The First Thing in D&D 5e I've Had to Give in and Ban
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 авг 2024
- This Dungeons and Dragons Spell is so broken, I've finally had to ban it from the table. Not just because it's overpowered, but because it's simply not good game design for DnD 5e. Can it be fixed? Maybe. But as is, it's simply too powerful for a D&D 5th Edition as written.
Check out the Mist Walker here: bit.ly/MistWalker
----------------------------------------------------------------
KILLER TAKING20 STUFF
----------------------------------------------------------------
Taking20 Rewards: WelcomeAdventur...
Join us on Discord: bit.ly/Taking20...
Taking20 Merch: bit.ly/Taking20...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOW AVAILABLE - The Mist Walker! - New 5e Class!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download the Mist Walker here: bit.ly/MistWalker
----------------------------------------------------------------
WANT TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the Rewards!
WelcomeAdventur...
LET'S CONNECT!
Twitter ------- / takingd20
Facebook ------- / takingd20
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOW AVAILABLE - MY 5E ADVENTURE!
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Much Bigger Problem - bit.ly/2ovBKtj (DriveThruRPG)
A Much Bigger Problem - bit.ly/2qiCYqp (Roll20 Add-on)
----------------------------------------------------------------
LOOKING FOR MORE PLAYLISTS?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tips & Tricks for Game Masters - bit.ly/GameMast...
KYPW D&D Monster Guides - bit.ly/KYPWDnDM...
Starfinder Week - bit.ly/Starfind...
Wrath and Glory Week: bit.ly/T20Wrath...
Call For Aid - bit.ly/CallForAid
For business inquiries please contact takingd20@gmail.com.What's the max damage possible with just one spell in all of dungeons and dragons 5th edition? Well the answer might surprise you. Today i attempt to hunt down the max damage possible in all of dnd 5e with the help of a little Minecraft hahahaha.
Chokfull's post
/ oc_actual_spell_area_o...
Check out the Mist Walker here: bit.ly/MistWalker
----------------------------------------------------------------
KILLER TAKING20 STUFF
----------------------------------------------------------------
Taking20 Rewards: WelcomeAdventur...
Join us on Discord: bit.ly/Taking20...
Taking20 Merch: bit.ly/Taking20...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOW AVAILABLE - The Mist Walker! - New 5e Class!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download the Mist Walker here: bit.ly/MistWalker
----------------------------------------------------------------
WANT TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the Rewards!
WelcomeAdventur...
LET'S CONNECT!
Twitter ------- / takingd20
Facebook ------- / takingd20
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOW AVAILABLE - MY 5E ADVENTURE!
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Much Bigger Problem - bit.ly/2ovBKtj (DriveThruRPG)
A Much Bigger Problem - bit.ly/2qiCYqp (Roll20 Add-on)
----------------------------------------------------------------
LOOKING FOR MORE PLAYLISTS?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tips & Tricks for Game Masters - bit.ly/GameMast...
KYPW D&D Monster Guides - bit.ly/KYPWDnDM...
Starfinder Week - bit.ly/Starfind...
Wrath and Glory Week: bit.ly/T20Wrath...
Call For Aid - bit.ly/CallForAid
For business inquiries please contact takingd20@gmail.com.
If you have to revolve all of your encounters to accommodate one single spell, then that single spell is broken.
Objectively correct sir!
silvery barbs be like this too, hate that shit
so fireball?
@@nathandoyle8852 not sure I've ever felt fireball was game warping tbh
Considering no self respecting DM bunches up enemies, or has them stand in a line you can say that about a lot of spells. I have not seen Mind Whip break the encounters I've run.
Healing Wo... lol you got me
I was so ready for it! I was like “THE MADMAN! HE’S GONNA DO IT! He’s gonna ban Healing Word!”
🤣
Now people are gonna count the days they ask you for this 😂
I ban Healing Word a lot of other spells and my game is fantastic.
Do people actually ban healing word?
I've come to realize that combat encounters with one big monster are extremely hard to do well by their very nature. The way I design encounters is to choose one or more centerpiece monsters and then add support monsters to back them up.
Without legendary actions, minions and favorable terrain single enemy combats are always blown out at my table
Here's a fantastic reflavoring trick I learned:
Monsters and Traps do not have to be monsters or traps.
I ran an ocean voyage encounter where the support caster for the Sahuagin weren't spellcasters, but just a normal, dangerous sea storm (which means the random spell effects target the sahuagin, too).
Build a team for your team to fight. It makes the encounter less about "hit em hard" to "keep em distracted so I can take out that god damn support"
4th Ed had the idea of Minions, regular monsters that helped your big monster but with only 1 hp. They’re useful to balancing action economy, but with the added benefits of not tracking their HP, making your players feel powerful when they kill them, and making the combat more challenging and tactical as they have to balance dealing with the big bad or dealing with the mob.
Big creatures could also be run as a group of smaller entities, like having to attack/restrain limbs separately
Thought it was gonna be silvery barbs
Also people defend some of the player options in this game as being perfectly ok and always choose to do so at the dm's expense. Guys we have limited time to prep, I don't want to spend 5 hours a week thinking of ways around a single spell
Just remove the part of the spell that lets them force enemies to repeat saving throws, that's what's broken about it, forcing creatures to repeat an attack roll is just a worse version of shield that you can use to on your allies, it's only strong then point is it can get rid of criticals.
Same, as I've actually banned Silvery barbs at my table for the same reasons Cody lays out here. There are so many spells to choose from now, it's easier to just ban it and have players choose a different spell rather than try to fix it via homebrew. It's the only thing I've completely banned from my game in terms of spells, classes, sub-classes, etc.
Put the master back in Dungeon Master people. We work hard to create a fun game for our players, we get to have fun too. If a spell, mechanic, or even a subclass is making it difficult for you to enjoy the game either as the DM or as a player, talk about it with your group and decide on a compromise, alteration, or just a replacement altogether.
@@muhammadal-hiyari5239 I just pushed Silvery Barbs to 2nd level. Everyone still takes it, but they have to think a little more before using it.
I took it on my arcane trickster, but i think i'm the only one in my party who has it, and as i'm only lvl 3 at the minute, i only have 2 first-level slots. I'm hardly spamming it, rather i'm keeping it as an 'oh sh**' button.
Silvery Barbs is in a setting book, Not allowing it isn't even really banning it, it's just not allowing spells from a specific setting. Tasha's is a general sourcebook so there's more expectation that players can use things from it.
Definitely don't make it a 4th level as a homebrew. It then becomes a strictly worse Raulothim's Psychic Lance, since that Incapacitates enemies on a failed INT save.
The fix for this is easy. Have upcasting be more damage not more targets
Psychic Lance is actually a spell i have been having issues with at my table. I have a Bard Sorcerer(Multiclass for metamagic) who is regularily twin casting it.
I can't relate the number of otherwise impressive massive minion monsters that totally fall to this spell, and even bosses!
Note the issues are only begining at 12-17th level when he can use it multiple times. but since incapacitation has virtually no immunities and almost no creatures even at those levels have solid Int saving throws he is regularily removing multiple of the largest monsters, sometimes even bosses. Banishment becomes way worse/risky as Charisma saves begin to skyrocket at high levels, while Int saves suck at all levels. Sure at this level I am having all bosses with legendary saves, but it is by far the biggest spell that either A strips away legendary saves, (often over2/3 of the time), while still dealing damage and B removes the large minions that are meant to keep the party busy that often don't have legendary saves. Honestly at higher levels its way more oppressive on encounters then mindwhip.
I think tying CC effect spells(anything that targets action economy) to Intelligence saving throws is the issue with both of these spells. Even penultimate boss creatures almost always suck at them, but Wisdom Carisma and Consitutation are all super high becuase traditionally those are the ones that have always required CC spells.
curious what people think and if they would consider and have found Psychic lance problematic, specifically at higher levels. yes when its first unlocked it doesn't seem to bad. its when its played repeatedly time and time again on creatures that should be fun challenges and it just removes them at all levels above level 10.
@@aaronwilliams8887 I have psychic lance on my enchantment wizard (level 10), and I feel it can be pretty oppressive (I’ve been using it sparingly because of this), especially since enchantment wiz’s level 10 is essentially a free twinned metamagic on every enchantment spell.
Personally I don’t think the int save matters as much as people think, but in general the spell is a bit strong for a non-conc spell.
(As a side note, very few CC spells are actually tied to cha saves, basically just bane and banish, idk why so many creatures have high cha saves tbh)
Psychic Lance is a broken spell imo. Incapacitated is such a brutal status effect...
@@aaronwilliams8887 I would still pick it if it was just dmg for an int save. I just want some options when playing a magic wielder. Target has high ac, and no-one seems to be able to hit it, cast something with a save. Problem is that at higher levels, enemies are starting to save a lot of spells. So it's nice to have one that hits a bit more reliably than others.
Good points. My first thought is to have constructs, undead and creatures with an Intelligence of maybe 5 or lower be unaffected by the action economy effect. The idea being they fight too instinctively to have their action economy affected.
I like this concept a lot.
I'd also apply the same benefit to targets under the influence of an ability that puts them into a berserk/enraged/feral state that represents their actions being run by automatic instinct rather than cognitive intellect.
That way you can have players understand that the effect of the spell having an INT save is because it is making it difficult for the target to _choose_ between moving, action, or bonus action as it can't maintain planned structure with all of those. That detail emphasizes _the intentional cognitive choice_ in prioritization of tactic while mentally stunned being what's impacted.
From a storytelling perspective, it makes it a spell that the players are more compelled to target intelligent enemies with, who are more likely to have a more balanced save against it. Then your more "thick-skulled" enemies still take the damage but the players know there's a possibility they won't be made less of a threat in combat.
As a lower level spell, this also helps to get newer players to think about HOW the targets are fighting, rather than just treat them like MMORPG XP pools. That can lead to fun things like trying to stop something before it goes into a blind rage, or intimidation into forced dialogue with intelligent opponents whose actions are actively being limited by the spell.
I've always run my games with "encounter" experience, so that ANY form of start & end to an enemy encounter nets them the same experience as killing it in combat. Oftentimes little nuances to how players think about a spell as a tool can prevent abuse, and a little tweak like this can help balance one that's a bit overturned to keep it from becoming the solution to everything - or at least make it one that has variety for the DM if it is their go-to tactic.
Or maybe the target must share a spoken language with the caster for the effect to happen.
@@Brashnir that could be an interesting way to do it, but I would make it almost a telepathic link for a moment where the character basically confuses the enemy. Just making the flavor text make sense with that limitation, but that could definitely work
Constructs are generally immune to psychic damage so I'd think the intent is that they are immune anyways. While they are separate effects in the spell I'd think you'd have to take the damage to be semi stunned by it thematically. That being said I think this spell is no where near needing a ban either way.
