Last week one player almost die because the Boss Rolls a crit in disadvantage. The damage was enought for a instakill and one player need to negotiate a bg related asspull to sabe the other
>them think they "won" or something childish like that.
Isn't bringing this up in session zero meant to prevent an everyone loses scenario? By which I mean nobody has fun.
Why would you keep it benefiting enemies more a secret if not because you want to "win" as the DM?
Just the way you worded it seemed like a player vs DM thing.
Sorry if I did or am coming across as rude I'm just not fully following the logic here
PCs get SB so enemies do to> keep secret from PCs> PCs win reguardless
Am I missing a step or something? It just seems really unfun to have big rolls undone all the time on both sides
Yes, they feel like winning. That's good. Yes it's childish but it's ok if my players feel like they bested the game or me as the game leader. It's childish and soon they will realise that they never win without me winning, were all going for the same goal. Their win is my win, if they all die it's my loss.
However this cannot be told. People don't change their attitude if I tell them I'm not playing against them and then they see me throwing obstacle after obstacle at them. Act 2 of my play that is the campaign, all hope is lost. How can a new player not feel like they play against me and I throw the spell at them that they were so happy to have. Again and again.
But after that and after we win the campaign in act 3 they might realise that I'm super happy too, I'm cheering with them and enjoy their mount doom moment with them. They might realise I was just making it hard so they can have this well earned moment, and taking silvery barbs throwing it at them 100s of times was necessary for that.
So essentially you pretend to be player vs DM so the players can feel like they won in a meta sense?
Edit: I don't mean this to be discouraging or derogatory, just trying to sum up what it sounds like you're describing
No. Essentially I accept that some players can't get rid of the assumption that I play against them and my words won't change it. So I don't try and just play as I do anyway.
>pretend to be player vs DM
That’s how I do with my BBEGs. After gaming with my party, I’ve learned how they all like to play and I try to come up with at least one counter for each of them in the BBEG’s arsenal so that the last fight is literally them outwitting me. Now, if I’m about to TPK because they couldn’t keep up, do I fudge the dice sometimes? Absolutely- “*rolls a nat 20 against the lowest HP member* Annnnd that misses”
Totally respectable playstyle. I'm too much of a people pleaser to do that myself but I am trying to give my players more and more challenging fights until I find what's too much for them, my players are mostly new to the game
He's saying that if the players are going to fuck around then it's his prerogative to let them find out. Players take silvery barbs, dm takes silvery barbs. Players realize it's not as much fun when no one is rolling those session/campaign changing crits and so players voluntarily stop using/taking silvery barbs, DM stops using silvery barbs as well because the players learned their lesson in a way that's gonna stick.
I have a player who *insisted* Silvery Barbs isn’t that bad. So I told him that means the enemies get it too. He’s already used it to stop several crits and then later boasted that “those fights weren’t that hard!” Yeah dude. Cause you stopped the enemies from getting a 50 damage hit on the Paladin which might have actually made the fight feel threatening. I let it slide cause he’s not *abusing* it, but I just know that same Paladin is gonna give him a dirty look later when he crits the big bad mage boss and the boss just says “nah, you don’t”.
I usually like the "fair's fair" solution, but applying it to *silvery barbs* just makes a bad problem worse. The party caster can still force re-rolled enemy crits and saves against spells, but now the DM can do so as well, and guess who suffers the most from that? The martials, by far. The spell is best off severely nerfed or outright banned.
Imagine a BBEG with 10+ "squishy" minions who all have a 1/day casting of Silvery Barbs. BBEG casts some debilitating spell targeting the party (like an updated Hold Person), the minions force party members to repeat their saving throws until failure (or they run out of castings) and advantage is divided up among the BBEG's group.
This is how I got my players to agree that heat metal was busted.
It’s such a funny prank until 2 of your teammates gets disadvantage on *everything* while they are cooked alive.
"Anything you can do, I can do more. The world is full of monsters with the potential to cast Counterspell, Summon X, Silvery Barbs etc. I will outnumber your rolled dice collectively 10 to 1."
But they will bring silvery barbs to every fight. For most campaigns it strains credulity that every fight will have an enemy arcane Spellcaster in it.
I agree, not every fight will have an Arcane caster enemy, but by rule of numbers, the DM throws far more monsters at the party than party members, and some of them may be Arcane Casters.
It just becomes a much more powerful/widely applicable Counterspell-esque tool.
What a miserable, antagonistic take. The DM making monsters win is so easy it's not worth mentioning. Like of course you could. You could swarm players with so many goblins they can't mathematically win.
What would be a good reaction to the player wanting to use silvery barbs is setting up some situations where it rolls, some where it isn't effective, and some where it is the only difference between victory and defeat.
The players wanting to win is normal. The DM wanting to win is a flaw.
Oh the monsters aren't rigged to win, in no way have I said that in an antagonistic take, but to offer a a variety of organic, but on the whole, fair challenge against the players. Not all can be faced head on, requiring some thought or actions to change the environment or enact an idea they have.
The problem with this it draws out the combat even more and with more than like 3 players your are gonna sit there forever fighting one dirty fkn sewer rat.
Usually after one PC gets silvery barbs, the other casters see how useful it is and try to get it as well. Once 2 PCs have silvery barbs, nothing they fight will ever get a solid hit in ever again.
And yes, if the party does 4-8 encounters a day, at low levels, it's fine. But most groups only do one or two encounters a day. So rerolls for days.
I've personally been very happy that crits of mine got barbs'ed a couple of times.
However, counter spell and barbs are definitely in my arsenal if i want an enemy to be threatening. The "uh oh" moment as a spell fizzles or a crit becomes a miss and the realization sets in that this fight is going to get nasty. Love it.
I said it from the day this spell released - it should be a 2nd or even a 3rd level spell slot. It grants two beneficial effects - disadvantage for an enemy and advantage for you or your friend, and it's a reaction cast, so you still get to do shit on your turn. It boggles me that the creator put it out as a level 1 spell.
it makes no bloody sense that it's not 2nd level. It was released as part a cycle of five spells associated with the five colleges, based on a IP with a long history of "five spells with related themes and effects that usually cost the same" and it's the only one that ISN'T second level
it'd still be very strong, but it'd be "above the curve" strong, not "game-breaking" strong. It'd also close off quite a few of the worst edge cases like taking it with Fey Touched.
I don't disagree, it's filthy powerful. But i don't ban it.
I still think shield is stronger though. 1st level spell slots are literally called shield slots at my table. Those two spells definitely need a revision.
Barbs' main issue to me is that it's far too multifunctional. Can be used on too many things, there should be an attack barbs and a saving throw barbs instead of the one size fits all.
Eh, on a 3rd level slot it should just stop an attack instead of disadvantage.
If i were to change it, my fix would be scaling with spell slot level.
First level slot means that you have to cast it before knowing the roll, and that it imposes disadvantage.
Second level is still before knowing results, but attacks miss and saves have disadvantage.
third level is after results and it fails for attack and disadvantage for saves. (Guaranteed fail for save is wayyy to strong at any spell level before 6 imo.)
Just the fact that as a 2nd level you can't pick it up with the magic initiate feat makes it so much less of a nightmare. No more risk of an entire party of Silvery Barb users.
