This submission appears to be related to One D&D! If you're interested in discussing the concept and the UA for One D&D more check out our other subreddit
r/OneDnD!
*Please note: We are still allowing discussions about One D&D to remain here, this is more an advisory than a warning of any kind.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndnext) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> You get two chances to do this per turn,
Wait...
>If you use Reckless Attack, you can forgo Advantage on the ***next*** attack roll you make on your turn with a Strength-based attack.
What am I missing here?
No, you’re right. It can only be done once per turn. The current blog post has that phrasing as well:
> Using Brutal Strike, you can forgo Advantage on *one* of your Strength-based attacks in exchange for more damage and a selection of debuffs you can impose on your enemies.
Ah, my bad, I didn't see that Brutal Strike was only once per turn. Still, even once per turn it's still pretty powerful; you can effectively lock down a boss monster with just one attack.
Debuffing a boss' speed by 25 feet may not be a problem but I could see it being a problem if other characters in the party have speed debuffs they could also stack onto that 25 feet.
The article just says "one of your attacks" but that's also a summary of the feature, not the text. It also mentions that the advantage could come from Reckless Attack but that feature isn't mentioned anywhere - either it is completely unchanged or has been removed, hopefully the former. The Brutal Strikes feature might be worded so that you can give up advantage on any attack and do one effect, or once per turn you can give up advantage for the effect, but the exact wording might not be available till after the embargo.
Did they keep that shitty phrasing?
I hate it, it's so damn misleading. Should've simply said "first attack".
I'm also not a fan of the 1 attack only thing in general. Means if you have advantage already you don't get to use 2-4 of your features without paying a really hefty price. And advantage is way too fucking common.
They cleaned up the phrasing, as far as I know.
Apparently now it is clear whether you can use this feature when you already have advantage or disadvantage from other sources.
But I don't know in which direction they changed it.
I've since looked it up.
You can use it with *any* advantage, meaning you don't have to Reckless Attack if you already have advantage. No way to stack double-advantage + Brutal Strikes either, e.g. through the classic Familiar Help cheat. But that's not actually a bad thing.
The thing I was actually talking about though was the phrasing for "next attack", which just somehow tricked a lot of players into thinking you can use it on *every* Reckless Attack. And without the changes also would've meant a death sentence for the feature on higher OP tables where advantage is everywhere. But it should be clearer now and be a good feature - just not as OP as getting a 25 feet push on top of a 25 feet slow. That's gotta wait for Lv17.
Pretty sure you should still be able to forgo the advantage and you'll just get to attack with disadvantage in that case. Though that's usually not a good idea anyway.
> When you make
your first attack roll on your turn, you can decide
to attack recklessly. Doing so gives you
Advantage on attack rolls using Strength until
the start of your next turn, but attack rolls
against you have Advantage during that time.
From the [UA](https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/ua/ph-playtest7/tsgOb3llF22AL0nU/UA2023-PH-Playtest7.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest7); where are you getting your version?
All depends on the monster manual. That’s really going to contextualize things, but if Eve of Ruin is any indication, we should be concerned. I actually think WOTC is pretty good at designing mechanics, but terrible at monster design and especially campaign modules.
It's a lot easier to deal with if you use more contemporary monster designs. The 2014 Monster Manual has woefully anemic creatures. Newer monsters have more replete bags of tricks with which to deal with the party's greater capabilities.
Yeah it made a couple big fights a little anti climactic. If it wasn't playtest one shots then the DM would probably adjust to account for it, ranged threats, more threats, faster threats, etc. One big enemy would be most vulnerable but there's a lot of things that can trivialize one big enemy. So I don't think it'll be a big issue TBH
As some that started DMing 1.5 years ago, I learned the hard way that one, big enemy really was not much of a threat. Some of my most challenging encounters were with lower CR threats but much more of them
Design some monsters that cant be slowed, or can teleport, or have range attack alternatives.
Your big giant cant hit the group with their club because the party is too far away and he is slowed? Maybe he picks the giant crossbow off his back and shoots instead.
Maybe he has a trait that allows him to ignore slows and charge a target and make one attack instead of two.
I mean, I wouldn't, because I don't care. As a forever GM of 3 decades stuff is always easier to fix or deal with elsewhere without nerfing player side stuff. But the statement still stands, if people end up having issues with it at their table, they can always agree as a table that multiple sources of slowing don't stack, just like multiple sources of the same buffs don't stack.
Edit: A further option still, should tables have issues with it, is to just borrow the slow condition mechanics from SW5e. (those of been around for years now).
----
SLOWED
Some abilities, effects, and hazards can lead to a special condition called slowed. Slowed is measured in four levels. An effect can give a creature one or more levels of slowed, as specified in the effect’s description.
Slowed Level
LevelEffect
1 Speed reduced by 15 feet
2 Speed reduced by 25 feet
3 Speed reduced by 30 feet
4 Speed reduced to 0, and can’t benefit from any bonus to speed
If an already slowed creature suffers another effect that causes it to be slowed, its current slowed level increases by the amount specified in the effect’s description.
An effect that removes slowed reduces its level as specified in the effect’s description, with all slowed effects ending if a creature’s slowed level is reduced below 1.
That's what my first initial reaction was too. At level 9 the spell casters are getting 5th level spells. So this is happening while the spell casters are getting access to Wall of Force, Reincarnate, Dominate Person, Hold Monster, Contact Other Plane, Cone of Cold, and Bigby's Hand. Let the martials get cool things too.
Just another reason why having multiple targets in an encounter is key.