They did something similar with Synaptic Static so it seems like a good compromise
I guess the thing that limits it is that if you want to sustain the suppression you need to repeatedly cast the spell. The other suppression spells you mentioned take a single spell slot to hold something for repeated rounds
This is true, but would be more significant if most encounters lasted long enough for that to matter. It is very very rare that a "cr appropriate" encounter lasts 10+ rounds, which means that EVERY turn that the heavy hitter isn't able to... heavy hit... is more than a 10% damage reduction from the mobs output dps(dpt/dpr?). Which makes it absolutely gross that a 2nd level spell can literally knock 10%-30% of all incoming damage from the heavy, or even more if it is spammed, on top of a bit of damage, and reaction loss. This is compounded by the base spell not even being concentration or counter-able without a spell caster/DM voodoo(which often feels like cheating when specifically targeted), and uses one of the easiest-to-fail saves for any "brutes".
2 points.
First point : If you can't deal with someone spamming low kick, it's a skill issue. Why do they need to come up with a better strategy if you haven't done the work for them to need to? It's a competition, adapt or lose.
2nd point : DnD is a cooperative game. If something is decreasing the fun for your group (the dm or the players) change it. Make it work, if that means yeeting a spell, yeet it. Don't let a fun experience with 7 people get sidetracked by something that isn't adding as much as it's taking away.
@@unshackledjester do your GM only run a single encounter pr day, and let you short rest whenever you like, that seems like a bigger issue then tbh, as that already skews the powerscales in the players favor ALOT. The games designed around 6-8 encounters pr day, and the DMG recommends only 2 short rests pr day.
You haven't sold me :p
It's a single round of semi-control w/damage. I've seen it used in multiple campaigns and on the surface none of the players or DM's have outwardly said anything overtly negative (verbally or through body language). Not sold on the "hammer" yet. lol
Ditto. Full action cast, single target, single round, and the target can still potentially attack? It's not like players have infinite spell slots. Not seeing a problem in my games.
Same. And that's as the player that could abuse it. AND as a well stocked up Coffeelock at that! I've had better things that I needed to use my action(or bonus action, hehe sorcerer) on the follow up turns. The longest I had Mind Whip rolling was three turns, before circumstances dictated I cast something else.
I can see where hes coming from. If you have an encounter with onyl 1 or 2 monsters this spell basicly does decent daamge AND almost completly takes the target out of the running for a turn. Hey if you upcast it, it effect multiple targets. Deffernitly a great deal more powerfull then most other 2nd level spells...
@@demoulius1529
Oh, I think it is definitely a 4/5 star spell. But I also think Web in equally, if not more, powerful.
From a previous poster I can see the power in the combo (web/tasha's) which would be relevant in all tiers of play. But as the DM I can also plan more encounters per day. Although I would probably prefer to just create larger more dynamic encounters. Personally I am beginning to favor a number of encounters equal to the Proficiency Bonus of the party. If they create encounters out of stupidity it's a bonus (must punish the murder hobo's).
@@peterwhitcomb8315 Web is saved by DEX and only creates a small area of effect. Even if you cast it in such a way that a creature starts in its effect thats no guarrantee it will be restrained.
Ofcourse whip also doesent have that guarrantee but its saved on INT which is arguably the entire world (aside from wizards apparently) dump stat so the chances of it sticking are magnitudes higher...
It also has guarranteed damage, which is nothing to sniff at. Even if they save vs your spell they take damage. Do it vs a caster and if hes concentrating on a spell its a guarranteed concentration check.
I do think web has added merit in constrained spaces because people then cant avoid it. And because you can put it on fire, creating a fire aoe. But you need specific conditions to get that benefit and whip has no such restrictions.
My table has come to an agreement that this spell sucks so much to get hit by its not worth having in our games.
One encounter of cultists with this spell made our barbarian rage in real life.
Oh now that's an idea
One barbarian
No javelins
I have a sneaking suspicion your barbarian would rage IRL if they ever encountered archers on top of a steep cliff too
This is the reason why I don't generally put lockdown spells on NPCs. It's just a dick move.
Also, if he's upset about getting hit by Mind Whip I'd like to introduce him to Hold Person.
It's a problem with ALL the intelligence saving throw spells and to a lesser extent all the CC but not Charm/Fear spells. Monsters were designed with Fear/Charm being the go-to low level CC, and Intelligence saves being non-existent. I don't know who decided they could just ignore this as they added more and more PC content, but that person should be fired.
@@Autonym Yeah the main use of the spell is just hosing melee-only bruisers. Seems like the solution is just having your PCs/NPCs fight smarter by having some things with ranged attacks instead of just all melee. If you've got a bow, then the inability to move usually hardly matters.
This actually gives me an idea to finally use one of my favorite monsters, being the helmed horror. It is one of those situations where you are literally building an encounter around the spell, but it make more canonical sense if it was created by an enemy who has been studying the target.
Technically force is the least resistant damage type in the game. But psychic is a very close second.
Technically magical bludgeoning damage is the most consistent.
@@TheDisplacerBeast thank you, beat me to it
Radiant, magical piercing, and magical slashing are also up there.
To Cody's players: Now that Tasha's Mind Whip is gone, try casting Command instead. It doesn't do damage, but it's only a 1st level spell.
Still avoids a lot of the issue Mind Whip has. It's a wisdom save and requires the target to share a language with you. That takes put a significant chunk of the monsters that mindwhip wrecked.
Or dissonant whispers…
I've been part of a campaign that's used the UA version of this spell, Mind Thrust, basically its entire run. From the PLAYER perspective, it's an absurdly fun spell to use, I'll be the first to admit. But from a DM perspective, especially as I've become co-DM of this campaign over time? It's... Difficult to work around. Though one of the things I've done is, instead of just saying "this effect happens," I've put the effects of Tasha's Mind Whip into a Condition, so that not only can I let even non-Spellcaster enemies inflict the effect on the party, but it can be healed by effects that can remove Conditions in combat
That's an interesting work around while still allowing it to function as normal.
@@Renagadezzzz Yeah! I've gotten to use this spell both as a player and as a DM in this campaign, so I know both how insanely fun and insanely frustrating it is! I might make more adjustments if it's still broken, but this first change has allowed me to make it more versatile and also allow for more counterplay when it does show up. The players seem to like it, too!
Ooh, a rare opportunity to disagree!! Where'd I put that old soapbox... oh! Here it is. Lemme just set that down and...
Okay so Intelligence saves were basically nonexistent in this game for a long time, and people complained about it. They wanted spells that targeted Intelligence since so many monsters would be weak to that. The designers obliged with several Psionic spells, many of which were dumb overpowered. Mind Thrust (later, Tasha's Mind Whip) was not one of them.
Mind Whip is a save-or-suck spell of second level. It can, in the right instances, completely shut down a single target in combat. But is it alone in that? No. You mention the problem of sending a single big dumb goon at the party and having them Mind Whip two or three times to win without trying - but what about that same Wizard casting Web? Now that dumb goon's liable to get destroyed just as easily with only a single spell slot. If it's a humanoid, Hold Person will have the same effect without having to run away. You could throw half a dozen giant lugs out and lose in one turn to Calm Emotions. Rime's Binding Ice could freeze them all in place too, while dealing damage.
Those are all second level spells. They all do a really good job of shutting down an enemy if they work. And what's more, you might not have noticed, but every single one of those targets a different saving throw. There's very little a DM can do about these all - you'd need your big lug to be reasonably good in every stat to not risk losing the whole combat to one of these. Or, you know... if they have any minions (Action Economy returns!) or any ranged attacks (a famously exploitable weakness of monsters like the Tarrasque) or Legendary Resistances (might seem excessive for a level 3 party but when the alternative is a one-round victory, maybe they can handle it after all).
So Tasha's Mind Whip is really good at doing one specific thing that several other 2nd-Level spells can do; but more inefficiently; and providing a new stat to target; and only working that well in very specific instances; and usually only being a combat-winning option when Action Economy is already in the party's favor. It really doesn't deserve to be held on a pedestal of "turning the tide of action economy" when it's not even the best spell of its level - heck, not even the best Enchantment spell of its level - for doing exactly that.
Edit: Honorable Mention goes to Grease, a first level spell with no Concentration that I swear to God was custom-tailored to auto-win combats against a single big enemy. I've never been more frustrated as a DM than when I planned a whole encounter with an Earth Elemental that just became a slapstick episode of "watch this idiot try to stand up".
Your analysis is terribly flawed since by definition a big dumb goon isn't likely to fall victim to a strength based spell like Web and even if they did they get saving throws every round (as Cody mentioned).
Hold Person on the other hand is massively limited in that it only affects humanoids and most big dumb goons (like giants) are not humanoids. And they also get a save every round. So in both cases you are very unlikely to be able to shut them down with a single cast of either spell.
Calm Emotions doesn't allow you to attack them without breaking it.
Rime is better but still requires a much easier CON saving throw and only stops movement not reactions and multi-attack and/or movement
I feel like if grease invalidated an encounter with an Earth Elemental, the problem wasn't grease, it was not using (or being able to use) it's Earth Glide to avoid the hazard completely. You can't trip a fish in water so the Earth elemental that essentially "swims" effortlessly through Earth wouldn't care about being prone on that surface. It could even keep only half of itself sticking out of the ground and only deal with the difficult terrain part since it's never "standing".
Worst case in the least generous ruling, it needs to Dash to get enough speed to get underground and get away. It could just sit underground and wait to come out on another turn in that case.
@@laurencebernstein1233 Grease + any form of slow effect (like Ray of Frost from another party member) can shut down a single monster much more effectively than Mind Whip - I should know, I played a couple of Adventurers League modules alongside a fellow wizard who loved using Grease in conjunction with my Ray of Frost spell - and yes, that was teamwork, didn't always work, only shut down one enemy out of several - and therefore was completely fine.
For most monsters, Mind Whip effectively only shuts down their reaction for a turn. It doesn't slow their movement, doesn't prevent multi-attack (which is *much* more common in big monsters than having bonus actions) and obviously doesn't shut down legendary resistances since those can be used without a reaction.
Tasha's mind whip is not something you can use round after round after round at level three. It's something you can use only twice at level three.
And only three times as a second level spell at any level.
A control spell that costs a spell slot every turn is very resource intensive. Web which can be cast at the same level can affect multiple creatures at a distance of up to 80 ft. It doesn't need anchors as long as it has a floor, and how often do you run encounters without a floor?
Yes Tasha's mind whip is clearly better when you're fighting a big dumb enemy with no range attack and you have plenty of resources. But there are lots of situations where it is just an inferior choice.
Also don't forget Hill Giants can throw rocks at a distance of 240 ft.
throwing rocks is underrated
@John Cox Agreed on all points. I'm concerned the video leans into hyperbole that may skew DMs unnecessarily without personal experience to better inform them. I haven't had to endure what Cody describes, but the one time I recall battling a Hill Giant he did in fact hurl rocks at us just before a gaggle of cockatrice jumped the party… well before this spell came to be, at a party level where it couldn't be abused even if it was available, and wouldn't simply trivialize the fight anyway.