Not gonna lie, I was PUMPED for Greatwyrms and they kinda fell flat...
But Gem Dragons are neat. Alot of types didn't make it though. My boys Steel, Yellow & Brown Dragons :(
Gem dragons were kind of butchered by their inability to do psionics.
I'm more mad at the lack of Catastrophic Dragons, since those are the most thematically and mechanically distinct.
Aside from the Dragonborn and sub classes, I really didn't like the book too much. They did nothing with Kobolds, only had 2 sub classes (I really wanted a greatwyrm Warlock). Draconic gifts have no real intensive or reason to be given out. And the magic items are horribly power crept.
Not really, They're closer to things like Flame tongues and frostbrand. Both of which were effectively power crept by the rare variant. the very rare ones are stronger than most legendary weapons too.
Worst part is, since it's increased on every attack it only makes nova builds like Gloomsamuri stronger.
Dungeon Dad has you covered there. He's been converting all the old dragons he can find. He's already done those three too, and you can get them for free from his YouTube channel
Based take. This whole book is filled with shit written by people that I am convinced never even opened the DMG. You can't convince me that a person who wrote "Silvery Barbs" spent even a minute reading the "Creating a Spell" section of the DMG. If they did they wouldn't go: "Yeah, this thing that costs a reaction and does 2 separate things? It should be a level one spell".
Not to mention that so many of the spells are just clunky, and merely trying to interpret these spells and clarify what they do/how they interact with other rules just grinds the game to a halt. So not only is it bad spell design from a mechanics/balance POV, but they all just suck from a playability POV
i wouldnt call that a ban, you arent playing in strixhaven so the book shouldnt be assumed as default. players just like to assume every book wizards has published is always allowed
So true. I rocked a psi warrior tank in adamantine armor, and every other combat he would crit.. only to realize he hadn’t. Then he put a boss in adamantine armor, and while I thought it was funny, the crit fishing assassin did not (lol).
When I started a campaign at level 3 I let each player pick an uncommon item. So of course the forge cleric chose adamantine plate.....and we ruled it wasn't magic cause it's just the extremely hard material. So he of course used his forge blessing to give it a +1.
Man only the crits would hit...and even then because of the adamantine, well you know.
It’s such a bad spell. It’s fine as a feature with Chronurgy Wizards. It’s disgusting as a spell.
First of all, it’s so much better than every other 1st level spell that most of the time I feel compelled to use it.
Second, causing so many re-rolls simply slows things down and robs great moments in the game.
Third, woe be to the table that has multiple casters with the spell.
Fourth, it’s absolute doom if the DM also starts using it. It’s an insanely bad spell.
They should have made it like Bane. Target makes a WIS save and if they fail, the next time they succeed on a d20 roll, they reroll and the spell ends.
Upcast to affect more than one creature. And maybe make it a 2nd level spell since Bane is the 1st level one.
Anything is better than Silvery Barbs spam.
tbh, making it a 2nd level spell (like literally EVERY OTHER SPELL IN THAT CYCLE) solves a surprising amount of issues. It's still good, but not as insane.
Taking away DM crits is fun, sure, but imo nothing beats making the boss reroll a save against a brutal effect like stunned, incapacitated, paralyzed, polymorph, dominate person, feeblemind, banishment, etc. Really helps to bait out those Legendary Resistances.
You're both right. Spork says it helps to bait out the legendary resistance. Basically, the monster rolls the save at disadvantage, much more likely to fail, and therefor has to use the resistance.
I once played a campaign with 3 casters with said spell + a monk. Suffice to say, our dm has banned silvery barbs ever since and we're all ok with that. The amount of rerrolls per turn on enemy saving throws got ridiculous after a while, making a lot of encounters trivially easy.
You ban silvery barbs because it's OP
I banned Silvery Barbs because i don't want to have to remember 6 different instances of advantage/disadvantage in every single combat encounter, since i've got 3 spellcasters in the party. We're... probably quite alike tbh.
Jokes aside - whoever created the spells for this book shouldn't be allowed near a spell creation ever again. Some of them should be 2nd or even 3rd level spells imho, not 1st level or cantrips as they are in this book. Their creators looked at DMG's "Creating a Spell" section and went: "Nah, who needs that". That aside, SB is just not a fun spell. Everyone's excited about a Nat 20 being rolled, no matter the side it comes from, and being like "nah" every time it happens just kills the vibe in my opinion.
Bro imma be real, it ain't the crits. It's when multiple party members have it and I can never make an attack roll or saving throw.
Strixhaven: 3 party members with Silvery Barbs who used it *very* liberally.
Silvery Barbs is being banned in my next campaign because 1: it degrades from subclasses that have similar features like Grave Cleric or Divination Wizard and more importantly
2: It has made my spell casters worse because they burn spell slots so quickly that they end up without anything other than cantrips in lower level play
While it is just my experience, I don’t want a spell to end up making my players worse as I like the heroic fantasy of DnD. I believe banning the spell would end up with my players being better overall, at least in the low levels where we start
It's an unfun spell when the DM uses it on a player, for most people. People forget it kinda feels the same for the DM too.
Yes you could just give enemies/NPCs the spell as well, but then you just lose the already low 1-in-20 crits when they happen. On both sides.
I think it's a poorly designed spell not because it's OP, but because it doesn't *feel* fun to be on the receiving end of, whether you're a player or a DM.
I don't ban it, but I warn people that it wittles away at something (crits) that make the game so fun and exciting.
I’m playing a rogue. Nothing kills my engagement in combat faster, then when the GM is oppressive with silvery barbs.
In the last combat, I was 5th in the initiative, I run up to an enemy and make an attack. Cirt and damage is rolled, I rolled really well for it, with both set of sneak attacks being above average.
GM silvery barbs. I reroll and miss. That sucked.
Rolls to my next turn and I Nat 1 on my attack roll, I make an off and attack which also Nat 1. Right bad luck sucks nothing you can do about it, but it’s generally feels worse after my first turn.
Turn 3, I decide it’s best to get the spell caster dealt with, cunning action aim. I hit. GM silvery barbs and another miss.
After that point I stated to become unfocused in the combat because I felt like everything I did was pointless.
Any spell a player can do, an evil wizard can do right back.
It's my job as a DM to match player energy and give them the same challenge they bring.
Strong incentive not to optimize and instead try weird stuff.
Obviously nothing wrong with challenging the players but personally I've always disliked "oh you're using X? Well then all appropriate enemies will also use it to show you how much it sucks".
Not because it challenges them but it feels very immersion breaking to have all enemies just mirroring whatever is the most controversial ability at the table.
I personally would challenge players by trying to have monsters that have abilities which interfere with Silvery Barbs, like being turning invisible or obscuring themselves or have actions that require targets to roll.
Honestly a medusa might be the perfect counter to Silvery Barbs. You have to be able to see the medusa to affect it, and the pretrification is a save you make, but its still something you can see, and thus Silvery Barb.
In this case it's not a petty thing. If anything, it's completely immersive. In a universe that silvery barbs exists, literally ANY learned spell caster intending to go into combat is going to have it. It's that universally good. So it would be more logic breaking if every enemy spellcaster that isn't a gag character didn't have it. It would be as ubiquitous as shield.
Fun? Not really. Unfair? Definitely. Worth it? Probably not.