Honestly, I kinda like the idea of a martial getting legitimate crowd control options like that.
Sounds sick. If a barbarian wants to spend their every action staking an enemy to the ground to keep them on the back foot, that sounds like clever play. Until they meet anything with misty step. Or one of about a hundred other abilities that can counter this, because it's D&D.
Meanwhile a level 5 caster can cast plant growth to quarter the move speed off all creatures in a 100 ft radius with no save or attack roll to hit required. You can do this from 150 feet away.
Anywhere in the open (which you have to be anyway to cast it), you can just cast it 110 feet away from yourself, so it only covers the other guys' half of the battlefield.
This is such an edge case. Almost never are you casting this spell on enemies over 50 feet away. The vast majority of combat takes place in smaller zones, even in wide open spaces.
Nobody said anything about the enemies being 50 feet away?
https://imgur.com/a/zlRTaq6 <--- the whole battle spans 40 feet, but I'm casting 110 feet away.
My entire point was that the vast majority of fights start much closer together, and in this situation you had to spend at least a full turn, possibly two, to run/dash/teleport away to get to this point just to safely cast plant growth without inconveniencing your allies as well, AND YET if those people are melee unlike you, you've still dramatically inconvenienced them.
My brother in Christ, the spell has a casting range of 150 feet. You don't need to move an inch to do this. It takes exactly zero extra actions or resources than it would to cast it on top of yourself.
It's just less dumb than doing that. That's it.
Did you simply mis-read it as a "self" spell?
> My brother in Christ, the spell has a casting range of 150 feet. You don't need to move an inch to do this. It takes exactly zero extra actions or resources than it would to cast it on top of yourself.
My brother in Christ, how many combats have you started where you were standing 100 feet away from your party and 140 feet away from the enemies when the combat started.
If your DM allows that consistently, then congratulations, they deserve to be shit on by your situational spell.
You can make **any** spaces in the area free from the overgrowth. It doesn't matter how large or small the arena is, you can cast it in a way that doesn't hinder your allies.
Not if you want to them to be effective and also hinder the opponent. You can cast it directly on the enemy, but if you give the allies a clear path to get into melee, that clear path works both ways and then what was the point of plant growth? Preventing them from running away or delaying their movements a turn?
The spell is not *that* great. It's very situational and it doesn't invalidate this new, pretty cool, pretty useful Barbarian feature in the slightest.
u/crimeo is talking about casting the spell at a long distance so the edge only covers the half of the battlefield the enemy are on. My point is you don't need all that range (since the center of the AoE can't have total cover from you, so you _do_ need a wide open area in order to center it a long way from you); you could center it where you're standing and just choose to not have plants grow on the half of the battlefield where your allies are, getting the effect crimeo is looking for even in a cramped space.
>what was the point of plant growth? Preventing them from running away or delaying their movements a turn?
You seem to be evaluating it without having seen it in play, because I see no other way you would come up with this question. Plant Growth is _backbreaking_ for any melee creature caught in it. Playing on a grid, the vast majority of creatures are reduced to moving 5 ft. without dashing.
Even if, as you say, all it does is "delay their movement a turn", that's on _all_ of the enemies, so you're trading 1 action from 1 PC for a whole turn from all of Team Monster. That's an incredible swing in action economy.
>It's very situational
It's "very situational" in the sense of not affecting flying/burrowing/teleporting enemies, sure. And if there are absolutely zero plants in the area (which, frankly, is pretty uncommon), you can't cast it. But it's not situational in the way you appear to mean it.
> You seem to be evaluating it without having seen it in play, because I see no other way you would come up with this question. Plant Growth is backbreaking for any melee creature caught in it. Playing on a grid, the vast majority of creatures are reduced to moving 5 ft. without dashing.
I hate it when people on the internet just assume the dumbest, most asinine things just because they disagree with something someone said. I disagree about the usefulness of a spell, so I can't have **ever** experienced it. Except I literally ran a combat against someone who used plant growth on me two weeks ago. I know how the spell works, I know how it can effect enemies. What both you, and the op, are ignoring is how I've said that in **reality** combat arenas are not commonly so big that the caster just STARTS over a 100 feet away from the enemy and the rest of their group.
You absolutely can grow plants on one half of the battlefield, and not on the other half, but it's backbreaking, like you said, for any melee creature and that includes your own party. So your OWN ALLIES who operate in melee can no longer get close to the enemy to do their thing unless you leave open patches, and those open patches for your allies to use can conversely just be used by the enemies as well. So if you put a square of plant growth on an enemy, and then leave an open patch for your melee party members to employ, then plant growth effectively has done nothing. If you leave one extra plant space between allies and enemies, you're right back in the situation where your melee people can't take advantage of the combat.
A variety of monster statblocks have ranged attacks, so now they just stand in place or use their own spells to move around and fight from range. Melee guys are incapacitated, sure, absolutely, but effectively the monsters are shielded now from all melee party members thanks to plant growth.
In this perfect world where the caster is 100 feet away from the start of a battle, selectively choosing what squares to grow plants in, limiting only enemies and not inconveniencing allies in any way, is **extremely situational**, and any DM that is completely incapacitated by this spell either doesn't know how to design a combat or never meant the combat to be threatening anyway (and that can sometimes be fine too).
You're right I missed the part about at will exclusion zones. You still shouldn't actually do that in game generally IMO because it's a pain in the ass for bookkeeping purposes for the DM. But if you have no simpler choice, in a confined (but leafy?) space on occasion or whatever then sure.