I choose to believe that most DMs are critical thinkers well used to employing challenging and confounding maneuvers vs their parties' dynamics, and this spell is no different. I rather think the expansion of players' tool kits plus DM countermeasures generally means more interesting fights where the same tricks won't always work. I don't get the fuss as players seek to challenge and confound their DMs in turn, as it should be.
*Whee*, engagement.
a wizard can do it at will at level 18 or so... although i usually pick misty step
@@nathandoyle8852 That's true, but using your signature spell a lot sounds like good game design to me.
My players use Mind Whip a lot, and I cannot fathom why it would be considered a problem spell. Many monsters don't have relevant bonus actions, at which point this spell is basically a weaker restrained, since a restrained monster can only use their action to attack, and doesn't have the choice to move. The damage was borderline irrelevant, even at level 3. Now the expected damage is basically cantrip level.
Sure you can upcast it, but if you can get just 3 enemies with an aoe controlspell, like level 1 entangle, you'd need a level 4 spellslot to hit the same number. Intelligence saving throw is the primary advantage that I see, concentration if you have another spell you want to have running and situationally for shutting down monsters that are overly reliant on bonus actions.
I like the spell as a GM and a player. It's good sure, but I've never felt like I had to balance encounters around it.
It depends if your party really optimizes around it. If your group is fighting a troll and the wizard casts it on the troll and the rest of the party just acts like normal the troll still swings and hits the party fighter and you feel good that you stopped it's multiattack but it wouldn't feel OP. But take that same party playing optimal and the wizard tells everyone "Hey the troll can never attack you if you don't end a turn next to it" and all of a sudden the troll might as well be wet noodle until the wizard runs out of level 2 spell slots.
@@Necromas it doesn't stop multiattack because multiattack is its own action on the sheet. Really, the problem is with having a single big dumb monster. This claims feel highly exagerated. I'm playing a campaing based mostly against wisdom based cultists and their monster minions, and I could never dream of breaking encounters like people here say the spell does. It makes some of them easier, yes, but then I spent all my 2nd and maybe 3rd level slots for the day by the end of it
This spell isn't a problem. Using your second level spell slots to stun a monster for one round is an incredibly weak spell, even with 3d6 damage. If the party can play around it, then they should be rewarded for working together.
@@Necromas wizard wastes +-4 spell slots to kill 1 enemy slightly easier and you have 4 more encounters that day - troll did his job and wizard wasn't actually playing optimally. If you only do 1 encounter a day - wizards will dominate any CR-balanced monster - it's a problem with DM going easy on the players (and making spellcasters OP) by not exhausting their spell slots over many encounters - not with the particular spell.
3:53 the least resisted damage type is Force, not Psychic
That’s because Force damage is 5e’s version of true damage. But it’s true, it’s the least resisted type of damage
Technically it is magical bludgeoning
@@setlerking ?? force damage existed long before 5e.
A good homebrew could be changing the higher level cast to just doing more damage, instead of targeting additional creatures. I mean single monster combats can be exploited in so many ways, at that point mind whip isn't the only spell or feature to worry about.
Just change the save to Wisdom, or give monsters an Intelligence save equal to their Wisdom save. It will be perfectly fine then.
@@agilemind6241 No. It's the impact on the action economy plus its distance that makes it OP. Do you really want to have fights where Mind Whip is used from a distance, and all the monster can do is move into melee range to end its turn? Then the next, everyone attacks, moves out of melee range, and the caster invokes Mind Whip again from a safe distance. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Even if they have a higher chance of a save, this is horribad.
The multitarget aspect doesn't matter. 3rd level and higher spells are SO MUCH BETTER than a 2-target Mind Whip.
@@jklappenbach Could easily do something worse with Dissonant Whispers tho. Command (if you speak a language they understand) can be even more powerful.
And those are 1st level spells.
Aberrant mind sorcerer could just hex the save any way, but then we're prepping specifically not just for one spell, but for a specific combo on a specific sub-class or class combo.
Command and Dissonant whispers do effectively the same, but at a lower level and a will save instead of intelligence so slightly worse, as lower level spells should be. It is not the spell that is overpowered, it is that big dumb monsters just don't work against a tactical party. The tarrasque can be taken down by any party that has a source of flight, and a save based cantrip, which is most level 7 parties.
Your big dumb monster needs a ranged attack, a breath weapon, a stomp or something similar. Otherwise it will just die to a control spell from the spellcaster and ranged attacks.
Just a reminder that people killed mammoths with spears and bows, imagine if they also had magic.
It is true, it is bad game design, but I submit that it is bad monster design, not bad spell design. I know it sucks that the monsters are designed this way, but honestly there are a lot more reasons than mind whip, that you should consider taking the time to add "Rock Throw" to your hill giants list of actions.
hill giants do have rock throw
@@bannjerplays6071 Ahh, didn't actually look them up, but more brute type monsters should have that kind of stuff.
Yes! It is a clash between monsters (designed for PHB spells & Classes) and all the new player goodies added in Tasha's and Xanathar's. I was hoping MMotM would fix it, but sadly this doesn't seem to be the case.
@@agilemind6241 I feel like big dumb monsters have always been underpowered, dissonant whispers and command have always been in the players handbook.
Disagree that its like other crowd control spells. The ones you listed target WIS and not INT. Generally speaking WIS saves are alot higher on most things and those spells you listed also dont do 3D6 psychic damage. Some can also multi target if upcasted but the fact that this spell can be multi target as well just means thats its even more problematic.
Im vieuwing this from a DM's perspective btw. As a player's perspective might not see the problem this represents but this spell basicly means that single monster (or even dual monster) encounters can be completly crowd controlled by a single spellcaster. The spell doesent check what type of creature it targets which already makes it alot more powerrfull then spells like hold person or hold monster, who do have that restriction; and dont have a damage component.
Heck, take hold person as a spell for example: only targets humanoids. Save vs WIS or parylized. Cant target anything other then humanoids and no damage component. Also level 2. Which one of these 2 would you rather have? Such big disparity between same level spells is bad game design. Or in laymens terms: this spell is OP.
Me prepping a new campaign: hmm... I should consider his words.
Also me in a campaign I'm already in: I could learn TMW on my wizard next level up 🤔
Literally me. I have a wizard, and never noticed this spell. It's not even concentration, so I can hold person one, and mind whip multiple others :O
@@skynes I mean I read it sure but I guess my encounters I don't think about movement that much 😅
Just put it on your back pocket and only use it when the party is losing.
Honestly, I was expecting the ban to be for Silvery Barbs.
No save, cast as a reaction, grants disadvantage to the attacking creature.
And then you grant advantage to someone else.
Did I mention that it's a 1st level spell?
I'm kind of interested to see this get exploited at one of my tables. I've used it against my players a couple of times, and it does seem a bit harsh for the fact that it deals 3d6 psychic in a multi-target chain upcast that can easily pop many opponents with this control effect, but I'm not sure I've seen it so fully abused that I would have to consider a ban yet. YET. lol. I guess I sort of expect that a Wiz/Sor exclusive spell can get a little potent, but it does seem a bit hardcore in the context you're referring to. However, I've had my low-level battles thwarted more frequently by Darkness, by Flock of Familiars, by a Bear Totem Barbarian, or by a Battle Master Fighter in ways I'd unforeseen and been unable to answer at low CR. So far no one has really abused Mind Whip on me yet, but now I'll be keeping a lookout.
Yeah... i agree. And for a caster theres nothing more sad than use a slot and do nothing over and over again.
Lol Barbarians in general... are hard to deal, becouse their weakness its well so sad and if you exploit they cant do nothing against it.
I used it only once and I don't know doesn't seem bad but then again my dm never ever uses monster that are not mobs i can confidently say enough that I can tell what were fighting every session so I hope my dm get more creative with other stated monster. when its my turn to dm I try to be different so maybe until I encounter it often enough as a dm maybe I will feel differently but till then seems fine
Nope, I don't get it. Can't relate.
Hold Person, a spell of the same level, can be cast on a target and rob it of all actions on its turn on a saving throw, and it can last to upward of 10 rounds with a save on each round.
Mind Whip does damage equivalent to a 1st level spell, removes some of the possible actions (much like a single target 'slow' spell), and lasts only 1 round.
I think it's too weak to be turned into a 3rd-level spell. Slow may not do damage, but it still affects many more targets. Hypnotic Pattern is a much stronger shutdown spell.
Can synergy with the party be used to take down a single BBEG? Sure. But then, it's still a 2nd level spell; it should have an impact. There are other very powerful spells such as web and spike growth which could majorly impede your oncoming hill giant.
Hold person only works on humanoids which already nulifies like 90% of the potential enemies possible in the game. Hold person has concentration and the target gets a save each turn. While it CAN take out a target for multiple turns the odds of that happening are very very small. It also does no damage aside from the parylizing effect. It also targets WIS rather then INT which means the odds that saves against it will succeed are generally speaking alot higher.
Also damage equal to a 1 lvl spell? Lol. I can think of 1 or 2 spells that do that much damage at level 1 (guiding bolt and inflict wounds) and the rest is less. There might be more but these spells are generally speaking outliers and exceptions. They also dont have a secondary effect of this magnitude ASIDE from the damage aspect. Sure guiding bolt gives the next attack advantage but its not limiting the opponent to 1 move, action or bonus action. The added effect is way smaller.
Hold person is nowhere near as powerfull as mind whip is.
@@demoulius1529 I think a lot of people just look for a spell that has a similar effect, but fail to read the "extra" rules, like targets, saves, components, etc. I find it odd they wrote that much about it, without reading the whole spell :P
@@guysmcfellas615 some tables dont use things like material components or have a dm that doesent read spells through themselves. Ive encountered both and it makes magic needlessly OP while it already is exceptionally strong.
That said not saying thats at play here but it looks like it. The spell arent comparable, and thats why I agree with the video.
You’re conveniently forgetting that hold PERSON can only be used against humanoids. Whip can be used against any creature
While I fully agree with what you are saying, I’ve found the biggest way to prevent a stomp is minions. Even if they get one shot, multiple minions make encounters more balanced
That is what I typically do. Also, there is always a chance you could encounter an exception to the rule version of said monster with a higher INT stat.
And sure, maybe the big baddie can move much, and the entire group is ganging up on it now, it also in turn leaves said spell caster alone and unguarded for gang tactics in turn. Or maybe one really really good stealthy type.
But most minions get dropped by an AOE spell from another member. Unless a minion has ways to stop aoe or spells in general, putting minions there only bloats the xp of an encounter as one player would mind whip the bbeg and their teammate then just drops a fireball or lightning bolt that will likely hit the bbeg and his minions. I think if they change the effect to lose your reaction and bonus only would be more balancing than the fact I can only choose one action along with not even being to save my reaction if I fail.
