none. Yes, the spell made my creatures miss, and yes, that fighter got advantages on 4 of his attacks. But guess what. A Rogue using steady aim would have got advantage on almost all of those attacks and and would have done more damage. The creatures still had their next attack, which hit. In once instance even after SB the creature hit. Did the spell help my players survive? Absolutely did it change anything? No? Did the fighter still have to use his one cast of shield to prevent a hit that would have dropped him like the Bard and Warlock were about to have happen? Yep, still had to use Shield. You are the DM, you determine how powerful your encounters are. How they fight and you already know what your party is capable of. Personally, I felt like them having SB actually made them stop to think about what would be the better option. The Bard struggled to use SB to help the fighter because he knew one cast of Dissonant Whispers would kill the creature and a dead creature can't do damage. SB is powerful and it will change how players battle but its not broken. I love Wild Magic and the Sorcerer basically Casts every 1st level spell with advantage because I ALWAY force proc wild magic surge.
Of course SB won't be that impactful when they use it just to reroll attacks Just wait till you have someone casting web/pattern and two casters use silvery barb to ensure it sticks Enjoy seeing them trivialize your encounters cause what's supposed to be a 55% to success became a 91%
The spell isn’t broken, but it is substantially stronger than what a first level spell should be in my opinion. While reactions aren’t free, a caster can likely deduce if they will need an absorb elements/shield on any given round. And now that enemy stat blocks are being redone, counterspell loses a lot of application as enemies lose spells in favor of “magical abilities”. The biggest weakness is obviously that it requires a spell slot, and you have a very limited number of those. But forcing a reroll on a critical hit or a successful saving throw against a high level spell can be incredibly impactful.
>But forcing a reroll on a critical hit or a successful saving throw against a high level spell can be incredibly impactful. So can shield on a multi-attack or absorb elements on a chain lightning or dragon's breath and yet these are also 1st level spells. You only use any of these spells when you already know it's going to have a significant impact, none of them are guesses.
I think it has a lot of balance issues because how it interact with classes and feats. Is really easy to get, it can be used by bards that doesn´t have shield or absorb elements, aberrant minds sorcs can cast it for only 1 sorc point without components, Order domain clerics can give attacks to allies on othr turns (heavy sneak attack combo), and probably there are more interactions I haven´t noticed yet.
@@adriel8498 it’s an undeniably powerful spell with some great synergies, but it has opportunity costs. If this were instead a feature with its own resource then I think it would be even stronger. But it isn’t. It directly competes with other spells. Those sorcery points could have been spent on shield instead which is also a powerful spell.
It's about as powerful as shield, which is a high complement since shield is an extremely good spell, but I agree it's not broken. It trades shield's ability to defend against multiple attacks for the ability to be used offensively, and the extra advantage.
@@PearseNation Eldritch Knight: "You guys cast Silvery Bard as a Reaction?... I treat this spell as an Action and as Bonus Action. In the same way, I treat Counter Spell as an Action or Bonus Action if I need to." I would use Silver Bard as a Bonus Action, which triggers Eldritch Strike. Then attack with my heavy great sword. Thus, imposing up to +3 Disadvantages on the target for the next turn and enhancing +1 Advantage on myself until I make the next roll. However, I do not roll 3 times. Adv and Disadv only rolls once because the +3 Disadv being imposed on the target can only nullify Adv from the target. Although, when Silvery Barb is successful. I not only force the target to roll with +3 Disadv. I also roll Adv for my own single AC roll.
@@brianb.6356 As the Eldritch Knight, I'll cast Silvery Bard as a Bonus Action then cast a Cantrip as an Action. I'll save Shield and Absorb Elements for my Reaction. It's better than casting a low damaging spell at lv10+ for this Sub Class.
Thank you for being you. Your critical thinking and thoughtful demeanor are what solidifies Treantmonk’s Temple as being my favorite D&D/role playing channel
I absolutely banned this from my table. Once the entire party found out they could get this spell and use it to basically one shot any big guy I fielded on the table trivializing encounters for a 1st level spell I banned it. When you have a sorcerer casting heightened spell on a save or suck spell then I make the roll at disadvantage then I roll again and then if I make it two more party member make me roll again. It basically turns into an "I win button." The spell does have counters but I'm not going to deafen the party, give my creatures legendary saves or have lots of counterspell every fight. The fact that everyone in the party can take the spell with fey touched feat is broken. When everyone is using this at the table why have saving throws? It's a hard pass for me.
Neither Lucky nor Silvery Barbs removes failure. It gives you a second chance at best. I've seen lucky/Silvery Barbs fail to change the result of the roll just as often as it does impact the result. It's good. But not broken.
My biggest issue with this spell is that it's on the wizard's spell list; not anything power level related just seems like it would be a good, powerful unique spell for the Bard and Sorcerer. It's literally a supped up version of vicious mockery.
Because this is a Planeswalker, AKA wizard Academy, there is no spell or almost no spell that would not be included to the wizard/sorcerer build when interpreted for Dungeons & Dragons. But I agree with you.
You've missed the strongest use of this spell, not as a defensive spell, but as an offensive spell. If your ally casts a powerful X-level spell and your enemies make their save, you can, using a 1st level spell slot, essentially duplicate that spell and force another save roll. It's like tag-teaming blasters! Then, on your turn, you cast your X-level spell, and if your enemy makes the save, your ally casts Silvery Barbs (using only a 1st level slot) and your enemy again has to make the save. I say BAN, if there isn't some other sort of control on it. Also, the point about using it with your own magic fails the sniff test, because you can't cast two spells in one turn, so you can't use this if your own magic is resisted.
He mentioned that in the heightened section. Also, one is only prevented from casting a second leveled spell in a round if one spell is cast as a bonus action.
@@dwainedwards615 you can counterspell a counterspell targeting your fireball according to sage advice, how can you do this if you cant cast multiple spells per turn?
People already mention this but when you cast it offensively in combat you no longer have protection from attacks. In my campaigns atleast enemies are usually in groups of 6-8 or 1 big bad and 4-5 smaller enemies and they usually have a habbit of trying to shoot me in the backline anytime im not protected. Mage's like my character will go down or almost go down in a single round if an enemy hits them. Using sb to make sure my attack/crowd control hits really only feels good until I get an arrow to the knee
I think this video is missing the forest for the trees. It's not broken as a defensive spell, it's broken as an offensive spell that will make higher level save-or-suck spells and abilities significantly more powerful. That why I've banned it at my table, and this video did not convince me otherwise.
if anything the video kinda omits the offensive use of the spell lols. It can be used to force enemies to eat damage for no good reason aside form the spells existence...
But the Spellcaster is using twice the resources. It's not making offensive spells twice as good. So it's going to be down to the player; do they want to cast that 1st level offensive spell twice with advantage or 4 times without it. STOP taking player decisions away from them without good reason. Chris is keeping an open mind; why can't you?
@@richardjames6990 you don't use twice the resources if you have wizard Spell Mastery which is a niche high level play carve out but it does remove that limit of resource cost. Not saying to ban, just a note.
90% of times ive been attacked in combat, its been by a creature with the ability to make more than 1 attack, and 80% of the time there are other creatures who are able to do the same nearby. Its astounding to me that people are acting like Silvery Barbs is better in every way than Shield. Perhaps its because my DM is a guy who likes to field creatures that make lots of attacks (Including an instance with a creature that could make SIX) but I still wonder why the hyperbolic reaction to this spell is occurring without experiencing the spell at the table over several sessions. Lets Humanize the thought experiment a lttle bit here - There are spells that players are going to want to use outside of Silvery Barbs. Like a lot of less optimized characters, a lot of players at my tables have an unhealthy obsession with blasting. If anyone thinks that sorcerers and wizards are going to cease blasting so that they can sit on their last first level slot Just in case they need silvery Barbs...I mean, CMON, no way.
Me, as the Eldritch Knight: "Ah... Another way to apply more tactical rolls... No, not damage. For damage?... I have my Dual Wield Heavy Great Sword that I only hold for cosmetic reasons. My meer presence forces weaker and smaller targets to make a Charisma Skill Role if they ever desire to be 5 ft near me. And if they touch my armor... They... Will... Know... Intimidation beyond fear with my Charisma at base 15 from Lv1, unmodified." Lv4 Normal Human Eldritch Knight 9 (+1) Str 15 (+1) Dex 15 (+1) Con 9 (+1) Int 9 (+1) Wis 15 (+1) Chr Feat: Telekinesis
Maybe because people have desired this for a long time and didn’t like relying on fellow party members or spending their own concentration to make it harder for enemies to make saves. Now you can use a low (very low) effort set up to do just that. People who are defending it just like power.
Silvery Barbs isn't primarily a defensive spell though. Shield is specifically a defensive spell so of course it ought to be better at defense than a spell that can be used for defense and 1001 other uses. If you as a wizard / sorcerer / bard are being attacked in low & mid tier then Shield will generally be a better option. However, if you as a low & mid tier wizard/sorcerer/bard are being attacked all the time, then you're kind of fed regardless. SBs is > Shield in the general case because during most rounds of combat the wizard/sorcerer/bard really shouldn't be being attacked thus Shield is useless during most rounds of combat. Whereas SBs can be used in far more situations - no you won't have the spell slots to cast it in ALL of the situations where you could, but if you take SBs there will never be an adventuring day where you still have most of your 1st level slots left over unused. Whereas if you have Shield or Absorb Elements it is highly likely there will be some adventuring days where there is never an opportunity to use those spell.
I'm a brand new DM. My players couldn't wait to use this against me. After 2 sessions they couldn't care less. It is a great spell but it doesn't break anything. Also at low levels the wizard burning two spell slots a turn/round really hurts the wizards ability to stay relevant long term in a day.
@@franciscofernandez8183 Thats not the rule, there is no 1 spell per turn rule. The rule is about casting a leveled spell as a bonus action, so nothing stops you from casting a spell as your action and then using SB as your reaction in the same turn.
@@AncientManBeast little correction: the rule is about casting A spell as a bonus action, if you quicken/watthever a cantrip to BA you'll be stuck with using a action cantrip the same way because cantrips are spells.
Without getting into the minutiae of this spell and its interactions with everything else in the game, I think something that is overlooked is that a new addition being good or bad for the game is not necessarily directly related to its power level. It can be the type of gameplay it encourages, the overshadowing of other abilities, bad wordings and the shenanigans that will ensue, etc. People often justify the opinions they have by trying to make them "objective", calling things overpowered or imbalanced, but this is not always the real problem. The first version of Healing Spirit didn't pose any problem in combat, but was an absolute mess out of combat. Silvery barbs encourages and optimizes the use of save&suck / save&die spells, and in doing so will favor more swingy combat encounters, which makes balancing them harder for the DM; it bring some power creep to mid-level full arcane casters, who are already some of the most potent characters in the game. So in my opinion, it doesn't have to be broken/overpowered to have a potential negative effect on games, and be better left out of the spell lists.
It can be used effectively out of combat for any skill-based check and subtle things cast on others or otherwise that require a saving throw by an opposition or technically any other person. That's what makes it much more versatile. It still requires one reaction and a spell slot which limits your overall casting of this all the time unless you are level 18 and choose this as a mastery as wizard.
When WotC balances everything to being so underwhelming, it's not hard for something new to overshadow past things. Not to mention how they've reduced game mechanics compared to past editions, giving less for spells to mess with so there is more overlap.
The argument is that Silvery Barbs is Over-Powered relative to the balance of other options available. I definitely agree it shouldn’t be banned out right, but I think it should at least cost a higher level spell slot. It’s a must have
I've found the games I play in usually have bosses with minions. I recently played In a game where we fought another group of npc adventurers. I found one good opportunity to use it, meanwhile the wizard with one hit point was able to pop shield and survive like 5 attacks. Shield, as a wizard, could give you an ac of 23 if you have mage armor and max dex. Even if he had like 20, that would have still saved him from most of the attacks, meanwhile silvery barbs only has potential against one attack per turn.
@@Thoumint it's not used defensively, nor should it be. That boss, did he have legendary resistance? (Which why would you use this knowing a creature has LR like treantmonk mentioned...) If not you use silvery barb on a banishment or suggestion spell and get rid of the boss... this spell means as a DM I need to give every decent big baddy at least one legendary resistance. Shield is still important, but silvery barb makes the BEST spells in the game better. Not marginally better, but disadvantage on the save for a 1st level spell better; while the sorcerer's most powerful metamagic requires 3 SP to do it (in a less efficient way mind you, you don't heighten after the first roll) AND these can be stacked. Someone mentioned a +6 on a save against a DC 13... with a heightened and silvery on the omni important cast...
@@chrisgee8441 I didn't say the boss had Legendary Resistance, because it didn't. As i sorta implied, the Boss in question was the leader of a group of NPC adventurers that the DM had set up to be on par with our group, if not a little bit better due to sheer numbers. Yes, I agree the spell is good, its great. But shield is just as good for a different purpose. You as a DM don't have to give legendary resistance to a boss. What you as a DM have to do, with those two examples, is give the boss immunity to charmed, or make it from the same plane as them. Or perhaps focus on the way in which the player words the suggestion? Yes, there is many spells in this game that benefit from this spells ability to impose a sort of disadvantage on a spell. But i think everyone is blowing it out of proportion. Unless your a high level Cavalier, reactions are far and few in between, and your using your reaction to force a re-roll on one creature, and you don't get another reaction until everyone else in the turn order, friend or foe(Especially if there is a lot of minions), gets their turns. At that point, shield is a better option, simply because it persists and effects everything that tries to attack you throughout those turns. Now to play devils advocate here, i see your points. Casting this on a spell like banishment, or disintegrate would be ideal. If you have the initiative on your side, you could do some real crazy stuff.
@@Thoumint Good points, I was legitimately asking if they had LR; possibly a home brewed npc boss. I was more picking at Treantmonk assuming an optimizer would used silvery barb/saversuck on a dragon with it's breath charge, not having casted fire shield, fully knowing that the dragon has LR. I agree shield would never be off my list, but if I can banish the big bad in round one and use my movement to duck behind cover and hope the martials can protect me and take care of the small fry; I done did my part (regardless of on the plane or not, 10 rounds out of combat. Might as well be dead) Even if I give my creature immunities, or super high saves; I'm still altering the baddy because of a single level one spell. That speaks volumes. As far as reaction economy goes, how often is the wizard/sorcerer (which aberrant mind btw... 1 SP cost if you put this on psionic) needing to cast shield/absorb. Something else, he uses this surrounded by crazy multi-attack monsters analogy. How many other people are you playing with and what the hell are they doing? Plus, MOST creature blocks have an average of two multi-attacks; at that point it IS possible silvery barb may be the better option. The fact that it can even be considered against shield when I believe it shouldn't be used defensively. Then the advantage buff that gets written off... The fact that it's just another concentrationless mini buff for free. Wizards should be kings at setting up. This spell makes them drastically better at the punch line. Also; bards get it... All that said, I'm not banning this spell. My players can have it; so can my uber villain casters. It's just another staple spell that would be stupid NOT to take, and further widens the gap between casters and martials. Where is my vortex warp and silvery barb equivalent for the barbarian or the rogue...
The problem with Silvery Barbs is that it is effective in many situations, while spells like Shield and Absorb Elements have niche uses. Let's say your opponent makes his save against a Banishment spell. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs? Let's say your Fighter is trying to grapple the enemy spellcaster to stop them from casting and the caster makes it's Athletics/Acrobatics Check. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs? Let's say you are an Arcane Trickster likely getting attacked only once, with no other way of getting Sneak Attack next turn. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs? Heck, lets say SOMEONE ELSE get's attacked. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs? Shield is ONLY better than Silvery Barbs when you expect YOU are going to be attacked multiple times AND the potential of the Advantage is not worth the risk. Wish does not let you replicate any other 9th level spell, but even so, it is STILL the best spell in the game, due to versatility. That is why Silvery Barbs is broken. Am I going to ban it? Probably not, but if my party grabs it ALL of my NPC spellcasters will have it.
features like heighten spell and chronal shift already existed, but by and large they were restricted to specific subclasses or heavy investment of your power budget. they're all still very strong features, even if they don't break the game. but none of them are nearly as accessible or as cheap as silvery barbs is now. any wizard, bard, sorcerer or someone taking fey-touched can now spend a 1st-level reaction spell to dump enemy saving throws. is that free? no, but you're still getting a _ton_ of bang for your buck there. it doesn't invalidate shield, but it makes most casters way better at something they previously didn't have many ways to address. when 5e came out, it felt like dumping enemy saving throws was treated with a lot more weight by the designers. you had to be a sorcerer and spend one of your two metamagics on heighten spell, and shell out three whole-ass sorcery points. nowdays the designers just hand it out like candy. by this point there's no excuse for a caster to not have some way to nearly ensure an enemy fails a crucial saving throw, because that ability is so powerful and so accessible. maybe it doesn't break the game, but it just continues to make casters all the more powerful and versatile when they already had more power and versatility than they ever needed. i'm happy it's setting-specific so i have an easier time justifying banning it from my table, because i'm definitely going to ban it.
Speaking as GM, I’m actually very excited about this spell though it hasn’t come up in play yet. I’m a big fan of reactions that allow players to support one another. It encourages cooperation which is very healthy for play. That’s why the lore Bard’s cutting words is such a well designed feature, even if it’s mathematically inferior to the Valor Bard’s option. I actually think Silvery Barbs is going to be most useful on partial casters or non-casters that take a 1 level dip. Rogues or Barbarians that can buff allied spell casters would be awesome, and by no means broken.
I do appreciate your take, even if I don't agree with all the points. I don't want to come to any definitive conclusion on banning prior to play testing, but I do feel like this analysis focuses too much on the individual, as opposed to the compounding power Silvery Barbs brings to an entire party. Some thoughts: - Silvery Barbs is potentially very powerful because of its proactive nature, unlike many other defensive-focused reactions. It's not free, but it gives parties an option to expend resources way earlier in the initiative and in key moments to more easily snowball a fight in a turnbase combat system (where it's very powerful). Improving Alpha-striking is VERY valuable. I.e. an optimized wizard winning initiative and opening up combat with a powerful control spell is suddenly that much more deadly when your other party members with lower initiative can also contribute to this crippling alpha-strike. - The fact that Silvery Barbs can be used to protect your teammates is also a HUGE plus compared to the self-targeted nature of Shield, because most of the time you can't choose who the enemy gets to target. It doesn't make Shield obsolete as explained in your video, but from a total party effectiveness, I think Silvery Barbs provides a coverage that Shield doesn't. - Silvery Barbs is pretty easy to access on non-full casters too and non-Bard/Sorcerer/Wizard too - really most optimized parties (so you assume spell casting for most characters) can and should have access to this spell per my point above. It becomes pretty efficient when you're trading spell slots of weaker casters with limited reaction options anyways to apply re-rolls on spells casted by characters with much more powerful DCs. - Another point of why Silvery Barbs hurts Heighten spell so much is yes, while it eats a reaction, it's overall much cheaper to use because you choose to use it AFTER the failure, unlike Heightened spell, on top of a level 1 slot being cheaper than 3 sorcery points. Most importantly though, 1 spell known is much cheaper than 1 of 2 metamagics known (up till level 10). And it's extra powerful when someone with limited save-or-suck capabilities (i.e. a Paladin with Fey-Touched) can contribute in this manner. - Building on the above - one great thing about Silvery Barbs is that it's very Spells-known efficient, as it's a very versatile spell. And spells known aren't free either. This is my issue with people who tear down Haste by pointing out that individual components of Haste (i.e. defense, DPR boost, etc) is outmatched by various other spells in each category (i.e. Bless for DPR, Rope Trick for hide defense, etc.) - but a lot of value is having all of that in 1 spell known. - While it's true that 1st level slots are far from infinite, abilities like Arcane Recovery and Sorcerous Restoration does help full casters to alleviate the stress of over-using level 1 slots. Aberrant Mind Sorcerer can also use their psionic spell feature for very cheap castings of Silvery Barbs.
I'm open to the idea I'm overreacting, but I'm still super skeptical of this spell. It's still the saving throws that concern me. I really don't care about rerolling attacks or the advantage (although that doesn't make me love the spell more.) I don't really care about it stepping on other classes' toes, or theory-crafted elaborate edge cases. I just hate what it does to monster saves. I take issue with Chris's example of a red dragon because, actually, no, I as the caster will NOT need another reaction. The dragon doesn't attack me, because I cast Hold Monster or Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Otto's Irresistible Dance or Polymorph on it. For the price of my 1st-level spell it had to save at disadvantage using its awful 13 WIS and it CAN'T attack me. A 9th-level wizard can theoretically do this eight times a day with powerful save-or-suck spells thanks to Arcane Recovery. I'll give it a chance until it proves it's broken in real life. After all, most people want to blast as wizards, and they'll probably keep doing that, so if we're just talking about saves against Fireball or whatever, no big deal.