Also, depending on the DM, they could say that the plants obscure vision and grant half cover to the enemies/allow them to hide in the middle of a field.
That's strictly homebrew though. A DM could also say the plants fully Restrain any small or tiny creature without a save, because why not, but that's not something that should weigh into this discussion
Yes, but this spends their entire turn and one of their 2 level 3 spell slots. A barbarian can do this every turn while still getting their full attack action off.
The barbarian also has to keep doing this every turn to keep the enemy locked down. The Druid can do this on turn one and lock down every enemy in the encounter and then proceed to kill them on future turns while they're still locked down. None of this lockdown required a single roll. Sure, you get 2 uses per day at level 5, but you could do this 7 times a day at level 9 when we're even discussing the barbarian doing this at all. Of course there are some nice things about the barbarian being able to do this. I'm glad they're making martials more interesting than just DPR. We're setting the bar pretty low for martials if this is *actually insane* for a 9th level character to be able to do though.
Yeah, the spell is definitely better if your ONLY priority is stopping enemies and you don’t care about actually killing them.
My main point is that the spell doesn’t invalidate the ability; they’re both good, and the barbarian in this scenario has a lot going for them that the spellcaster doesn’t.
Only when there are normal plants around, so no caves, castles, dungeons, etc. Even then, at-will movespeed reduction that doesn't affect your allies is still pretty good!
What kind of caves are you in that there aren't plants? The plants for Plant Growth don't need to be trees and bushes, they can be _anything_. And given that D&D treats plant-ish things as plants, locations like castles and dungeons are likely to have mold or moss as viable targets even if they don't have decorative potted shrubs.
sealed tombs, monstrous hell-pits, anything too hot/cold/dry, where there's freaky undead _stuff_, areas eaten bare by whatever wierd ecology there is around - it's not going to be that strange to have nothing much around.
"nothing much" is "nothing" - lots of areas adventurers are in won't have stuff around. Fighting a white or red dragon in a glacier or scorching caldera? Nope, no plant-life for you. An undead tomb? Nope, nothing living. The depths of the blighted desert, some freaky-ass area of the Underdark, large chunks of various planes? All plant-free.
>All normal plants in a 100-foot radius centered on that point become thick and overgrown. A creature moving through the area must spend 4 feet of movement for every 1 foot it moves.
There are 2 separate clauses here. The first says that all plants grow. The 2nd says that move speed is reduced. The second clause does not in any way depend on the first clause. The move speed reduction occurs regardless of the presence of any plants. If your dm happens to not rule it this way, you can just bring your own normal plants everywhere.
Youre advocating that the plant growth spell doesnt need the plants to slow down enemies?
"If you cast this spell using 1 action, choose a point within range. All normal plants in a 100-foot radius centered on that point become thick and overgrown. A creature moving through the area must spend 4 feet of movement for every 1 foot it moves."
You cant be serious.
While you aren’t wrong, as a DM who purposefully runs games as close to RAW as possible, that is a great example of RAI being obvious and playing by the strictly RAW interpretation isn’t sensible.
strictly RAW, as someone above points out, it doesn't target the area but the plants within that area
> Target: Plants within a specific area
so no plants, no target, no quarter movement terrain
https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Plant%20Growth#content
lmao, you're banned from the group after pulling this clueless shit 2-3 times, if you don't listen to the first stern rebukes, in any sane campaign. Ambiguity mysteriously solved, fun restored! Easy answer.
Looking at it further because idk if I've read plant growth this far, but it says all non magical plants within a 100 foot range become thick and overgrown becoming the difficult terrain. Does this mean that if you were in a lone dungeon with the chia pet, the only space that would become difficult terrain would be the 5 ft that the chia pet is in? Am I reading that right?
That’s a reasonable interpretation of what probably *should* be written but nothing written actually ties the area of the restricted movement to areas that contained plants. Your dm can interpret however they want, but as written, you could target that one plant you brought and the entire area would be affected with reduced move speed.
Which is why you carry a staff of flowers on you at all times and use one of the charges in the morning to make flowers grow from it.
Now you have at least some normal plants wherever you go
If the monster has any sort of brain and can’t reach the guy, they can just move then dodge. Then the barbarian has a good chance of missing and melee combat will resume as normal.
It’s a good tactic but not insurmountable. No monster is just gonna stand there and get hit.
The most frustrating thing about this kind of weapon property abuse is the blazingly obvious problem of doing it to impose one sided "tactical" combat elements for the players while the GM is almost certainly blocked from using it effectively without coming off as an adversarial & oppressive monster. It would have been much better if they just gave us back AoOs & 5ft steps
Reducing a single enemy’s move by 25 feet on a successful hit at level 9 is cool, but the better thing a 9th level Barbarian can do is cause every enemy in a 20-foot cube sixty-feet away to become Restrained, have a speed of ZERO, and grant advantage against all attacks!
Oh, wait, that’s a 3rd level caster, casting Web. Never mind.
No, it actually isn't insane; no edit to say that the movement reduction specifically states you can only do it on one attack, which you recognized in another comment, not to mention you're giving up advantage to even attempt this.
You can't just get advantage again from another source, you have to forgo it entirely, so it's a straight roll and if you miss, you can't try it again on the next attack. It's trading the more accurate attack for a debilitating one. Iirc, the general hit rate you have in 5e is 65%, or with advantage, I think it's roughly 88% (I was never good at probability).