I contest that claim of psychic being the least resisted damage type (at 3:50) and raise Force damage. Far as I know less than 10 things within WotC books resists force damage.
I see your Force damage and raise you... Magical Bludgeoning, Slashing and Piercing. There are plenty of monsters that resist Bludgeoning, Slashing and Piercing. But when it becomes magical I can't recall any monsters that resist them.
Magical bludgeoning damage is less resisted than Force, but magical slashing and piercing are more resisted, putting them behind Radiant damage as well. Psychic is actually #8 on least resisted damage types, behind acid and thunder.
@@hatihrodvitnisson Wait what resists Magical Piercing and Slashing damage?
@@Zulk_RS There are at least 45 creatures in official 5e sources that are resistant to piercing damage that doesn’t specify nonmagical, including examples like the Flameskull. There are 26 resistant to slashing damage that doesn’t specify nonmagical, and 9 completely immune, such as the Black Pudding.
@@hatihrodvitnisson I see... so what I'm getting here is that Magical Bludgeoning is actually the best damage type. Also how high are Magical Slashing and Magical Piercing in the resistance ranking? Like #3? #4?
Oh snap, we're back to the timeline where his head shape matches the background.
Tasha's mind whip does essentially 2-3 spells in one go to be fair. It's a pretty fun one for players to be sure. I remember the only time I fought a Hydra. We had to use Chill Touch and Slow to cripple it. Tasha's mind whip would do most of the work for that actually.
Do you mean he got a haircut again?
Or dissonant whispers…
@@StabYourBrain High level boss, upcast it to equal the amount of players in the party, walk away from them as the melee characters spend their turn walking towards you. Just stand out of range of counter-spell before casting, because you can outrange it by 30ft. Repeat it a few times to break spirits and mental fortitude of players. 🤣
1:55 - "Mez spells"? Cody confirming he was a Norrathian? (EverQuest player)
I see your point, but I feel like Tasha's Mind Whip plays an important role in helping the players against bosses with Lair/Legendary actions. As well as monsters that have effects that attack a players action economy. I just can't see a full on removal for those reasons. But perhaps make it a spell that needs to be taught. A wizard can't just take Tasha's, they have to earn the right to learn that spell. Make it a quest. And limit it's availability until better spells that outstrip it become available.
I agree not everyone should have access to this spell, and should have to earn it. I fell an aberrant mind Sorcerer should have access to this spell with very few restrictions. Being Psionics is the whole power fantasy to the aberrant mind.
But Tasha's Mind Whip literally does nothing against lair actions or legendary actions - they are completely unaffected, as are multi-attacks.
@@Nr4747 no but it does on overall action economy on the creature. So no it can't stop layer actions, but it decreases the overall output on the monster, especially if you are also using forced movement via, fear or area of effect spells like cloud kill
One of the core tenets of DMing: your table, your rules. With the understanding that as long as your players are good with the ruling.
Honestly, even at Higher levels of play it's good because if you cast it then you might force a Legendary Resistance use which means if you do it enough times they'll run out or save it for a more powerful spell
At higher levels you're probably willing to burn 3rd or even 4th level slots to burn through those legendaries, so nerfing it with a level boost wouldn't prevent that. I agree though, that is a great use for it because no way in hell I'm giving my players and entire turn to just go to town on the boss if I can help it.
@@kevindaniel1337 Potentially. It really depends on the circumstances. If the party is up against a big brute with a club, TMW essentially just limits the monster to doing what it was going to do anyway - hit 'em with a club.
Simple tweak, make the target of the spell immune or resistant to its effects after the first time. Also, cut the range to 30ft, and boom, I think you would have balance back. Probably try granting advantage on the save for subsequent uses on the same target first, then scale to immunity if still OP.
I think just granting advantage on subsequent uses would be enough even without cutting the range. I doubt immunity would even be necessary. That's an interesting approach to nerfing it.
@@kevindaniel1337 It seems a simple test at the table, one that can be quickly scaled up as necessary to get the desired balance.
And technically you don't even have to tell your players it's happening if you didn't want to. 😉
Great idea, I think this would be a good and fair balance to it.
Because it is still an insanely good spell for only being 2nd level. If it goes off and you basically take a turn from a scary monster that is still huge for a 2nd level spell. Which as Cody pointed out has a good chance of occurring due to it being an INT save.
Pathfinder 2e has a bunch of strong effects be they are immune for "one minute" after use which is basically once per combat per enemy. I think it is a good approach since it does not nerf the power just the frequency. Some spells can be hard to balance against without being a gotcha moment for the players. Plus is feels like targeting if you buff up saves. So I think this is a good tweak.
Personally I don’t think this spell is that big a deal. Most encounters have multiple enemies and this would just lock down one. On encounters with one or two big bads they could only lock down one. Single monster? Legendary resistance or actions.
Thats when as a player you upcast it to 3, or 4. Locking down those 3 enemies.
Lily's right. An issue is that upcasting will target more targets.
Now I'm not an expert, but I can see this shutting down say an encounter with swamp trolls easy, monsters that should put some pressure on your party unless you're high level or got some broken gear.
@@lilybruggeman9634 At that point it competes against Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, and Polymorph. Although it's not concentration, so it's still a good option for round 2 onwards.
@@Autonym kinda. But those spells use WIS and CHA saves, I believe proficiencies in those are more common than INT
it's such a great spell that i was talking to my sorcerer about doing it right back at them, but that wouldn't be fun for anyone. it's one thing to get in a counter spell fight to where it's a battle of attrition, but another to go back and forth shutting down everyone's turns
for pcs though making them pick between a move, action or bonus action isn't that bad the sorcerer probably still used firebolt or cast their big shutdown spell.
it's moreso the single dumb enemies... but easy fix just give them a ranged attack. and mind whip becomes a non issue.
I forgot that you're not a fan of healing word, but I honestly thought you were going to say silvery barbs or shield.
EDIT: Looked it up, and remembered that this spell used to be mind thrust in the UA, and it only had 60 feet of range. How'd it get approved for an additional 30 feet? I guess that was to compensate for it being a bonus action back then. I'd use the UA range and knock it back to 60 and keep it as an action.
Ban Shield? Ban Shield.
Also thanks for the learning, can't believe WotC just bumped the range up when Command is 60 ft and deals no damage.
4th level spell? When Slow is a third level spell? What am I missing here?
4th level spell if the damage was 4d6 or 5d6, he said. As is, he'd really only make it a 3rd level spell as-written.
Tashas mindwhip became my most upcasted spell. It’s so good, shutting down movement/actions is too powerful, especially if your party knows how to play along. My Graviturgy wizard gets to move the targets that fail the mind whip save five feet any direction effectively shutting that creature down no matter there position in the fight.
Graviturgy + Mind Whip is so saucy 😈 hahahhaha
Pretty good stuff, until you face ranged enemies.
@@Adurnis too true, then I just use kickass wizard spells lol
@@Adurnis honestly I don't get how the guy in the video ignores that. Ranged attacks are pretty common and if a creature relies on them they're not likely to use many reactions. At least not unless its a spellcaster which usually have pretty good INT to begin with.
Tasha's Mind Whip also becomes exceptionally powerful if you cast it w/ Mind Sliver especially as a Sorcerer with metamagic by Quickening Mind Sliver then casting Mind Whip.
If the target gets hit by both spells that's 4d6 psychic damage, minus 1d4 from their next saving throw, lost action economy, & no reactions. This level 3 character spell combination is MEAN!
RAW you cannot do that, if you cast a spell as a bonus action (quick mind sliver) the only other spell you can cast is a cantrip with a casting time of one action. You'd have to quicken the mind whip.
@@nathandoyle8852 Thank you. Never played a Sorcerer so I always get that mixed up.
@@nathandoyle8852 you can still Mind Sliver as an Action and then Mind Whip as a bonus action tho, which really ain't bad
Using a lot of ressource for 1 turn semi shutdown with correct damage. How is it ''exceptionnaly'' powerful?
In most of the games I’ve played or Dm’d I’ve literally seen mind whip fail, over and over. So I’ve never had an issue with it.
Perhaps the encounters we face are more diverse, or more likely to have enemy humanoids and spell casters than a single “dumb monster”.
If you are concerned about monsters having a crappy intelligence save, the quickest and easiest solution would be use their wisdom save bonus or constitution save bonus. That should adjust the percentage of mind whip working enough to make it only as good as most other spells.
Most of the suggested fixes are way too convoluted. Just roll a different save, and be done with it.
Could be that the dice were just on the monsters favour or the DM fudged the dice. Most iconic big scary monsters have horrid INT stats and would get massive penalties on the diceroll.
Ive defenitly fumbled a dice to keep an encounter interesting at times and the impact this 2nd level spell has is pretty insane. At the end of the day we have an adventuring party. Not just a single spell caster with this spell. We want to make everyone feel important and thats kinda hard when a single cast bascily completly nullifies the BBEG.
So you mean fixing the spell by just changing the save? seems enough for you?
I've never banned anything official.
I have always found a rule/mechanic/creature that balances the situation.
If anything i have had to nerf my self as i can out optimize a groups of optimizers.
If you think this spell isn't oppressive - just ask your DM to start using it against your party regularly. THEN you'll suddenly notice how 1-sided it is.
If my parties abuse a spell this is EXACTLY what I do. Thankfully I haven't had my parties try to abuse anything super OP yet
I think the rules for players and dms is different, as a DM you will probably be running multiple enemies and you often aren't AS invested as the players are in combat. If a player is stunned or paralysed or banished or something they just skip their turn and have to watch the rest of the party take their turns and wait which if the goal is fun then it's a bit ineffective to use these spells in combat as a DM whereas as a player they can still be fun for everyone as it can progress the narrative better or lead to teamwork.
@@peterusmc20 The point is, this idea of "fun" is too vague to be a proper argument at all, for some, the very fact that monsters aren't capable to use what players can, breaks any concept of verissimilute, thus being "unfun" to them (you may argue that monsters and players should abide by different sets of rules, which i agree with, but first, it's not a consensus and 5e doesn't work this way at all). And that is disregarding the fact that you are taking into account only the fun of the players, happily abusing these sort of spells for their benefit, while screwing over the DM, who has to input an extraordinary amount of effort into circuling around a bad concept and design of the rules.
@@XvicvicX Fair, I speak only from my own experience.
@ReallyBurntToastthe party having a limited set of abilities who can be used and therefore being confined on what their classes/builds are capable of is one thing, however, becoming a one trick ponny depending entirely on one particular ability or combination is a completely different situation. Though fireball is powerfull and generally used quite frequently, disregarding the meme, It isn't used everywhere, all the time. The nature of the spell confines it into a particular type of context. In other words, fireball is thematic and limited enough to counterbalance it's good features. A DM doesn't have to put nearly as much effort in not letting a fireball take the game as spells like silvery barbs and tasha's mind whip are, due to their bad design. You know that it's used a lot simply because their pros outweight their cons by a large margin.