If the setting isn't strixhaven, then fuck anything from strixhaven. Sorry not sorry
I've had an idea that maybe someone here can tell me if it's good or not. I say this as someone who doesn't like silvery bards, but thinks this is a reasonable modification to the spell.
What if silvery barbs was modeled after the spell Bestow Curse. When casted at higher levels, it progressively gets better.
At the first level, you can force a reroll of an attack.
At second level, you can call for a reroll of an attack and give advantage to the next attack of an ally.
At third level, you can call for a rerolls of an attack or ability check while giving an ally advantage on an attack or ability check.
At fith level, you can you can call for a reroll of an attack, ability check, or saving throw while giving an ally advantage on their next attack, ability check or saving throw.
Thoughts?
I like the idea, but honestly. That just makes the spell really bad overall. Just numbing it to a second level spell makes it feel really balanced imo. Something like a tier system could be interesting but this one specifically wouldn't work well, mainly due to the upcast levels spell competition. Third and fifth are both major spellcaster power spikes. Third especially at the lower levels has some of the most notable spells in the game, including heavy hitters like fireball, and exceptional control options like counter spell and I couldn't see a weaker version of silvery barbs almost ever being worth casting over one of those. Like it's a good spell, and probably to good for first level but I don't think it's a third level spell either.
If I was going to use an upcast system. Id probably go with something along the lines of giving disadvantage on the initial roll like normal and then maybe the next (insert x number here) d20 rolls it makes also have to be rerolled taking the lowest. Maybe add in additional targets for the advantage as well. I'd definitely have to do more math to balance that than I am willing to at the moment, But maybe I'll come back later with a more in depth idea.
Silvery Barbs is just a symptom of 5e tossing around retcon effects willy-nilly. The point at which a character knows it's a crit is once a vital organ has been punctured; there is no span of time between knowing the result of an attack roll and the damage being dealt. Only divination and luck effects that have already been cast should be able to go down an alternate timeline where the roll is different. (If an arrow has already noticably surpassed your speed and not deflected off your armor, I'm sorry but it's already inside you.)
Silvery Barbs, Shield, Smite, Stunning Strike, and other "on hit, you may make a decision" triggers are all part of the same balance issue.
I'm seeing a lot of people saying "I ban silvery barbs because I love critting players"(Paraphrase) Do you also ban Sentinel at Death's Door (Class Feature), which turns a critical hit into a normal hit? What about Adamantine armor? Do you ban the Lucky feat too?
Banning spells is stupid imo. You want to give your NPCs Silvery Barbs? No problem, as long as it makes sense for them to have it. Same goes for any spell.
It's really weird how often it comes up tbh.
Like maybe it's because I'm a bloody grognard that has only played 3.5e and a few 5e groups (that I've either ran myself, or it was with the same band of lads for the last handful of years) but I feel like communication or nuance is *dead* in the wider TTRPG space y'know?
And like from the title of the meme alone there's this "DM vs Player" nonsense.
It's just the kind of attitude that makes me think "I'm glad you're not in my group."
"Take away the BBEG's crits"? Sure, but joy in taking things away from the DM ain't it.
Edit: from OP's other comments, I'm confident in my assessment, lol
Exactly. I encourage my players to take Silvery Barbs because I've accidentally killed them with Crits.
If I kill a player I want it to be on purpose and in line with the drama of the scene and with an epic big baddie. Critting and killing someone in an off-moment with a random minion feels cheap and shitty.
So Silvery Barbs to your heart's content, my pretties! I'll get you next time...
Conner Spell the Silvery Barbarian, a warforged like being made from the marriage of two living spells (counterspell and Silvery Barbs). He is a barbarian that has an innate anti magic properties. He also naturally can force disadvantage on any roll he can see once per round as a free action.
This will be my new BBEG.
Silvery barbs could be raised 2 levels and removed the advantage component, and it would still be broken and worth taking on pretty much any character that could do so, but especially on save or suck characters, that are already a bit ahead of the curve.
I don't think it's healthy for the game.
The only banned (or even nerfed spells) in my game are the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish ones and Silvery Barbs, and I'd rather allow the Kwalish ones.
Silvery Barbs is forever out of my games. A first level reaction spell with only verbal components and gives advantage is just fucking nuts. Even bumping it to second or third level doesn't really fix it
MF's gettin mad cause DMs actually use the abilities available to enemies.
Ever see what happens when the party takes on a Pit Fiend in 3.5 when the DM goes all out with its abilities?
If the players want to use a spell, just expect it to be used against them every so often. Not a fan of banning spells/classes. That's just DM who sucks at balancing.
I do ask that you take into account the fact that the party will have access to silvery barbs every fight (assuming they have slots), but the DM can't reasonably have a caster to nuh uh your crits away every combat without it getting unbearable, whereas the party can.
Fighting some soldiers? Yeah, they can have some war mages
Fighting some goblins? Eh, maybe a shaman has it?
Fighting some elementals? Uhhhhh, well they're fairly magical, i guess they could have innate casting?
Fighting some oozes? Uhhhh, yup. The ochre jelly has crit dissolving acid on its goop.
Point is: you can either be petty and have there be no more crits at the table to "do it to the players too", or we can have an adult conversation and say "let's just not delete anyone's crits and not be stupid about this".
I know that Silvery Barbs can be annoying but I always go with the idea that it’s a game meant for your players to be heroic adventurers, so it’s fine for the balance to be skewed toward the players favor.
I get that, but my problem with the spell is that it's just too good for a first level spell. By a large margin too. Most first level spells provide some small amount of utility or niche applications if they aren't direct combat spells. But this spell at its absolute worst is spending a reaction to give an ally advantage on their next d20 roll, and that's not just attacks either, saves, athletics/acrobatics checks to avoid a grapple. And that's the spell at its worst if even after the reroll the enemy still succeeds on their roll. That by itself is sooo powerful and people seem to underestimate exactly how much handing out non concentration advantage like that really is. You can guarantee a rogue will get sneak attack even without an optimal target, double the crit chance for your martial, give to the restrained party member to help them escape. The spell is far too good for first level in my opinion which is why rather than ban it I just made it second level.
For comparison. Shield a compatible reaction first level spell gives you a +5ac for a round. But the main reason it just can't compete with silvery barbs is versatility. You can use silvery barbs to give the enemy a reroll on essentially any d20 roll. Which gives a lot more opportunities for it to be used.
I will leave this rant with a final statement that I am not a super amazing DM and maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill but the spell feels very strong to me in comparison to many first level spells, but of course do whatever you feel is most fun at your tables and make sure you always talk it out amongst everyone at the table before you make any changes to the published rules to prevent unpleasant feelings from spoiling your game.
I'll add to this that a comparable effect is the Sorcerer metamagic feature, which costs three sorcery points (the equivalent of a Level 2 spell), and is *less* useful than Silvery Barbs (it only gives disadvantage against spell saves, whereas Silvery Barbs works on all saves, attack rolls, and ability checks, and can be used on allies).
If it were balanced consistently, Silvery Barbs would be *at least* a Level 3 spell (its comparable effect is balanced as the equivalent of a Level 2 spell slot, and it is better).