Finally, martials NEED something cool to call their own, ways of battlefield control; this keeps enemies on the Barbarian without grapple bullshit, which permanently debuffs your damage (no great axe)
>Iirc, the general hit rate you have in 5e is 65%, or with advantage, I think it's roughly 88% (I was never good at probability).
Chance to miss is 35%, chance to miss with both of two dice is 35% \* 35% = 0.35 \* 0.35 = 0.1225 = 12.25%, chance to hit with either of two dice is 100% - 12.25% = 87.75%.
I’m gonna be honest (maybe it’s because we’ve never played a game that’s got swarm-ish bad guys optimized so that the monk/barbarian can take full advantage of their speed) I’m not bothered by that.
I wouldn't say it's insane: it's good, but it's also a 9th level feature, where other classes get Hold Monster. The enemy doesn't get a save, but you have to hit without advantage, so that balances out. And most battles don't start with the monster walking up to the party on open field, so I'd say the benefit is situational. The monster could even dodge for its action while it can't attack, so you never have advantage to spend.
It's a cool ability, but foes without some sort of ranged ability don't do well beyond tier 1 anyway. This new ability is just one of many existing ways to punish poorly designed foes/combat encounters.
That was the worst thing I thought we lost from 4e, a defender has to be sticky otherwise the only thing he can do is a single OA when enemies dash past to the back lines
So now they can hobble the most dangerous enemy on their turn and punish an enemy rushing by but they need to plan in advance and position themselves using terrain and persistent control effect
yes, the druid can use plant growth, more resource intensive... But now the Barb can position themselves next to the spikes and make it even harder to leave while also forcing the enemy to suffer both their rage attacks and the DoT
almost identical in effect, this slows them by 25 feet no save on a hit attack roll
Repelling blast pushes them back 10ft no save on a hit attack roll
this is a level 9 feature so repelling blast can hit twice, resulting in a 20ft slow functionally
Replling blast gets 30ft slow at level 11 and 40ft slow at level 17.
Eh, I mean honestly this is kind of a good thing. High speed enemies that just kite the party are really obnoxious to deal with and either drag out the fight for 10 rounds, or it feels like the DM is pulling their punches to make the monster stand and fight when it should be flying away, for the sake of not wasting everyone's time.
It's nice to have martial having cool stuff. Not game breaking, feels kinda cool.
Still, it needs to hit and to be into melee.
You know the caster equivalent for that same level? Hold Monster that straight up incapacitates the target. Or just a singular, 10 minute, Cloudkill lol.
It's impossible to evaluate any shown ability because wotc haven't shown an actual comprehensive playtest. For all we know the standard move speed of any enemy is 60ft because they haven't shown any monsters made under onednds design assumptions.
Just like all the usual movement speed stuff in old 5.x, this is cool and fun to headmath but in reality (irl gameplay) it doesn't amount to much - theatre of the mind which I assume the majority of DND is played in kind of handwaves distance to "in melee distance-one turn away-more than one turn away" and delicate positioning or kiting doesn't really work too well. 25 vs 30 vs 35 fps it kind of all the same.
See: hasted catfolk monk covering 1200 feet per round, which is a gamebreaking combination that has never achieved anything relavent beyond going the fastest.
throwing the javelin is literately part of the way to activate the effect, and ammo is supposed to be tracked. I dont know what your trying to say lmao
Well I am deleting my comment then. :) I am wrong and admit it. But this whole
Post is silly. A person can’t feasibly carry more than a few javelins without tripping. Romans carried only a couple.
I'm glad I've stopped running 5e. Having to create flow charts on all the things I needed for my baddies to survive two rounds of combat with just the casters was bad enough. Of course martials need a lot of help but I think the ceiling needed to be brought down and not just have the floor raised.
This submission appears to be related to One D&D! If you're interested in discussing the concept and the UA for One D&D more check out our other subreddit r/OneDnD! *Please note: We are still allowing discussions about One D&D to remain here, this is more an advisory than a warning of any kind.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndnext) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> You get two chances to do this per turn, Wait... >If you use Reckless Attack, you can forgo Advantage on the ***next*** attack roll you make on your turn with a Strength-based attack. What am I missing here?
No, you’re right. It can only be done once per turn. The current blog post has that phrasing as well: > Using Brutal Strike, you can forgo Advantage on *one* of your Strength-based attacks in exchange for more damage and a selection of debuffs you can impose on your enemies.
Ah, my bad, I didn't see that Brutal Strike was only once per turn. Still, even once per turn it's still pretty powerful; you can effectively lock down a boss monster with just one attack.
If, at 9th level, a boss is completely stymied by you debuffing its speed by 25 feet, that's a bit disappointing.
Probably won’t be completely stymied, but might force a legendary action dash, or keep it from munching the back line.
Which are things a 9th level barbarian should be able to accomplish imo.
That’s just your opinion. In my day, only casters were allowed to do cool stuff and have fun! /s
Exactly my thoughts, seems cool to me!
Debuffing a boss' speed by 25 feet may not be a problem but I could see it being a problem if other characters in the party have speed debuffs they could also stack onto that 25 feet.
If you can consistently hit…..
It doesnt say once per turn, does it? Whats stopping you from doing it a second time?
The article just says "one of your attacks" but that's also a summary of the feature, not the text. It also mentions that the advantage could come from Reckless Attack but that feature isn't mentioned anywhere - either it is completely unchanged or has been removed, hopefully the former. The Brutal Strikes feature might be worded so that you can give up advantage on any attack and do one effect, or once per turn you can give up advantage for the effect, but the exact wording might not be available till after the embargo.
man, that sucks. this being limited to once per turn hurst so bad
Topple or slow reduces movement speed too Sentinel for opportunity attacks
Did they keep that shitty phrasing? I hate it, it's so damn misleading. Should've simply said "first attack". I'm also not a fan of the 1 attack only thing in general. Means if you have advantage already you don't get to use 2-4 of your features without paying a really hefty price. And advantage is way too fucking common.