I look forward to you being skeptical about it and testing it and telling us your results from the party's perspective, including yours. Also, I look forward to you being said red dragon and using one of your legendary saves, burning it, and thus; the lower slot spell has done what it is intended to do: use up these things (as well as use the higher-level spell spot that was cast that caused them to succeed the spell in the first place.)
I think everyone, including you, is missing the forest for the trees. If this spell did nothing but force rerolls on saving throws it would still be an auto-pick on every serious control-caster's spell list. If your high level save-or-suck gets saved, Silvery Barbs could just as well read that you use your reaction and a 1st level slot to cast your high level save-or-suck spell again in the same turn. If you're using the spell for anything else, it's either a super niche case or you're using it wrong. But that fact that it CAN be used for other things, on top of providing incidental benefit with every cast, is just gravy on top of it's primary use. Also, the Chronal Shift comparison: That feature is arguably the best class feature most Wizard players will ever touch, you could argue Portent is better but even then only by a hair. That feature is limited to 2/long rest for good reason, but now everyone gets it as a 1st level spell, including the Divination and Chronurgy wizards. Lucky Halfling DIvination wizard with Silvery Barbs prepared. May as well just let him decide what number the three most important rolls of the day are gonna be.
I absolutely agree. If it only had the save-or-suck recast effect, it would be a viable spell. I used it in a level 19 one shot, and I caused many spells to hit after first failing, basically using my reaction and a level 1 spell slot to gain the effect of a high level spell. Plus I had an order cleric dip, so I used it to give the barbarian a reaction attack at advantage (doing 35 damage roughly).
Well in D&D it depends on the DM how man magic items buff your primary ability. So your spell DC could be high or mediocre. And a Pit Fiend has a Wisdom save of +10, and mgc resistance. So you can negate mgc resistance i think by forcing a re-roll. Now the fiend is rolling to beat your DC of 19 or so. It has to roll about a 9 or higher. So your save or suck spell has another 50 percent chance of succeeding, but it's a coin toss. Congratulations, you might pick your save or suck spell more often b/c you NEVER took any save or suck spells before b/c you already SUCKED up all of Treantmonk's videos and didn't take ANY save or SUCK spells, and now you're ready to flip on your previous experience and say that save or suck spells are OP b/c of your coin toss chance at not sucking. So really, your suck spells are just less sucky, but still a coin toss. But instead of noticing the game getting rounded out, you said something about the forest from the trees and all the moments that a Demon suffers from Hold Person are going to make your experience playing magical fairy land is going to be more tragic. Hardly, and god forbid magical fairy land needs adjusting after thousands of magical fairy land words have been printed.
@@GildedTongues alongside shield and gift of alacrity. It is like Chronal Shift for everybody at a lower cost. I'd use the example above with a Chronurgy Wizard too. Make a battlefield and time control Wiz. Of course, it is very bad if more than 1 person has it. But if only 1 person has it, it is easy to miss how abusable the spell is. So, sure, test it, but I strongly recommend bumping it to 2nd level. Increasing cost is all it'll take. The spell still sounds solid as 2nd level to me, and still slightly abusable, but you can't just get via race or feat or something as simple. This is like 'you guys aren't thinking' sounds like projection. No, I started thinking it was overhype. I got here via arguments and wanting 'overhype' to be right as my original confirmation bias. Yes, shield is good and I'd put them in the same tier. And TM bans shield in his games... So... The argument is like "there are other good spells". Yes, and?
It's strength isn't in replacing heightened spell, its in combining with it. I'm not a fan of lucky and elven accuracy bringing double advantage into the game, so double disadvantage isn't really my cup of tea either. Triple disadvantage hold person/monster can trivialize a lot of content. Losing your other reaction options is a decent response but I think locking the DM into the "player uses silvery barbs, player gets attacked" response as a counter measure is kind of lame and would get repetitive/predictable. Sure, at higher level legendary resist comes into play but casters get access to this thing at lvl 1 and you wont find much legendary resistance for a while.
Seems like if the players are spending that many resources on a Hold Person spell, that it's fine for it to work. That's at least one 1st level slot, one 2nd level slot, and 3 sorcery points. Unless the PCs are facing very few encounters per day, this doesn't seem so bad. You're either draining a significant chunk of your resources if you are at lower levels, you are cheesing one humanoid at mid-levels, or you are casting Hold Monster with a bunch of other stuff when you could instead be casting Wall of Force without all the extra strings to taking a single creature out of the combat.
@@TheBCE Fair point. It is a lot resource expenditure but I think worth it. Hold monster was just one example of a powerful spell to use with the heightened spell + silvery barbs combo. I'm sure there are plenty more, and many probably more powerful. Edit: I think what i'm getting at is that a person using this combination has an unnecessarily strong trump card in their back pocket for big bads at lower level game play. At higher level game play you may have multiple spell casters using this so legendary resist useage falls off. I don't think I would ban it but would instead houserule that the first function of the spell means disadvantage rather than the current mechanic.
@@xUnnamedx44 you have a trump card as well. It's called counterspell. Watch all of those resources go away or used prematurely to stop other said resources above from being used.
This one defo gets a spot next to shield and absorb elements as my first level spells. There are MANY more situations where shield is better though. The fact that multiattack and multiple enemies exist debunks all of the whining about Silvery Barbs. It's all circumstancial though.
It's great for the Eldritch Knight... But I wouldn't cast it as a Reaction, even when I can. I'll save that for Counter Spell. Since Reaction, Bonus Action, and 1 Action for Spell casting time are mainline to each other. There's room to move each spell around as the Eldritch Knight since I can stack Disadvantages up to +3 with Eldritch Strike and Heavy Great Sword just in case they have up to +3 Advantage. Along with giving myself +1 Advantage but it only takes one -1 Disadvantage being imposed on me in order to nullify Silvery Bards +1 Adv to myself. ... In a world of dice, RNG is life or death. So minimize the amount of RNG as possible...
@@gangr3l It's good for an Eldritch Knight since it can act as a Bonus Action for Eldritch Strike and War Master. I wouldn't waste it as a Reaction, though. The same is when I know that "you could take damage", so I would cast Shield as a Bonus Action then cast a Cantrip... I won't waste Action Surge. (General rules for Spell Casting. Not specific rules like "you can cast this Spell as a Bonus Action".)
@@gangr3l Reaction Spells are faster to cast when compared to Action Spells... It is a choice to cast Shield as a Reaction as stated by its specific rules. Other than that, you can cast Shield as a Bonus Action followed by Cantrips or just as an Action... Under general rules and limitations. Spells containing Reaction or Bonus Action specific rulings are exceptions but not exclusive to the general rules. Such specific rules only take out the limitations if it was done normally. The same is said for Spells which requires more than 1x Action worth of cast time, if you can reduce that cast time down to one Action. Then cast that Spell as a Bonus Action followed by Cantrips or just as an Action.
Reactions aren't free but lots of characters won't have a need of them in a given turn in combat. While its true that the shield spell is still better at avoiding taking damage one big advantage of silvery barbs over shield is that it doesn't have to be you casting it. So if you have a character that doesn't have shield that is being attacked you can also protect them.
I did allow Healing Spirits at my table, until it absolutely change how our game was played. It's really problematic at higher levels (+8) when to challanege players you really need to start to drain their resources though the adventuring day. Healing Spirit just made healing far too available for my table. So I had two choices to fix what was happening, start pumping out twice the amount of damage onto my players (which would require modifying the module I was running even more), or ban the spell which was breaking the game. The issue with Silvery Barbs is the reaction. Reactions are generally limited to defensive option. Shield, Absorb Elements and Counterspell are all primarily defensive. Yes, Attacks of Oppuntity and other offensive reactions exist, but they are things to support certain styles of play. Like not freely disengaging from martial characters. Spell casters are rarely if ever given offensive reactions. So it being a new reaction spell which can be used offensively is a red flag. There's a general rule in D&D and almost all other games. Offensive takes precedent over defense. Defensive options slow down the fight, but they don't win them. No number of casting of the shield or absorb elements will end an encounter. They exist only to prolong it. In your dragon example, of disintegrate vs dragon fire. Saving your reaction for absorb elements, you're only buying yourself another round. Eventually the next round cometh and you're going to be in the same position. Except now you don't have your sixth level disintegrate spell anymore. Where as if you used silvery barbs, you could've ended the encounter. In that regard, Silvery Barbs is indeed the better choice because it made your limited 6th level spell much more valuable and ultimately increases the odds of winning the encounter. Silvery Barbs does encroach on design space for certain class features. Even outside the examples of Shield and Heighend Spell. For example, Sentential at Death's Door grave domain feature or Warding Flare from light domain. With Heighten Spell, the main point of encroachment is the resource cost. 3 sorcery points is considered equal to about a level 2 spell. You have access to both at level 3, and you can cast a 2nd level spell for three sourcery points. Is it a perfect replacement for shield? No. Is it a perfect replacement for Heighten Spell? No. But the main issue with Silvery Barbs is that any feature where we're comparing it to Shield, Sentential at Death's Door, Heighten Spell, and along with many other class features and spells shows the application of this spell is far too broad. I think saying it encorches on the design space of those abilities is a better way of describing what's happening, rather then saying it makes them obsolete. I think that's another red flag. Fundmentally, I don't think it's "game-breaking" until you do start getting those amazing 3th-9th level save or suck spells. It's not going to highly negatively impact your level 1st-4th games. But when 1st level spells should be getting outshined by higher level spells, Silvery Barbs only gets better and better as the player levels up. The strength isn't in the spell itself, but how it increases the effectiveness of other spells and abilities. I think this is yet another red flag. So yes, I do think it deserves a day zero ban. I'll also say, I'm very disappointed that as 5e goes along, the spell lists are becoming longer and longer. While martial characters for the most part, aside of a few mutually selective options like fighting styles and subclasses, are mostly stuck with many of the same options as when PHB was released.
in 5e there aren't really things thst can be added to martials like spells. casters have much more modular abilities because of the fact you choose spells from lists and the number of spells you get don't change even if the list is longer. martials the only way to add to them is fighting styles and new subclasses as they don't really have anything else where they pick an ability from a list and they get a certain number of picks
@@johnpaullogan1365 I think the fallacy here is that there isn't a need to continually add new spells. Like sure, fill a hole in the spell list if there is something that's missing, the new summoning spells in Tasha's are an example of that. But we don't need to continually add new spells that have no theme or reason to their effects, just mixing or remixing. Take Tasha's Mind whip: Do we really need more CC spells? It's just basically just slow at a lower level, targets weaker saves (int vs wis), and does damage. Pure power creep over something that kinda already existed. With the Strixhaven spells, like maybe it's important for that setting. But we know that they will be reprinted in new splat books eventually. I'm all for adding new subclasses, feats, races, magic items, etc. Those are elements which are designed to be expansive. But expanding the list of spells is something that should be done more meaningfully.
Great video, very insightful! I actually made a video myself on how to balance this spell, and I'm pretty happy with my conclusion. Rather than banning it, I made it concentration. It has a portion that can last for a minute already, and it increases the risk/reward ratio when casting it. Plus that means that Heightened Spell remains better than this first level spell!
Before even watching the video I already have my answer. I'm banning ALL strixhaven content UNLESS it's a strixhaven especial campaign. Why? Because silvery barbs is VERY silverquill, and the backgrounds are super strong. It's a all or nothing package for me.
Without watching this video personally I think if you increase the level to a level 2 or 3 (probably just 2nd) spell it would be more balanced, but now I am going to see your opinion Edit: After watching I think though this a great spell (fantastic even), the opportunity cost is huge. I feel like this spell is very strong in cases that you set up, IE casting a powerful save or suck spell like feeblemind with heighted and silvery bards to basically destroy the bbeg. However even that requires more stipulations. As far as I see it, even if a dm is on the fence they should give it a try before they just out right ban it, or even better do what Wizards of the Coast tells you to and edit the spell because you have the power to do that at your table.
Nerd immersion is a news channel. Not the place to go to for mechanic clarifications. I love Ted for the work he does, but always come here for mechanics advice.
Well again, as I stated earlier in my video if this does indeed target an ally, then yeah Split Enchantment and Twin Spell don't work but I'd say the interactions with Order Domain Cleric are definitely worth more discussion
granting an advantage for a lvl 1 slot is still hella useful outside of combat (in puzzles, social encounters, etc.). This spell doesn't require the original target to be hostile, so a party member performing a known to be easy ability check (e.g. juggling a couple coins, impersonating another party member's voice, or doing any equally easy thing they happen to be proficient in) can be an easy trigger for this spell... and it's a reaction, so can be paired with guidance.
Advantage outside of combat can also be achieved with the help action, which doesnt cost a spell slot and doesnt require that you make a fool of your other party members (assuming your DM calls for rolls on trivial tasks to begin with)
This spell is banned in my current campaign. That’s only because one of my players is a power gamer and is already playing a chronurgy wizard. It’s more of a player issue than a spell issue, but I do think Silvery Barbs is pretty pushed.
This is such a smart video! Not only because it is analyzing the spell so well but because of the invaluable advice given for so many situations we face all the time. Don’t jump to wild conclusions on things you have no experience on. Thank you Chris, this is one of your best videos! Please keep that spirit up.
Some very smart Answers by Chris to some very stupid sounding what-if questions by people who didn't think first. Sorry if you're one of those broadcasters who's reading this and reads my reply.
It's an improved Runic Shield, a level 7 subclass feature of the Rune Knight subclass for Fighters. It's insane that Silvery Barbs is a level one spell. Runic Shield makes a target reroll their attack (doesn't work on saving throws) and forces them to use the new roll (not the lowest of the two). There also isn't a secondary advantage effect tied to Runic Shield. And it's only proficiency times per day, which is way less than the insane amount of spell slots a typical spellcaster would have at level 7. No idea what they were thinking during the design phase (because I doubt there was a testing phase anyway).
My problem with Silvery Barbs is that it's a first level spell with two effects that are effectively first level spells in their own right... in a single first level spell.
@@agilemind6241 it is much closer to true strike but not quite as good because you can guarantee true strike goes on an attack instead of getting wasted by inane rolls like getting struck for 1 damage. If you think that is remotely close to being able to activate a reroll anytime in an hour you need it after seeing the result or an opponents roll within an hour with no concentration and the ability to upcast on multiple people you have no clue how to judge the power of spells at all. All it takes is a simple DM flag on the play and it does nothing at all.
I think it is too powerful. There are very limited ways previously to impact enemy saving throws. Bane, bestow curse, bardic inspiration, bend luck (major class feature). All of these are major class features. A warlock has to take an invocation to get bane or bestow curse, or otherwise is focused on increasing their spell save dc. Now you can cast bestow curse as a reaction with a first level spell that people can get with magic initiate? Sorry youre wrong treantmonk on this one.
Yes, because the L2+Warlock does so much with their full two spell slots until a high level of progress. See the word situational. Anyway, many classes don't get a lot to do with their reaction.
@@joshuacr have you played a full warlock? In a real game they play stronger than other casters mostly due to the fact most DM give short rests and they dont give more than 1-3 resource depleting encounters and always cast max level spell slots. Ive played sorc and druid and warlock recovers on a short rest and has at will spell casting and an invisible stealthy flying intelligent familiar with hands you can speak through at any distance and can do more damage if speced or have more utility if spec. The imp alone with voice of the chain master is like having permanent arcane eye / rogue scout, unseen servant, mage hand, trap detection and disarm if you give it a wand of secrets, a common item, sending, devil sight as an action,and it doesnt die due to magic resistance, immunities, and resistances.
Nah aberrant mind can cast them for a single sorcerer point at lvl 6 instead of heightened spell which is 3 or making the spell slot which is 2 and a bonus action. But then again aberrant is the king of fuckery spells to mess with any encounter weather its social or in the battlefield this spell just made them even more disgusting in both scenarios.
@@frking100 I definitely agree that aberrant mind is king of messing creatures up. . But I am not sure that silvery barbs makes that much of a difference compared to the bard. Bards get a good reaction spell five to 9 levels earlier with silvery barbs. Sorcerer get two att level one instead of one . I can agree that the aberrant might be extremely powerful with this spell playing in certain campaigns with certain dungeon masters. But with my DM' s I ain't that sure. I am quite sure that I would get into big trouble before or later if I used this to often. Sometimes the defence of shield is just more optimal. But the mileage will definitely vary. Not all dm''s are sadists.
@@Swedish_Viking I was mostly speaking of the social strength of the aberrant. At level 6 an aberrant mind can cast charm person and Silvery barbs with their mind at any npc they meet or do the same trick with suggestion. At level 9 they can cast dominate person or modify memory coupled with Silvery barbs and at lvl 11 mass suggestion (subtle spelled) and Silvery barbs. Basically the aberrant mind just got the best spell they could ever wish for. Yes bards will use it in combat but an aberrant mind can break any social encounter if they really wish to sink spell slots into it.
In the games that I have seen, it is used to nullify Crits from the DM. All I can say is - don't run modified rules for Crits if you are also allowing this spell. The enemies will almost never connect their crits, while players will have a few more chances to crit fish.
That seems like a really mundane use of this spell. There's that Grave cleric ability, adamantine armor, the Lucky feat, and my favorite, the fighter's Cloud rune, which can all beat crits. Seems very un-broken to me.
I always see people complaining about how powerful spells will make players compared to the encounters they face as if DMs can't just include enemy spellcasters in battles.
@@Hissingace110 The problem is the aim of the game is for people to have fun. Getting a Crit whether it is the players or the DM is awesome! It creates drama, tension, and excitement. Players using their class's unique ability to cancel a crit is also awesome and exciting. The two spellcasters in the party debating between them which one will use SBs to cancel a crit isn't exciting. And having the DM cancel your crit, SUCKS!
@@agilemind6241 Fun is subjective. I'd say canceling the DM's crit is fun too. And as somebody else already pointed out, there's already several ways to do that in the game for that exact reason.
I absolutely agree. The spells you can compare to are shield, counterspell, and absorb elements. All great, adding an additional option to compete for that reaction adds play diversity. Multiclassing to get shield spell feels less necessary. This is all great stuff. It offers a support play to help allies for a few different classes, love it. Effective use of the spell will come with trying to maximize the advantage given adding a more thoughtful spell use. So the opportunity to create Superior play opportunity is there. I'm very excited by the flexibility this creates. Yes power creep is a thing, but what is the point of creating a spell that isn't in the top 8 spells of that level. It will never see play. Buffing unused spells does not sell books so they have to "power creep" and I'm ok with that.
@@J0eMega So, apparently you didn't watch the video. Silvery Barbs is NOT broken, OP, etc. Shield and Absorb Elements are just as good, if not better, 1st level reaction spells. And it does NOT come close to being as good as Counterspell. Silvery Barbs is a very good spell though. Counterspell: 3rd level abjuration Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell Range: 60 feet Components: S Duration: Instantaneous Classes: Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard You attempt to interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell. If the creature is casting a spell of 3rd level or lower, its spell fails and has no effect. If it is casting a spell of 4th level or higher, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a success, the creature’s spell fails and has no effect. At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the interrupted spell has no effect if its level is less than or equal to the level of the spell slot you used. Silvery Barbs: 1st level enchantment Casting Time: 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 Range: 60 feet Components: V Duration: Instantaneous You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature. The triggering creature must reroll the d20 and use the lower roll. You can then choose a different creature you can see within range (you can choose yourself). The chosen creature has advantage on the next attack roll, ability check, or saving throw it makes within 1 minute. A creature can be empowered by only one use of this spell at a time. Now explain to me how Silvery Barbs is broken AF...
@@shaneturnes6458 I did watch it. Agreed with none of it. It’s OP as fuck. However, I’ve explained this way too many times to care anymore. You’ve clearly already made up your mind.
One of the main problems with this spell is the fact that it forces the game to be played around it. Just like Shield, this is an essential spell that casters are almost forced to take. This limits player agency for Sorcerers, who already have a small amount of known spells. DMs will be have to give all of their low-level bosses legendary resistances just to counter this one spell. A player using this spell almost necessitates the BBEG to either use a legendary resistance or a third level spell slot to counterspell it. If the DM gives their monsters this spell, the party is forced to create tactics just to counter it. No first level spell should have this big of an impact on the game.
Hey Treantmonk's Temple, speaking of targeting multiple creatures, I have a question about twinned spell. One of the restrictions with twinned spell is that it can't affect spells that are capable of targetting more than 1 creature. Does this mean that you cannot twin spells like Hex and Platinum Shield, since they can change targets?