Also, as a DM you’re /always/ expected to build your encounters around your party, so I hardly see how having to design your encounters with you’re party’s spells in mind is any different.
Reeeeeeeeally fail to see the big problem here. Sure, in certain scenarios at certain levels the spell can be phenomenal. In other situations it’s basically useless… Broken? Must be banned or changed? I think not
Putting In 7 or so e's is not really a counter argument. If you see a problem with the video, maybe try articulating it. Everyone knows that added e's only start to matter after the 11th.
@@PhyreI3ird but he's right. He also went on to say "Sure, in certain scenarios at certain levels the spell can be phenomenal. In other situations it’s basically useless… ", which is correct. It's essentially useless if you don't put a dumb Ogre or (insert other dumb monster here) by himself. It's also a full action spell, you can cast on one target (unless twinned, which costs sorcery points) or upcasted (an in that case you're just using a higher level spell slot) and it's using another spell slot to extend it (because you have to cast it again). Any encounter with minions, legendary actions, or just a smarter enemy just demolishes the use of the spell.
On top of the fact that an Ogre, if someone is still in melee combat with it, still gets it's Greatclub or Javelin attack. He doesn't have a bonus action, and he doesn't have to move to absolutely rip someone a new one. It's even more useless when you start to face monsters who honestly don't even have to move in the first place. Any ranged or spellcasting monster is going to still take it's regular turn.
@@tylerp5259 the video is specifcly mentioning the fact that the guy now has issues with single or dual monster encounters.. It isent useless in the slightest.
Its also a pretty big shutdown spell on spellcaster or even fighter-type enemies. Melee enemies cant do much to you if they cant attack and arent in melee. If you got a person in contact with a caster he cant get out of there safely nor fight back in any meaningfull way. AND he takes 3D6 damage. And spellcaster generally speaking are already low on hp compred to more fighty enemies.
Compared to other lvl 2 spells like hold person (who can only target humanoidss) or command (can drop you prone or something but doesent strip you off actions) itts very much an overpowered spell.
@@demoulius1529 If you are KO'd by a Mind Whip's 3d6, you shouldn't have been a solo monster encounter. I'll also add on, if his only gripe with it, as in the video was for single or double monster encounters, it isn't OP.
A spellcaster is still going to cast a spell after being mindwhipped, as well as the fact that if it's a Wizard spellcaster, they're probably going to pass the save. One action? Fireball. Lightning Bolt. Literally any of the other 100 spells in the collective books.
His problem was 100% just "Solo Encounters as Underpowered" and used the spell to give an example. Hold Person, Hold Monster, and similar spells can be just as "OP" and "gamebreaking" or "bannable" as Tasha's Mind Whip, and the problem isn't the spell, but how you design the encounter. We've known for years that action economy wise, it'd be stupid to create a solo encounter without either 1. giving the monster a massive amount of health. or 2. giving them ways to take more actions in a turn (i.e. Legendary Actions or Lair Actions).
@@tylerp5259 are you daft? Its not the 3d6 damage that will kill you. Its beeing unable to act for several turns while a party of adventurers is seal-clubbing you that will.
Last dnd encounter I ran for my party (level 6) had them encounter 2 giants. The giants were in a fight with a group of orks. Only 1 of the giants was actually fighting the orks and the party engaged the 2nd giant. They engaged it at range and while he could fight back by throwing a boulder he only got 1 turn of melee combat before he expired. He died in 2 turns. The Orks had not attacked the Giant they were engaging and the Orks also killed their giant in 2 turns. It was the first time I ran giants in a dnd adventure and was quite frankyl suprised with how quikly they went down.
The comparison between mind whip and all of the other spells is also invalid. Those spells have powerfull effects yes but they also have a boat load of restrictions, require concentration and for hold monster a far higher spell level. 5th level to be exact. If you have to compare a spell to a spell 3 levels higher then it, to show comparisons then something is seriously off.
Your counter of giving the monster more actions is also hilarious because the spell we are discussing SPECIFICLY COUNTERS THAT.
Seriously if you dont the problem as presented you are either legally blind or are purposefully ignoring the issue that the video presents.
I might just be stupid, but my wizard in my Friday game has had this spell since the first session (we started at 3rd) and I haven't actually used it very often. I am playing a buff caster I suppose, but still. And against the monsters you listed, it doesn't actually have that great of an effect. Take the beholder zombie for example- it has range. It should already be flying. It has no good bonus actions or reactions. This equates to: No reason to move, no bonus actions or reactions to miss out on, all you've done is slightly meh amounts of psychic damage. Against a single target, upcasted chromatic orb does way more. Sure you can upcast it to affect multiple targets. For the same level you can cast slow or fireball. Or banishment or dimension door. Rarely is this spell greater than those options.
In order for this spell to be effective, the monsters have to have something worth loosing from it. Otherwise it's effectively a shitter one round only earthen grasp that does damage. It's actually MUCH worse in the DM's toolkit as it can fuck over barbarians, wizards, clerics ect.
Yeah, I don't see 3d6 damage (10.5 average) at 2nd level game breaking. And the NPC's retain their ability to either just attack from where they are standing or move and gain cover (harder for your ranged characters to hit them). It's a great spell but nothing like some of the other game breaking spells at lower level.
The creature loses a lot of action economy. If you're trapped with no cover, yes this spell isn't that great. Anywhere the players can just move out of sight every turn, this spell would be severely limiting. The creature can only move OR take an action. So it either chases the players then potentially just get hit again before they move and hide again. I'm pretty sure all the beholder's eyes need a target. And it has only a movement of 20. Smart players wouldn't just stand in front of it and let it freecast.
I mean i wouldn't just stand in front of a beholder even if I was a melee class. I'd be throwing shit at it and taking cover again.
@@Milocinia The same effect can be achieved with entangle. Sure entangle is concentration, but it's an ongoing effect rather than something you have to keep recasting. The only thing making it better than say web is it does damage and is an int save. I've played with it as DM and as a player and have just found that it's really good in the right situation and sub par the rest of the time. It's most effective against fellow casters, and of that caster is a wizard you bet they have a high int save
@@Milocinia
Assuming there is more than one PC they don't have to chase anything. Granted they can't retaliate against the caster this round (because they are hiding).
You could just have its ranged brought down to 60, cut speed in half and get disadvantage on attacks on a failed save, seems more in line with what they were going for with the flavor of a psychic brain slap doing concussions, but less exploitable
Then it'd be a weaker entangle/web.
@@CommanderCoyler doesn't it do psychic damage?
@@Kingnothing7x 3d6 is a tiny amount for a level 2 spell. It's a bit of icing on the cake rather than the main thing it has going for it. As it currently stands, I'd put TMW on par with Web: Web is AoE restrain (so even debuffs on ranged enemies) where TMW is single-target action denial (doing nothing to ranged enemies).
@@CommanderCoyler Right, it's not insanely powerful or anything, I doubt most people have an issue with the spell, his group just found a way to exploit it like T rex pixie party
I dont really mind it in my games, but the higher casting makes its obnoxious. What makes me realise how unbalanced it is though, is that I cant see it as a spell to use against my players. Its just not fun to get hit by.
I totally disagree. Yeah, they won't like it. Fine.
So where does that leave us? Players don't like getting knocked unconscious, so I won't do that. They don't like getting hit with Sleep spells so I won't do that. They don't like getting poisoned so I won't do that. They don't like getting hit with Fireball so I won't do that. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Furthermore, I'm a firm believer in the idea of reciprocity. If the players think it's OK to do it to the monsters, then the GM should think it's OK to do it to the PCs. Especially if word gets out. Spellcasters tend to communicate with each other from time to time. Wizards like to learn spells from each other. Priests congregate, maybe even across deities or alignments. Everybody keeps their ears to the ground to learn new things, because they're all smart, wise, or at the very least charismatic. So once a party of heroes starts making a name for themselves, the good guys and bad guys are going to learn some of the tricks those heroes like to use, especially the really effective ones they use a lot.
Even if that doesn't happen, smart and/or wise casters are likely to figure out the same things the PCs figure out,, all by themselves, at least some time. And charismatic casters use their charisma to network with other casters to learn whatever they're not smart enough to figure out on their own.
These enemies SHOULD be hard to kill. They SHOULD do whatever they can to survive because the WANT to survive. They are not just a stat block to be killed and looted by the PCs. And for many of them, especially casters, their best survival happens days, weeks, or even months before the PCs ever encounter them, when they are learning their spells, leveling up, and figuring out the best way to survive the challenges they face in their own lives.
If that means they learn the best spells and actually USE them, then so be it.
At least at my table, my players would not want me pulling punches and never using any of the good combat abilities because they might make a player spend a half hour being frustrated. I've asked them, and they've answered, so I'm not just guessing. They want to know that combat has consequences and that when they overcome an enemy it's because they earned it, not because I made it easy for them.
Intellect Devourer has an ability like this. 2d10 damage and the player might get knocked down right away. Its a CR 2 monster.
Devour Intellect. The intellect devourer targets one creature
it can see within 10 feet of it that has a brain. The target must
succeed on a DC 12 Intelligence saving throw aga inst this
magic or take 11 (2d10) psychic damage. Also on a failure,
roll3d6: If the total equals or exceeds the target's Intelligence
score, that score is reduced to 0. The target is stunned until it
regains at least one point of Intelligence.
@@Neumonics429 Now make the intellect devourer have 90ft range in that ability.
@@blakewalker84120 The game has encounter difficulty levels for this reason. In an eight encounter adventuring day your PCs don’t have resources to deal with eight deadly encounters, they’re mechanically designed not to.
Are you also rolling the series of deception and insight checks to determine if your rogue wizard is able to swap spells at the local mage tower without being found out and removing them from the encounter because they’ve been jailed by the guard? How about the encounter rolls to see if they’ve made enough gold to copy the spell into their spell books? How about the rolls to see if they’re killed off screen by a random gnoll pack ambushing them in their sleep? I’m guessing you don’t, because that wouldn’t be fun for you. If you want to argue the realism route you have to go all the way or you’ve lost the plot entirely.
The PCs have to roll for those things and take them into account, and the rule of reciprocity would say your monsters do too.
@@II-wu7mx No. I assume the ones that got thrown in jail aren't the ones we encounter. We get the ones who managed a reasonably successful OFF-SCREEN career to elevate them to the level that makes them a suitable encounter, regardless of whether we are encountering just that guy today, or 8 encounters today - if he's in any of those encounters, then he was, by default, successful enough to be there.
And therefore, he's likely to be successful enough to know the best spells either through his own experience or through learning from other casters, and he's able to use them against the PCs.