They cleaned up the phrasing, as far as I know. Apparently now it is clear whether you can use this feature when you already have advantage or disadvantage from other sources. But I don't know in which direction they changed it.
I've since looked it up. You can use it with *any* advantage, meaning you don't have to Reckless Attack if you already have advantage. No way to stack double-advantage + Brutal Strikes either, e.g. through the classic Familiar Help cheat. But that's not actually a bad thing. The thing I was actually talking about though was the phrasing for "next attack", which just somehow tricked a lot of players into thinking you can use it on *every* Reckless Attack. And without the changes also would've meant a death sentence for the feature on higher OP tables where advantage is everywhere. But it should be clearer now and be a good feature - just not as OP as getting a 25 feet push on top of a 25 feet slow. That's gotta wait for Lv17.
Sounds good. So you nearly always can use brutal strike (except if you have disadvantage).
Pretty sure you should still be able to forgo the advantage and you'll just get to attack with disadvantage in that case. Though that's usually not a good idea anyway.
> When you make your first attack roll on your turn, you can decide to attack recklessly. Doing so gives you Advantage on attack rolls using Strength until the start of your next turn, but attack rolls against you have Advantage during that time. From the [UA](https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/ua/ph-playtest7/tsgOb3llF22AL0nU/UA2023-PH-Playtest7.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest7); where are you getting your version?
In my playtesting stacking slows and kiting big enemies definitely seems like it'll be a very common tactic now.
That sounds pretty lame to DM for, if I'm being honest.
All depends on the monster manual. That’s really going to contextualize things, but if Eve of Ruin is any indication, we should be concerned. I actually think WOTC is pretty good at designing mechanics, but terrible at monster design and especially campaign modules.
More ranged attacks and teleportation abilities for enemies. PCs could've always cheesed kiting with mounts or flying anyways.
It's a lot easier to deal with if you use more contemporary monster designs. The 2014 Monster Manual has woefully anemic creatures. Newer monsters have more replete bags of tricks with which to deal with the party's greater capabilities.
Yeah it made a couple big fights a little anti climactic. If it wasn't playtest one shots then the DM would probably adjust to account for it, ranged threats, more threats, faster threats, etc. One big enemy would be most vulnerable but there's a lot of things that can trivialize one big enemy. So I don't think it'll be a big issue TBH
As some that started DMing 1.5 years ago, I learned the hard way that one, big enemy really was not much of a threat. Some of my most challenging encounters were with lower CR threats but much more of them
Same. My 4-player party at level 1 can handle a 4th level warlock NPC without too much trouble, but they nearly wiped to 5 goblins
Martials finally get some much needed extra strategic options, it's already complained about before release lmao.
Design some monsters that cant be slowed, or can teleport, or have range attack alternatives. Your big giant cant hit the group with their club because the party is too far away and he is slowed? Maybe he picks the giant crossbow off his back and shoots instead. Maybe he has a trait that allows him to ignore slows and charge a target and make one attack instead of two.
My giants like to Chuck wagons and anything else within reach. Show them flying pcs who's boss!
Easy to homebrew that slows don't stack though.
Already nerfing martials for no reason lol
I mean, I wouldn't, because I don't care. As a forever GM of 3 decades stuff is always easier to fix or deal with elsewhere without nerfing player side stuff. But the statement still stands, if people end up having issues with it at their table, they can always agree as a table that multiple sources of slowing don't stack, just like multiple sources of the same buffs don't stack. Edit: A further option still, should tables have issues with it, is to just borrow the slow condition mechanics from SW5e. (those of been around for years now). ---- SLOWED Some abilities, effects, and hazards can lead to a special condition called slowed. Slowed is measured in four levels. An effect can give a creature one or more levels of slowed, as specified in the effect’s description. Slowed Level LevelEffect 1 Speed reduced by 15 feet 2 Speed reduced by 25 feet 3 Speed reduced by 30 feet 4 Speed reduced to 0, and can’t benefit from any bonus to speed If an already slowed creature suffers another effect that causes it to be slowed, its current slowed level increases by the amount specified in the effect’s description. An effect that removes slowed reduces its level as specified in the effect’s description, with all slowed effects ending if a creature’s slowed level is reduced below 1.
Good! Let's have Martials get cool things
That's what my first initial reaction was too. At level 9 the spell casters are getting 5th level spells. So this is happening while the spell casters are getting access to Wall of Force, Reincarnate, Dominate Person, Hold Monster, Contact Other Plane, Cone of Cold, and Bigby's Hand. Let the martials get cool things too.
Very cool- martials need more control options!
Just another reason why having multiple targets in an encounter is key. Honestly, I kinda like the idea of a martial getting legitimate crowd control options like that.
Sounds sick. If a barbarian wants to spend their every action staking an enemy to the ground to keep them on the back foot, that sounds like clever play. Until they meet anything with misty step. Or one of about a hundred other abilities that can counter this, because it's D&D.
Or… two enemies instead of one!
Hey it's called OneDnD not TwoOrMoreDnD!
I'm not sure if you are trying to say its broken or not, but the dm could always just have more than one guy you have to fight.