This spell is better than other reaction based 1st level spells because it has extreme versatility. 1) it can be used after knowing whether something hits. Shield does this slightly better. 2) it can be used after knowing a crit happens and reduce it 95% of the time. Shield can't do this at all. 3) it then gives advantage to a friend. Shield can't do that at all. And while Treantmonk goes into the many ways advantage can be given to martials to hit, there's little talk about how it could be given to a caster to help them have advantage on a save or check - perhaps against a concentration check or a save or suck spell that would make a concentration check completely unnecessary. 4) Barbs also works against spells which Shield doesn't. Did your awesome 5th level spell just get counterspelled? Hit em with Barbs! Sure, it doesn't ensure that your 5th level spell didn't get through, but it gives you another chance, AND you get to give another player Advantage! 5) You can get a FREE casting of this (in terms of spell slots, not action economy) with a half-feat feytouched. So many players can start with it due to VH and Custom Lineage casters without even being a bard / sorc / wizard. It's the only 1st level reaction spell available this way. X) yes, you lost action economy of your reaction, and yes, Shield is a better option when multiple enemies are near you because the AC stays for the whole turn. But if you're a caster, you should be making sure you aren't getting caught in a position where numerous people are able to attack you like that on a consistent basis. And if you are in a situation like that, either your game is set up that way for enjoyment and thus you are the outlier (the 0.5% that the video was talking about when Treantmonk referred to 99.5%) or you are having larger issues within your party and you should talk with your party and GM about why your tactics don't necessarily go as planned very often. I'm not a big proponent of banning anything in games. If it's in the game, it has gone through a number of playtests and is enjoyable. Is there substantial changes to the meta that makes other choices incredibly less favorable? Yes, and that evolution of the game is what I actually look forward to.
I don’t think it’s an over powered spell, I just think it does too much for a level 1 spell.. or at least it feels that way. The fact that it is not a SELF spell puts it in a different category of shield or absorb elements. Should it be banned? No… should it be a level 2 spell, YES. Otherwise I agree that it’s perfectly fine
Currently in a bizarre game where the DM nerfed halfling luck for being too strong and banned Lucky and Elven Accuracy, but is allowing this spell. It's been a few months, we're all waiting for the hammer to come down on it.
My main thing is that the main part of the spell (the reroll) is already incredibly strong, but not broken. But the extra advantage on top not only makes it needlessly complicated, but even more strong than it needed to be. The spell feels kinda forced, like wotc wanted it to be used constantly
Half the time, Silvery Barbs doesn't change the outcome of the roll. The advantage is there for those times. Otherwise, your 1st level slot was a total waste.
I'll admit I had something of a knee-jerk reaction when I first learned of this spell, too, in part due to being able to counter a counterspell used on a higher-level spell (thus requiring a roll). My greatest concern regarding the spell isn't that it's broken in its entirety, but in my humble opinion, it is overpowered for a first-level spell. I think I'd have placed it as a decent second-level spell, myself, rather than first. (And thus excluding it from Magic Initiate and such feats, as well.)
It's not busted, it's just really good. I think of it like an alternate version of Shield. The 'disadvantage' is the equivalent of the +5 AC (rather than 3.5), but barbs is only on one hit and doesn't work on magic missile. The trade off is the advantage, which I don't see anyone talking about. That's really good, and makes the tradeoff worth it. It could be a reason to go arcane trickster, or maybe to find a way to get it with Smites for higher crit rate.
Only if you are able to use the advantage how you want which can get a bit tricky. If you have a legendary action used against you or a spell causing a saving throw or do anything where an acrobatics check might be required its burnt. You can't multiattack and give it to the lowest roll. It is not as flexible as like bardic inspiration.
@@regaleagle6533 You cast it as an Action or Bonus Action, treating Silver Barb as a normal spell instead of wasting it as a Reaction Spell. Just remember the two targets you're affecting and do not "hold" your turn less you'll be forced to make a Constitution Saving throw in order to keep Silver Bard as a Hold Action if you're hit or are disrupted. Outside of that, you do not roll Constitution Saving Throws for this specific Spell. Basically... You can impose disadvantage on a Skeleton until the end of your next turn if you cast Silver Bard as an Action or Bonus Action, as long as the Skeleton does not attack you (since it will end the Spell if that happens). If he fails the roll, then activate advantage on yourself. With this, cast a Cantrip as an Action or (Eldritch Knight) first, Cast Silver Barb as an Action then perform the Bonus Action with a Non Spell Attack. Action Surge, then Extra Attack the Skeleton knowing that you've also applied disadvantage from Eldritch Strike for your next Spell/Cantrip and disadvantage from your Heavy Great Sword. By doing so, you are imposing 3 different disadvantages on the target, aided by Blooming Blade and Green Flame Blade. However, with those 3 Disadvantages that you impose. If the Skeleton has 3 Advantages on himself, then your 3 Disadvantages and their 3 Advantages nullify each other... A Skeleton with spells/effects like Fog, Darkness, Night Vision, and Cover can stack advantages to him. Although, you or the Skeleton only role one advantage and one disadvantage specific to what's taking place in the action order. Thus, without Green Flame Blade and Blooming Blade, your +3 Disadvantage Effect divides into +2 Disadvantage for Spells/Contrips and +1 Disadvantage for your Heavy Great Sword.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 I have no idea what you are trying to get at based on your words but it is clearly something way off base. Silvery barbs is only a reaction not an action not a bonus action these concepts are not mix and match. It only works to force one single reroll it has nothing that impacts a creature until your next turn. An eldritch knight without barbs can cantrip as an action, attack as a bonus then action surge a spell at disadvantage for them. This spell does little to change that and eats your reaction allowing the DM to beat the ever living stuffing out of you without the shield spell.
@@regaleagle6533 Given Spell Casting Rules between Reaction, Bonus Action, and Actions. And given how Adv Vs DisAdv amounts nullify each other until only one or none take effect... There isn't a rule that you cannot cast Counter Spell as an Bonus Action if it falls under the time frame of 1 Action, then cast a Cantrip. Followed by another Counter Spell as a Reaction. This is where having Adv and DisAdv is important since it nullifies the opposing Adv and DisAdv.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 there are no casting rules or any other action economy rules that let you trade around actions move bonus action reaction. This is straight up cheating. You can use a reaction during your turn which still uses up that reaction although I find smashing two spells with verbal components into the same time sketchy. But this does not mean you can just free cast silvery barbs with no cost. Nor does the spell work on multiple rolls it’s just one shot that’s it and it’s not disadvantage it’s a reroll it doesn’t work the same.
You have to take it because it’s a great spell and there’ll be plenty of opportunities to use it in pretty much any campaign. Chris is right, the taxing of your resources is what keeps it from being game-breaking. I’m currently playing a multi-class character, “The Trickstalker,” a multi-class combo of a half-caster (Ranger), and a one-third-caster (Arcane Trickster). The multi-class caster table is NOT kind to me in giving me spell slots. So, while I can get SB; it’s an Enchantment spell available to Arcane Tricksters; it’s competing with offensive spells like Sleep, or; from Ranger; Hunter’s Mark, Zephyr Strike, Ensnaring Strike, Absorb Elements, etc… for spell slots. Also by burning my reaction to cast…. Say the first goon to go crits on my tank, and I cast SB to force a re-roll. The 2nd goon to go turns out to be a 5th-level caster, with Fireball. Guess who doesn’t have a reaction free to use Uncanny Dodge? Adventuring is about action economy and resource management. Silvery Barbs stresses your character both ways when you go to use it. Just my 2 cents.
I agree it's too early to give a verdict on this spell, but I think it's broken, especially if combined with something like Hold Person or Monster. The DM basically has to give every boss Legendary Resistances if multiple players keep taking this. There is no reason to optimize anything besides Save or Suck spells with SB. Time will prove it.
I have a College of Lore bard that's been using this spell. The party composition is a Drow Hexblade Warlock, a Drakewarden Variant Human, and Variant Human Echo Knight. The user is very keen on saving her reaction and her spell slots to use this spell when it's most effective. For when Tasha's Hideous Laughter absolutely needs to shut down a powerful caster, for when an opponent succeeds against Echo Knight's grapple, for when an opponent succeeds against the Warlock's Wrathful Smite, etc. It also makes sure the other 3 are hitting with advantage and pressing their advantage. She's very shrewd and only uses it when the outcome is best maximized for the party. It's probably the strongest single spell among the three casters, and it does make the encounters she uses it in very very easy. Just my experience with the spell.
I mean, if you're going to ban this, you should also ban a whole host of broken spells, spells that invalidate class features, spells that invalidade other spells, and so on and so forth. Giving ridiculous abilities to spellcasters is not an exception for 5e
God THANK you for saying this spell cant be twinned/split, its getting pretty obnoxious seeing people complain abt the advantage without realizing it’s very clearly there to prevent twinning 😰
I should have mentioned that specifically, but you are correct, you can't use a spell that targets multiple creatures with twinned spell, it's frusturating that suddenly this needs clarification for some players.
I’m so glad that there’s someone breaking this down with careful arguments. I came to this channel awhile back from hearing about it in the discord of one such youtuber that is adamantly calling for an auto-ban of this spell. I’ve since left that community because of pervasive negativity and knee jerk reactions like this, so I’m especially appreciative of you even just saying that forming an opinion on something like this after seeing it in practice is better than doing so without it.
As a DM, I generally like to never ban content that has been officially published by WoTC, because I consider it a personal challenge to my game design skills to be able to cope with everything they come up with, and deliver great combat experiences. The only thing that I find worrying about this spell is that if I allow it into my games, it's not the PCs that will be using it the most. I use homebrew stat blocks almost exclusively, so it's me who now has access to this, too. But I have secound thoughts, because I feel like this spell can be a very anti-fun addition into the game. Counterspell is also an anti-fun spell from a player's perspective, but counterspell is a 3rd level spell, so it's rare that NPCs have it and it's also rare that they can use it a lot. But this one? It's 1st level spell slots baby. My homebrew spellcasters also haven't all been neutered like the more recent stat blocks have: they still have spell slots! So yeah, I don't know. I'll probably default to using it rarely.
As a player after a caster uses this spell they would be my target for the rest of that round. Their shield and counterspells are off the table so that's the time to target them. I'll happily reroll one attack to leave a caster vulnerable for the rest of the round.
This is very true, I expect some seasoned players will also be self-censuring when they choose to use it or not in order to enhance the drama of the game. Because blocking a critical hit that would down a player is fun & exciting, but blocking one early in the combat just evaporates tension.
@@MageLeaderInc Eldritch Knight: "I cast Silver Bard as a Action, if successful, then I gain +1 Adv against my target's +1 DisAdv. Because I casted a Spell, Eldritch Strike triggers on the target, giving him another +1 DisAdv. Using War Master, I attack with my Bonus Action, spending my Slivery Bard Second Effect of +1 Adv. Then I Action Surge. I cast Shocking Touch with +2 DisAdv against the target. If the target fails the rolls, then he cannot perform his Reaction until the start of his turn. If he tries to counter my Spells during this process, then I will use my Reaction to Counter Spell their Reaction Spell. Afterward, I simply walk 30ft away since his Opportunity Attack is no longer possible until the start of his turn." Rogue Paladin: "I Sneak Smite Attack the enemy who cannot make Reactions."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Buddy, I've seen you spam the same incorrect information over the past hour. I'm not the only one who has told you, but here it goes: you cannot choose to cast Silvery Barbs as an action or a bonus action. The rules do not allow you to do that. It can only be cast as a reaction. Additionally, multiple sources of advantage and disadvantage simply cancel each other out, and the result is one roll without advantage or disadvantage. Either you don't understand 5e rules, or you're playing in a heavy homebrew game. Either way, you are currently not contributing anything useful to the conversation.
Give this spell to enemies. Paladin crits... Nope... Re-roll. Now I have advantage. Wizard makes a big concentration check... Nope... re-roll. Now I have advantage...
@@TreantmonksTemple The reaction casting and double effect, compared to other spells, is what bumps it above 1st level for me. I'd be fine as a 2nd level spell I think, but 5e has in the past heavily weighted cast time to a spell's power, so operating within the system as written prior to strixhaven, I think you could argue 3rd level and it would still be a popularly used spell. People might not take it at 5th level, but by the time 4th, 5th, + spells are available they would 100% take it to maximize the effect of those higher level saving throw spells.
I find myself disagreeing with you on this one. I think claiming that because it does not 'break the game' it's fine, is the wrong metric. There is really only 1 problem I have with it though, and that's it's range. If they gave this a range of 15 feet, I'd say great, it's powerful because it requires you to be in the thick of whatever it is you're trying to mess with. I could look past the stacking of effects this allows, it's offensive and defensive properties, and it's better cost economy than something like heighted spell. But at 60 ft, I'm sorry that's just too large a range for you to be zoning for a first level spell. Compare this to grave clerics, that can only cancel crits out to 30 ft. And while this has a 5% chance of it still criting, also is capable of completely negating the attack with at least that same amount (nat 1) but more likely a 30-50% chance of making it miss. We can compare it to several spells / features that are amazing in their small niche, and it get's to be on par with several of them? It just can fill to many different tasks that each would warrant their own spell or ability.
Wholeheartedly agree that people have blown this way out of proportion. It's a very good spell but it's nothing game breaking. It's just going to be another tool in the standard kit (when available) to use at appropriate moments.
I wouldn't say that the spell will immediately destroy your game balance, but it is the most powerful 1st level spell and every single caster that can take it, will take it, at least once they get past the initial levels. The ability to use a 1st level spell to grant effective disadvantage on a save is basically equivalent to casting one of your higher level spells like say hold monster or dominate, twice in the same turn, for the equivalent of a throwaway spell slot. Effectively once you allow this spell, every save against the big game-changing spells (banishment, polymorph, domiante, etc). will always be at disadvantage. It's an absurd power boost to a bunch of classes that don't need extra power. Damn, the monsters are already nerfed enough in 5E at higher levels. They don't need to be rolling every important spell save at disadvantage.
@@taragnor At level 4, a full caster has only 7 spell slots (4 - 1st level, 3 - 2nd level). Let's average in 3-4 medium encounters a day. Silvery Barbs is a 1st level reaction spell. Even if the caster used it once per encounter, it wouldn't break the encounter, and they'd be out of 1st level spell slots. Maybe at higher levels, but there are so many more powerful spells, and if a good DM pressed the caster in an encounter, it could force them to use a different reaction spell (shield, absorb elements, counterspell, etc).
@@shaneturnes6458 At low levels it's not that big a deal. I mean, you can potentially get off effectively a second blindness spells or hold person for the cost of a 1st level spell and a reaction. Yes, it only works when the creature succeeds on the save, but that's pretty significant as far as spell economy because in many situations you're turning your 1st level slots into 2nd or 3rd, AND giving advantage to one of your allies to boot, plus effectively casting the spell in the same turn. So really it's far better in many cases than just having another 2nd or 3rd level slot, because it comes with the added benefit of happening immediately, as opposed to having to wait until the next turn to cast the spell. Oh and also it stacks with disadvantage so even if you had some ability that grants disadvantage normally, silvery barbs still works to create effective double disadvantage. And if the target fails the initial save, you don't have to use barbs, so it's also very efficient. Even at low levels, it's very powerful. An argument could be made that it's not super broken, but it's still without a doubt top tier, so long as you have spells of higher slots than 1st. The only time silvery barbs is reasonably balanced is when you've got only 1st level slots to play with. At higher levels, there's honestly not any more powerful 1st level spell than silvery barbs. Because silvery barbs infinitely scales, you can do it to an 8th level spell like dominate monster or feeblemind if you want. Your big 8th level feeblemind fails? Whatever, effectively cast it again in the same turn all for the cost of a measly first level slot and a reaction. Oh and you get to give an ally advantage for more icing on the cake, cause you know apparently trading a 1st level slot for another shot at an 8th level spell isn't enough. And you can even use it as a foil towards enemy counterspells by making them reroll their ability check when they counterspell you. This spell is an example of people just automatically wanting to accept anything with the Wizards of the Coast official logo and then trying to do logical backflips to justify it being balanced. if a fan or third party author wrote a 1st level spell that was a 1 action cast time that did: "repeat a single target spell with a saving throw that you cast last turn regardless of its level" If that was a fan creation, everyone would say it was overpowered. Silvery Barbs is that spell, but supercharged. Instead of taking 1 action, It's a reaction, and it has the cherry on top of giving an ally advantage. The fact that anyone is defending this pile of broken garbage is rather surprising.
I'm surprised noone has brought up the most important aspect of SB. RAW, if you are wielding both a shield and a weapon you can't cast either Absorb Elements or Shield as you need a hand free for the somatic component, and as it doesn't use a material component you can't use a spell-focus weapon as a substitute. So your player's handbook gish subclasses (EK and AT) finally get an effective 1st level defensive spell they can use. Of course in both cases the loss of their Reaction is a significant cost, as at mid-levels a rogue should be setting themselves up to use their Reaction for an additional sneak attack, and enemies can now just walk straight past the fighter to threaten the backline now they have given up their opportunity attack. The other thing that was not addressed in this video is PREPARATION SLOTS/SPELLS-KNOWN AREN'T FREE! Between Shield, AE, and SB we are now looking at three preparation slots to have access to them all, and I only have four 1st level slots to use them with (7 if I'm upcasting with 2nd). So do I prioritise sticking that one saving throw (so use SB), prioritise protecting my concentration (so Shield), or give up access to one of my precious high-level spells? I consider this a difficult and interesting decision that will have ongoing ramifications-ie. this spell just made low level spell selection *interesting* for mid/high level players, and I don't see how that isn't a good thing.
I think the community is goldfishing a bit with this spell. I mean that people are constructing imaginary scenarios where it's too good. For right now I think it's too good. I still need to see it in action in different levels before I make my choice to ban it. By looking at the video I agree with your points, silvery barbs isn't strictly better than any of those options, but it gets close, pretty close to some (IMO the comparison to shield is silly, the spells do very different things). It's the combinations of all of these aspects that make it borderline overpowered when looking at it at face value. My biggest problem is that we already know that casters are better, this is a well know fact, some people disagree and I think they are very wrong. The issue is that this is a very cost efficient spell when you consider the power vs the cost, a level 1 slot. This is another great buff for casters and I really think that's a terrible design choice from WotC's part. We should be trying to shorten the gap, not increase it further, which is what has been happening since the release of the CR book. And yes, there are many examples of power creep, but I think power creep is bad. And just because there are other examples of power creep doesn't make new power creep options fine. When setting aside the idea of banning the spell or not, I still think this spell is another step in the wrong direction.
I fully agree. Once again, non casters are even further away from Casters in regards to equivalent attacks as they go up. As mentioned in several of these earlier replies, mid-level casters shine (compared to mid-level melee fighters who aren't as good.) Not saying that Fighters aren't good, just that the casters now outshine them even faster. I'll change my mind when there is a feat for reactions by melee Fighters to cause an attack to be rerolled, then giving themselves or a companion Advantage for the next role.
Personally I think the spell should have been Bard only. But that is the only restriction it needs, because get touched can add it to any caster anyways
Either good or too powerful is an awful dichotomy to have. If D&D had more horizontal design in it this wouldn't be a problem. As it is I generally think the game is not explicitly "balanced" at all. It always comes down to the sanity of your DM.
Although I agree it is not the be all end all spell it is TOO potent at guaranteeing powerful combat ending spells. Suggestion, banishment, hold person/monster, and command are all low level spells that can just end/pause combats if they land and with a sorcerer pumping heighten spell and silvery barbs into a suggestion (although expensive) will just be able to end any combat with a snap of there fingers.
Hi, treantmonk, I had a question: How would you rule a Harengon grappler? Would the jump count as forced movement or would they be able to take their grappled target with them? Would you halve the distance of the jump? What about something like spike growth? Thanks in advance!
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!! My god, I feel like it's been an uphill battle trying to get people to RELAX. It's ridiculous how people who've never even experienced it in play are banning things like come on.
We used this spell recently in the ending our most recent campaign (Literally 2 days ago.) Yes it's strong but it didn't break the final boss. It did help a lot but it didn't make the boss fight a joke. From my experience I think it shouldn't be banned. It as a spell isn't even close to being ban worthy. Like Moon Druid for example. Edit: I didn't expect Treantmonk to see this comment. I think it'd be important to clarify this so that way it is just known. Our table is good at building powerful characters. It was a hard campaign so we made powerful characters that we could. So our person with Silvery Barbs was trying to see how good the spell is. It didn't make the biggest impact in our party during the final boss but it did allow for one instance of the bbeg failing the saving throw taking a metric crap ton of damage from Dawn, (It was a buffed up Strahd with a lot more hp from my knowledge. He took big boi damage from the Cleric) In my final conclusion it's a good offensive spell. If you have the right set up it can make an encounter a joke. But let's be real here. If you have enough planning and luck you can use anything to make an encounter/boss fight a joke.
They made Moon Druid a spell now?😁 Seriously, (speaking as a person who started playing a mood Druid in Waterdeep Heist, before that undermountain of the Mad mage thing,) really depends on your dungeon master and player and how much preparation and contingency they think about based on the resources seen by the opposite side, (player and DM included in this, not just PC/enemies) seeing what the others have.