Does that mean that every encounter is a wizard casting exactly the same spell list as the PC wizard? No, of course not.
But if certain spells are highly prized by PC casters then they should be equally highly prized by NPC casters, and used proportionally often. Holding them back because a player may not enjoy it is, ultimately, coddling the players.
Some players want to be coddled. Mine don't like it at all.
Single large entity vs any party above 4th level is bad encounter design
True, but it's a staple of the genre. Would be nice if it was doable without having to give monsters specific counters to specific spells.
@@Autonym I see your point but would rather have legendary actions/ counter spell then not overall. Ultimately the dragon is suppose to be slain so I say let them have it. Boring is subjective
It's powerful, but ban worthy? Cast on hill giant, move back, get smashed in the face with a thrown rock. Sure, there are enemies that don't have ranged attacks, but if your melee party members run in, they can still get attacked.
Also, *JUST ONCE* I'd like to see a GM make a video about "This thing is overpowered and should never ever be used against the PCs". It's just that allllllwaaaaays when it's about an overpowered something, it's from the perspective of PCs using it against NPCs.
control spells .... never use control spells like hold person against the PCs
Treantmonk made such a video when he did two videos: one about spells that are good for players and bad for dms and then one vice versa.
@@michaelwhite6864 But what if I want to hypnotic pattern the party?
@@subaruforester910pengis Then I hope you are willing to test your friendship🤣
But melee characters can just step out of range because the monster loses its reaction
If the spell just killed reactions, I'd be fine with that or maybe if it did the one action thing while still keeping reactions, maybe that would be better. Idk but those are my suggested fixes. Needs testing but it definitely does too much in its current state
On top of that, the at higher level casting just makes it multiply lol.
@@Renagadezzzz honestly the spell would have been fine if it just targeted one enemy and damage went up thinking more on it
Honestly I group this effect with things like Stunning Strike (worse condition, better save, no range, more times a day that it can be used are the differences) and I don't see it as overpowered. If a party is using this on a big dumb creature they are both using resources and outsmarting it, and I'm ok with that. mostly because I have mixtures of types of encounters so it will work in that combat very well, but not the next. The party has limited resources so it can't go on forever, but if they are smart and use it at the right time they deserve the win. I am also not shy at throwing a lot at my players, so they need to be careful of what resources they use and when.
The problem is that it costs very little resources compared to alternatives.
I personally feel that it is a spell to keep in the game,
But second level spell slots become trivial quite quickly,
So I'd rather have it compete with other 3rd level spells.
I don't think its close to other 3rd level spells that have similar effects. Look at Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, or slow that affect more creatures with worse effects and greater range. Yes they are concentration, but that just means less castings to maintain the same effects. Yes later on you get 3 castings per long rest, or more if you use higher spell slots that might as well have been other spells. You get 3 3rd level slots very soon too. The biggest problem is it is an intelligence saving throw, so if you only throw unintelligent enemies at them it will be effective, but not overpowered.
Level 3 sorcerer, quickened action Mind Sliver, Tasha's Mind Whip, still succeed the save? Silvery barbs. All three of these only have verbal components. Wonderful.
Yes but you toss out 2/3 sorcery points, and 1/3 of your spell slots.
I think it should balance out, after all you can still fail concentration and after that encounter you have 3 slots for the day
@@barco7004 True, it's not cheap, it's only really worth if you want to mess up one guy in particular lol
You can't cast a leveled spell with your action if you cast any spell at all (even a cantrip) with your bonus action.
You would have to reverse it, quickening mind whip and using your action on mind sliver
@@PsyrenXY
Ya its the same
My solution would be 1. Targets with an intelligence under 4 are immune. Constructs, undead, and things without an actual brain are also immune. Lastly an target with multiple (heads/brains) have advantage on their save.
well constructs are immune by the fact they are contructs. they're immune to psychic damage and it's one of those things where if they don't take the damage, the rider effects don't happen either. like how mind blank protects you from mind flayers instakill.
Say it again for the people in the back. Can we work around it? Yes. But WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.
I think it at least partially depends on your group. We haven’t had a problem with this spell in our group, but I’ll freely admit. We aren’t always the most strategic group, and our builds often favor role play and flavor over strategy.
This 100% leads to better gameplay than min-maxing neckbeards sweating all over their keyboards bashing out tasha's mind whip, hypnotic pattern, and silvery barbs into their spell lists over and over. Crazy how some of them forget that the point is to tell a story and combat serves the story.
One quick correction. force damage is the the least resisted damage in the game not psychic
I was thinking that. After he said it I was like Wait... I thought it was force? Am I wrong? I know it used to be force but maybe I missed some changes with MotM.
@@StupidButCunning yeah it is force damage. Nothing has changed
All you have to do is talk to your player that has the spell and ask them to use it more sparingly or just alter the spell a little. Add concentration, make the creature choose action (limited to one attack) or bonus action and keep movement, increase the level, decrease the range, etc. You don't have to ban anything if you just alter it or ask your players to use it more sparingly.
For 1 monster vs party fights, those monsters need to be beefed anyways. It doesn't say it gets past legendary actions, so having even low level threats that are 1 vs party fights having like 1 legendary resistance and a legendary action to make them threatening (obviously depending on the difficulty of the fight) could help mitigate that beat down incredibly.
What's the better fix? Banning a broken spell or giving a Gelatinous Cube legendary resistance?
@@Taking20 I mean it's really dm by dm basis. Obviously if its plagued you for so long than its your prerogative. No shame for doing that. I personally like the thought of a gelatinous cube having a LR or LAs cause it sounds amusing and terrifying, but I do understand that's more work in the long run.
If thasha's mind whip is so much of I problem I would almost think just to be sure you should also ban Raulothim's psychic Lance a though 4th level spell which is also a int save deals way more psychic damage namely 7d6 and incapacitates the target also only verbal component and even worse if the enemy is like you BBEG then they just need to be in its 120ft range to be targeted they can be invisible hidden and behind full cover and the caster merely needs to say the targets name and it will target and subject them to the int save
I don't think the Lance is as bad because it's competing with Polymorph.
@@vxicepickxv yeah but he suggest at some point to make it a fourth level to fix it but then this spell is way better because it is a direct upgrade of the spell if you really look at it
@@joshvwvd i mean it does more damage and incapacitates (with a chance to be used against invisible targets) but I wouldn't call it an obvious upgrade or overly better spell. Mind Whip, when upcast, can target more than one creature, and more importantly, being a level 2 spell means it doesn't compete with any other important spell slot. I've played a wizard and as you level up, you almost never have a reason to use 1st or 2nd spell slots if you're smart with your spells, mainly because your 3+ level spells are much more powerful and game-changing. But Mind Whip as a level 2 spell means it's always on the table
Obviously you've had a bad experience with this spell at your table, so I can't say that your ruling is "wrong", however I personally think you're overestimating the spell. At 3rd level Spellcasters can do this twice per day, that doesn't really seem like a problem. At higher levels things have legendary resistances. That leaves a smaller range of levels where this might be a problem, and even then I've seen encounters get shut down by a single hypnotic pattern that might've taken 5 mind whips to win. And yes it uses an int save, but there are classes that can subtract dice from saves so that basically bridges the gap there. And we always knew that any D&D party was gonna stomp 1 big dumb enemy because of action economy in the first place. So strong yes, broken I don't think so.
Yeah, I don't see it either. The biggest advantage this spell has it's that it's hard to find a situation where you can't use it, but there are *so* many spells in 5e like that. It's got cantrip level damage, requires a save to get any value as a lockdown effect and compared to the other lockdown spells at it's level (Web, Binding Ice, Earthen Grasp) the biggest edge this thing has is the rare save and the long range (which is irrelevant in most dungeons.).
Banning this would be like banning Stunning Strike on a Monk, imo.
It's okay cody, I'll just give you other war flashbacks.
Instead I'd like to move my manifest mind around the corner. What does it see?
I think a good nerf for this would be to let target to use 2 of 3 things from: move, action, bonus action. At this point you will still weaken the enemy, like not letting goblins to disengage/hide with their bonus action, but martials will still have possibility to move and hit you, or even dash to get closer. Upcasting it should give +1d6 to damage, instead of effectively doubling impact. With such nerf this spell should be a decent for players and very interesting for dm to test in combats. Like using this on barbarian to not let him rage or on rogue to counter his dash/disengage
This sounds like one of 2 problems:
1) The party's resources are not being sufficiently challenged. TMW is only up for a single turn on a single target. You'd have to be going through spell slots like crazy for it to constantly be an issue
2) You're not giving big beefy monsters Legendary Resistances. If the issue is that they're being burned through too quickly, simply give them more
Maybe I'm using it wrong but my wizard has mind whip and the dm saves more than half the time and then it has cei minimal impact on the encounter
Is it open rolls or hidden behind a screen?
I have to disagree. Command is actually stronger, makes the target lose their whole turn and probably makes them prone. All you have to do is know their language. Of course, int save is better than wis save but saves are a whole different subject in 5e.
Tasha's mind whip and other spells and tashas cauldron of everything. The stepping stones to eventually get psionics.
You are spot on, Cody.
This is an issue that I find with the entirety of 5e, but it is magnified with Tashas Mindwhip. The issue I have, for the most part, is the approach of "Bounded Accuracy" results in a Harrison Bergeron scenario where any exceptionalism stands out as particularly over powered due to the "press down". For me, this means that I basically have no actual monsters to work with beyond a base template that needs heavy modification; so more of a guideline for a starting point and a format for making the stat block(s). It also makes it difficult to "tune" encounters to be enjoyable because the players are almost locked into a specific, pre-determined, course of action for "optimal" action economy. If someone has slow... they're going to use it if there are enough mobs to merit the use, or if it is a single heavy hitting boss. I can basically spit-ball exactly how an encounter is going to go with just a few minutes of work. While this is nice for balancing "difficulty" this isn't particularly fun for me as the DM, and feels far more like I'm setting up a scenario for a video game than for a TTRPG. Especially when the only way to keep the party from shooting off scale is to limit the funds they have to such a paltry sum that "heros" often feel like paupers if you're running by the RAW economy.
I trend towards more powerful parties as a result of personal preference as a DM and my own philosophies on how games should "feel" from the players perspective. 5e make every gain feel woefully underpowered, if it is at an appropriate power level from the games mechanical point of view, for the most part. Each level up doesn't feel all that significant unless you're a caster/on one of the outliers where something cool is gained(I don't count "extra attack" as a "cool" addition), and the magic item economy falls squarely into the "useless" category RAW. Hell, even the modules they release tend to hand out items like candy and give no attention to how over powered this makes the players for the supposed CR.