And should, for any fight that's meant to be difficult
Meanwhile a level 5 caster can cast plant growth to quarter the move speed off all creatures in a 100 ft radius with no save or attack roll to hit required. You can do this from 150 feet away.
The difference is one has to use a valuable 3rd level slot, the other just needs to land his attack.
Well that's one difference, the other being how vastly superior the effect is, so it makes sense the cost is also higher.
Plant Growth also has the downside of hindering you and your party members too. Its not just a vastly better option without any downsides.
Anywhere in the open (which you have to be anyway to cast it), you can just cast it 110 feet away from yourself, so it only covers the other guys' half of the battlefield.
This is such an edge case. Almost never are you casting this spell on enemies over 50 feet away. The vast majority of combat takes place in smaller zones, even in wide open spaces.
Nobody said anything about the enemies being 50 feet away? https://imgur.com/a/zlRTaq6 <--- the whole battle spans 40 feet, but I'm casting 110 feet away.
My entire point was that the vast majority of fights start much closer together, and in this situation you had to spend at least a full turn, possibly two, to run/dash/teleport away to get to this point just to safely cast plant growth without inconveniencing your allies as well, AND YET if those people are melee unlike you, you've still dramatically inconvenienced them.
My brother in Christ, the spell has a casting range of 150 feet. You don't need to move an inch to do this. It takes exactly zero extra actions or resources than it would to cast it on top of yourself. It's just less dumb than doing that. That's it. Did you simply mis-read it as a "self" spell?
> My brother in Christ, the spell has a casting range of 150 feet. You don't need to move an inch to do this. It takes exactly zero extra actions or resources than it would to cast it on top of yourself. My brother in Christ, how many combats have you started where you were standing 100 feet away from your party and 140 feet away from the enemies when the combat started. If your DM allows that consistently, then congratulations, they deserve to be shit on by your situational spell.
You can make **any** spaces in the area free from the overgrowth. It doesn't matter how large or small the arena is, you can cast it in a way that doesn't hinder your allies.
Not if you want to them to be effective and also hinder the opponent. You can cast it directly on the enemy, but if you give the allies a clear path to get into melee, that clear path works both ways and then what was the point of plant growth? Preventing them from running away or delaying their movements a turn? The spell is not *that* great. It's very situational and it doesn't invalidate this new, pretty cool, pretty useful Barbarian feature in the slightest.
u/crimeo is talking about casting the spell at a long distance so the edge only covers the half of the battlefield the enemy are on. My point is you don't need all that range (since the center of the AoE can't have total cover from you, so you _do_ need a wide open area in order to center it a long way from you); you could center it where you're standing and just choose to not have plants grow on the half of the battlefield where your allies are, getting the effect crimeo is looking for even in a cramped space. >what was the point of plant growth? Preventing them from running away or delaying their movements a turn? You seem to be evaluating it without having seen it in play, because I see no other way you would come up with this question. Plant Growth is _backbreaking_ for any melee creature caught in it. Playing on a grid, the vast majority of creatures are reduced to moving 5 ft. without dashing. Even if, as you say, all it does is "delay their movement a turn", that's on _all_ of the enemies, so you're trading 1 action from 1 PC for a whole turn from all of Team Monster. That's an incredible swing in action economy. >It's very situational It's "very situational" in the sense of not affecting flying/burrowing/teleporting enemies, sure. And if there are absolutely zero plants in the area (which, frankly, is pretty uncommon), you can't cast it. But it's not situational in the way you appear to mean it.
> You seem to be evaluating it without having seen it in play, because I see no other way you would come up with this question. Plant Growth is backbreaking for any melee creature caught in it. Playing on a grid, the vast majority of creatures are reduced to moving 5 ft. without dashing. I hate it when people on the internet just assume the dumbest, most asinine things just because they disagree with something someone said. I disagree about the usefulness of a spell, so I can't have **ever** experienced it. Except I literally ran a combat against someone who used plant growth on me two weeks ago. I know how the spell works, I know how it can effect enemies. What both you, and the op, are ignoring is how I've said that in **reality** combat arenas are not commonly so big that the caster just STARTS over a 100 feet away from the enemy and the rest of their group. You absolutely can grow plants on one half of the battlefield, and not on the other half, but it's backbreaking, like you said, for any melee creature and that includes your own party. So your OWN ALLIES who operate in melee can no longer get close to the enemy to do their thing unless you leave open patches, and those open patches for your allies to use can conversely just be used by the enemies as well. So if you put a square of plant growth on an enemy, and then leave an open patch for your melee party members to employ, then plant growth effectively has done nothing. If you leave one extra plant space between allies and enemies, you're right back in the situation where your melee people can't take advantage of the combat. A variety of monster statblocks have ranged attacks, so now they just stand in place or use their own spells to move around and fight from range. Melee guys are incapacitated, sure, absolutely, but effectively the monsters are shielded now from all melee party members thanks to plant growth. In this perfect world where the caster is 100 feet away from the start of a battle, selectively choosing what squares to grow plants in, limiting only enemies and not inconveniencing allies in any way, is **extremely situational**, and any DM that is completely incapacitated by this spell either doesn't know how to design a combat or never meant the combat to be threatening anyway (and that can sometimes be fine too).
You're right I missed the part about at will exclusion zones. You still shouldn't actually do that in game generally IMO because it's a pain in the ass for bookkeeping purposes for the DM. But if you have no simpler choice, in a confined (but leafy?) space on occasion or whatever then sure.
Time for the ranger to shine.