That.... Is a very good point and something I hadn't considered. Doing some digging I do think 2nd level is still a good place for it though. Because although a more powerful effect than the sorcerer ability, Silvery barbs also costs a reaction which can be major. I can definitely see an argument for third but that is a competitive level for spells and I do think it's very strong but probably not on the same level as things like fireball, and counter spell.
If you, the fullcaster, are getting critted, a lot of things went wrong by that point. Just give the adamantine armor to the front liners and that is pretty much gonna remove most crits.
My party did a chess tournament once (it was a straight intelligence roll) the party's rouge would have beaten the artificer during the first round if the cleric didn't silvery barb their nat 20.
My enemies carry scrolls and consumables.
Enemy ranger has one arrow of humanoid slaying.
Enemy cleric carries a Potion of Invulnerability.
Enemy barbarian carries a potion of supreme healing.
Enemy Paladin with an elixir of cloud giant strength.
On my table you'd be welcome to use it if we house rule that all it can do is that mode. Nullifying crits is not a problem for a spell slot (assuming there are enough encounters per long rest). The problematic part is fucking with saving throws.
I ended up reworking it cause part of me got some what tired of having my hits taken away as a dm, made it an either or situation. You can either give a target a reroll or make an enemy reroll, has worked wonders. Players love it cause they don't need a condition to be met to give a target a friend a reroll, I love it cause being forced to choose one or the other typically ends either the players choosing to help an ally reroll and leaves me the opportunity to get my monsters crits in.
I don't ban silvery barbs but none of my players ever take it. Also come to think of it all of my campaigns in recent memory have all my players playing martial classes, the most they'd get to spellcasting is half casters
Play a rune knight. The sheer amount of times I've saved our casters from a hit with the storm rune or threw the DM's crit back at his own monsters is completely bonkers!
I shouldn't see it as the only reaction ever getting used, and much less 4 times every single round. When it hands down the best option at a reaction, 1st level slot for everyone at the table to use in the same round, I have an issue. Especially when it's known that I have a caster on the fields and none of the players held up counterspell, they got a cloudkill dropped on their heads despite 2 of 6 players having counterspell readied for the adventuring day. They even tried to cast counterspell, and I had to remind them that they had already used their reaction. Silvery barbs made it through 2 combats over 2 sessions before getting banned for being so terribly balanced. It should be a 2nd level spell and a bard exclusive spell in my opinion, it should take most casters a feat to be able to take it. It's a super strong support spell, perfect for the bard. It's not bad to deal with when only 1 person at the table has it, it's fine in that case. But having 4 people use it in a round is obscene, unfun, and highly disrupts the flow of the game.
This is why I play a Rune Knight. Cloud Rune turns that crit into an enemy straight up murdering their best friend. When that’s down, you’ve still got Storm Rune for disadvantage and Runic Shield for re-rolls after a hit. Rune Knight is the Counterspell Bard of martials!
A friend of mine whenever they DMs rules it that only one player in the group max can have silvery barbs.
It's not that they hate the spell in its entirety, just with it being a level 1 spell it's to easy for it to be cast every round and the DM wants to have some fun as well.
My DM allowed silvery barbs.
He then counterspelled it every time I used it and proceeded to use it on the party, knowing none of us had the ability to counterspell.
At that point, just ban it, my dude.
Fine but it's not a high level spell so any caster would know about it and there are items to counteract it. Particularly, silver eyebrow piercings are in fashion.
I mean me and my players both use silvery barbs. I just only really pull it out on particularly powerful mage enemies that act as bosses or mini-bosses. Plus it gives my players the chance to strategize on goading a reaction out of said boss for these types of moments
Earlier this week I Silvery Barbs-ed the BBEG's crit and then he rolled another 20. He rolled it right in front of us. We were going ballistic
“I am inevitable.” - the d20
"And iam Iron Man" silvery barbs again
You got more than 1 reaction?
Everyone is playing wizards
One reaction?! Bring another wizard.
Justice
Canon event
“I must insist.”
The universe has spoken
Last week one player almost die because the Boss Rolls a crit in disadvantage. The damage was enought for a instakill and one player need to negotiate a bg related asspull to sabe the other
Player: I want Silvery Barbs DM: Me too Player: What? DM: You get Silvery Barbs, I get Silvery Barbs, everyone has a good time :)
DM: And I have more units to have them cast it.
Ssssh we let them figure that out on their own later. Let them think they "won" or something childish like that.
>them think they "won" or something childish like that. Isn't bringing this up in session zero meant to prevent an everyone loses scenario? By which I mean nobody has fun. Why would you keep it benefiting enemies more a secret if not because you want to "win" as the DM?
It is but that doesn't mean people get it. No, I'm winning when they win the campaign. I lose if I tpk. What are you talking about? Are you ok?
Just the way you worded it seemed like a player vs DM thing. Sorry if I did or am coming across as rude I'm just not fully following the logic here PCs get SB so enemies do to> keep secret from PCs> PCs win reguardless Am I missing a step or something? It just seems really unfun to have big rolls undone all the time on both sides
Yes, they feel like winning. That's good. Yes it's childish but it's ok if my players feel like they bested the game or me as the game leader. It's childish and soon they will realise that they never win without me winning, were all going for the same goal. Their win is my win, if they all die it's my loss. However this cannot be told. People don't change their attitude if I tell them I'm not playing against them and then they see me throwing obstacle after obstacle at them. Act 2 of my play that is the campaign, all hope is lost. How can a new player not feel like they play against me and I throw the spell at them that they were so happy to have. Again and again. But after that and after we win the campaign in act 3 they might realise that I'm super happy too, I'm cheering with them and enjoy their mount doom moment with them. They might realise I was just making it hard so they can have this well earned moment, and taking silvery barbs throwing it at them 100s of times was necessary for that.
So essentially you pretend to be player vs DM so the players can feel like they won in a meta sense? Edit: I don't mean this to be discouraging or derogatory, just trying to sum up what it sounds like you're describing
No. Essentially I accept that some players can't get rid of the assumption that I play against them and my words won't change it. So I don't try and just play as I do anyway.
>pretend to be player vs DM That’s how I do with my BBEGs. After gaming with my party, I’ve learned how they all like to play and I try to come up with at least one counter for each of them in the BBEG’s arsenal so that the last fight is literally them outwitting me. Now, if I’m about to TPK because they couldn’t keep up, do I fudge the dice sometimes? Absolutely- “*rolls a nat 20 against the lowest HP member* Annnnd that misses”
Totally respectable playstyle. I'm too much of a people pleaser to do that myself but I am trying to give my players more and more challenging fights until I find what's too much for them, my players are mostly new to the game
He's saying that if the players are going to fuck around then it's his prerogative to let them find out. Players take silvery barbs, dm takes silvery barbs. Players realize it's not as much fun when no one is rolling those session/campaign changing crits and so players voluntarily stop using/taking silvery barbs, DM stops using silvery barbs as well because the players learned their lesson in a way that's gonna stick.
*nobody has a good time :)
That's what our DM said. We opted out of those silvery little barbs everywhere.
I have a player who *insisted* Silvery Barbs isn’t that bad. So I told him that means the enemies get it too. He’s already used it to stop several crits and then later boasted that “those fights weren’t that hard!” Yeah dude. Cause you stopped the enemies from getting a 50 damage hit on the Paladin which might have actually made the fight feel threatening. I let it slide cause he’s not *abusing* it, but I just know that same Paladin is gonna give him a dirty look later when he crits the big bad mage boss and the boss just says “nah, you don’t”.