Thank you for being the adult in the room Chris. Your videos are so important to help us combat hysteria so that we can all sit back, relax and play some dnd
People all over the internet are saying that they want to houserule this spell into a 2nd, 3rd, or even 5th level spell and it's driving me bananas. Thanks for putting out some sane content that looks at the spell with a more adequate examination!
The reason they suggested that is that so many people won't get access to this as a feat optional spell. It is my opinion that Wizards of the Coast released it as a first-level spell for that. I have posted a separate thread asking if this is a good or bad idea and look forward to hearing all the answers in this commentary. I've already seen commentary elsewhere both for and against it I look forward to the users here who know about optimization and their views.
Silvery Barbs is fine. It even helps the DM to exhaust the resources of the party much faster. If your encounter is constructed in a way, that a single save or suck spell would make it obsolete, it wasn't that well designed in the first place. Let your players have fun and enjoy the interactive gameplay. If your players running through encounters too easy, try to split the encounter into smaller threads than just one big one. Action economy is king in this game. And remember, the game and the rules are for the players. As a DM you can create whatever to create a satisfying game and story. Just have fun!
As an Eldritch Knight... Silvery Bard being casted as an Action or as a Bonus Action is more viable than as a Reaction. Although, "if you have disadvantage from being flanked by two enemies, then Silver Bard will not save you. In fact, it may even be out right nullified if one enemy Shoves you to face them while the other enemy has their Flank Adv canceling out your Silver Bard DisAdv that's on them."
@@MrGotyouto True... I know that by now. But I can cast Slivery Bard by provoking the enemy's opportunity attack during my turn, with a high enough AC for my Eldritch Knight.
You make a lot of great points around the misconceptions of the spell. The idea that it's "free", for example, is a little ridiculous, and Shield is far better against attack rolls. I appreciate the thorough analysis. I do think there's quite a bit missing here around how low the cost-to-value ratio is. If I want to cast Hold Monster (or any save-or-suck spell, of which there are many) and the target succeeds on the saving throw, I would normally have to expend another 5th-level slot on the NEXT turn to try again. With Silvery Barbs, I can expend one 1st-level spell slot and get the same effect, but only for the cost of one 1st-level spell. If a Sorcerer wants to do the same thing with Heightened Spell, they have to expend 3 sorcery points to do it. That's the equivalent of one 2nd-level spell slot via Font of Magic. That tradeoff is inherently worse than just using Silvery Barbs to get rid of one 1st-level. The only downside is that you burn your reaction, but I think this video is slightly overvaluing how often those get used. One of the other things I think many are forgetting is that while spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Counterspell, and Feather Fall are powerful, they're only powerful in the limited uses where they come up. Shield is a little more broadly applicable here because attack rolls are common across the majority of combats, but every other reaction spell is technically situational. Silvery Barbs isn't, and it goes far beyond Shield in its versatility. Attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws pretty much encompass all rolls you can make in combat. I definitely won't be banning it, but if the players take it and I find that it's an abuse case, I'll give it to monsters...
My issue is that you have instantly made every "save or suck" spell a lot more powerful, that sorcerers can turn sorcery pts into spells very efficiently(nevermind they can skip the "heightened spell" metamagic without giving up much and pick something else) and it negates advantage and makes enemies scoring critical hits very unlikely, I agree there are plenty of examples where other spells will be more beneficial like being triple teamed by salaads who all won initiative I guess. Haven't used or seen this spell yet but I can see it becoming the most spammed spell in the game
Excellent. I've just gotten back into making D&D videos--did one on Strixhaven and was going to follow it up with one about Silvery Barbs just because I take all the yelling and complaining about it to be WAY overblown and it annoys me. And you made this video far better than I could have. I love your calm, even outlook on this (and other things). Nice video.
While maybe not the most egregious power creep (that would be Twilight and Peace Clerics), Silvery Barbs is just another example of how casters are always the ones benefitting from the power creep. Martials have not gotten any worthwhile new material since the PHB, while casters, already more powerful to begin with, have gotten new option after new option. Linear fighter, quadratic wizard doesn't just describe the general leveling curve, it also describes how the power difference between the two grows wider with every rules supplement.
Twilight and Peace were exactly the examples I was thinking of when I said this wasn't the biggest example of power creep we've seen. Ugh, hate those subclasses, and the more I play with them, the more I hate them.
@@TreantmonksTemple having play Twilight cleric more than once, I absolutely agree, it is broken. And yet I am addicted to them. Fortunately, I like trying concept builds so I don't become a munchkin player when I play clerics. But I hear the dark side calling. Always.
@@TreantmonksTemple I ban both Twilight and Peace, for precisely the same reason I ban Silvery Barbs.
Having played with both casters with silvery barbs and martials with Gift of Chromatic and Metallic Dragon I think this is highly off base. Giving pseudo shield and absorb elements to already tanky characters and a damage boost that scales with 4 attacks has been fantastic in flavor and power levels.
Peace clerics are an abomination I only play in 1shots. It is cool being op.
It's a bit early to tell how strong it is. Reaction spells are already in high demand with Absorb Elements and Shield so unrestrained use will burn through spell slots quickly. Plus, this does require some level of knowledge about an enemy's chance to succeed on a save. If a creature has a +6 to save against a DC 13 spell, then they have a really high chance to succeed on the reroll regardless if they have to use the lower dice roll (as an example).
"Reaction spells are in high demand on Wizards and Sorcerers. Bards don't have Shield, Absorb Elements or Counterspell, and Silvery Barbs is also available to anyone who picks up the very very powerful feat Fey Touched, and Clerics/Paladins have no reaction spells while the other casters only have one of the decent ones.
@@nilsjonsson4446 While anyone can get this with Fey Touched like you said, not everyone will have the spell slots to power it the way everyone thinks will be game breaking. Rangers and Paladins already have very limited slots and lots of things worth spending those slots on, and non-casters aren’t going to get a whole lot out of a single cast in a day. It’ll be nice, but in no way is this game breaking.
@@jonathanwynes2542 Nothing is gamebreaking in D&D. It's a big and very unnecessary buff to Bards, Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics/Druids with Fey Touched. Will D&D be a slightly better or slightly worse game by its introduction? I think worse.
My Normal Human Eldritch Knight: "Ah yes... More lv1 Spells for me to use that isn't damage."
Silvery Barb, when casted as an Action or Bonus Action (Just don't cast it as a Reaction even when you can.) is well suited for an Eldritch Knight since I can stack disadvantage with Eldritch Strike and Heavy Great Sword.
However, advantages can be nullified by an equal disadvantage amount, so fighting in the dark without night vision and being flanked is NOT great for Silvery Barb.
Most likely, the second effect of the Silvery Barb will be useful when casting Banishing with Action Surge Teleport. Thus, imposing +2 Disadvantage on the target from Silver Bard and Eldritch Strike. Just in case the target had more advantages on them or that they impose their own disadvantages on you.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 You can't cast Silvery Barbs as an action or a bonus action. It is a reaction, you don't get to choose to cast it any other way. And I don't see how it would do anything when cast any other way since there is no triggering attack or save to change.
Advantages and disadvantages aren't nullified by equal amounts. As soon as you have at least one of each they do nothing, you can have advantage from 4 sources and disadvantage form 1, you will make a normal roll.
12:45 if we are talking about Save-or-Suck spells here, the enemy won't get the opportunity to attack you if it fails the save. Save-or-Suck spells' effects strong and they are balanced by their fail chance. Silvery Barbs is essentially casting the same spell again after the initial casting failed. Duplicating a spell is powerful which is why Heightened Spell is so expensive (3 sorcery points vs Silvery Barbs 1st level spell slot), and Silvery Barbs doesn't cost anything if the initial casting succeeds.
Heightened Spell has a higher chance of not mattering at all (if the enemy fails on their first roll, or succeeds on both) because you use it before the rolls.
This is the position I find myself taking on Silvery Barbs. I’d think this is a good (but not overpowered) 3rd level spell, but I think it’s too freely available as a 1st level spell.
Generally speaking, slot for slot, most of the best debuff/control spells in the game either have no saving throw involved (e.g. wall of force, forcecage) or the effect that matters about it doesn't care too much about the enemy's saving throw (e.g. transmute rock). The scenarios where you are likely to use silvery barbs offensively are probably with stuff like web and hypnotic pattern. Single target save or suck spells are generally terrible; silvery barbs makes them somewhat less so, but not enough to actually make them worth picking up compared to superior options in the same slot.
@@rayndeon1 SBs can combo with AoE control spells as well to help ensure the most valuable target gets caught by the effect - e.g. a ensure the enemy spellcaster gets caught by the Hypnotic Pattern, or the annoying rogue gets caught in the web.
Forcecage is a horribly unfun spell in combats without spellcasters (it's also super high level so most players will have never seen it cast).
Wall of Force is ok but has a lot of limitations, it's also a 5th level spell - so you're usually getting it near the end of the campaign.
Transmute Rock isn't that good for the difficult terrain and is terrible for a 5th level spell if all you are getting from it is the difficult terrain, if that's what you're casting it for may I suggest you consider Plant Growth or Spike Growth or Erupting Earth or better yet Malestrom.
I think you meant spells like Sleep, Spike Growth, Silence or Sleet Storm. But honestly Web, Entangle, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, and Banishment are just way better and they are all saving throw based.
@@agilemind6241 As I stated above, I do agree that it works with valuable multihitting AoE control spells such as hypnotic pattern or web. As for your other points:
Fun or not about forcecage aside, it is one of the most effective control spells in the game and does not require a saving throw.
Transmute Rock does not create "difficult terrain." It creates where movement through it costs quadruple the normal amount over a huge area, and thus it actually stacks with difficult terrain. The associated saves with it also are repeated upon re-entering the area or ending one's turn there, so it synergizes well with features such as telekinetic or repelling blast.
@@rayndeon1 It is a decently large area but nothing close to Plant Growth which is a 3rd level spell and is equally restricted by the type of terrain required to have it work. So if you are assuming enemies always make the saving throw it isn't a good spell.
OTOH if the saving throw is important to its effectiveness then SBs makes it a whole lot better because again you can greatly increase the chance of those enemies you most want to get stuck - i.e. big brutish melee enemies - do get stuck.
Arguing that SBs (available from level 1-20) isn't good because it does nothing to enhance a 7th level spell (available only at level 13+) is pretty silly in my books. 95% of all control spells cast by your party during a normal campaign are going to require saving throws, Silvery Barbs is THE most potent way to increase the chance enemies fail those saving throws. So unless you are going to argue that battlefield control is inherently weaker than most other strategies, I find it baffling that you could think SBs isn't the best 1st level spell in the game.
AGAIN, Treantmonk going against the grain, and telling it like it is, with his abundance of knowledge and hard evidence. Thank the D&D gods for your work.
And the players also thank him too!
You have corrected a couple of my misconceptions about the spell, so thank you very much for that, but I have a few concerns nonetheless:
1. Even while Shield gives the +5AC for the rest of the round until it gets back to your turn, Shield is self-cast only. You can use Barbs to save an ally from an attack, not just yourself.
2. It can be used on ANY attack, saving throw, or ability check. Any single one. Shield and similar protective spells only affect attack rolls. Heighten Spell can't be used to ruin, say, a Dex check to break free of a Web's entanglement, or a Strength check to get free of Evard's Black Tentacles. This spell can.
3. As far as I can tell, you completely overlooked the part where you can convert an advantaged roll into a disadvantaged one. Because you get to wait to see the results of the roll, you effectively get to take a roll that had Advantage, and then apply a new roll that they must take the worse result of afterwards. Normally when someone has Advantage and you apply Disadvantage, the two simply cancel each other out. This spell however, OVERRIDES advantage with disadvantage, in other words it BYPASSES and NEGATES standard game mechanics. That is a serious problem, even if advantage and disadvantage are commonly come by in 5e.
4. Silvery Barbs does not allow a save against its effects. Let's take the bard cantrip Vicious Mockery for example, which gives Disadvantage on an enemy roll as well as a very small amount of damage. Vicious Mockery requires a save. Why doesn't Silvery Barbs?
5. You are correct that the Advantage roll only directly applies to an ally's NEXT roll, so it can take some planning and effort to maximize its use, but at the same time there are so many situations where knowing how the Advantage will be used is a no-brainer. Ally bleeding out, or stuck in an Entanglement, or under the influence of a spell where they're making new saves every turn, or completely unhindered and ready to make a single big attack... It's more consistently plannable than you seemed to portray it as.
6. You did briefly acknowledge the crit negation, but seemed to gloss over it rather than give it a proper looking-into. Say you're up against a Giant, which generally only gets 1-2 attack rolls per round but the damage per successful hit is much higher. Getting a crit on 1d12+5 is FAR more potent than doubling, say, a simple 1d8+3 claw attack from a Slaad. It is a fact that there is NOTHING ELSE IN THE GAME that can negate a confirmed Crit, and there are a lot of situations where one crit can have a significant impact - especially when dealing with smaller numbers of stronger foes.
The fact remains that this spell is INCREDIBLY powerful by first-tier standards, even taking into account that reactions are not free and never have been free. Do I think it should be banned? No; personally I'd say it sits about perfect as a 2nd-tier spell. It's got too many things going for it as written to be a 1st, plus Wizards and Sorcerers alike can restore their 1st tier slots quite easily either through short rests or through spending sorcery points, but 2nd tier slots take just enough extra resources to balance it out in the long run.
Your assessment was way better than his was. At least you acknowledged a few of the abuses that could be done.
I know this comment is from a while ago, but I feel like a response is necessary given how much I have seen the spell in use as a DM.
1. Yes, this is a strength of the spell, and a good one. It encourages spellcasters to be less selfish and to take risks, since if you use your reaction, the DM may have the monsters turn on your Wizard, who can now not cast Shield or Absorb Elements.
2. In addition to being ephemeral (i.e. it doesn't last until the start of your next turn like Shield or Absorb Elements), it's more flexible. I think that's a fair trade-off, especially when you consider that if it only targeted attack rolls, it would likely only be used to try to prevent critical hits, and that's a very, VERY narrow purpose.
3. The spell does not override advantage with disadvantage, it simply requires a reroll with a straight roll. That's not disadvantage, and if you take a minute to consider how the math works you will see that. The Pack Tactics video on Silvery Barbs explains the math well, so I'm not going to here; you can seek it out if you want to.
4. You just compared a Cantrip to a leveled spell...
5. A DM can ruin your planning as much or as little as they want to. I tend to roleplay my monsters, so while a gnoll won't understand what the spell is doing, you can bet that my Mind Flayer will not use their Mind Blast into it. Again, I think it a good thing that casters have a way to be less selfish and assist their party members out, though it carries the risk of them expending their very precious reaction.
6. Not only did you use a terrible example (an additional 1d12 will add, on average, 6.5 points of damage as compared to an additional 1d8 which will add 4.5; if you want a better example of a devastating critical hit you need something that is rolling multiple dice, like a Giant Poisonous Snake or a Rogue's Sneak Attack), but I feel like negating a critical hit is EXACTLY the best use of Silvery Barbs. It's actually not that great for ruining saving throws or skill checks except in edge cases where those roles are very "do or die", and even then it's just a straight reroll. For example, if a CR 1/4 Giant Poisonous Snake just landed a critical hit against your level 2 Fighter for 2d4+4 piercing plus 6d6(!) poison damage (DC11 CON save to take half, which is still a ton!), Silvery Barbs has a 95% chance of eliminating that critical hit and saving the life of your Fighter, who could possibly just die outright on an unlucky CON save plus high poison damage dice rolls. That's great! As a DM, I'd love to see this happen. It would instantly create a bond between those characters and make for a good "tavern story" about how the frail Sorcerer, through strength of will, saved the burly Fighter from an early grave.
Overall, I think it's a perfectly positioned 1st level spell. Like Shield and Absorb Elements, both of which are very powerful in the right situations, it will compete with limited spell selections (especially for Wizards).
1. Yes Shield is self cast only, but 9 times out of 10 its going to be more useful for the Eldritch Knight to cast Shield than Silvery Barbs. Further more yes the wizard can use silvery barbs to help the Eldritch Knight, but what about the enemy mage waiting for the right moment to cast his Cone of Cold? What about the Demon Lord with Feeblemind? wouldn't you rather your wizard to save their reaction for counterspell than to use it on silvery barbs to stop one attack or force one creature to potentially fail a save?
2. Thats great, but its still not broken. It has a advantage not covered by other spells which makes it useful in its own way, thats not gamebreaking thats adding more utility to the spell.
3. This also exists in the game too.
4. Why should it? Its a 1st level spell to a cantrip and deals no damage. It just affects a save which the creature is simply rerolling a save immeadiately if it passes great then silvery barbs did nothing if not well then silvery barbs reaction affect mattered. This seems overcomplicated a rather simple matter here.
5. If you can plan it out, great, but again all it takes is something you arent expecting to happen for this all to go out the window. The slaad instead of attacking the eldritch knight who has shield, goes over and smacks the unconscious rogue. Youve already used your reaction, and advantage doesnt help on a automatic failed death save.
6. Clerics have features that can negate crits. Adamantine armor blocks crits completely. Crit negation exist in D&D 5e, albeit it not insanely common.
Ultimately again its a powerful 1st level spell, but I fail to see how these things make it more powerful than shield, or absorb elements, let alone counterspell.
This comment aged like Milk. 😂@@VeteranVandal
Whole argument changed when a DM starts using silvery barbs.
In a campaign I am in now I have had to hold reaction several times because of the examples you gave we had a swarm of harpies attack us (30+) I’m a low level wizard and silvery barbs is great for single interactions but if I think I am about to be attacked by several hits between turns then shield is the better reaction.
With a swarm of 30-plus harpies and a low-level party, I think running away is the better action, assuming that they are all up in the air and not going to get attacks of opportunity. But I hope you all survived!
@@joshuacr we were on an airship so part of us were under cover and they had to come to us in small packs until a smaller group found a way in, but our group was able to kill 18 of them, we have lots of control with myself casting sleep and having bless from the lorehold background and the Druid thorn whip enemies, our group is pretty balanced as far as melee goes and our cleric does more damage than me so we kept the swarm under control.
RAW Split enchantment doesn't work on Silvery barbs because your not targeting 1 creature with that spell your targeting 2 so it works like the Twinned spell metamagic
You can Split it if you choose not to confer the advantage, as the spell when cast would only affect one creature. Twinned Spell is different in that it requires the spell to be incapable of targeting more than one creature, not just that it is the case that the spell is targeting only one creature on a given cast.
@@rayndeon1 I'd agree.Split Enchantment is worded closer to War Caster's replacement of an Opportunity Attack than to Twin Spell, War Caster's can be capable of targeting multiple (Level 5+ Eldritch Blast, Magic Missile, etc) as long as it doesn't that particular time and only focuses down the one that triggered
There are spells like shield and absorbed elements. I think it's better for debuffing a enemy then use it for defence.
I don't necessarily believe this spell is broken, but it's inclusion annoys me, because it is undeniable it broadens the options and potency of any caster that takes it. A lot of casters just got access to a way to make their spells more likely to land.
The problem with this is they *did not need it*. Casters did not need the buff, at all. We continue to see this, casters getting broadening of their options and potency through magic items and spells, while we have barely seen anything for martials. Even among new subclasses, which I generally don't consider because they are mutually exclusive, casters have gotten some amazing subclasses recently.
Martials have gotten... crusher, slasher and piercer. I guess crusher is good, but it is competing with the feats martials are already using as a crutch to be relevant.
Casters need more relevant Magic Items and Feats. Martials need more powerful abilities and features.
When 5e Tome of Battle release?
Eldritch Knight: "Ah yes... Silvery Barb at lv1... But then it becomes redundant at higher levels for me. At least, I can use it at range and directly at targets. Unlike casting my usual Spells to trigger disadvantage against my next Spell."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 the real power for the eldrich knight is they can use it to avoid the enemy to make the save against your full casters high level spells, gives you a way to protect an allie from a crit hit, etc.
this doesn't mean we should not have silvery barbas
This means we should have gamechanging mechanics for martials
besides I can't understand this mindset, because dnd is not a competitive game. Yes, my fighter is not as versatile as my friend's bard, what gives? We are on the same side, we do different things.
@@adriel8498
Yeap... But I would use Silvery Barb as an Action or Bonus Action since the effect lasts until the end of my next turn, as the Eldritch Knight. And I can affect two targets at once.
Although, with a Heavy Great Sword, one of the thunder spells, and Eldritch Strike. Silvery Barb is kind of redundant as an Action/Bonus Action by that level.
I started DMing recently and was sorta worried about this spell coming up w the various examples the band wagon ppl have said, this video is perfect for greater insight into why it’s not broken and leaves me feeling better about players who take this, so thanks Chris :)
My recommendation would be, that if you're uneasy about the spell, tell players you are tenatively allowing it for now, but if you find it's problematic, you may ban or adjust it later. Then you get a chance to see it in action, and make a judgement based on experience.
The one thing I'd say is try your players depending on experience is to try not to meta game with using it. Also, early levels I feel like this spell isn't as strong. It's at mid tier where it really shines for big saving throws. Good luck with your campaign.