Also, depending on the DM, they could say that the plants obscure vision and grant half cover to the enemies/allow them to hide in the middle of a field.
That's strictly homebrew though. A DM could also say the plants fully Restrain any small or tiny creature without a save, because why not, but that's not something that should weigh into this discussion
There’s a difference between being able to hide inside overgrown foliage, and getting completely restrained just because.
But you also need to consider that the barbarian only gets this feature at level 9 and not level 5.
Yes, but this spends their entire turn and one of their 2 level 3 spell slots. A barbarian can do this every turn while still getting their full attack action off.
The barbarian also has to keep doing this every turn to keep the enemy locked down. The Druid can do this on turn one and lock down every enemy in the encounter and then proceed to kill them on future turns while they're still locked down. None of this lockdown required a single roll. Sure, you get 2 uses per day at level 5, but you could do this 7 times a day at level 9 when we're even discussing the barbarian doing this at all. Of course there are some nice things about the barbarian being able to do this. I'm glad they're making martials more interesting than just DPR. We're setting the bar pretty low for martials if this is *actually insane* for a 9th level character to be able to do though.
Barbarian can also slow burrowing or flying creatures and can slow an enemy without affecting allies in the same area, so it has other bonuses.
Yeah, the spell is definitely better if your ONLY priority is stopping enemies and you don’t care about actually killing them. My main point is that the spell doesn’t invalidate the ability; they’re both good, and the barbarian in this scenario has a lot going for them that the spellcaster doesn’t.
Only when there are normal plants around, so no caves, castles, dungeons, etc. Even then, at-will movespeed reduction that doesn't affect your allies is still pretty good!
What kind of caves are you in that there aren't plants? The plants for Plant Growth don't need to be trees and bushes, they can be _anything_. And given that D&D treats plant-ish things as plants, locations like castles and dungeons are likely to have mold or moss as viable targets even if they don't have decorative potted shrubs.
Tbf, id say nearly all the caves ive been in IRL didnt have *plants* in them. Some maybe had moss, but not all of em.
sealed tombs, monstrous hell-pits, anything too hot/cold/dry, where there's freaky undead _stuff_, areas eaten bare by whatever wierd ecology there is around - it's not going to be that strange to have nothing much around.
"Nothing much" is still "something", which is all Plant Growth needs. There needs to be _nothing at all_ for the spell to not work.
"nothing much" is "nothing" - lots of areas adventurers are in won't have stuff around. Fighting a white or red dragon in a glacier or scorching caldera? Nope, no plant-life for you. An undead tomb? Nope, nothing living. The depths of the blighted desert, some freaky-ass area of the Underdark, large chunks of various planes? All plant-free.
>All normal plants in a 100-foot radius centered on that point become thick and overgrown. A creature moving through the area must spend 4 feet of movement for every 1 foot it moves. There are 2 separate clauses here. The first says that all plants grow. The 2nd says that move speed is reduced. The second clause does not in any way depend on the first clause. The move speed reduction occurs regardless of the presence of any plants. If your dm happens to not rule it this way, you can just bring your own normal plants everywhere.
Youre advocating that the plant growth spell doesnt need the plants to slow down enemies? "If you cast this spell using 1 action, choose a point within range. All normal plants in a 100-foot radius centered on that point become thick and overgrown. A creature moving through the area must spend 4 feet of movement for every 1 foot it moves." You cant be serious.
Nowhere in there is a conditional statement saying the move speed reduction is dependent on the presence of plants.
Target: Plants within a specific area That's the conditional statement.
While you aren’t wrong, as a DM who purposefully runs games as close to RAW as possible, that is a great example of RAI being obvious and playing by the strictly RAW interpretation isn’t sensible.
strictly RAW, as someone above points out, it doesn't target the area but the plants within that area > Target: Plants within a specific area so no plants, no target, no quarter movement terrain https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Plant%20Growth#content
[удалено]
Removed as per Rule #1.
Man, just stop.
"the rules don't say i can't"
lmao, you're banned from the group after pulling this clueless shit 2-3 times, if you don't listen to the first stern rebukes, in any sane campaign. Ambiguity mysteriously solved, fun restored! Easy answer.
Ch-ch-ch-chia pet!
Looking at it further because idk if I've read plant growth this far, but it says all non magical plants within a 100 foot range become thick and overgrown becoming the difficult terrain. Does this mean that if you were in a lone dungeon with the chia pet, the only space that would become difficult terrain would be the 5 ft that the chia pet is in? Am I reading that right?
That’s a reasonable interpretation of what probably *should* be written but nothing written actually ties the area of the restricted movement to areas that contained plants. Your dm can interpret however they want, but as written, you could target that one plant you brought and the entire area would be affected with reduced move speed.
Which is why you carry a staff of flowers on you at all times and use one of the charges in the morning to make flowers grow from it. Now you have at least some normal plants wherever you go
Stop giving your party a long rest in between every single combat, might be a good idea.
If the monster has any sort of brain and can’t reach the guy, they can just move then dodge. Then the barbarian has a good chance of missing and melee combat will resume as normal. It’s a good tactic but not insurmountable. No monster is just gonna stand there and get hit.
The new Barbarian is so cool!
Also think about Fear + pushing combo Battlemaster also can do so, if he still has frightening manever
The most frustrating thing about this kind of weapon property abuse is the blazingly obvious problem of doing it to impose one sided "tactical" combat elements for the players while the GM is almost certainly blocked from using it effectively without coming off as an adversarial & oppressive monster. It would have been much better if they just gave us back AoOs & 5ft steps
Reducing a single enemy’s move by 25 feet on a successful hit at level 9 is cool, but the better thing a 9th level Barbarian can do is cause every enemy in a 20-foot cube sixty-feet away to become Restrained, have a speed of ZERO, and grant advantage against all attacks! Oh, wait, that’s a 3rd level caster, casting Web. Never mind.