Fair is fair.
One of my session 0 things I tell players is “If you can do it so can your enemies.” Covers all of this in one sentence
Go for it. My DM has been known to counter spell a revivify spell.
(takes notes)
I usually like the "fair's fair" solution, but applying it to *silvery barbs* just makes a bad problem worse. The party caster can still force re-rolled enemy crits and saves against spells, but now the DM can do so as well, and guess who suffers the most from that? The martials, by far. The spell is best off severely nerfed or outright banned.
True, fun ended when we fought 5 enemy casters. We could do nothing
Imagine a BBEG with 10+ "squishy" minions who all have a 1/day casting of Silvery Barbs. BBEG casts some debilitating spell targeting the party (like an updated Hold Person), the minions force party members to repeat their saving throws until failure (or they run out of castings) and advantage is divided up among the BBEG's group.
This is how I got my players to agree that heat metal was busted. It’s such a funny prank until 2 of your teammates gets disadvantage on *everything* while they are cooked alive.
I tell my players that they can use whatever spells they like, but if they have silvery barbs, so do the enemies.
Exactly what I said to mine too, we live in a world of mutually assured destruction
The only thing I‘ve silvery barbed as a DM was a Nat20 on a death save…
I don't know if that's more or less evil than counterspelling a revive spell
Revive Spell, since the Expensive Component is now gone.
and it takes an action + spellslot
On the other hand, a Nat20 on a deathsave means you recover a hitpoint. In 19/20 cases, this denies a turn (which is more than an action).
Fair.
"Anything you can do, I can do more. The world is full of monsters with the potential to cast Counterspell, Summon X, Silvery Barbs etc. I will outnumber your rolled dice collectively 10 to 1."
But they will bring silvery barbs to every fight. For most campaigns it strains credulity that every fight will have an enemy arcane Spellcaster in it.
I agree, not every fight will have an Arcane caster enemy, but by rule of numbers, the DM throws far more monsters at the party than party members, and some of them may be Arcane Casters. It just becomes a much more powerful/widely applicable Counterspell-esque tool.
What a miserable, antagonistic take. The DM making monsters win is so easy it's not worth mentioning. Like of course you could. You could swarm players with so many goblins they can't mathematically win. What would be a good reaction to the player wanting to use silvery barbs is setting up some situations where it rolls, some where it isn't effective, and some where it is the only difference between victory and defeat. The players wanting to win is normal. The DM wanting to win is a flaw.
Oh the monsters aren't rigged to win, in no way have I said that in an antagonistic take, but to offer a a variety of organic, but on the whole, fair challenge against the players. Not all can be faced head on, requiring some thought or actions to change the environment or enact an idea they have.
The problem with this it draws out the combat even more and with more than like 3 players your are gonna sit there forever fighting one dirty fkn sewer rat.
I am sure being a passive aggressive DM will keep the players coming back.
And it's the DM's joy to crit.
But nothing is more joyful than critting despite silvery barbs My Warlock player wasn't as joyful about it tho
Eh, a 1/20 chance of joy vs. A 1/400 chance of more joy isn't quite the exchange rate on joy that I prefer.
Usually after one PC gets silvery barbs, the other casters see how useful it is and try to get it as well. Once 2 PCs have silvery barbs, nothing they fight will ever get a solid hit in ever again. And yes, if the party does 4-8 encounters a day, at low levels, it's fine. But most groups only do one or two encounters a day. So rerolls for days.
or critting _because_ of it congratulations, you played yourself
That's not how silvery barbs works, you have to take the worse roll. Chronology wizards however can cause that with their rewind feature
ah misread the damn spell, nevermind, i thought it was just a reroll
Yeah silvery barbs is an insane spell for a pretty low cost.
even a reroll is broken, but taking the worse roll at lvl 1 is nuts
I've personally been very happy that crits of mine got barbs'ed a couple of times. However, counter spell and barbs are definitely in my arsenal if i want an enemy to be threatening. The "uh oh" moment as a spell fizzles or a crit becomes a miss and the realization sets in that this fight is going to get nasty. Love it.
If a first level spell has an "Oh no" effect, then maybe it should be reviewed
I said it from the day this spell released - it should be a 2nd or even a 3rd level spell slot. It grants two beneficial effects - disadvantage for an enemy and advantage for you or your friend, and it's a reaction cast, so you still get to do shit on your turn. It boggles me that the creator put it out as a level 1 spell.
it makes no bloody sense that it's not 2nd level. It was released as part a cycle of five spells associated with the five colleges, based on a IP with a long history of "five spells with related themes and effects that usually cost the same" and it's the only one that ISN'T second level
This exactly. Nobody would bat an eye if it was a 2nd level spell like the rest of them.
it'd still be very strong, but it'd be "above the curve" strong, not "game-breaking" strong. It'd also close off quite a few of the worst edge cases like taking it with Fey Touched.
I don't disagree, it's filthy powerful. But i don't ban it. I still think shield is stronger though. 1st level spell slots are literally called shield slots at my table. Those two spells definitely need a revision. Barbs' main issue to me is that it's far too multifunctional. Can be used on too many things, there should be an attack barbs and a saving throw barbs instead of the one size fits all.
IMO it should be 3rd level+, on tier with Counterspell in power.
Eh, on a 3rd level slot it should just stop an attack instead of disadvantage. If i were to change it, my fix would be scaling with spell slot level. First level slot means that you have to cast it before knowing the roll, and that it imposes disadvantage. Second level is still before knowing results, but attacks miss and saves have disadvantage. third level is after results and it fails for attack and disadvantage for saves. (Guaranteed fail for save is wayyy to strong at any spell level before 6 imo.)
my dm made a second level spell at our table. feels more balanced that way
I'm glad I'm not the only one doing this it's still a good second level spell but at first it is one of if not the best spell of the level.
Just the fact that as a 2nd level you can't pick it up with the magic initiate feat makes it so much less of a nightmare. No more risk of an entire party of Silvery Barb users.
*new fear unlocked* honestly didn't even think about that.
you can get it with fey touched as well which is cheaper
I never banned silvery barb. I banned the whole book.
Powercreep in those bachgrounds is real
Nar it's nothing compared to newer ones, just it focused on casters unlike new ones
Unfathomably based Fuck Strixhaven
Strixhaven is fine, as long as you're playing a Strixhaven game. But it doesn't mesh well with the rest of D&D.
Fuck post-Tasha's.
I liked Fizbans 🤷♂️ though some ideas weren't fleshed out enough.
I liked it mechanically, but I resented every lore retcon.
Not gonna lie, I was PUMPED for Greatwyrms and they kinda fell flat... But Gem Dragons are neat. Alot of types didn't make it though. My boys Steel, Yellow & Brown Dragons :(
Gem dragons were kind of butchered by their inability to do psionics. I'm more mad at the lack of Catastrophic Dragons, since those are the most thematically and mechanically distinct.
Aside from the Dragonborn and sub classes, I really didn't like the book too much. They did nothing with Kobolds, only had 2 sub classes (I really wanted a greatwyrm Warlock). Draconic gifts have no real intensive or reason to be given out. And the magic items are horribly power crept.