Lv20 Eldritch Knight with a Heavy Great Sword: "I impose disadvantage on the Goblin with my Heavy Great Sword as I attack him. But before I do, I cast Silvery Barb as an Action on the Hobgoblin and invoke Eldritch Strike on the Hobgoblin. If he fails to roll against Silvery Barb, then I empower myself with this Spell's second effect. Finally, I use Action Surge to Shove the Goblin near the Hobgoblin then to Extra Attack 3x... Move 5ft near both targets, Prone the Goblin, Prone the Hobgoblin, then use "variant combat rules when fighting multiple mobs at once" in order to deal damage to both targets in a circular sweeping Heavy Great Sword slash, thus affecting both targets with disadvantage from my Heavy Great Sword... But wait, There's more... I also use my Bonus Action to cast Thunder Clap to only affect/keep Silvery Bard on the Hobgoblin, but to also apply a new Eldritch Strike on the Goblin and end the Eldritch Strike on the Hobgoblin... Once done, I walk away using the rest of my Move of 25 Feet."
Lv20 Rogue: "Oh... I sneak attack the Goblin King... He dies."
Lv20 Wizard: "I cast Fire Ball as a Bonus Action then I cast Minor Illusion to make my Fire Ball even more louder... Why?... Because the Cleric got CC'd in the first round of this battle, so no one was being healed... And how dare the Eldritch Knight copy my Fire Ball with better stats and proficiencies in everything under the sun while I take 1d4 of stress damage from the Warlock who never wakes up after he uses Eldritch Blast."
Paladin: "Can I use Smite with my fists?"
Don't thank him, his arguments weren't good and the spell is 100% busted in the mid game. I guess if you don't think you'll make it to the point where they have 4th level slots it's not ban-able but still very broken.
@@TreantmonksTemple He had an update: Silvery Barbs Clarification - Sage Advice Update! ruclips.net/video/h0f-IocN-_M/видео.html
I dislike that it takes Grave cleric's anti crit, Lore bard's Cutting Words, and a bit of Eloquence's Unsettling Words into a first level spell. This takes three great features and just hands them to the already overpowered Wizard. While Sorcerer would enjoy some more power they just don't have the spell count for it outside of Tasha's subclasses.
I believe its an example of bad power creep and I'm banning it outside of Strixhaven.
Keep in mind those characters can take this spell too, giving them even more options. I'm doing this with my Lore bard currently. Power creep is real, and limiting setting-specific material to games in those settings is totally understandable. But I don't think that players of the mentioned class archetypes should feel slighted by this spells existence since they can also benefit from it.
@@jumpman83 It is still giving one character one the best features of three separate Sub-classes.
@@larstollefsen1236 Grave cleric ability is way more amped than this spell it stops a crit where silvery barbs does not. Unsettling words works different and great with this added on top of it which is especially on point because this is a very bard eloquent flavored spell.
@@regaleagle6533 Silvery Barbs has 95% chance to stop a crit, and a good chance to turn a crit into a miss, whereas grave cleric only turns a crit into a normal hit. Plus Silvery Barbs gives Adv to an ally at the same time. Thus Silvery Barbs is generally better than the grave cleric ability and if I was a grave cleric I'd probably use SBs instead of the cleric ability as long as I had lots of 1st level slots left.
@@agilemind6241 Grave clerics ability can be used AFTER you find out it is a crit. Silvery barbs cannot be used after you find out you got crit. The spell doesn't do what you want it to.
I found it to work well as an Arcane Trickster spell since you have limited spell slots and it fit the subclass thematically imo.
Exactly why I gave this to my magical thief NPC. Let's see how their battle goes when they try to rob my players lmao.
I mostly find it interesting that it's available through Fey Touched, whereas the other reaction spells usually are more onerous to acquire. Since misty step and free spell slots are really great already, it makes the spell very available to all classes combined with the rest of an already great feat.
If setting specific spells were already allowed at your table through Fey Touched, then Gift of Alacrity was an option. I'm not sure this is a better spell than GoA
That is really my only complaint personally about this spell. It should not have been a part of the Enchantment school. It should have been a part of the Abjuration school. The reason it is available only available through the Fey Touched feat because it is an enchantment spell.
It's also available for Arcane Tricksters. They have problems with picking effective lvl 1 spells; most of the wizard's Enchantment and Illusion spells are utility, and the spell from any school is often taken by some other option (Find Familiar), so in combat 1-st lvl slots may end up not used at all. Silvery Barbs give a good way of spending resources. And that not mentioning how advantage is good for Rogues.
@@LordMorin It should be a 2nd or 3rd level spell so that it isn't available through feats, and requires a minimum 3 level MC to get it beyond the 'intended' classes.
@@TreantmonksTemple I suppose, though they do rather different things and probably are wanted on somewhat different builds. GoA is a reasonable choice on anyone, but seems best on like a full caster that has lower level slots to burn just giving the whole party better initiative, or on a non caster who doesn't have any slots to make use of the cast with your slots feature of the feat. Especially if you already have good initiative or your party is covering this, barbs seems like a good always in your back pocket kind of spell. It's something where one or two uses can overturn critical situations throughout the day.
I'm not even saying it's a bad thing necessarily that it is available this way, just interesting that if you wanted, say, shield or absorb elements on your tank paladin, you have to multiclass or do spell storage rings or something. But now you can just pick up a pretty good feat now and have a defensive reaction option, which wasn't an option before.
For me the problem is that this is yet another example of power creep. While it may not be the only example, or even the worst, it is one that can be motivated with no negative effect on players.
Have to say I disagree on the fact that it gives advantage on top of the reroll not being too strong. It's a reaction spell. Level 1. Gives a reroll PLUS advantage. A second chance at a spell saving throw which is the mechanical equivalent of casting an X-level spell as a reaction AND you can give your Rouge/GWM Fighter/whoever another likely success. As a reaction. Yes reactions aren't free, but spellcasters with access to this spell now have an overwhelmingly strong option for their reaction.
It's not game breaking, but it is certainly centralizing and IMO unhealthy for the game. Wouldn't judge anyone for banning it.
I totally agree. Just because the secondary feature is weaker than the primary feature doesn’t make the secondary feature obsolete. For a sorcerer, Silvery Barbs gives disadvantage for two sorcery points, while heightened spell costs three. To _add_ advantage on top of that is just mind-boggling.
@@ellewong137 I mean I think that more so sheds light on how poorly designed sorcerer and the over emphasis on mostly subpar metamagics is than how strong silvery barbs is. Short of niche dual buffs there's no reason to choose a sorcerer over a wizard, cleric, or bard. Multiclassing ability score considerations aside. Sorcerers pay for features most classes either always have on or have easier to get back resources for them while sorc is religated to needing long rests to get anything back.
@@ellewong137 Since you're talking about using sorcery points in combat, it also costs that Sorcerer a bonus action. Reactions and bonus actions are not free. Heightened spell costs neither. Unless they are Aberrant Mind, then they can cast it for 1 sorcery point directly without the bonus action.
@@tarrickmerdev2324 I was comparing sorcery points to spell slots. A first level spell slot is the equivalent of two sorcery points.
Disagree with monk Treant too. It is roughly like everyone being a Chronurgy Wizard.
Being able to decide whether to expend the resources after the save is made makes this decidedly not equivalent to giving disadvantage on the save. Much of the time, disadvantage on the save is wasted because the creature fails the first die roll anyway. So if we have a spell that has an arbitrary utility on a failed save of 10 units of some sort, and the chance of success is 50%, then we can make these comparisons: The expected value of casting the spell in the first place is 5 units, the expected value of giving a creature disadvantage is 2.5 units, and the expected value of silvery barbs at the time of casting is 0.5 units (plus the advantage, but we'll ignore that). So it's mathematically twice as good as giving the creature disadvantage, making your comparison extremely spurious. It also at its most inefficient effectively costs 2 sorcery points (due to flexible casting) while heightened spell costs 3. Yes heightened spell does not consume your reaction so it's not literally just 3 times better per sorcery point, but it still makes heightened spell look pretty not great in comparison imo.
We can also look at things a different way. If silvery barbs is giving us the same expected value as the original spell, then casting it is equivalent to casting the original spell a second time, with its slot cost reduced to a 1st level slot and its action cost reduced to a reaction. Even if you assign a very high value to a reaction, you surely have to admit that it's still lower value than an entire action, so silvery barbs, when cast, seems to be to be very nearly strictly better than the spell it's "copying". At low levels I think this is fine- your save-or-sucks aren't the best spells of those spell levels anyway, so applying a super-quicken and making them a 1st level spell is strong but not insane, especially when we consider the timing restrictions on this super-quickened 1st level version. But once we get into late tier 2, certainly tier 3 and 4? Recasting a 5th level spell with a 1st level slot is some insane spell slot economy.
Overall this is a disappointing video for me. It feels like you spent nearly all of your time rebutting some awful strawman arguments, and then against the one actual serious argument you completely misrepresented the spell saying it's literally half as good as it actually is. I get that there are definitely people making those stupid arguments, but why was it necessary to give them 90% of the video's time? Your audience isn't *stupid*, we know advantage on a single roll isn't gamebreaking lol.
This is a much better way of expressing how I felt about this video.
I definitely felt that Treeant ignored some stronger arguments for weaker ones. For instance, he talked about 18th level wizards, but not 6th level Aberrant Mind sorcerers.
He also used assumed that you would give your advantage to a caster with Warcaster who is concentrating on a spell. On literally anybody else, the advantage would probably be used for an important saving throw or an attack roll. And the assumption that you would give advantage to a teammate that always has advantage is stupid. You have multiple teammates, and you give the advantage to the person who needs it most.
I also feel that his dragon example is a white room scenario. It assumes that the dragon is going to ignore all your other teammates and attack you. It also assumes that you aren’t behind cover or giving advantage to yourself for the breath attack saving throw.
This video just feels like a jab at other RUclipsrs who, admittedly, made some dumb arguments, while ignoring many people with valid arguments.
@@ellewong137 He’s made a name for himself in part by being contrarian. Usually I dig it, this just feels like he hates the big response more than the actual arguments. Cherry picking bad/hyperbolic criticisms makes it easy to argue.
Terrible comparison. it isn't remotely the same as casting a spell a second time. A second cast nets you another target, a new location, a re-applied effect that became broken, etc. This only increases the chance of a spell landing and ONLY the first saving throws as many of those spells whose saving throws you want to fail allow one every turn. It still costs additional resources to do so and those resources are not unlimited, which was basically the whole point of his video. You don't want to do this on every spell you cast, only a few choice ones here and there. If spending resources to go without defenses to have a bit better success rate on a spell you're already casting is breaking the game, then the spell you're casting in the first place is the part that's game-breaking.
@@tarrickmerdev2324 it's specifically for single target save or suck spells, but for that subset of spells it is just a recast. The targets are inherently the best targets because the game state is identical to before you cast the spell in the first place so if you picked the best targets then they're still the best targets now. At that moment you're expending a first level slot and a reaction to cause the target to make a save and suffer the effects of the spell on a failure, which has exactly the same value as the spell did when you decided to cast it moments ago. Yes it costs resources, but if you determined that casting the spell in the first place was worth expending the resource of, say, a 5th level spell then clearly it's worth the resources to recast it under exactly the same conditions for a 1st level slot (or a higher slot- it's still very good value when upcast).
Currently running Strixhaven and two players have Silvery Barbs (limited access to the Silverquill background)
In one battle both players used the spell 4 times (2 spell slots each) at the end of that combat, two players were near 0 hit points, 1 was fairly damage and two others. One which had an advantages position and another could fly took none.
Yes, the spell made my creatures miss, and yes, that fighter got advantages on 4 of his attacks.
But guess what. A Rogue using steady aim would have got advantage on almost all of those attacks and and would have done more damage. The creatures still had their next attack, which hit. In once instance even after SB the creature hit.
Did the spell help my players survive? Absolutely did it change anything? No?
Did the fighter still have to use his one cast of shield to prevent a hit that would have dropped him like the Bard and Warlock were about to have happen? Yep, still had to use Shield.
You are the DM, you determine how powerful your encounters are. How they fight and you already know what your party is capable of.
Personally, I felt like them having SB actually made them stop to think about what would be the better option. The Bard struggled to use SB to help the fighter because he knew one cast of Dissonant Whispers would kill the creature and a dead creature can't do damage.
SB is powerful and it will change how players battle but its not broken.
I love Wild Magic and the Sorcerer basically Casts every 1st level spell with advantage because I ALWAY force proc wild magic surge.
lol, SB didn't change anything cause they used it wrong-
Of course SB won't be that impactful when they use it just to reroll attacks
Just wait till you have someone casting web/pattern and two casters use silvery barb to ensure it sticks
Enjoy seeing them trivialize your encounters cause what's supposed to be a 55% to success became a 91%
The spell isn’t broken, but it is substantially stronger than what a first level spell should be in my opinion. While reactions aren’t free, a caster can likely deduce if they will need an absorb elements/shield on any given round. And now that enemy stat blocks are being redone, counterspell loses a lot of application as enemies lose spells in favor of “magical abilities”. The biggest weakness is obviously that it requires a spell slot, and you have a very limited number of those. But forcing a reroll on a critical hit or a successful saving throw against a high level spell can be incredibly impactful.
Yeah... 4th level may be better. 5th may be better. You may want to pump up the advantage a bit then, but otherwise this spell has amazing potential
>But forcing a reroll on a critical hit or a successful saving throw against a high level spell can be incredibly impactful.
So can shield on a multi-attack or absorb elements on a chain lightning or dragon's breath and yet these are also 1st level spells. You only use any of these spells when you already know it's going to have a significant impact, none of them are guesses.
Totally agree with you. I think it's a strong spell, but broken is a bit far.
I think it has a lot of balance issues because how it interact with classes and feats. Is really easy to get, it can be used by bards that doesn´t have shield or absorb elements, aberrant minds sorcs can cast it for only 1 sorc point without components, Order domain clerics can give attacks to allies on othr turns (heavy sneak attack combo), and probably there are more interactions I haven´t noticed yet.
@@adriel8498 it’s an undeniably powerful spell with some great synergies, but it has opportunity costs. If this were instead a feature with its own resource then I think it would be even stronger.
But it isn’t. It directly competes with other spells. Those sorcery points could have been spent on shield instead which is also a powerful spell.
It's about as powerful as shield, which is a high complement since shield is an extremely good spell, but I agree it's not broken.
It trades shield's ability to defend against multiple attacks for the ability to be used offensively, and the extra advantage.
@@PearseNation
Eldritch Knight: "You guys cast Silvery Bard as a Reaction?... I treat this spell as an Action and as Bonus Action. In the same way, I treat Counter Spell as an Action or Bonus Action if I need to."
I would use Silver Bard as a Bonus Action, which triggers Eldritch Strike. Then attack with my heavy great sword. Thus, imposing up to +3 Disadvantages on the target for the next turn and enhancing +1 Advantage on myself until I make the next roll.
However, I do not roll 3 times. Adv and Disadv only rolls once because the +3 Disadv being imposed on the target can only nullify Adv from the target. Although, when Silvery Barb is successful. I not only force the target to roll with +3 Disadv. I also roll Adv for my own single AC roll.
@@brianb.6356
As the Eldritch Knight, I'll cast Silvery Bard as a Bonus Action then cast a Cantrip as an Action. I'll save Shield and Absorb Elements for my Reaction.
It's better than casting a low damaging spell at lv10+ for this Sub Class.
Thank you for being you. Your critical thinking and thoughtful demeanor are what solidifies Treantmonk’s Temple as being my favorite D&D/role playing channel
I absolutely banned this from my table. Once the entire party found out they could get this spell and use it to basically one shot any big guy I fielded on the table trivializing encounters for a 1st level spell I banned it. When you have a sorcerer casting heightened spell on a save or suck spell then I make the roll at disadvantage then I roll again and then if I make it two more party member make me roll again. It basically turns into an "I win button." The spell does have counters but I'm not going to deafen the party, give my creatures legendary saves or have lots of counterspell every fight. The fact that everyone in the party can take the spell with fey touched feat is broken. When everyone is using this at the table why have saving throws? It's a hard pass for me.
My DM banned it, but he also bans the Lucky feat. He feels that removing the chance at failure takes away from the story. Failure should be an option.
Neither Lucky nor Silvery Barbs removes failure. It gives you a second chance at best. I've seen lucky/Silvery Barbs fail to change the result of the roll just as often as it does impact the result. It's good. But not broken.
My biggest issue with this spell is that it's on the wizard's spell list; not anything power level related just seems like it would be a good, powerful unique spell for the Bard and Sorcerer. It's literally a supped up version of vicious mockery.
Because this is a Planeswalker, AKA wizard Academy, there is no spell or almost no spell that would not be included to the wizard/sorcerer build when interpreted for Dungeons & Dragons. But I agree with you.
You've missed the strongest use of this spell, not as a defensive spell, but as an offensive spell. If your ally casts a powerful X-level spell and your enemies make their save, you can, using a 1st level spell slot, essentially duplicate that spell and force another save roll. It's like tag-teaming blasters! Then, on your turn, you cast your X-level spell, and if your enemy makes the save, your ally casts Silvery Barbs (using only a 1st level slot) and your enemy again has to make the save. I say BAN, if there isn't some other sort of control on it.
Also, the point about using it with your own magic fails the sniff test, because you can't cast two spells in one turn, so you can't use this if your own magic is resisted.
He mentioned that in the heightened section. Also, one is only prevented from casting a second leveled spell in a round if one spell is cast as a bonus action.
@@JB33809 Turn not round. You can cast a reaction levelled spell on a different turn in that round, just not your turn.
@@dwainedwards615 you can counterspell a counterspell targeting your fireball according to sage advice, how can you do this if you cant cast multiple spells per turn?
People already mention this but when you cast it offensively in combat you no longer have protection from attacks. In my campaigns atleast enemies are usually in groups of 6-8 or 1 big bad and 4-5 smaller enemies and they usually have a habbit of trying to shoot me in the backline anytime im not protected. Mage's like my character will go down or almost go down in a single round if an enemy hits them. Using sb to make sure my attack/crowd control hits really only feels good until I get an arrow to the knee
This comment aged like Milk. 😂
I think this video is missing the forest for the trees. It's not broken as a defensive spell, it's broken as an offensive spell that will make higher level save-or-suck spells and abilities significantly more powerful. That why I've banned it at my table, and this video did not convince me otherwise.
if anything the video kinda omits the offensive use of the spell lols. It can be used to force enemies to eat damage for no good reason aside form the spells existence...
But the Spellcaster is using twice the resources. It's not making offensive spells twice as good. So it's going to be down to the player; do they want to cast that 1st level offensive spell twice with advantage or 4 times without it. STOP taking player decisions away from them without good reason. Chris is keeping an open mind; why can't you?
@@richardjames6990 you don't use twice the resources if you have wizard Spell Mastery which is a niche high level play carve out but it does remove that limit of resource cost. Not saying to ban, just a note.
This comment aged like Milk. 😂
90% of times ive been attacked in combat, its been by a creature with the ability to make more than 1 attack, and 80% of the time there are other creatures who are able to do the same nearby. Its astounding to me that people are acting like Silvery Barbs is better in every way than Shield. Perhaps its because my DM is a guy who likes to field creatures that make lots of attacks (Including an instance with a creature that could make SIX) but I still wonder why the hyperbolic reaction to this spell is occurring without experiencing the spell at the table over several sessions. Lets Humanize the thought experiment a lttle bit here - There are spells that players are going to want to use outside of Silvery Barbs. Like a lot of less optimized characters, a lot of players at my tables have an unhealthy obsession with blasting. If anyone thinks that sorcerers and wizards are going to cease blasting so that they can sit on their last first level slot Just in case they need silvery Barbs...I mean, CMON, no way.
Me, as the Eldritch Knight: "Ah... Another way to apply more tactical rolls... No, not damage. For damage?... I have my Dual Wield Heavy Great Sword that I only hold for cosmetic reasons. My meer presence forces weaker and smaller targets to make a Charisma Skill Role if they ever desire to be 5 ft near me. And if they touch my armor... They... Will... Know... Intimidation beyond fear with my Charisma at base 15 from Lv1, unmodified."
Lv4 Normal Human Eldritch Knight
9 (+1) Str
15 (+1) Dex
15 (+1) Con
9 (+1) Int
9 (+1) Wis
15 (+1) Chr
Feat: Telekinesis
Maybe because people have desired this for a long time and didn’t like relying on fellow party members or spending their own concentration to make it harder for enemies to make saves. Now you can use a low (very low) effort set up to do just that. People who are defending it just like power.
Silvery Barbs isn't primarily a defensive spell though. Shield is specifically a defensive spell so of course it ought to be better at defense than a spell that can be used for defense and 1001 other uses. If you as a wizard / sorcerer / bard are being attacked in low & mid tier then Shield will generally be a better option. However, if you as a low & mid tier wizard/sorcerer/bard are being attacked all the time, then you're kind of fed regardless.