As a result I find my players punching so far above their weight class, with just a few small buffs/items, that I am using base templates of 2-3 CR levels higher than a single "Deadly encounter" would merit as one of several enemies. Hell, I JUST ran a mildly down-tuned Iron Golem(CR16) against a party of 5 level 6 players; all I did was replace "resistances" with greater HP pool(substantially so, as in around 700-800 effective hp), removed the poison breath(which makes no sense to me thematically anyway), reduced the AC by 2(20 to 18), and only allowed it to use the slam attack(-1d8 for a total of 2d8+7 w/ two attacks), and they handily stomped it even with a few minor mobs on top. Only 1 character went down, and that was on the last turn.
The only compensation is to either run a "resource tax" set of encounters before a boss fight, as intended, which just feels...dumb, or to flood the area with trash mobs to force action economy against them.-I do a bit of both, but more of the latter. I also run my players at lower levels and stall on level progression as a balance, letting them "get stronger" by access to boons, custom items, and cash flow for buffs(potions, items, etc); as this removes the issues that higher level spells can bring in that act as force multipliers.
Mind you, I have been a DM for 1+ decade, so I'm not complaining about doing the work involved, but it just bothers me that you have to hand out buffs, items, and coinage incredibly stingily, or just ignore the base "balance" entirely.
Tashas mindwhip is more a symptom of the underlying issue that is shown when a relatively simple spell, in concept(bits from a cantrip, a level 2, and a level 3, but all reduced) is outright "over powered" when it acts like a minor Slow/Mockery/Scorching Ray... when on paper it should be "balanced" but clearly isn't in practice. 3d6 damage, when Scorching Ray is 6d6(1/2 potential damage of another 2nd level sell), mockery/grasp reaction loss(1/2 cantrip, no damage but utility), and single target single round slow(1/6th the targets and 1/10th the potential rounds, unless upcast which then makes it 1/3rd and 1/10th plus damage).
TL:DR If you, as a DM, follow the rules... you're doing it wrong. If you don't follow the rules, you REALLY need to know what you're doing or the campaign will scale out of control quickly.
While I’ve not experienced this level of difficulty with Mind Whip, I’ve noticed the pattern that you’re describing. Subclasses like Twilight Cleric and it’s CD trivialize encounters and other means of granting THP, spells like Silvery Barbs are extremely potent, for the cost of a 1st level reaction, spell, and so forth.
It’s an issue of power creep that has also been experienced in MTG and it’s one that I’ve not seen enough content creators addressing, so thank you Cody.
Dnd isn't a card game though, you're not competing against anyone. Pcs are already overpowered relative to the encounters they can face, making them stronger doesn't really change anything.
Sweats looking at my favorite spell, Raulothim's Psychic Lance
I'm playing a Wizard and I topped using Mind Whip because Slow and Hypnotic Pattern where still miles and miles better. I keep Mind Whip as an escape button for the party but that's it
I've seen this spell on the spell list when looking to clarify how certain spell work, but I've never read it before... Good lord lol
I'm sure during review of the original spell someone said "isn't that basically just a single target slow? No one's going to want to use that! Add some psychic damage and increase the range!" completely unaware that they weren't looking at a third level spell :-D
Game balance is a beautiful damnable thing :-)
imo, the spell does just 1 too many things, perhaps if the caster was forced to choosing between the enemy losing their reaction *OR* move/action/b. action, that would go some distance towards balancing it.
That was honestly exactly how I was thinking of nerfing it. Though I'm also pretty sure I messed up and let psychic damage hurt a broom, which is immune to psychic damage, but would have other wise tpks the party. But that's another story
I mean, the single, melee boss enemy is already screwed over even harder by things like Web and Hold Person, so even with that spell banned you’d have to adjust those encounters anyway. Heck, there’s even more room for you to play around since it only lasts a single turn, which a big beefy boss should be able to survive anyway
The Iron Man movies had a resolution to overpower: The Djinni is out of the bottle, and enemy teams start hiring their own mind whipping wizards.
I mean... to be honest you have to make encounter decisions regardless of this spell. This is just another factor to consider. I'm not saying TMW is "good game design", but if we're calling out TMW, then there are plenty of other things we can call out, to which, yes, I would say "just work around it." I don't get why people think it's such a drag to do this. I hear the same argument from DMs that either outright ban flying races or severely nerf them at early levels. Maybe it's just me, but I love trying to find unique ways to challenge my party. Maybe it's because I homebrew everything anyways, so this isn't adding more work to my plate, but I've never understood the mindset of "oh no I have to work around x thing, better ban or nerf it." You're the DM. You have infinite power. Anything the party can do, you can do better. Plus, it's your job to keep your party's strengths and weaknesses in mind when making an encounter regardless of what they are. Also, why would it be boring for players? If I succeeded on taking away action economy from the enemy, that would feel great! It's not "easy mode" if you design the encounter right.
Idk, I'm in the camp of people that you said would say "just design better encounters."
I also blatantly disagree with the mindset of "oh no, my characters can do this powerful thing, guess I can't use monsters that are weak to it." Why not? Maybe don't consistently do it, but it's a great way to make that character feel important and give them a little spotlight. You throw encounters for the assassin rogue to get big crits on round 1 every so often, you make sure the barbarian isn't shaking their fist at the sky because you have a purely flyer only encounter, you give the party a swarm/horde type battle so the wizard with fireball can feel powerful. Why not throw something with low int at the party every now and again to make the TMW user feel good? Not every fight has to be something that is almost guaranteed to fail the Int save. On the opposite end of that spectrum, you can also toss in psychic resistance/immunity and a high Int every now and again to challenge the player with TMW.
I'm not sure what this "headache" and extensive extra prep work you're talking about is unless you just want to mindlessly throw unmodified monsters from the MM at the party. If you just want to say "I want them to fight x" and that's all the encounter prep you want besides the map, then I can't really say you have a leg to stand on when criticizing things that the players have that are powerful. Every DM needs to put more thought into encounter design than that. You have to take party composition and abilities of everyone into account when making an encounter. Choosing to not have a flyer only battle so that the melee bois can have something to hit is the same amount of prep work as "hmm the player has TMW and this monster has a low int, let's see how I can tweak the encounter to maybe offset that disadvantage a little bit."
My hot take on official player options is that if you aren't willing to work around it, you're just lazy and/or uncreative. Give the monsters resistances, buff certain attributes, play the encounter out in a way that forces them to want to use OTHER spells, there are so many possibilities, you just have to actually use your noggin. Also, once you've found your "hey this challenges the player that has x", guess what, the spell hasn't changed. It's the most work the FIRST time you have to plan around it. After that, you know exactly how to plan around it and can do it again in a fraction of the time.
5e is full of "well shit now I have to plan around that" abilities and spells. If you're gonna ban one, you have to ban them all. If your reasoning is "well it adds too much prep work", well then every ability or spell that "adds too much prep work" should be banned as well. Only fair if it's all or nothing.
> “psychic, which is the least resisted damage type in the game”
When did force get removed from the game?
It definitely shouldn't be 4th level because it just doesn't even begin to compare to Raulothim's Psychic Lance. I have a Amethyst Dragonborn Divination Wizard in the party I DM for whom has both spells generally prepared, and honestly I can't really disagree with the sheer power of the spell. It is worth noting, however, that it's not nearly as useful against ranged attackers, though most melee-only monsters are the ones with the especially poor INT saves. The damage is also pretty subpar for its level to compensate for the great save, half on a success, and secondary effect, though it would kinda depend on the campaign to what degree that balances out. You also neglected to mention how incredible the upcasting is, targeting more creatures rather than just adding 1d6 per level.
Overall, I can see why you banned it, but if you have a front liner and/or the creature has ranged options (which I'd honestly suggest giving most creatures some sort of ranged weapon and/or improvised weapon anyway to nerf flight), it's a meh spell. Otherwise, it's broken. A bit screwy, but I don't mind.
When you said Tasha, I feared for my beloved Hideous Laughter.
I totally agree on this spell. A nice alternative to straight off banning something is to talk it over with your group and decide collectively. As a DM you might wanna throw in a "remember if you can take this spell your enemies can, too" for good measure.
honestly I agree with your insights on this. That is a level 2 spell that even beats out several 5th-7th level spells for effectiveness and that is BEFORE upcasting. it looks like upcasting this thing to just 6th level could put it on par with the more combat focused 8th or even 9th level spells.... and that's doable for even warlocks who don't get to have 9th level spell slots
no it doesn't
You're exaggerating a bit, Raulothim's Psychic Lance is a 4th level spell and is much worse, the target is fully incapacitated, and takes more psychic damage. And single dumb NPC fights can be trivialized by any strong party, with or without these spells. If your 11th level caster is burning a 6th level spell slot for this spell, instead of say, beefed up fireball, or saving it for word of recall, you're good. At that level they should be facing more than hill giants.
@@letopizdetz
Oh God, the lance.
My last session two of my players (Lv 7) where facing off a chain devil (they where meant to run away and get help by a group of 5 priests, so the devil wasn't even attacking them)
All of a sudden the sorcerer turned back and casted Raulothim's Psychic Lance, the other player, unfortunately for me, was a Paladin. That's the story of how two Lv7 characters destroyed a CR11 Chain devil in 2 turns.
@@letopizdetz I would whole-heartedly agree with your argument had I not stated that it outperformed only "several" 5th -7th level spells before upcasting. I left open the fact that there are still spells that outperform it at multiple levels, and was merely remarking that this one in particular is too strong for it's level
The main problem is Wizards of the Coast didn't design most of the the creatures in the Monster Manual with high INT saves at the time of their creation; they mainly focused on dex, con, and wisdom, with a few charisma and strength saves thrown in. As time goes on, they finally print good INT saving spells and now we run into this problem with this particular spell.
To make it worse, your player could cast mind sliver on the enemy first and reduce their next saving throw by 1d4. If a cleric casts bane on them and they fail that, thats another 1d4 subtracted. Then you can add silvery barbs to the list to greatly increase the chance they fail per party member that has it. This can also include the Level 2 Chronurgy wizard feature, Chronal Shift, that gives the wizard 2 smaller silvery barbs per long rest.
BBEG with Mind Whip + Time Skip = medicine *evil laugh*
Maybe its just the adventures I've played, but through the last 2 campaigns, there were fewer than 10 single monster encounters, and several with more than 30 enemies, where Tasha's Mind Whip would have been a complete waste of time. Also, how many encounters do you have in a day where the player can spend multiple rounds each combat casting it?
5th edition overall really only works if there are other enemies other than 1 big bad. It's an overall weak game design as a whole in this way. My parties never have any issues with 1 big bad unless I give them minions or a favorable environment for the big bad. But my players are all veteran players of over 20 to 30 years. Plus if they use it, use it against them with your wizards.
Honestly I when I first saw Tasha's Mindwhip I wondered how strong it would be. And having recently had to play a character with Slow cast on them, Tasha's Mind Whip seems supremely frustrating to deal with.
Slow is definitely the benchmark. Mindwhip does damage and *completely* locks the target to move zero feet if it needs to take any action at all. It's strictly stronger.