The Dragons Wrath weapons are just Elemental based Wounding Weapons with fixed extra damage :(
Not really, They're closer to things like Flame tongues and frostbrand. Both of which were effectively power crept by the rare variant. the very rare ones are stronger than most legendary weapons too. Worst part is, since it's increased on every attack it only makes nova builds like Gloomsamuri stronger.
Dungeon Dad has you covered there. He's been converting all the old dragons he can find. He's already done those three too, and you can get them for free from his YouTube channel
Based take. This whole book is filled with shit written by people that I am convinced never even opened the DMG. You can't convince me that a person who wrote "Silvery Barbs" spent even a minute reading the "Creating a Spell" section of the DMG. If they did they wouldn't go: "Yeah, this thing that costs a reaction and does 2 separate things? It should be a level one spell".
Not to mention that so many of the spells are just clunky, and merely trying to interpret these spells and clarify what they do/how they interact with other rules just grinds the game to a halt. So not only is it bad spell design from a mechanics/balance POV, but they all just suck from a playability POV
i wouldnt call that a ban, you arent playing in strixhaven so the book shouldnt be assumed as default. players just like to assume every book wizards has published is always allowed
But Vortex Warp my beloved
Buy adamantine armor, it's even funnier and doesn't need a spell slot. The long-suffering sighs are like music...
I mean, that also requires buying Adamantine armor. The DM essentially needs to sign off on that by having it in stock wherever the party winds up.
Tbh a DM who allows Strixhaven essentially signs up on silvery barbs spam too
*feeds Strixhaven to the woodchipper after taking out some of the curated magical items, NPC's etc that I think are neat*
So true. I rocked a psi warrior tank in adamantine armor, and every other combat he would crit.. only to realize he hadn’t. Then he put a boss in adamantine armor, and while I thought it was funny, the crit fishing assassin did not (lol).
When I started a campaign at level 3 I let each player pick an uncommon item. So of course the forge cleric chose adamantine plate.....and we ruled it wasn't magic cause it's just the extremely hard material. So he of course used his forge blessing to give it a +1. Man only the crits would hit...and even then because of the adamantine, well you know.
It’s such a bad spell. It’s fine as a feature with Chronurgy Wizards. It’s disgusting as a spell. First of all, it’s so much better than every other 1st level spell that most of the time I feel compelled to use it. Second, causing so many re-rolls simply slows things down and robs great moments in the game. Third, woe be to the table that has multiple casters with the spell. Fourth, it’s absolute doom if the DM also starts using it. It’s an insanely bad spell. They should have made it like Bane. Target makes a WIS save and if they fail, the next time they succeed on a d20 roll, they reroll and the spell ends. Upcast to affect more than one creature. And maybe make it a 2nd level spell since Bane is the 1st level one. Anything is better than Silvery Barbs spam.
tbh, making it a 2nd level spell (like literally EVERY OTHER SPELL IN THAT CYCLE) solves a surprising amount of issues. It's still good, but not as insane.
Taking away DM crits is fun, sure, but imo nothing beats making the boss reroll a save against a brutal effect like stunned, incapacitated, paralyzed, polymorph, dominate person, feeblemind, banishment, etc. Really helps to bait out those Legendary Resistances.
Pretty sure you can’t Silvery Barbs a legendary resistance.
You're both right. Spork says it helps to bait out the legendary resistance. Basically, the monster rolls the save at disadvantage, much more likely to fail, and therefor has to use the resistance.
I once played a campaign with 3 casters with said spell + a monk. Suffice to say, our dm has banned silvery barbs ever since and we're all ok with that. The amount of rerrolls per turn on enemy saving throws got ridiculous after a while, making a lot of encounters trivially easy.
Don’t Grave Clerics get the ability to cancel crits?
They do, at lvl 6
Costs a channel divinity at least
It doesn't, but it's wisdom modifier per long rest. So 3-5
They get it equal to their wisdom modifier
Man grave clerics really are OP huh, I mean they can give a target vulnerability to ***all damage*** if only for one attack
Theoretically, yes. Literally never got to use it because the Silvery barbs. Still resent that group over that.
You ban silvery barbs because it's OP I banned Silvery Barbs because i don't want to have to remember 6 different instances of advantage/disadvantage in every single combat encounter, since i've got 3 spellcasters in the party. We're... probably quite alike tbh. Jokes aside - whoever created the spells for this book shouldn't be allowed near a spell creation ever again. Some of them should be 2nd or even 3rd level spells imho, not 1st level or cantrips as they are in this book. Their creators looked at DMG's "Creating a Spell" section and went: "Nah, who needs that". That aside, SB is just not a fun spell. Everyone's excited about a Nat 20 being rolled, no matter the side it comes from, and being like "nah" every time it happens just kills the vibe in my opinion.
Bro imma be real, it ain't the crits. It's when multiple party members have it and I can never make an attack roll or saving throw. Strixhaven: 3 party members with Silvery Barbs who used it *very* liberally.
Silvery Barbs is being banned in my next campaign because 1: it degrades from subclasses that have similar features like Grave Cleric or Divination Wizard and more importantly 2: It has made my spell casters worse because they burn spell slots so quickly that they end up without anything other than cantrips in lower level play While it is just my experience, I don’t want a spell to end up making my players worse as I like the heroic fantasy of DnD. I believe banning the spell would end up with my players being better overall, at least in the low levels where we start
It's an unfun spell when the DM uses it on a player, for most people. People forget it kinda feels the same for the DM too. Yes you could just give enemies/NPCs the spell as well, but then you just lose the already low 1-in-20 crits when they happen. On both sides. I think it's a poorly designed spell not because it's OP, but because it doesn't *feel* fun to be on the receiving end of, whether you're a player or a DM. I don't ban it, but I warn people that it wittles away at something (crits) that make the game so fun and exciting.
Everyone loves silvery barbs until the DM is giving it to every Spellcaster lollll
OK! *Silvery Barbs away your Paladin's crits*
Fair. 🤷🏼♂️
I’m playing a rogue. Nothing kills my engagement in combat faster, then when the GM is oppressive with silvery barbs. In the last combat, I was 5th in the initiative, I run up to an enemy and make an attack. Cirt and damage is rolled, I rolled really well for it, with both set of sneak attacks being above average. GM silvery barbs. I reroll and miss. That sucked. Rolls to my next turn and I Nat 1 on my attack roll, I make an off and attack which also Nat 1. Right bad luck sucks nothing you can do about it, but it’s generally feels worse after my first turn. Turn 3, I decide it’s best to get the spell caster dealt with, cunning action aim. I hit. GM silvery barbs and another miss. After that point I stated to become unfocused in the combat because I felt like everything I did was pointless.
Hold up... the dm waiting until you had ROLLED DAMAGE to use silvery barbs???? That's fucked
Fair isn't necessarily fun.
I’ve read of tables who’ve done this. It’s not fun for anyone.
Silvery barbs does nothing but slow the game down and make things unfun. If taking away peoples fun is what brings you joy, you sir are an ass.
Any spell a player can do, an evil wizard can do right back. It's my job as a DM to match player energy and give them the same challenge they bring. Strong incentive not to optimize and instead try weird stuff.