SBs is > Shield in the general case because during most rounds of combat the wizard/sorcerer/bard really shouldn't be being attacked thus Shield is useless during most rounds of combat. Whereas SBs can be used in far more situations - no you won't have the spell slots to cast it in ALL of the situations where you could, but if you take SBs there will never be an adventuring day where you still have most of your 1st level slots left over unused. Whereas if you have Shield or Absorb Elements it is highly likely there will be some adventuring days where there is never an opportunity to use those spell.
I'm a brand new DM. My players couldn't wait to use this against me. After 2 sessions they couldn't care less. It is a great spell but it doesn't break anything. Also at low levels the wizard burning two spell slots a turn/round really hurts the wizards ability to stay relevant long term in a day.
Yeah, it’s nice at higher levels, but even then 1st level slots are being used for shield and absorb elements at a very high rate.
What level is the party at your table when you tried this?
Wait, how do they cast 2 spellslots per turn? Aren't you limited to max 1 (non cantrip) spell per turn?
@@franciscofernandez8183 Thats not the rule, there is no 1 spell per turn rule. The rule is about casting a leveled spell as a bonus action, so nothing stops you from casting a spell as your action and then using SB as your reaction in the same turn.
@@AncientManBeast little correction: the rule is about casting A spell as a bonus action, if you quicken/watthever a cantrip to BA you'll be stuck with using a action cantrip the same way because cantrips are spells.
The line-by-line refutation is the "calm down" we needed for this spell. It is strong. It's not ban-worthy.
Without getting into the minutiae of this spell and its interactions with everything else in the game, I think something that is overlooked is that a new addition being good or bad for the game is not necessarily directly related to its power level. It can be the type of gameplay it encourages, the overshadowing of other abilities, bad wordings and the shenanigans that will ensue, etc. People often justify the opinions they have by trying to make them "objective", calling things overpowered or imbalanced, but this is not always the real problem.
The first version of Healing Spirit didn't pose any problem in combat, but was an absolute mess out of combat. Silvery barbs encourages and optimizes the use of save&suck / save&die spells, and in doing so will favor more swingy combat encounters, which makes balancing them harder for the DM; it bring some power creep to mid-level full arcane casters, who are already some of the most potent characters in the game. So in my opinion, it doesn't have to be broken/overpowered to have a potential negative effect on games, and be better left out of the spell lists.
It can be used effectively out of combat for any skill-based check and subtle things cast on others or otherwise that require a saving throw by an opposition or technically any other person. That's what makes it much more versatile. It still requires one reaction and a spell slot which limits your overall casting of this all the time unless you are level 18 and choose this as a mastery as wizard.
When WotC balances everything to being so underwhelming, it's not hard for something new to overshadow past things. Not to mention how they've reduced game mechanics compared to past editions, giving less for spells to mess with so there is more overlap.
The argument is that Silvery Barbs is Over-Powered relative to the balance of other options available. I definitely agree it shouldn’t be banned out right, but I think it should at least cost a higher level spell slot. It’s a must have
I've found the games I play in usually have bosses with minions. I recently played In a game where we fought another group of npc adventurers.
I found one good opportunity to use it, meanwhile the wizard with one hit point was able to pop shield and survive like 5 attacks. Shield, as a wizard, could give you an ac of 23 if you have mage armor and max dex. Even if he had like 20, that would have still saved him from most of the attacks, meanwhile silvery barbs only has potential against one attack per turn.
@@Thoumint it's not used defensively, nor should it be. That boss, did he have legendary resistance? (Which why would you use this knowing a creature has LR like treantmonk mentioned...) If not you use silvery barb on a banishment or suggestion spell and get rid of the boss... this spell means as a DM I need to give every decent big baddy at least one legendary resistance. Shield is still important, but silvery barb makes the BEST spells in the game better. Not marginally better, but disadvantage on the save for a 1st level spell better; while the sorcerer's most powerful metamagic requires 3 SP to do it (in a less efficient way mind you, you don't heighten after the first roll)
AND these can be stacked. Someone mentioned a +6 on a save against a DC 13... with a heightened and silvery on the omni important cast...
@@chrisgee8441 I didn't say the boss had Legendary Resistance, because it didn't. As i sorta implied, the Boss in question was the leader of a group of NPC adventurers that the DM had set up to be on par with our group, if not a little bit better due to sheer numbers.
Yes, I agree the spell is good, its great. But shield is just as good for a different purpose. You as a DM don't have to give legendary resistance to a boss.
What you as a DM have to do, with those two examples, is give the boss immunity to charmed, or make it from the same plane as them. Or perhaps focus on the way in which the player words the suggestion?
Yes, there is many spells in this game that benefit from this spells ability to impose a sort of disadvantage on a spell. But i think everyone is blowing it out of proportion. Unless your a high level Cavalier, reactions are far and few in between, and your using your reaction to force a re-roll on one creature, and you don't get another reaction until everyone else in the turn order, friend or foe(Especially if there is a lot of minions), gets their turns.
At that point, shield is a better option, simply because it persists and effects everything that tries to attack you throughout those turns.
Now to play devils advocate here, i see your points. Casting this on a spell like banishment, or disintegrate would be ideal. If you have the initiative on your side, you could do some real crazy stuff.
@@Thoumint Good points, I was legitimately asking if they had LR; possibly a home brewed npc boss. I was more picking at Treantmonk assuming an optimizer would used silvery barb/saversuck on a dragon with it's breath charge, not having casted fire shield, fully knowing that the dragon has LR. I agree shield would never be off my list, but if I can banish the big bad in round one and use my movement to duck behind cover and hope the martials can protect me and take care of the small fry; I done did my part (regardless of on the plane or not, 10 rounds out of combat. Might as well be dead)
Even if I give my creature immunities, or super high saves; I'm still altering the baddy because of a single level one spell. That speaks volumes.
As far as reaction economy goes, how often is the wizard/sorcerer (which aberrant mind btw... 1 SP cost if you put this on psionic) needing to cast shield/absorb. Something else, he uses this surrounded by crazy multi-attack monsters analogy. How many other people are you playing with and what the hell are they doing? Plus, MOST creature blocks have an average of two multi-attacks; at that point it IS possible silvery barb may be the better option. The fact that it can even be considered against shield when I believe it shouldn't be used defensively. Then the advantage buff that gets written off... The fact that it's just another concentrationless mini buff for free.
Wizards should be kings at setting up. This spell makes them drastically better at the punch line. Also; bards get it...
All that said, I'm not banning this spell. My players can have it; so can my uber villain casters. It's just another staple spell that would be stupid NOT to take, and further widens the gap between casters and martials.
Where is my vortex warp and silvery barb equivalent for the barbarian or the rogue...
@@chrisgee8441 I'll respond ina bit, eating rn lol.
The problem with Silvery Barbs is that it is effective in many situations, while spells like Shield and Absorb Elements have niche uses.
Let's say your opponent makes his save against a Banishment spell. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs?
Let's say your Fighter is trying to grapple the enemy spellcaster to stop them from casting and the caster makes it's Athletics/Acrobatics Check. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs?
Let's say you are an Arcane Trickster likely getting attacked only once, with no other way of getting Sneak Attack next turn. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs?
Heck, lets say SOMEONE ELSE get's attacked. Would you rather have Shield or Silvery Barbs?
Shield is ONLY better than Silvery Barbs when you expect YOU are going to be attacked multiple times AND the potential of the Advantage is not worth the risk.
Wish does not let you replicate any other 9th level spell, but even so, it is STILL the best spell in the game, due to versatility. That is why Silvery Barbs is broken.
Am I going to ban it? Probably not, but if my party grabs it ALL of my NPC spellcasters will have it.
And the fix is simply bumping it to second level.
That seems like overreacting.
@@magonus195 Why? If its well accepted by everyone at the table that its a must have spell why wouldn't the enemies use it too?
features like heighten spell and chronal shift already existed, but by and large they were restricted to specific subclasses or heavy investment of your power budget. they're all still very strong features, even if they don't break the game. but none of them are nearly as accessible or as cheap as silvery barbs is now. any wizard, bard, sorcerer or someone taking fey-touched can now spend a 1st-level reaction spell to dump enemy saving throws. is that free? no, but you're still getting a _ton_ of bang for your buck there. it doesn't invalidate shield, but it makes most casters way better at something they previously didn't have many ways to address.
when 5e came out, it felt like dumping enemy saving throws was treated with a lot more weight by the designers. you had to be a sorcerer and spend one of your two metamagics on heighten spell, and shell out three whole-ass sorcery points. nowdays the designers just hand it out like candy. by this point there's no excuse for a caster to not have some way to nearly ensure an enemy fails a crucial saving throw, because that ability is so powerful and so accessible.
maybe it doesn't break the game, but it just continues to make casters all the more powerful and versatile when they already had more power and versatility than they ever needed. i'm happy it's setting-specific so i have an easier time justifying banning it from my table, because i'm definitely going to ban it.
Speaking as GM,
I’m actually very excited about this spell though it hasn’t come up in play yet.
I’m a big fan of reactions that allow players to support one another. It encourages cooperation which is very healthy for play. That’s why the lore Bard’s cutting words is such a well designed feature, even if it’s mathematically inferior to the Valor Bard’s option.
I actually think Silvery Barbs is going to be most useful on partial casters or non-casters that take a 1 level dip. Rogues or Barbarians that can buff allied spell casters would be awesome, and by no means broken.
Particularly with the Magic Initiate feat.
I do appreciate your take, even if I don't agree with all the points. I don't want to come to any definitive conclusion on banning prior to play testing, but I do feel like this analysis focuses too much on the individual, as opposed to the compounding power Silvery Barbs brings to an entire party. Some thoughts:
- Silvery Barbs is potentially very powerful because of its proactive nature, unlike many other defensive-focused reactions. It's not free, but it gives parties an option to expend resources way earlier in the initiative and in key moments to more easily snowball a fight in a turnbase combat system (where it's very powerful). Improving Alpha-striking is VERY valuable. I.e. an optimized wizard winning initiative and opening up combat with a powerful control spell is suddenly that much more deadly when your other party members with lower initiative can also contribute to this crippling alpha-strike.
- The fact that Silvery Barbs can be used to protect your teammates is also a HUGE plus compared to the self-targeted nature of Shield, because most of the time you can't choose who the enemy gets to target. It doesn't make Shield obsolete as explained in your video, but from a total party effectiveness, I think Silvery Barbs provides a coverage that Shield doesn't.
- Silvery Barbs is pretty easy to access on non-full casters too and non-Bard/Sorcerer/Wizard too - really most optimized parties (so you assume spell casting for most characters) can and should have access to this spell per my point above. It becomes pretty efficient when you're trading spell slots of weaker casters with limited reaction options anyways to apply re-rolls on spells casted by characters with much more powerful DCs.
- Another point of why Silvery Barbs hurts Heighten spell so much is yes, while it eats a reaction, it's overall much cheaper to use because you choose to use it AFTER the failure, unlike Heightened spell, on top of a level 1 slot being cheaper than 3 sorcery points. Most importantly though, 1 spell known is much cheaper than 1 of 2 metamagics known (up till level 10). And it's extra powerful when someone with limited save-or-suck capabilities (i.e. a Paladin with Fey-Touched) can contribute in this manner.
- Building on the above - one great thing about Silvery Barbs is that it's very Spells-known efficient, as it's a very versatile spell. And spells known aren't free either. This is my issue with people who tear down Haste by pointing out that individual components of Haste (i.e. defense, DPR boost, etc) is outmatched by various other spells in each category (i.e. Bless for DPR, Rope Trick for hide defense, etc.) - but a lot of value is having all of that in 1 spell known.
- While it's true that 1st level slots are far from infinite, abilities like Arcane Recovery and Sorcerous Restoration does help full casters to alleviate the stress of over-using level 1 slots. Aberrant Mind Sorcerer can also use their psionic spell feature for very cheap castings of Silvery Barbs.
This comment aged like Milk. 😂
I'm open to the idea I'm overreacting, but I'm still super skeptical of this spell. It's still the saving throws that concern me. I really don't care about rerolling attacks or the advantage (although that doesn't make me love the spell more.) I don't really care about it stepping on other classes' toes, or theory-crafted elaborate edge cases. I just hate what it does to monster saves.
I take issue with Chris's example of a red dragon because, actually, no, I as the caster will NOT need another reaction. The dragon doesn't attack me, because I cast Hold Monster or Tasha's Hideous Laughter or Otto's Irresistible Dance or Polymorph on it. For the price of my 1st-level spell it had to save at disadvantage using its awful 13 WIS and it CAN'T attack me.
A 9th-level wizard can theoretically do this eight times a day with powerful save-or-suck spells thanks to Arcane Recovery.
I'll give it a chance until it proves it's broken in real life. After all, most people want to blast as wizards, and they'll probably keep doing that, so if we're just talking about saves against Fireball or whatever, no big deal.
I look forward to you being skeptical about it and testing it and telling us your results from the party's perspective, including yours.
Also, I look forward to you being said red dragon and using one of your legendary saves, burning it, and thus; the lower slot spell has done what it is intended to do: use up these things (as well as use the higher-level spell spot that was cast that caused them to succeed the spell in the first place.)
Lots of people can't/won't think for themselves. That's how channels like yours get popular. You do the thinking for them.
I think everyone, including you, is missing the forest for the trees. If this spell did nothing but force rerolls on saving throws it would still be an auto-pick on every serious control-caster's spell list. If your high level save-or-suck gets saved, Silvery Barbs could just as well read that you use your reaction and a 1st level slot to cast your high level save-or-suck spell again in the same turn.
If you're using the spell for anything else, it's either a super niche case or you're using it wrong. But that fact that it CAN be used for other things, on top of providing incidental benefit with every cast, is just gravy on top of it's primary use.
Also, the Chronal Shift comparison: That feature is arguably the best class feature most Wizard players will ever touch, you could argue Portent is better but even then only by a hair. That feature is limited to 2/long rest for good reason, but now everyone gets it as a 1st level spell, including the Divination and Chronurgy wizards.
Lucky Halfling DIvination wizard with Silvery Barbs prepared. May as well just let him decide what number the three most important rolls of the day are gonna be.
I absolutely agree. If it only had the save-or-suck recast effect, it would be a viable spell.
I used it in a level 19 one shot, and I caused many spells to hit after first failing, basically using my reaction and a level 1 spell slot to gain the effect of a high level spell.
Plus I had an order cleric dip, so I used it to give the barbarian a reaction attack at advantage (doing 35 damage roughly).
only for single target save or suck spells.
Well in D&D it depends on the DM how man magic items buff your primary ability. So your spell DC could be high or mediocre. And a Pit Fiend has a Wisdom save of +10, and mgc resistance. So you can negate mgc resistance i think by forcing a re-roll. Now the fiend is rolling to beat your DC of 19 or so. It has to roll about a 9 or higher. So your save or suck spell has another 50 percent chance of succeeding, but it's a coin toss. Congratulations, you might pick your save or suck spell more often b/c you NEVER took any save or suck spells before b/c you already SUCKED up all of Treantmonk's videos and didn't take ANY save or SUCK spells, and now you're ready to flip on your previous experience and say that save or suck spells are OP b/c of your coin toss chance at not sucking. So really, your suck spells are just less sucky, but still a coin toss. But instead of noticing the game getting rounded out, you said something about the forest from the trees and all the moments that a Demon suffers from Hold Person are going to make your experience playing magical fairy land is going to be more tragic. Hardly, and god forbid magical fairy land needs adjusting after thousands of magical fairy land words have been printed.
Honestly reads as TM trying too hard to be contrarian here. This is easily the greatest value spell for its level in 5e currently.
@@GildedTongues alongside shield and gift of alacrity.
It is like Chronal Shift for everybody at a lower cost. I'd use the example above with a Chronurgy Wizard too. Make a battlefield and time control Wiz. Of course, it is very bad if more than 1 person has it. But if only 1 person has it, it is easy to miss how abusable the spell is.
So, sure, test it, but I strongly recommend bumping it to 2nd level. Increasing cost is all it'll take. The spell still sounds solid as 2nd level to me, and still slightly abusable, but you can't just get via race or feat or something as simple.
This is like 'you guys aren't thinking' sounds like projection. No, I started thinking it was overhype. I got here via arguments and wanting 'overhype' to be right as my original confirmation bias. Yes, shield is good and I'd put them in the same tier. And TM bans shield in his games... So... The argument is like "there are other good spells". Yes, and?
Great breakdown.
The example you gave was a great way of showing how it's not as good as most people think in alot of scenarios.
It's strength isn't in replacing heightened spell, its in combining with it. I'm not a fan of lucky and elven accuracy bringing double advantage into the game, so double disadvantage isn't really my cup of tea either. Triple disadvantage hold person/monster can trivialize a lot of content. Losing your other reaction options is a decent response but I think locking the DM into the "player uses silvery barbs, player gets attacked" response as a counter measure is kind of lame and would get repetitive/predictable. Sure, at higher level legendary resist comes into play but casters get access to this thing at lvl 1 and you wont find much legendary resistance for a while.
Seems like if the players are spending that many resources on a Hold Person spell, that it's fine for it to work. That's at least one 1st level slot, one 2nd level slot, and 3 sorcery points. Unless the PCs are facing very few encounters per day, this doesn't seem so bad. You're either draining a significant chunk of your resources if you are at lower levels, you are cheesing one humanoid at mid-levels, or you are casting Hold Monster with a bunch of other stuff when you could instead be casting Wall of Force without all the extra strings to taking a single creature out of the combat.
@@TheBCE Fair point. It is a lot resource expenditure but I think worth it. Hold monster was just one example of a powerful spell to use with the heightened spell + silvery barbs combo. I'm sure there are plenty more, and many probably more powerful. Edit: I think what i'm getting at is that a person using this combination has an unnecessarily strong trump card in their back pocket for big bads at lower level game play. At higher level game play you may have multiple spell casters using this so legendary resist useage falls off. I don't think I would ban it but would instead houserule that the first function of the spell means disadvantage rather than the current mechanic.
@@xUnnamedx44 you have a trump card as well. It's called counterspell. Watch all of those resources go away or used prematurely to stop other said resources above from being used.
@@joshuacr not many monsters with counterspell
@@xUnnamedx44 two words, enemy caster
This one defo gets a spot next to shield and absorb elements as my first level spells.
There are MANY more situations where shield is better though.
The fact that multiattack and multiple enemies exist debunks all of the whining about Silvery Barbs.
It's all circumstancial though.
It's great for the Eldritch Knight... But I wouldn't cast it as a Reaction, even when I can. I'll save that for Counter Spell.
Since Reaction, Bonus Action, and 1 Action for Spell casting time are mainline to each other. There's room to move each spell around as the Eldritch Knight since I can stack Disadvantages up to +3 with Eldritch Strike and Heavy Great Sword just in case they have up to +3 Advantage.
Along with giving myself +1 Advantage but it only takes one -1 Disadvantage being imposed on me in order to nullify Silvery Bards +1 Adv to myself.
... In a world of dice, RNG is life or death. So minimize the amount of RNG as possible...
@@absolstoryoffiction6615
Like I said, very circumstancial.
It is defo a spell I want available even if I don't need it at any given situation though.
@@gangr3l
It's good for an Eldritch Knight since it can act as a Bonus Action for Eldritch Strike and War Master. I wouldn't waste it as a Reaction, though.
The same is when I know that "you could take damage", so I would cast Shield as a Bonus Action then cast a Cantrip... I won't waste Action Surge.
(General rules for Spell Casting. Not specific rules like "you can cast this Spell as a Bonus Action".)
@@absolstoryoffiction6615
Well, no.
Because Shield is a reaction spell, not a bonus action.
Try again.
@@gangr3l
Reaction Spells are faster to cast when compared to Action Spells...
It is a choice to cast Shield as a Reaction as stated by its specific rules. Other than that, you can cast Shield as a Bonus Action followed by Cantrips or just as an Action... Under general rules and limitations.
Spells containing Reaction or Bonus Action specific rulings are exceptions but not exclusive to the general rules. Such specific rules only take out the limitations if it was done normally.
The same is said for Spells which requires more than 1x Action worth of cast time, if you can reduce that cast time down to one Action. Then cast that Spell as a Bonus Action followed by Cantrips or just as an Action.
Silvery Barbs:
Its not broken, because other spells are already broken.
Reactions aren't free but lots of characters won't have a need of them in a given turn in combat. While its true that the shield spell is still better at avoiding taking damage one big advantage of silvery barbs over shield is that it doesn't have to be you casting it. So if you have a character that doesn't have shield that is being attacked you can also protect them.