@@Casino220 oh wait, YEAH. Slow only halves your movement, it doesn’t make you choose between moving, making an action OR taking a bonus action. (And loosing your reactions entirely). And it’s lower level. Good grief it’s strong!
@@thedragonknight3600 Don't listen to them. Slow is far better than TMW in almost every instance, even against a single target. Halved/No movement essentially negates movement regardless. Most PCs can, as Cody said, attack a creature in melee, move 20 feet (without provoking with either spell) and the halved/no movement will keep them out of reach. Slow removes reactions (the non-provoking I just mentioned), makes targets easier to hit (-2AC), makes them worse at dodging spells (-2 Dex saves), and *AND* gives casters affected by it a 50% chance of losing a spell they cast on their turn and having to use their action ON THEIR NEXT TURN to cast the spell they tried to cast the turn before. Talk about destroying the Action Economy.
To top it off, unlike TMW, Slow doesn't just limit huge brutes to an Action or Bonus Action, it limits them to a SINGLE attack per turn if they choose an Attack Action, regardless of their abilities or features (e.g., Multiattack.) TMW allows a Hydra to get an attack for every head, allows an archer to multi-attack the wizard without moving, allows a Marilith to get off her 8 total attacks because, you guessed it, not every party member is going to be able to run away before the creature hit by TMW takes their turn.
But Slow doesn't allow this and doesn't for EVERY creature that failed within a 40-foot cube. Yes, it allows the more common WIS save but even a single creature failing means it is already as potent as TMW. Why? Because it affects the target for a turn and the increased chance to be hit by the party (thanks to bounded accuracy) will equate to whatever damage you get from TMW. However, Slow IS likely going to affect them for more than just a single turn and it likely won't affect only ONE enemy. Slow can completely shut down the battlefield (or BBEG) for multiple turns and all at the cost of a single spell-slot. TMW requires many many slots (higher level ones too) to equal that power.
@@benjaminmeyer2139 well, you do also make a good point. Slow is a better spell in a lot of ways. Still, TMW is nearly as powerful as that is while being like half the level.
0:47 Gotta admit, you almost had me there
I found it funny you mentioned Sending at the end, because going in that's the spell I thought you'd be talking about. As for Tasha's Mindwhip, yeah, bannable. 5e is turning into 3.5 version 2, so other than the source books being harder to find, I've gotten to the point where I just prefer to play 3.5 again, or pathfinder, or some homebrew mix of the two..
I haven't gotten Monsters of the Multiverse yet and... I'm not sure that I will. Every book they shoot out means more things I need to be familiar with. And there's always power creep with new subclasses and mechanics and spells, such that the old material feels irrelevant or boring by comparison. Makes sense from a marketing perspective, but eventually you just get tired of having to buy the new thing every few months to keep up with the "meta" - reminds me too much of playing League of Legends at that point... *shudders*
Check out Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition. It's a great rent keeping the best of 5E and expanding from there.
Yeeeaah... I won't say you're wrong because I haven't really seen the spell in action. (I am planning to use it in a campaign that I'm just starting in, so we'll see.)
Things is, at least from how you describe it, Mind Whip is crazy good because it can completely defuse a fight against a single big dumb melee monster. That's... not exactly hard to accomplish. Damn near every time I see an encounter like that either the monster gets shut down by any number of spells/abilities (entangle, stunning strike, web, fear, ensnaring strike, hold person, ancestral barbarian, etc etc etc) or the party just mindlessly surrounds and pounds and wipes it out in a couple of rounds anyway. As a DM I never send a single big dumb melee monster at the party if I want it to be a challenging encounter.
I think the problem is a lot of big monsters are literally incapable of making the intelligence save, so unless the monster has legendary resistance the DM has no way to not get affected by mind whip.
i have seen it used and it made most big bosses an absolute joke to beat because they couldn't do much, specially with multiple castings
@@castroofthevault7563 At that point, just give the monster a ranged option.
Last time I used that spell on a big dumb, he just used his action to expend the rest of his neckless of fireball.
@@arthurgraton7165 I think that works for some enemies but others not some much, beasts won't know how to use something like that
i should say i like the spell but I have seen how it can stunlock an enemy
Theres another spell that has a similar problem I think its called Psychic Lance except instead of restricting actions it makes them incapacitated
Thankfully that is a 4th level spell but it can have the same if not worse effects on combat
When i ran a combat a group of 3 level 9 players managed to take down a creature cr15 in 5 turns with the lance because it was too stupid to succeed
Yeah honestly there's so many ways to hose a big melee-only bruiser, I just don't see how mind whip is that OP.
Honestly I was expecting Silvery Barbs lmao
I'd honestly suggest as a better course of action to in general run smarter monsters. It seems mostly like the issue is running big dumb monsters. Sure they have their place, but is this something that happens so often a spell that is pretty powerful becomes broken?
Or give the players less short rests or more combat encounters. If they can afford to spend multiple spell slots per combat to keep the big dumb brute monster locked down, then you're probably going to easy on your players.
Thing is, most monsters or big encounters just simply have a poor INT score. Boosting their int so this spells doesent effect them and completly trivializes the encounter seems like the reverse from how the situatoin should be. We shouldnt be buffing the INT because otherwise every single single (or dual) monster encounter will be trivialized by a 2nd level spell..,
It's one round, in my experience playing pre-written campaigns at level 3 big bad enemies in encounters don't die from 18 damage. if someone is still next to the monster it can still choose to take an action and attack. It lasts a round so unless the spellcaster wants to continuously burn a slot to pseudo-disable a monster, I'd rather do hold person if the creature is a humanoid.
The creature has no reactions so you could just hit it and move 10ft away with no repercussions.. The creature has to choose to move OR take an action. If its a full melee creature you could easily just hit it and then move 10ft away and then the creature can't do anything to you. Why would ANYONE just keep standing next to it if they know it can only move OR take an action. You would have to want to be hit to just stand next to it.
what about replacing "it must choose whether it gets a move, an action, or a bonus action" with something like "if the target has the multiattack feature, they cannot benefit from it until the start of their next turn" basically give the monster the loading property and limiting them to only one attack for one turn. That way the spell can still limit the target's attacks, but you don't have to choose between getting into melee range and actually attacking
I make oozes and the like immune to such attacks as they are basically just mindless, so Psychic attacks just fail.
Clearly you don't have many combats a day for players to have enough spell slots for repeated castings per fight. Also I prefer effects like this one to stuns or paralyses. Better tough decisions on whether to move or attack than no decision.
Yeah, people don't really run D&D as intended. The reason combats that seem really weak are labeled hard or deadly is that you're supposed to be having 3-5 of them per long rest. If anyone actually ran the game like that you couldn't get away with blowing all your slots on this one spell to nerf a single encounter. It is better to take the damage, use your hit dice in a short rest and have slots for the next 4 encounters.
I'd argue no one runs the game this way because 3-5 encounters per day outside a dungeon is basically an impossible situation. It reduces the kinds of campaigns that are possible because you'd have to have a dire threat in every town and throughout the wilderness to a degree that strains belief that anyone could survive in this world. Even in dungeons, usually players can _find a way_ to make a room in the dungeon safe enough to rest in. Without some kind of time pressure - which again limits the kinds of campaigns you can run - there is nothing stopping the players from spending a week in the dungeon, sleeping after every other encounter.
I feel like sometimes solutions are easy. For a 2d level spell like this... its just more encounters, slightly more hp, maybe more monsters per fight, or add a ranged damage feature to your bbeg.
@@DampeS8N I agree tbh, my sessions tend to be RP heavy but I will occasionally through a dungeon my players way to challenge them.
I will also try to always have some downside to waiting 8h every if not a time limit, even if it is just knowing there is another group out there trying to find the same goal as them that might not be resting or intel they have might change.
A quick fix we used on our table is: Mind Whip / Slow do not take *all* of the possible reactions of a creature, and affect only its Actions. That means a creature with multiple reactions (like a Hydra) or a boss (with Legendary or Mythic Actions) are affected in some capacity, but not simply cut off from action at all.
I refuse to ban ANYTHING from my games. That being said, my players know that everything they have, I have as the DM.
I'm also the same kind of DM to give the bbeg's counterspell to use against healing and revival spells. My players know that I balance my fights against them, but reward them MASSIVELY.
The key to proper encounter design, design around the party and how they play.
On its turn, it can use either an action or a bonus action, not both. Regardless of the creature's abilities or magic items, it can't make more than one melee or ranged attack during its turn.
If the creature attempts to cast a spell with a casting time of 1 action, roll a d20. On an 11 or higher, the spell doesn't take effect until the creature's next turn, and the creature must use its action on that turn to complete the spell. If it can't, the spell is wasted.
Slow - 3rd level spell
I don't see what the big deal is about 3d6 damage and no movement, bonus, or reaction next turn.... They can still do their main thing with their action...... Its pretty good don't get me wrong, but I don't see a problem. You could have cast Hideous laughter at two targets for the same cost. If you want to be able to give your party one big stupid dumb monster, then you better ban all classes but rouge, barbarian, and fighter......
Im sorry, but constantly sweeping your opponents knee in a fighting game so they keep falling down is super satisfying.
Not boring.
They need to learn to crouch when they block lol
First rule of fighting games: The enemy is never spamming a move, you're spamming a mistake by not figuring out how to deal with it.
Tasha's Mind Whip with my arcane trickster rogue was capable of taking out the BBEG Lich at level 14 with our fairly-large party of 5. It held down the bad guy enough to murder with a round of Paladin/Fighter. If I didn't get that one off, one of the party was gonna die to Power Word: Kill. But I truly understand why it's so OP, because forcing an enemy to either move or use Bonus Action is SO POWERFUL in 5e's combat.
Spell is fine where it is and unbanned imo, maybe with creatures being immune to charm effects being immune to it.
Command is a 1st level spell and does more to stop the target's turn if it goes off.
At 3rd it would be competing unfavourably with Slow (literally it but AoE instead of the tiny bit of damage) and Hypnotic Pattern (AoE complete shutdown).
Also single 'boss' fights are the DM throwing their players a bone and letting them use effects like this. Even with legendary resistances.
EXACTLY! 1 round isn't that much, people talk about this spell as if it were a minute in duration or something like that, if you wanna nerf it, make it concentration but not more than that. If one round of combat is enough for a big ass monster to die anyways, then you did NOT balance the encounter well enough. As a DM you have complete freedom to make the HP of your enemies higher than the average (or just max em), and that alone should fix the problem. *unless* everyone in the party has this and they're abusing it (if that's the case, then make it so a monster affected by this once cannot be affected again in 24 hours, and/or remove the upcasting benefits)
Just like a lot of other ones, this spell is definitely abusable, but that's the players' problem, and you can talk that out with them before banning the shit outright
I never had a problem with my players spamming these spells. It feels more like a problem with running predictable encounters easily thewarted by these spells.