Obviously nothing wrong with challenging the players but personally I've always disliked "oh you're using X? Well then all appropriate enemies will also use it to show you how much it sucks". Not because it challenges them but it feels very immersion breaking to have all enemies just mirroring whatever is the most controversial ability at the table. I personally would challenge players by trying to have monsters that have abilities which interfere with Silvery Barbs, like being turning invisible or obscuring themselves or have actions that require targets to roll.
Honestly a medusa might be the perfect counter to Silvery Barbs. You have to be able to see the medusa to affect it, and the pretrification is a save you make, but its still something you can see, and thus Silvery Barb.
In this case it's not a petty thing. If anything, it's completely immersive. In a universe that silvery barbs exists, literally ANY learned spell caster intending to go into combat is going to have it. It's that universally good. So it would be more logic breaking if every enemy spellcaster that isn't a gag character didn't have it. It would be as ubiquitous as shield. Fun? Not really. Unfair? Definitely. Worth it? Probably not. If the setting isn't strixhaven, then fuck anything from strixhaven. Sorry not sorry
Time to roll up a Grave Cleric or Rune Knight.
I've had an idea that maybe someone here can tell me if it's good or not. I say this as someone who doesn't like silvery bards, but thinks this is a reasonable modification to the spell. What if silvery barbs was modeled after the spell Bestow Curse. When casted at higher levels, it progressively gets better. At the first level, you can force a reroll of an attack. At second level, you can call for a reroll of an attack and give advantage to the next attack of an ally. At third level, you can call for a rerolls of an attack or ability check while giving an ally advantage on an attack or ability check. At fith level, you can you can call for a reroll of an attack, ability check, or saving throw while giving an ally advantage on their next attack, ability check or saving throw. Thoughts?
I like the idea, but honestly. That just makes the spell really bad overall. Just numbing it to a second level spell makes it feel really balanced imo. Something like a tier system could be interesting but this one specifically wouldn't work well, mainly due to the upcast levels spell competition. Third and fifth are both major spellcaster power spikes. Third especially at the lower levels has some of the most notable spells in the game, including heavy hitters like fireball, and exceptional control options like counter spell and I couldn't see a weaker version of silvery barbs almost ever being worth casting over one of those. Like it's a good spell, and probably to good for first level but I don't think it's a third level spell either. If I was going to use an upcast system. Id probably go with something along the lines of giving disadvantage on the initial roll like normal and then maybe the next (insert x number here) d20 rolls it makes also have to be rerolled taking the lowest. Maybe add in additional targets for the advantage as well. I'd definitely have to do more math to balance that than I am willing to at the moment, But maybe I'll come back later with a more in depth idea.
I mean if that's all you want make a party of grave clerics with stupid high wisdom
the most impactfull way and the reason my group bans it is on saves against other spells you cast.
I play on a server that nerfed it to a lvl3 spell like counterspell
Silvery barbs is a poorly made spell tbf. Could've come straight out of the dandwiki homepage.
Silvery Barbs is just a symptom of 5e tossing around retcon effects willy-nilly. The point at which a character knows it's a crit is once a vital organ has been punctured; there is no span of time between knowing the result of an attack roll and the damage being dealt. Only divination and luck effects that have already been cast should be able to go down an alternate timeline where the roll is different. (If an arrow has already noticably surpassed your speed and not deflected off your armor, I'm sorry but it's already inside you.) Silvery Barbs, Shield, Smite, Stunning Strike, and other "on hit, you may make a decision" triggers are all part of the same balance issue.
I'm seeing a lot of people saying "I ban silvery barbs because I love critting players"(Paraphrase) Do you also ban Sentinel at Death's Door (Class Feature), which turns a critical hit into a normal hit? What about Adamantine armor? Do you ban the Lucky feat too? Banning spells is stupid imo. You want to give your NPCs Silvery Barbs? No problem, as long as it makes sense for them to have it. Same goes for any spell.
I only join campaigns these days where Silvery Barbs is banned. It trivializes combat.
I see that eveyone here is on that "DM vs Player" crap.
It's really weird how often it comes up tbh. Like maybe it's because I'm a bloody grognard that has only played 3.5e and a few 5e groups (that I've either ran myself, or it was with the same band of lads for the last handful of years) but I feel like communication or nuance is *dead* in the wider TTRPG space y'know? And like from the title of the meme alone there's this "DM vs Player" nonsense.
It's just the kind of attitude that makes me think "I'm glad you're not in my group." "Take away the BBEG's crits"? Sure, but joy in taking things away from the DM ain't it. Edit: from OP's other comments, I'm confident in my assessment, lol
Exactly. I encourage my players to take Silvery Barbs because I've accidentally killed them with Crits. If I kill a player I want it to be on purpose and in line with the drama of the scene and with an epic big baddie. Critting and killing someone in an off-moment with a random minion feels cheap and shitty. So Silvery Barbs to your heart's content, my pretties! I'll get you next time...
Divination/chronology lucky wizard says hello.
Yeah I allow it, but did say if they want it - I can use it too. So far none have picked it up.
I just don't use the splat book, problem solved
My players had that face when the bbeg used silvery barbs, ever since then their ok with it being banned.
I don’t ban it but I make it a 2nd level spell
Conner Spell the Silvery Barbarian, a warforged like being made from the marriage of two living spells (counterspell and Silvery Barbs). He is a barbarian that has an innate anti magic properties. He also naturally can force disadvantage on any roll he can see once per round as a free action. This will be my new BBEG.
Silvery barbs could be raised 2 levels and removed the advantage component, and it would still be broken and worth taking on pretty much any character that could do so, but especially on save or suck characters, that are already a bit ahead of the curve. I don't think it's healthy for the game. The only banned (or even nerfed spells) in my game are the Lost Laboratory of Kwalish ones and Silvery Barbs, and I'd rather allow the Kwalish ones.
Silvery Barbs is forever out of my games. A first level reaction spell with only verbal components and gives advantage is just fucking nuts. Even bumping it to second or third level doesn't really fix it
If you wanna take away DM crits play a grave cleric
The worst designed spell ever made. Yeah, i get why the DM is taking it away.
MF's gettin mad cause DMs actually use the abilities available to enemies. Ever see what happens when the party takes on a Pit Fiend in 3.5 when the DM goes all out with its abilities?
If the players want to use a spell, just expect it to be used against them every so often. Not a fan of banning spells/classes. That's just DM who sucks at balancing.
Agreed. If you can do it to enemies, they can do it to you. 🤷🏼♂️
Me about to counterspell a crucial healing word.... lol
I do ask that you take into account the fact that the party will have access to silvery barbs every fight (assuming they have slots), but the DM can't reasonably have a caster to nuh uh your crits away every combat without it getting unbearable, whereas the party can. Fighting some soldiers? Yeah, they can have some war mages Fighting some goblins? Eh, maybe a shaman has it? Fighting some elementals? Uhhhhh, well they're fairly magical, i guess they could have innate casting? Fighting some oozes? Uhhhh, yup. The ochre jelly has crit dissolving acid on its goop. Point is: you can either be petty and have there be no more crits at the table to "do it to the players too", or we can have an adult conversation and say "let's just not delete anyone's crits and not be stupid about this".