I did allow Healing Spirits at my table, until it absolutely change how our game was played. It's really problematic at higher levels (+8) when to challanege players you really need to start to drain their resources though the adventuring day. Healing Spirit just made healing far too available for my table. So I had two choices to fix what was happening, start pumping out twice the amount of damage onto my players (which would require modifying the module I was running even more), or ban the spell which was breaking the game.
The issue with Silvery Barbs is the reaction. Reactions are generally limited to defensive option. Shield, Absorb Elements and Counterspell are all primarily defensive. Yes, Attacks of Oppuntity and other offensive reactions exist, but they are things to support certain styles of play. Like not freely disengaging from martial characters. Spell casters are rarely if ever given offensive reactions. So it being a new reaction spell which can be used offensively is a red flag.
There's a general rule in D&D and almost all other games. Offensive takes precedent over defense. Defensive options slow down the fight, but they don't win them. No number of casting of the shield or absorb elements will end an encounter. They exist only to prolong it. In your dragon example, of disintegrate vs dragon fire. Saving your reaction for absorb elements, you're only buying yourself another round. Eventually the next round cometh and you're going to be in the same position. Except now you don't have your sixth level disintegrate spell anymore. Where as if you used silvery barbs, you could've ended the encounter. In that regard, Silvery Barbs is indeed the better choice because it made your limited 6th level spell much more valuable and ultimately increases the odds of winning the encounter.
Silvery Barbs does encroach on design space for certain class features. Even outside the examples of Shield and Heighend Spell. For example, Sentential at Death's Door grave domain feature or Warding Flare from light domain. With Heighten Spell, the main point of encroachment is the resource cost. 3 sorcery points is considered equal to about a level 2 spell. You have access to both at level 3, and you can cast a 2nd level spell for three sourcery points.
Is it a perfect replacement for shield? No. Is it a perfect replacement for Heighten Spell? No. But the main issue with Silvery Barbs is that any feature where we're comparing it to Shield, Sentential at Death's Door, Heighten Spell, and along with many other class features and spells shows the application of this spell is far too broad. I think saying it encorches on the design space of those abilities is a better way of describing what's happening, rather then saying it makes them obsolete. I think that's another red flag.
Fundmentally, I don't think it's "game-breaking" until you do start getting those amazing 3th-9th level save or suck spells. It's not going to highly negatively impact your level 1st-4th games. But when 1st level spells should be getting outshined by higher level spells, Silvery Barbs only gets better and better as the player levels up. The strength isn't in the spell itself, but how it increases the effectiveness of other spells and abilities. I think this is yet another red flag.
So yes, I do think it deserves a day zero ban. I'll also say, I'm very disappointed that as 5e goes along, the spell lists are becoming longer and longer. While martial characters for the most part, aside of a few mutually selective options like fighting styles and subclasses, are mostly stuck with many of the same options as when PHB was released.
in 5e there aren't really things thst can be added to martials like spells. casters have much more modular abilities because of the fact you choose spells from lists and the number of spells you get don't change even if the list is longer. martials the only way to add to them is fighting styles and new subclasses as they don't really have anything else where they pick an ability from a list and they get a certain number of picks
@@johnpaullogan1365 I think the fallacy here is that there isn't a need to continually add new spells.
Like sure, fill a hole in the spell list if there is something that's missing, the new summoning spells in Tasha's are an example of that. But we don't need to continually add new spells that have no theme or reason to their effects, just mixing or remixing.
Take Tasha's Mind whip: Do we really need more CC spells? It's just basically just slow at a lower level, targets weaker saves (int vs wis), and does damage. Pure power creep over something that kinda already existed.
With the Strixhaven spells, like maybe it's important for that setting. But we know that they will be reprinted in new splat books eventually.
I'm all for adding new subclasses, feats, races, magic items, etc. Those are elements which are designed to be expansive. But expanding the list of spells is something that should be done more meaningfully.
For sure, most abuse cases don't happen until higher levels start
Great video, very insightful! I actually made a video myself on how to balance this spell, and I'm pretty happy with my conclusion. Rather than banning it, I made it concentration. It has a portion that can last for a minute already, and it increases the risk/reward ratio when casting it. Plus that means that Heightened Spell remains better than this first level spell!
Before even watching the video I already have my answer. I'm banning ALL strixhaven content UNLESS it's a strixhaven especial campaign. Why? Because silvery barbs is VERY silverquill, and the backgrounds are super strong. It's a all or nothing package for me.
They get it. The backgrounds and spells were optimized for the setting and for players who are playing a level 1 through level 10 campaign.
Without watching this video personally I think if you increase the level to a level 2 or 3 (probably just 2nd) spell it would be more balanced, but now I am going to see your opinion
Edit: After watching I think though this a great spell (fantastic even), the opportunity cost is huge. I feel like this spell is very strong in cases that you set up, IE casting a powerful save or suck spell like feeblemind with heighted and silvery bards to basically destroy the bbeg. However even that requires more stipulations. As far as I see it, even if a dm is on the fence they should give it a try before they just out right ban it, or even better do what Wizards of the Coast tells you to and edit the spell because you have the power to do that at your table.
As long as you got to prepare for contingencies, as long as the DM gets to as well.
Nerd immersion is a news channel. Not the place to go to for mechanic clarifications. I love Ted for the work he does, but always come here for mechanics advice.
Well again, as I stated earlier in my video if this does indeed target an ally, then yeah Split Enchantment and Twin Spell don't work but I'd say the interactions with Order Domain Cleric are definitely worth more discussion
granting an advantage for a lvl 1 slot is still hella useful outside of combat (in puzzles, social encounters, etc.). This spell doesn't require the original target to be hostile, so a party member performing a known to be easy ability check (e.g. juggling a couple coins, impersonating another party member's voice, or doing any equally easy thing they happen to be proficient in) can be an easy trigger for this spell... and it's a reaction, so can be paired with guidance.
Advantage outside of combat can also be achieved with the help action, which doesnt cost a spell slot and doesnt require that you make a fool of your other party members (assuming your DM calls for rolls on trivial tasks to begin with)
This spell is banned in my current campaign. That’s only because one of my players is a power gamer and is already playing a chronurgy wizard. It’s more of a player issue than a spell issue, but I do think Silvery Barbs is pretty pushed.
This is such a smart video! Not only because it is analyzing the spell so well but because of the invaluable advice given for so many situations we face all the time. Don’t jump to wild conclusions on things you have no experience on. Thank you Chris, this is one of your best videos! Please keep that spirit up.
Some very smart Answers by Chris to some very stupid sounding what-if questions by people who didn't think first. Sorry if you're one of those broadcasters who's reading this and reads my reply.
I still think it should have been a 2nd level spell. I would not ban it at my Table, but I will change it to 2nd level.
And that makes it acceptable.
It's an improved Runic Shield, a level 7 subclass feature of the Rune Knight subclass for Fighters. It's insane that Silvery Barbs is a level one spell. Runic Shield makes a target reroll their attack (doesn't work on saving throws) and forces them to use the new roll (not the lowest of the two). There also isn't a secondary advantage effect tied to Runic Shield. And it's only proficiency times per day, which is way less than the insane amount of spell slots a typical spellcaster would have at level 7. No idea what they were thinking during the design phase (because I doubt there was a testing phase anyway).
My problem with Silvery Barbs is that it's a first level spell with two effects that are effectively first level spells in their own right... in a single first level spell.
That you can cast the same turn you cast a spell! This here is my issue exactly.
The butt half of the silvery barbs isn't even as good as a cantrip. It isn't two first level spells.
@@regaleagle6533 The butt half is very close to Fortune's Favor which is a 2nd level spell.
@@agilemind6241 it is much closer to true strike but not quite as good because you can guarantee true strike goes on an attack instead of getting wasted by inane rolls like getting struck for 1 damage. If you think that is remotely close to being able to activate a reroll anytime in an hour you need it after seeing the result or an opponents roll within an hour with no concentration and the ability to upcast on multiple people you have no clue how to judge the power of spells at all. All it takes is a simple DM flag on the play and it does nothing at all.
I think it is too powerful. There are very limited ways previously to impact enemy saving throws. Bane, bestow curse, bardic inspiration, bend luck (major class feature). All of these are major class features. A warlock has to take an invocation to get bane or bestow curse, or otherwise is focused on increasing their spell save dc. Now you can cast bestow curse as a reaction with a first level spell that people can get with magic initiate?
Sorry youre wrong treantmonk on this one.
Yes, because the L2+Warlock does so much with their full two spell slots until a high level of progress. See the word situational. Anyway, many classes don't get a lot to do with their reaction.
@@joshuacr have you played a full warlock? In a real game they play stronger than other casters mostly due to the fact most DM give short rests and they dont give more than 1-3 resource depleting encounters and always cast max level spell slots. Ive played sorc and druid and warlock recovers on a short rest and has at will spell casting and an invisible stealthy flying intelligent familiar with hands you can speak through at any distance and can do more damage if speced or have more utility if spec.
The imp alone with voice of the chain master is like having permanent arcane eye / rogue scout, unseen servant, mage hand, trap detection and disarm if you give it a wand of secrets, a common item, sending, devil sight as an action,and it doesnt die due to magic resistance, immunities, and resistances.
I'd love this spell on a Fey Touched Conqueror, but I doubt I'll ever be in a position to take it due to the setting specific context.
I think bards get the most out of this spell. A good reaction spell for them from level 1 . Quite a boost in power level for the bards.
And Eloquence already can cut Saves so this stacks
Nah aberrant mind can cast them for a single sorcerer point at lvl 6 instead of heightened spell which is 3 or making the spell slot which is 2 and a bonus action. But then again aberrant is the king of fuckery spells to mess with any encounter weather its social or in the battlefield this spell just made them even more disgusting in both scenarios.
@@frking100 I definitely agree that aberrant mind is king of messing creatures up. . But I am not sure that silvery barbs makes that much of a difference compared to the bard. Bards get a good reaction spell five to 9 levels earlier with silvery barbs. Sorcerer get two att level one instead of one . I can agree that the aberrant might be extremely powerful with this spell playing in certain campaigns with certain dungeon masters. But with my DM' s I ain't that sure. I am quite sure that I would get into big trouble before or later if I used this to often.
Sometimes the defence of shield is just more optimal. But the mileage will definitely vary. Not all dm''s are sadists.
@@Swedish_Viking I was mostly speaking of the social strength of the aberrant. At level 6 an aberrant mind can cast charm person and Silvery barbs with their mind at any npc they meet or do the same trick with suggestion. At level 9 they can cast dominate person or modify memory coupled with Silvery barbs and at lvl 11 mass suggestion (subtle spelled) and Silvery barbs. Basically the aberrant mind just got the best spell they could ever wish for. Yes bards will use it in combat but an aberrant mind can break any social encounter if they really wish to sink spell slots into it.
@@frking100 Aberrant mind is definitely social demigods 😊
In the games that I have seen, it is used to nullify Crits from the DM. All I can say is - don't run modified rules for Crits if you are also allowing this spell. The enemies will almost never connect their crits, while players will have a few more chances to crit fish.
That seems like a really mundane use of this spell. There's that Grave cleric ability, adamantine armor, the Lucky feat, and my favorite, the fighter's Cloud rune, which can all beat crits. Seems very un-broken to me.
I always see people complaining about how powerful spells will make players compared to the encounters they face as if DMs can't just include enemy spellcasters in battles.
Let me introduce you to the dodge action.
@@Hissingace110 The problem is the aim of the game is for people to have fun. Getting a Crit whether it is the players or the DM is awesome! It creates drama, tension, and excitement. Players using their class's unique ability to cancel a crit is also awesome and exciting. The two spellcasters in the party debating between them which one will use SBs to cancel a crit isn't exciting. And having the DM cancel your crit, SUCKS!
@@agilemind6241 Fun is subjective. I'd say canceling the DM's crit is fun too. And as somebody else already pointed out, there's already several ways to do that in the game for that exact reason.
i have a feeling this spell was the answer to the new caster stat blocks, giving you a way to interact with the new spell attacks
I absolutely agree. The spells you can compare to are shield, counterspell, and absorb elements. All great, adding an additional option to compete for that reaction adds play diversity. Multiclassing to get shield spell feels less necessary. This is all great stuff. It offers a support play to help allies for a few different classes, love it.
Effective use of the spell will come with trying to maximize the advantage given adding a more thoughtful spell use. So the opportunity to create Superior play opportunity is there. I'm very excited by the flexibility this creates.
Yes power creep is a thing, but what is the point of creating a spell that isn't in the top 8 spells of that level. It will never see play. Buffing unused spells does not sell books so they have to "power creep" and I'm ok with that.
If you’re comparing it to 3rd level spells, you know this shits broken Lmao
Silvery barbs is too situational, and reactions aren't free. Shield and absorb elements are better 1st level reaction spells. It isn't OP, imo.
@@shaneturnes6458
Silvery barbs is the least situational spell, wtf are you on about?
@@J0eMega So, apparently you didn't watch the video.
Silvery Barbs is NOT broken, OP, etc. Shield and Absorb Elements are just as good, if not better, 1st level reaction spells. And it does NOT come close to being as good as Counterspell. Silvery Barbs is a very good spell though.
Counterspell: 3rd level abjuration
Casting Time: 1 reaction, which you take when you see a creature within 60 feet of you casting a spell
Range: 60 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous
Classes: Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard
You attempt to interrupt a creature in the process of casting a spell. If the creature is casting a spell of 3rd level or lower, its spell fails and has no effect. If it is casting a spell of 4th level or higher, make an ability check using your spellcasting ability. The DC equals 10 + the spell’s level. On a success, the creature’s spell fails and has no effect.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the interrupted spell has no effect if its level is less than or equal to the level of the spell slot you used.
Silvery Barbs: 1st level enchantment
Casting Time: 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
Range: 60 feet
Components: V
Duration: Instantaneous
You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature. The triggering creature must reroll the d20 and use the lower roll. You can then choose a different creature you can see within range (you can choose yourself). The chosen creature has advantage on the next attack roll, ability check, or saving throw it makes within 1 minute. A creature can be empowered by only one use of this spell at a time.
Now explain to me how Silvery Barbs is broken AF...
@@shaneturnes6458
I did watch it. Agreed with none of it. It’s OP as fuck. However, I’ve explained this way too many times to care anymore. You’ve clearly already made up your mind.
One of the main problems with this spell is the fact that it forces the game to be played around it. Just like Shield, this is an essential spell that casters are almost forced to take. This limits player agency for Sorcerers, who already have a small amount of known spells. DMs will be have to give all of their low-level bosses legendary resistances just to counter this one spell. A player using this spell almost necessitates the BBEG to either use a legendary resistance or a third level spell slot to counterspell it. If the DM gives their monsters this spell, the party is forced to create tactics just to counter it. No first level spell should have this big of an impact on the game.
Hey Treantmonk's Temple, speaking of targeting multiple creatures, I have a question about twinned spell. One of the restrictions with twinned spell is that it can't affect spells that are capable of targetting more than 1 creature. Does this mean that you cannot twin spells like Hex and Platinum Shield, since they can change targets?
No, you can't twin those spells for the reason you mentioned.
The instant you said "Opportunity cost" I hit the like button. Nobody ever considers the opportunity cost.
Chris, I really enjoyed this video! This was awesome!
This spell is better than other reaction based 1st level spells because it has extreme versatility.
1) it can be used after knowing whether something hits. Shield does this slightly better.
2) it can be used after knowing a crit happens and reduce it 95% of the time. Shield can't do this at all.
3) it then gives advantage to a friend. Shield can't do that at all. And while Treantmonk goes into the many ways advantage can be given to martials to hit, there's little talk about how it could be given to a caster to help them have advantage on a save or check - perhaps against a concentration check or a save or suck spell that would make a concentration check completely unnecessary.
4) Barbs also works against spells which Shield doesn't. Did your awesome 5th level spell just get counterspelled? Hit em with Barbs! Sure, it doesn't ensure that your 5th level spell didn't get through, but it gives you another chance, AND you get to give another player Advantage!
5) You can get a FREE casting of this (in terms of spell slots, not action economy) with a half-feat feytouched. So many players can start with it due to VH and Custom Lineage casters without even being a bard / sorc / wizard. It's the only 1st level reaction spell available this way.
X) yes, you lost action economy of your reaction, and yes, Shield is a better option when multiple enemies are near you because the AC stays for the whole turn. But if you're a caster, you should be making sure you aren't getting caught in a position where numerous people are able to attack you like that on a consistent basis.
And if you are in a situation like that, either your game is set up that way for enjoyment and thus you are the outlier (the 0.5% that the video was talking about when Treantmonk referred to 99.5%) or you are having larger issues within your party and you should talk with your party and GM about why your tactics don't necessarily go as planned very often.
I'm not a big proponent of banning anything in games. If it's in the game, it has gone through a number of playtests and is enjoyable. Is there substantial changes to the meta that makes other choices incredibly less favorable? Yes, and that evolution of the game is what I actually look forward to.
I don’t think it’s an over powered spell, I just think it does too much for a level 1 spell.. or at least it feels that way. The fact that it is not a SELF spell puts it in a different category of shield or absorb elements. Should it be banned? No… should it be a level 2 spell, YES. Otherwise I agree that it’s perfectly fine
No one would use Silvery Barbs if it was second level slot. It's not worth it.
Currently in a bizarre game where the DM nerfed halfling luck for being too strong and banned Lucky and Elven Accuracy, but is allowing this spell. It's been a few months, we're all waiting for the hammer to come down on it.
My main thing is that the main part of the spell (the reroll) is already incredibly strong, but not broken. But the extra advantage on top not only makes it needlessly complicated, but even more strong than it needed to be. The spell feels kinda forced, like wotc wanted it to be used constantly
Half the time, Silvery Barbs doesn't change the outcome of the roll. The advantage is there for those times. Otherwise, your 1st level slot was a total waste.
Always the voice of reason.
I'll admit I had something of a knee-jerk reaction when I first learned of this spell, too, in part due to being able to counter a counterspell used on a higher-level spell (thus requiring a roll).
My greatest concern regarding the spell isn't that it's broken in its entirety, but in my humble opinion, it is overpowered for a first-level spell. I think I'd have placed it as a decent second-level spell, myself, rather than first. (And thus excluding it from Magic Initiate and such feats, as well.)
I wouldn't use Silvery Barbs if it was a second level slot. It's not worth it.
Always appreciate the well-reasoned approach in your videos!
It's not busted, it's just really good. I think of it like an alternate version of Shield. The 'disadvantage' is the equivalent of the +5 AC (rather than 3.5), but barbs is only on one hit and doesn't work on magic missile. The trade off is the advantage, which I don't see anyone talking about. That's really good, and makes the tradeoff worth it. It could be a reason to go arcane trickster, or maybe to find a way to get it with Smites for higher crit rate.
Only if you are able to use the advantage how you want which can get a bit tricky. If you have a legendary action used against you or a spell causing a saving throw or do anything where an acrobatics check might be required its burnt. You can't multiattack and give it to the lowest roll. It is not as flexible as like bardic inspiration.
@@regaleagle6533
You cast it as an Action or Bonus Action, treating Silver Barb as a normal spell instead of wasting it as a Reaction Spell. Just remember the two targets you're affecting and do not "hold" your turn less you'll be forced to make a Constitution Saving throw in order to keep Silver Bard as a Hold Action if you're hit or are disrupted. Outside of that, you do not roll Constitution Saving Throws for this specific Spell.
Basically... You can impose disadvantage on a Skeleton until the end of your next turn if you cast Silver Bard as an Action or Bonus Action, as long as the Skeleton does not attack you (since it will end the Spell if that happens). If he fails the roll, then activate advantage on yourself. With this, cast a Cantrip as an Action or (Eldritch Knight) first, Cast Silver Barb as an Action then perform the Bonus Action with a Non Spell Attack. Action Surge, then Extra Attack the Skeleton knowing that you've also applied disadvantage from Eldritch Strike for your next Spell/Cantrip and disadvantage from your Heavy Great Sword.
By doing so, you are imposing 3 different disadvantages on the target, aided by Blooming Blade and Green Flame Blade.
However, with those 3 Disadvantages that you impose. If the Skeleton has 3 Advantages on himself, then your 3 Disadvantages and their 3 Advantages nullify each other... A Skeleton with spells/effects like Fog, Darkness, Night Vision, and Cover can stack advantages to him. Although, you or the Skeleton only role one advantage and one disadvantage specific to what's taking place in the action order.
Thus, without Green Flame Blade and Blooming Blade, your +3 Disadvantage Effect divides into +2 Disadvantage for Spells/Contrips and +1 Disadvantage for your Heavy Great Sword.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 I have no idea what you are trying to get at based on your words but it is clearly something way off base. Silvery barbs is only a reaction not an action not a bonus action these concepts are not mix and match. It only works to force one single reroll it has nothing that impacts a creature until your next turn. An eldritch knight without barbs can cantrip as an action, attack as a bonus then action surge a spell at disadvantage for them. This spell does little to change that and eats your reaction allowing the DM to beat the ever living stuffing out of you without the shield spell.