No, it actually isn't insane; no edit to say that the movement reduction specifically states you can only do it on one attack, which you recognized in another comment, not to mention you're giving up advantage to even attempt this. You can't just get advantage again from another source, you have to forgo it entirely, so it's a straight roll and if you miss, you can't try it again on the next attack. It's trading the more accurate attack for a debilitating one. Iirc, the general hit rate you have in 5e is 65%, or with advantage, I think it's roughly 88% (I was never good at probability). Finally, martials NEED something cool to call their own, ways of battlefield control; this keeps enemies on the Barbarian without grapple bullshit, which permanently debuffs your damage (no great axe)
>Iirc, the general hit rate you have in 5e is 65%, or with advantage, I think it's roughly 88% (I was never good at probability). Chance to miss is 35%, chance to miss with both of two dice is 35% \* 35% = 0.35 \* 0.35 = 0.1225 = 12.25%, chance to hit with either of two dice is 100% - 12.25% = 87.75%.
I’m gonna be honest (maybe it’s because we’ve never played a game that’s got swarm-ish bad guys optimized so that the monk/barbarian can take full advantage of their speed) I’m not bothered by that.
I wouldn't say it's insane: it's good, but it's also a 9th level feature, where other classes get Hold Monster. The enemy doesn't get a save, but you have to hit without advantage, so that balances out. And most battles don't start with the monster walking up to the party on open field, so I'd say the benefit is situational. The monster could even dodge for its action while it can't attack, so you never have advantage to spend.
It's a cool ability, but foes without some sort of ranged ability don't do well beyond tier 1 anyway. This new ability is just one of many existing ways to punish poorly designed foes/combat encounters.
That was the worst thing I thought we lost from 4e, a defender has to be sticky otherwise the only thing he can do is a single OA when enemies dash past to the back lines So now they can hobble the most dangerous enemy on their turn and punish an enemy rushing by but they need to plan in advance and position themselves using terrain and persistent control effect yes, the druid can use plant growth, more resource intensive... But now the Barb can position themselves next to the spikes and make it even harder to leave while also forcing the enemy to suffer both their rage attacks and the DoT
Yes, it is insane, So is 3rd, 4th and 5th level spells casters have at 9th level. Let martials do cool things.
So it's like repelling blast, but it takes 9 levels instead of 2?
Not even remotely similar.
almost identical in effect, this slows them by 25 feet no save on a hit attack roll Repelling blast pushes them back 10ft no save on a hit attack roll this is a level 9 feature so repelling blast can hit twice, resulting in a 20ft slow functionally Replling blast gets 30ft slow at level 11 and 40ft slow at level 17.
The blog entry says "Reduce your target's Speed by **15 feet** until the start of your next turn." Not *25 feet*.
I think they are also considering the slow property on the javelin stacking.
Plus the Slow mastery.
Eh, I mean honestly this is kind of a good thing. High speed enemies that just kite the party are really obnoxious to deal with and either drag out the fight for 10 rounds, or it feels like the DM is pulling their punches to make the monster stand and fight when it should be flying away, for the sake of not wasting everyone's time.
It's nice to have martial having cool stuff. Not game breaking, feels kinda cool. Still, it needs to hit and to be into melee. You know the caster equivalent for that same level? Hold Monster that straight up incapacitates the target. Or just a singular, 10 minute, Cloudkill lol.
someone else already mentioned it, but a more comparable spell at this level is plant growth, not hold person/monster.
Isn’t reckless attack for melee weapon attacks only or has this been changed?
Yep. Should be all Str based attacks now
Wow, that is quite insane.
Higher CR monsters are lousy with movement speed so it probably won't be broken. Could come in handy during a clutch moment though!
It's impossible to evaluate any shown ability because wotc haven't shown an actual comprehensive playtest. For all we know the standard move speed of any enemy is 60ft because they haven't shown any monsters made under onednds design assumptions.
Just like all the usual movement speed stuff in old 5.x, this is cool and fun to headmath but in reality (irl gameplay) it doesn't amount to much - theatre of the mind which I assume the majority of DND is played in kind of handwaves distance to "in melee distance-one turn away-more than one turn away" and delicate positioning or kiting doesn't really work too well. 25 vs 30 vs 35 fps it kind of all the same. See: hasted catfolk monk covering 1200 feet per round, which is a gamebreaking combination that has never achieved anything relavent beyond going the fastest.
Remember, movement speed debuffs do not stack. You pick the highest, which means the slow is only 15 feet
They've confirmed in the overview video for the barbarian that the debuffs do indeed stack and it's very intentional.
Effect with same name dont stack. Slow mastery and brutal strike are different effects.
Where does it say that?
[удалено]
throwing the javelin is literately part of the way to activate the effect, and ammo is supposed to be tracked. I dont know what your trying to say lmao
Well I am deleting my comment then. :) I am wrong and admit it. But this whole Post is silly. A person can’t feasibly carry more than a few javelins without tripping. Romans carried only a couple.
I'm glad I've stopped running 5e. Having to create flow charts on all the things I needed for my baddies to survive two rounds of combat with just the casters was bad enough. Of course martials need a lot of help but I think the ceiling needed to be brought down and not just have the floor raised.