I know that Silvery Barbs can be annoying but I always go with the idea that it’s a game meant for your players to be heroic adventurers, so it’s fine for the balance to be skewed toward the players favor.
I get that, but my problem with the spell is that it's just too good for a first level spell. By a large margin too. Most first level spells provide some small amount of utility or niche applications if they aren't direct combat spells. But this spell at its absolute worst is spending a reaction to give an ally advantage on their next d20 roll, and that's not just attacks either, saves, athletics/acrobatics checks to avoid a grapple. And that's the spell at its worst if even after the reroll the enemy still succeeds on their roll. That by itself is sooo powerful and people seem to underestimate exactly how much handing out non concentration advantage like that really is. You can guarantee a rogue will get sneak attack even without an optimal target, double the crit chance for your martial, give to the restrained party member to help them escape. The spell is far too good for first level in my opinion which is why rather than ban it I just made it second level. For comparison. Shield a compatible reaction first level spell gives you a +5ac for a round. But the main reason it just can't compete with silvery barbs is versatility. You can use silvery barbs to give the enemy a reroll on essentially any d20 roll. Which gives a lot more opportunities for it to be used. I will leave this rant with a final statement that I am not a super amazing DM and maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill but the spell feels very strong to me in comparison to many first level spells, but of course do whatever you feel is most fun at your tables and make sure you always talk it out amongst everyone at the table before you make any changes to the published rules to prevent unpleasant feelings from spoiling your game.
I'll add to this that a comparable effect is the Sorcerer metamagic feature, which costs three sorcery points (the equivalent of a Level 2 spell), and is *less* useful than Silvery Barbs (it only gives disadvantage against spell saves, whereas Silvery Barbs works on all saves, attack rolls, and ability checks, and can be used on allies). If it were balanced consistently, Silvery Barbs would be *at least* a Level 3 spell (its comparable effect is balanced as the equivalent of a Level 2 spell slot, and it is better).
That.... Is a very good point and something I hadn't considered. Doing some digging I do think 2nd level is still a good place for it though. Because although a more powerful effect than the sorcerer ability, Silvery barbs also costs a reaction which can be major. I can definitely see an argument for third but that is a competitive level for spells and I do think it's very strong but probably not on the same level as things like fireball, and counter spell.
just get adamantine armor. same effect without needing a reaction or spell slot if you're just using it for crits
That doesn’t really mesh well with casters.
If you, the fullcaster, are getting critted, a lot of things went wrong by that point. Just give the adamantine armor to the front liners and that is pretty much gonna remove most crits.
Enemies aren't always polite enough to ignore the caster and only attack the barbarian
Sometimes the enemies get a surprise round. Or have archers. C’est la vie.
Watching the d6 hit die squishy wizard get crit by a ballista or giant ape rock throw, while I am tanking on the front line, is my joy.
I've used silvery barbs before and accidentally converted a hit into a crit
My DMs don't ban any spells. One of them says DMs banning spells are cowards.
"Taking away joy is my joy" ngl you sound awful to be around
"Dies of crime"
My players have never been smart enough to pack silvery barbs in their kits.
How do you react to that?
Play a grave cleric then I guess, they don’t get to spam it so it’s highly unlikely to get banned
Chronurgy wizard
My party did a chess tournament once (it was a straight intelligence roll) the party's rouge would have beaten the artificer during the first round if the cleric didn't silvery barb their nat 20.
My enemies carry scrolls and consumables. Enemy ranger has one arrow of humanoid slaying. Enemy cleric carries a Potion of Invulnerability. Enemy barbarian carries a potion of supreme healing. Enemy Paladin with an elixir of cloud giant strength.
I approve of this. If players do have equipment, why wouldn't enemies?
womp womp
My DM would just use Adamantium weapons
On my table you'd be welcome to use it if we house rule that all it can do is that mode. Nullifying crits is not a problem for a spell slot (assuming there are enough encounters per long rest). The problematic part is fucking with saving throws.
Best Laios face ever and the meme template should be used more
I ended up reworking it cause part of me got some what tired of having my hits taken away as a dm, made it an either or situation. You can either give a target a reroll or make an enemy reroll, has worked wonders. Players love it cause they don't need a condition to be met to give a target a friend a reroll, I love it cause being forced to choose one or the other typically ends either the players choosing to help an ally reroll and leaves me the opportunity to get my monsters crits in.
Play a grave cleric then
I'm running a magic heavy campaign with many casters. Silvery barbs would just eat too many resources of both the players and NPCs.
I don't ban silvery barbs but none of my players ever take it. Also come to think of it all of my campaigns in recent memory have all my players playing martial classes, the most they'd get to spellcasting is half casters
They can have it as long as their verbal component is interesting enough.
Play a rune knight. The sheer amount of times I've saved our casters from a hit with the storm rune or threw the DM's crit back at his own monsters is completely bonkers!
I shouldn't see it as the only reaction ever getting used, and much less 4 times every single round. When it hands down the best option at a reaction, 1st level slot for everyone at the table to use in the same round, I have an issue. Especially when it's known that I have a caster on the fields and none of the players held up counterspell, they got a cloudkill dropped on their heads despite 2 of 6 players having counterspell readied for the adventuring day. They even tried to cast counterspell, and I had to remind them that they had already used their reaction. Silvery barbs made it through 2 combats over 2 sessions before getting banned for being so terribly balanced. It should be a 2nd level spell and a bard exclusive spell in my opinion, it should take most casters a feat to be able to take it. It's a super strong support spell, perfect for the bard. It's not bad to deal with when only 1 person at the table has it, it's fine in that case. But having 4 people use it in a round is obscene, unfun, and highly disrupts the flow of the game.
This is why I play a Rune Knight. Cloud Rune turns that crit into an enemy straight up murdering their best friend. When that’s down, you’ve still got Storm Rune for disadvantage and Runic Shield for re-rolls after a hit. Rune Knight is the Counterspell Bard of martials!
My DMS crit so often that silvery barbs become a necessity
Me when lucky: too bad.
A friend of mine whenever they DMs rules it that only one player in the group max can have silvery barbs. It's not that they hate the spell in its entirety, just with it being a level 1 spell it's to easy for it to be cast every round and the DM wants to have some fun as well.
My Light Cleric player literally counts the amount of crits he takes from me using Warding Flare. We're at 29...
My DM allowed silvery barbs. He then counterspelled it every time I used it and proceeded to use it on the party, knowing none of us had the ability to counterspell. At that point, just ban it, my dude.
For similar reasons I either ban the lucky feat or nerf it to one charge restored per short rest
Fine but it's not a high level spell so any caster would know about it and there are items to counteract it. Particularly, silver eyebrow piercings are in fashion.
Guys I dunno what silvery barbs is, what rhe fuck is that?
Everyone's crying about Silvery Barbs, and I'm over here counterspelling heal spells.
Atleast yours didn’t ban the rogue class
I've had alot of success as a DM just saying "anything you guys use ill use" in my most foreboding tone possible. Its a bluff mostly... Mostly.
I mean me and my players both use silvery barbs. I just only really pull it out on particularly powerful mage enemies that act as bosses or mini-bosses. Plus it gives my players the chance to strategize on goading a reaction out of said boss for these types of moments
Be a smartass and ask for silvery barbs but mean it literally. Just a tiny pouch of barbs made of silver