@@regaleagle6533
Given Spell Casting Rules between Reaction, Bonus Action, and Actions. And given how Adv Vs DisAdv amounts nullify each other until only one or none take effect...
There isn't a rule that you cannot cast Counter Spell as an Bonus Action if it falls under the time frame of 1 Action, then cast a Cantrip. Followed by another Counter Spell as a Reaction.
This is where having Adv and DisAdv is important since it nullifies the opposing Adv and DisAdv.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 there are no casting rules or any other action economy rules that let you trade around actions move bonus action reaction. This is straight up cheating. You can use a reaction during your turn which still uses up that reaction although I find smashing two spells with verbal components into the same time sketchy. But this does not mean you can just free cast silvery barbs with no cost. Nor does the spell work on multiple rolls it’s just one shot that’s it and it’s not disadvantage it’s a reroll it doesn’t work the same.
You have to take it because it’s a great spell and there’ll be plenty of opportunities to use it in pretty much any campaign. Chris is right, the taxing of your resources is what keeps it from being game-breaking.
I’m currently playing a multi-class character, “The Trickstalker,” a multi-class combo of a half-caster (Ranger), and a one-third-caster (Arcane Trickster). The multi-class caster table is NOT kind to me in giving me spell slots. So, while I can get SB; it’s an Enchantment spell available to Arcane Tricksters; it’s competing with offensive spells like Sleep, or; from Ranger; Hunter’s Mark, Zephyr Strike, Ensnaring Strike, Absorb Elements, etc… for spell slots.
Also by burning my reaction to cast…. Say the first goon to go crits on my tank, and I cast SB to force a re-roll. The 2nd goon to go turns out to be a 5th-level caster, with Fireball. Guess who doesn’t have a reaction free to use Uncanny Dodge?
Adventuring is about action economy and resource management. Silvery Barbs stresses your character both ways when you go to use it. Just my 2 cents.
I agree it's too early to give a verdict on this spell, but I think it's broken, especially if combined with something like Hold Person or Monster. The DM basically has to give every boss Legendary Resistances if multiple players keep taking this. There is no reason to optimize anything besides Save or Suck spells with SB. Time will prove it.
I have a College of Lore bard that's been using this spell. The party composition is a Drow Hexblade Warlock, a Drakewarden Variant Human, and Variant Human Echo Knight. The user is very keen on saving her reaction and her spell slots to use this spell when it's most effective. For when Tasha's Hideous Laughter absolutely needs to shut down a powerful caster, for when an opponent succeeds against Echo Knight's grapple, for when an opponent succeeds against the Warlock's Wrathful Smite, etc. It also makes sure the other 3 are hitting with advantage and pressing their advantage.
She's very shrewd and only uses it when the outcome is best maximized for the party. It's probably the strongest single spell among the three casters, and it does make the encounters she uses it in very very easy. Just my experience with the spell.
I mean, if you're going to ban this, you should also ban a whole host of broken spells, spells that invalidate class features, spells that invalidade other spells, and so on and so forth. Giving ridiculous abilities to spellcasters is not an exception for 5e
I say ban fireball! Lightning bolt is the only true way!
God THANK you for saying this spell cant be twinned/split, its getting pretty obnoxious seeing people complain abt the advantage without realizing it’s very clearly there to prevent twinning 😰
I should have mentioned that specifically, but you are correct, you can't use a spell that targets multiple creatures with twinned spell, it's frusturating that suddenly this needs clarification for some players.
@@TreantmonksTemple this. Yes I know one of them is an enemy, and I know another is an ally, but technically this targets multiple creatures.
I’m so glad that there’s someone breaking this down with careful arguments. I came to this channel awhile back from hearing about it in the discord of one such youtuber that is adamantly calling for an auto-ban of this spell. I’ve since left that community because of pervasive negativity and knee jerk reactions like this, so I’m especially appreciative of you even just saying that forming an opinion on something like this after seeing it in practice is better than doing so without it.
To me it seems a powerful spell to have access to at first level. It sounds like a second level spell to me, and one that I'd like for dunemancy.
As a DM, I generally like to never ban content that has been officially published by WoTC, because I consider it a personal challenge to my game design skills to be able to cope with everything they come up with, and deliver great combat experiences. The only thing that I find worrying about this spell is that if I allow it into my games, it's not the PCs that will be using it the most. I use homebrew stat blocks almost exclusively, so it's me who now has access to this, too. But I have secound thoughts, because I feel like this spell can be a very anti-fun addition into the game.
Counterspell is also an anti-fun spell from a player's perspective, but counterspell is a 3rd level spell, so it's rare that NPCs have it and it's also rare that they can use it a lot. But this one? It's 1st level spell slots baby. My homebrew spellcasters also haven't all been neutered like the more recent stat blocks have: they still have spell slots! So yeah, I don't know. I'll probably default to using it rarely.
As a player after a caster uses this spell they would be my target for the rest of that round. Their shield and counterspells are off the table so that's the time to target them. I'll happily reroll one attack to leave a caster vulnerable for the rest of the round.
This is very true, I expect some seasoned players will also be self-censuring when they choose to use it or not in order to enhance the drama of the game. Because blocking a critical hit that would down a player is fun & exciting, but blocking one early in the combat just evaporates tension.
@@MageLeaderInc
Eldritch Knight: "I cast Silver Bard as a Action, if successful, then I gain +1 Adv against my target's +1 DisAdv. Because I casted a Spell, Eldritch Strike triggers on the target, giving him another +1 DisAdv. Using War Master, I attack with my Bonus Action, spending my Slivery Bard Second Effect of +1 Adv. Then I Action Surge. I cast Shocking Touch with +2 DisAdv against the target. If the target fails the rolls, then he cannot perform his Reaction until the start of his turn. If he tries to counter my Spells during this process, then I will use my Reaction to Counter Spell their Reaction Spell. Afterward, I simply walk 30ft away since his Opportunity Attack is no longer possible until the start of his turn."
Rogue Paladin: "I Sneak Smite Attack the enemy who cannot make Reactions."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 you can't cast silver barbs as an action it's a reaction spell only.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Buddy, I've seen you spam the same incorrect information over the past hour. I'm not the only one who has told you, but here it goes: you cannot choose to cast Silvery Barbs as an action or a bonus action. The rules do not allow you to do that. It can only be cast as a reaction. Additionally, multiple sources of advantage and disadvantage simply cancel each other out, and the result is one roll without advantage or disadvantage. Either you don't understand 5e rules, or you're playing in a heavy homebrew game. Either way, you are currently not contributing anything useful to the conversation.
Give this spell to enemies. Paladin crits... Nope... Re-roll. Now I have advantage. Wizard makes a big concentration check... Nope... re-roll. Now I have advantage...
If you have to go all the way to a melee character being ganged up on to evaluate a spell "fairly" something is logically amiss.
I don't think it should be banned. I do think it is a 2nd or 3rd level spell though.
I definitely wouldn't take this spell if it were 3rd level.
@@TreantmonksTemple The reaction casting and double effect, compared to other spells, is what bumps it above 1st level for me. I'd be fine as a 2nd level spell I think, but 5e has in the past heavily weighted cast time to a spell's power, so operating within the system as written prior to strixhaven, I think you could argue 3rd level and it would still be a popularly used spell. People might not take it at 5th level, but by the time 4th, 5th, + spells are available they would 100% take it to maximize the effect of those higher level saving throw spells.
@@jiiaga5017 Exactly, if SBs was a 3rd level spell, every control caster would take it by level 10.
I find myself disagreeing with you on this one. I think claiming that because it does not 'break the game' it's fine, is the wrong metric. There is really only 1 problem I have with it though, and that's it's range. If they gave this a range of 15 feet, I'd say great, it's powerful because it requires you to be in the thick of whatever it is you're trying to mess with. I could look past the stacking of effects this allows, it's offensive and defensive properties, and it's better cost economy than something like heighted spell. But at 60 ft, I'm sorry that's just too large a range for you to be zoning for a first level spell.
Compare this to grave clerics, that can only cancel crits out to 30 ft. And while this has a 5% chance of it still criting, also is capable of completely negating the attack with at least that same amount (nat 1) but more likely a 30-50% chance of making it miss.
We can compare it to several spells / features that are amazing in their small niche, and it get's to be on par with several of them? It just can fill to many different tasks that each would warrant their own spell or ability.
Fantastic analysis. Thank you Treantmonk.
Wholeheartedly agree that people have blown this way out of proportion. It's a very good spell but it's nothing game breaking. It's just going to be another tool in the standard kit (when available) to use at appropriate moments.
Exactly!
I wouldn't say that the spell will immediately destroy your game balance, but it is the most powerful 1st level spell and every single caster that can take it, will take it, at least once they get past the initial levels. The ability to use a 1st level spell to grant effective disadvantage on a save is basically equivalent to casting one of your higher level spells like say hold monster or dominate, twice in the same turn, for the equivalent of a throwaway spell slot. Effectively once you allow this spell, every save against the big game-changing spells (banishment, polymorph, domiante, etc). will always be at disadvantage.
It's an absurd power boost to a bunch of classes that don't need extra power. Damn, the monsters are already nerfed enough in 5E at higher levels. They don't need to be rolling every important spell save at disadvantage.
@@taragnor At level 4, a full caster has only 7 spell slots (4 - 1st level, 3 - 2nd level). Let's average in 3-4 medium encounters a day. Silvery Barbs is a 1st level reaction spell. Even if the caster used it once per encounter, it wouldn't break the encounter, and they'd be out of 1st level spell slots.
Maybe at higher levels, but there are so many more powerful spells, and if a good DM pressed the caster in an encounter, it could force them to use a different reaction spell (shield, absorb elements, counterspell, etc).
@@shaneturnes6458 At low levels it's not that big a deal. I mean, you can potentially get off effectively a second blindness spells or hold person for the cost of a 1st level spell and a reaction. Yes, it only works when the creature succeeds on the save, but that's pretty significant as far as spell economy because in many situations you're turning your 1st level slots into 2nd or 3rd, AND giving advantage to one of your allies to boot, plus effectively casting the spell in the same turn. So really it's far better in many cases than just having another 2nd or 3rd level slot, because it comes with the added benefit of happening immediately, as opposed to having to wait until the next turn to cast the spell. Oh and also it stacks with disadvantage so even if you had some ability that grants disadvantage normally, silvery barbs still works to create effective double disadvantage. And if the target fails the initial save, you don't have to use barbs, so it's also very efficient. Even at low levels, it's very powerful. An argument could be made that it's not super broken, but it's still without a doubt top tier, so long as you have spells of higher slots than 1st. The only time silvery barbs is reasonably balanced is when you've got only 1st level slots to play with.
At higher levels, there's honestly not any more powerful 1st level spell than silvery barbs. Because silvery barbs infinitely scales, you can do it to an 8th level spell like dominate monster or feeblemind if you want. Your big 8th level feeblemind fails? Whatever, effectively cast it again in the same turn all for the cost of a measly first level slot and a reaction. Oh and you get to give an ally advantage for more icing on the cake, cause you know apparently trading a 1st level slot for another shot at an 8th level spell isn't enough. And you can even use it as a foil towards enemy counterspells by making them reroll their ability check when they counterspell you.
This spell is an example of people just automatically wanting to accept anything with the Wizards of the Coast official logo and then trying to do logical backflips to justify it being balanced. if a fan or third party author wrote a 1st level spell that was a 1 action cast time that did: "repeat a single target spell with a saving throw that you cast last turn regardless of its level" If that was a fan creation, everyone would say it was overpowered. Silvery Barbs is that spell, but supercharged. Instead of taking 1 action, It's a reaction, and it has the cherry on top of giving an ally advantage. The fact that anyone is defending this pile of broken garbage is rather surprising.
I'm surprised noone has brought up the most important aspect of SB. RAW, if you are wielding both a shield and a weapon you can't cast either Absorb Elements or Shield as you need a hand free for the somatic component, and as it doesn't use a material component you can't use a spell-focus weapon as a substitute. So your player's handbook gish subclasses (EK and AT) finally get an effective 1st level defensive spell they can use.
Of course in both cases the loss of their Reaction is a significant cost, as at mid-levels a rogue should be setting themselves up to use their Reaction for an additional sneak attack, and enemies can now just walk straight past the fighter to threaten the backline now they have given up their opportunity attack.
The other thing that was not addressed in this video is PREPARATION SLOTS/SPELLS-KNOWN AREN'T FREE! Between Shield, AE, and SB we are now looking at three preparation slots to have access to them all, and I only have four 1st level slots to use them with (7 if I'm upcasting with 2nd). So do I prioritise sticking that one saving throw (so use SB), prioritise protecting my concentration (so Shield), or give up access to one of my precious high-level spells? I consider this a difficult and interesting decision that will have ongoing ramifications-ie. this spell just made low level spell selection *interesting* for mid/high level players, and I don't see how that isn't a good thing.
I think the community is goldfishing a bit with this spell. I mean that people are constructing imaginary scenarios where it's too good.
For right now I think it's too good. I still need to see it in action in different levels before I make my choice to ban it. By looking at the video I agree with your points, silvery barbs isn't strictly better than any of those options, but it gets close, pretty close to some (IMO the comparison to shield is silly, the spells do very different things). It's the combinations of all of these aspects that make it borderline overpowered when looking at it at face value.
My biggest problem is that we already know that casters are better, this is a well know fact, some people disagree and I think they are very wrong. The issue is that this is a very cost efficient spell when you consider the power vs the cost, a level 1 slot. This is another great buff for casters and I really think that's a terrible design choice from WotC's part. We should be trying to shorten the gap, not increase it further, which is what has been happening since the release of the CR book.
And yes, there are many examples of power creep, but I think power creep is bad. And just because there are other examples of power creep doesn't make new power creep options fine. When setting aside the idea of banning the spell or not, I still think this spell is another step in the wrong direction.
I fully agree. Once again, non casters are even further away from Casters in regards to equivalent attacks as they go up. As mentioned in several of these earlier replies, mid-level casters shine (compared to mid-level melee fighters who aren't as good.) Not saying that Fighters aren't good, just that the casters now outshine them even faster. I'll change my mind when there is a feat for reactions by melee Fighters to cause an attack to be rerolled, then giving themselves or a companion Advantage for the next role.
Personally I think the spell should have been Bard only. But that is the only restriction it needs, because get touched can add it to any caster anyways
I agree with you. It really feels like it should be a Bard only spell, especially that Bards don't get to do much with a reaction.
Either good or too powerful is an awful dichotomy to have. If D&D had more horizontal design in it this wouldn't be a problem. As it is I generally think the game is not explicitly "balanced" at all. It always comes down to the sanity of your DM.
Although I agree it is not the be all end all spell it is TOO potent at guaranteeing powerful combat ending spells. Suggestion, banishment, hold person/monster, and command are all low level spells that can just end/pause combats if they land and with a sorcerer pumping heighten spell and silvery barbs into a suggestion (although expensive) will just be able to end any combat with a snap of there fingers.
This is why I think it needs to be higher level. Banning is an extreme reaction, but it does seem too good for just a first level slot.
@@brettmajeske3525 2nd or 3rd level should do the trick.
Hi, treantmonk, I had a question: How would you rule a Harengon grappler? Would the jump count as forced movement or would they be able to take their grappled target with them? Would you halve the distance of the jump? What about something like spike growth?
Thanks in advance!
I restrict grapple drag/carry to the grapplers movement. Harengon hop doesn't use their movement.
Harengon hop is like a stealth disengage spring people are trying to drag a larger person with them with it? Hah nothing surprises me much anymore.
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!! My god, I feel like it's been an uphill battle trying to get people to RELAX. It's ridiculous how people who've never even experienced it in play are banning things like come on.
We used this spell recently in the ending our most recent campaign (Literally 2 days ago.) Yes it's strong but it didn't break the final boss. It did help a lot but it didn't make the boss fight a joke. From my experience I think it shouldn't be banned. It as a spell isn't even close to being ban worthy. Like Moon Druid for example.
Edit: I didn't expect Treantmonk to see this comment. I think it'd be important to clarify this so that way it is just known. Our table is good at building powerful characters. It was a hard campaign so we made powerful characters that we could. So our person with Silvery Barbs was trying to see how good the spell is. It didn't make the biggest impact in our party during the final boss but it did allow for one instance of the bbeg failing the saving throw taking a metric crap ton of damage from Dawn, (It was a buffed up Strahd with a lot more hp from my knowledge. He took big boi damage from the Cleric) In my final conclusion it's a good offensive spell. If you have the right set up it can make an encounter a joke. But let's be real here. If you have enough planning and luck you can use anything to make an encounter/boss fight a joke.
They made Moon Druid a spell now?😁
Seriously, (speaking as a person who started playing a mood Druid in Waterdeep Heist, before that undermountain of the Mad mage thing,) really depends on your dungeon master and player and how much preparation and contingency they think about based on the resources seen by the opposite side, (player and DM included in this, not just PC/enemies) seeing what the others have.
Thanks for taking the time to produce a measured response to an excellent, but not game breaking, spell.
Thank you for being the adult in the room Chris. Your videos are so important to help us combat hysteria so that we can all sit back, relax and play some dnd
People all over the internet are saying that they want to houserule this spell into a 2nd, 3rd, or even 5th level spell and it's driving me bananas. Thanks for putting out some sane content that looks at the spell with a more adequate examination!
The reason they suggested that is that so many people won't get access to this as a feat optional spell. It is my opinion that Wizards of the Coast released it as a first-level spell for that.
I have posted a separate thread asking if this is a good or bad idea and look forward to hearing all the answers in this commentary. I've already seen commentary elsewhere both for and against it I look forward to the users here who know about optimization and their views.
@@joshuacr Oh absolutely it is clear they intended this spell to compete with Shield as the go-to spell to grab with a feat.
Silvery Barbs is fine.
It even helps the DM to exhaust the resources of the party much faster.
If your encounter is constructed in a way, that a single save or suck spell would make it obsolete, it wasn't that well designed in the first place.
Let your players have fun and enjoy the interactive gameplay.
If your players running through encounters too easy, try to split the encounter into smaller threads than just one big one.
Action economy is king in this game.
And remember, the game and the rules are for the players.
As a DM you can create whatever to create a satisfying game and story.
Just have fun!
As an Eldritch Knight... Silvery Bard being casted as an Action or as a Bonus Action is more viable than as a Reaction.
Although, "if you have disadvantage from being flanked by two enemies, then Silver Bard will not save you. In fact, it may even be out right nullified if one enemy Shoves you to face them while the other enemy has their Flank Adv canceling out your Silver Bard DisAdv that's on them."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 You cannot cast silvery barbs as an action or bonus action. Only as a reaction.
@@MrGotyouto
True... I know that by now.
But I can cast Slivery Bard by provoking the enemy's opportunity attack during my turn, with a high enough AC for my Eldritch Knight.
You make a lot of great points around the misconceptions of the spell. The idea that it's "free", for example, is a little ridiculous, and Shield is far better against attack rolls. I appreciate the thorough analysis. I do think there's quite a bit missing here around how low the cost-to-value ratio is.
If I want to cast Hold Monster (or any save-or-suck spell, of which there are many) and the target succeeds on the saving throw, I would normally have to expend another 5th-level slot on the NEXT turn to try again. With Silvery Barbs, I can expend one 1st-level spell slot and get the same effect, but only for the cost of one 1st-level spell. If a Sorcerer wants to do the same thing with Heightened Spell, they have to expend 3 sorcery points to do it. That's the equivalent of one 2nd-level spell slot via Font of Magic. That tradeoff is inherently worse than just using Silvery Barbs to get rid of one 1st-level. The only downside is that you burn your reaction, but I think this video is slightly overvaluing how often those get used.
One of the other things I think many are forgetting is that while spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Counterspell, and Feather Fall are powerful, they're only powerful in the limited uses where they come up. Shield is a little more broadly applicable here because attack rolls are common across the majority of combats, but every other reaction spell is technically situational. Silvery Barbs isn't, and it goes far beyond Shield in its versatility. Attack rolls, ability checks, and saving throws pretty much encompass all rolls you can make in combat.
I definitely won't be banning it, but if the players take it and I find that it's an abuse case, I'll give it to monsters...
My issue is that you have instantly made every "save or suck" spell a lot more powerful, that sorcerers can turn sorcery pts into spells very efficiently(nevermind they can skip the "heightened spell" metamagic without giving up much and pick something else) and it negates advantage and makes enemies scoring critical hits very unlikely, I agree there are plenty of examples where other spells will be more beneficial like being triple teamed by salaads who all won initiative I guess. Haven't used or seen this spell yet but I can see it becoming the most spammed spell in the game
Excellent. I've just gotten back into making D&D videos--did one on Strixhaven and was going to follow it up with one about Silvery Barbs just because I take all the yelling and complaining about it to be WAY overblown and it annoys me. And you made this video far better than I could have. I love your calm, even outlook on this (and other things). Nice video.