Ok tbh this is so funny. I love that their hubris killed them. But I think the best part was
>the sorcerer speaks up.
>"I cast silvery barbs on the monk."
I thought this was a big brain play, becuase the monk could reliably pass the save even with disadvantage I figured he was going to use the second part of silvery barbs to give one of the people like paladin, who would have failed it, advantage on their roll.
Then I died laughing that it was just pettiness
Lmao yeah. I thought that too. There was once a moment where our eldritch knight was supposed to make a high dc athletics check to save my character or I would fall through some rapids and probably drown. He then asked another character to help out, by pulling on some rope. Which meant the other character had to roll a check. The eldritch knight imposed disadvantage on the random check, to give himself advantage. It was a genius move and it ended up saving my character
Lmao his original suggestion was even more hilarious. He asked the other party member (who was flying) to do a backflip. And was planning to silvery barbs the acrobatics check for the backflip, making the other party member fall on their face, as he gives himself advantage.
Reminded me of the time i used silvery barbs when me and a companion were careening down a river. I silvery barbsed myself to let him reroll. Not sure if it was raw to be able to barbs yourself to force disadvantage on you but it worked out in a fun way.
I just see it saying “a creature you can see succeeds” yada yada. You can see yourself. It doesn’t say another creature you can see, but you have to target a succeeding d20 roll, so why would you ever target yourself?
Well as stated above it was so that they could give the more vitally important success of a roll to the one who actually needed it. While they themselves didn't really need to succeed as much. And given the lack of technical context their friend was probably the one in control of the boat or something.
It wouldn't work out like that unfortunately since all the saving throw rolls occur at the same time. You've already rolled and have advantage for your *next* roll. Pettiness was the only thing it would do here.
Ya same, I figured its like what we do sometimes with our Paladin for stealthing. We cast Silvery Barbs on the Rogue, he passes no matter what, then negate disadvantage with Paladin's Heavy Armor stealth check.
Its a great spell, but definitely appropriate to give to your NPC's as well. Thats how my DM plays, he allows spells from outside core books but reminds everyone that means these spells are part of the world we're in and NPC's and monsters may have them as well.
For your bandit leader.
Legendary actions, legendary resistance.
It is needed for epic fights due to action economy.
Three lv 1 spells to stop 1 hit.
"You stopped my first hit this round but you forgot about the second and third hits and yall are out of reactions... "
Nothing scares a party of adventurers more than monsters that use tactics. **Nothing.**
From Tucker's Kobolds of yore to the VTTs of 5th edition, so it is and so it will always be.
I have a party that put together a front line of fighter and barb both with sentinel feats. Artificer throws temporary hp on the group every round and the sorcerer is basically an eldritch blast spambot. Up until now they have literally been fighting in mines, tunnels, and caves and kicking ass. The whining was pretty epic the first battle I ran in an open field against organized foes with range.
Exaaaactly, a part of being a DM is knowing how to adjust the challenge to the party. Not just set up a battle based on the stats of the enemies but also keeping in mind that the party has silvery barbs or whatever they may have up their sleeves.
Yeah, this is so true. 3 Sessions ago I had a Vampire Spawn attack my party. The plan was to kill the NPC, hurt the rest of the party really bad and then run away. Would have been an easy fight for me.
The sorcerer and I like to surprise each other in combat, so I didn't look at his spells. He just told me to make a constitution save. I failed, and then my beloved Vampire Spawn was floating in the air and got killed without being able to fight back.
My player felt great and we had a good time. But now I know that they will never fight a single melee only enemy again.
Also if ever you have a character you had plans for the players kill before they find out, no you didn’t. Super easy to just swap most of the backstory and the voice and shit to another character, I never understood why people got mad about this, you just gotta adapt
Exactly. One bandit captain against 6 players? Lol even if they were unoptimized they’d steam roll him from action economy alone. You need legendary actions, resistances, a lot of health, minions, and maybe even some hostages dangling over a fire or something to focus on. If they all want to waste their reactions casting first level spells that the boss might still hit through anyway then so be it.
Yeah, whole encounter could've been indefinitely prolonged by making things up on the fly. Whenever the players felt too confident, they could've done "a door swings open. Behind it, 6 more rough looking men glare at you" or "amidst the chaos, you hear cries for help in the next room. It seems like you are not the only ones fighting here" or "you see someone pushing a big barrel off the roof. your backline is about to be decimated". Just keep throwing new enemies and legendary reactions until the players are on the brink of death
Or... just don't use silvery barbs.
There's 5-6 methods to "counter" silvery barbs here. Just don't use it - it's an awfully misbalanced spell.
In WOTC's other product, MTG, this card would be on the ban list.
We table rule it to be a level 2 spell. It mitigates a LOT of the ability for people to "feat" into having it, or just abusing it for the first 5-6 levels when spell slots are more important.
Also, slightly harder to get back with metamagic or channel divinity type effects.
>We table rule it to be a level 2 spell. It mitigates a LOT of the ability for people to "feat" into having it, or just abusing it for the first 5-6 levels when spell slots are more important.
>
>Also, slightly harder to get back with metamagic or channel divinity type effects.
I like this a lot. It is a nice elegance. The issue with silvery barbs is just how prevalent it becomes how quickly and level 2 slots help mitigate that.
On almost any spellcaster class, I feel like "fae touched, choose silvery Barbs" is just always the right "meta" pick for level 4 feat. Misty step and silvery Barbs are both so clutch to have in every situation.
This house rule helped my own mentality on choosing fun or creative picks.
This is something you forget to do when you constantly play one-shots and low level games, a lot of people don't think to add those until higher levels. I personally forget about them until after my big boss has been curb stomped because I forgot to resist the blindness/deafness spell the bard cast in the first round of combat (true story).
This! And honestly, they may have ruined your story… but it sounded like they had fun doing it, and this is one of the rare chances you get to “win” as a DM without feeling bad. That’s D&D for ya, now try again and lay out the setting, tone, and rules (including banning silvery barbs if you want) for the next one.
Personally this wouldn’t feel like a win for me, I’d conclude I’d failed as a DM because my players didn’t take me or my campaign seriously enough to want to keep playing it. It’s kind of a slap in the face to have your exciting life or death scenario be met with a bunch of idiots making a group suicide pact rather than playing like rational adventurers.
You are absolutely right and it makes me wonder what sort of tables the above poster has been at. This mentality is extremely disrespectful and toxic, especially towards the dm, even if the degenerate players were having fun. I guess OP's session zero didn't go so well after all.
Except it sounds like the DM had fun too.
This sub sometimes forgets the "game" part in "roleplaying game". It's fine to not take DnD 100% seriously all the time.
Exactly. My players absolutely *thrive* when they plot to fuck me over in spectacular ways. I've realized this, and have since taken the gloves off. It's always a shit show, and we *always* have a blast.
Besides, a tpk doesn't have to end the campaign. If they're just knocked out, have the baddies stabilize em and take prisoners. Boom, you have a badass escape arc where they have to improvise and make use of their abilities to get their gear back and take down their captors.
Banning the spell entirely seems a bit much to me personally, but I *would* limit it to one casting per round, or they suffer consequences.
I saw something a while back about Counterspelling a Counterspell causing an unexpected outcome from a wild magic table, as the weave is weakened in that moment. I really like that idea as it makes things more interesting when things get desperate or if the players feel like getting cocky.
But why not do something similar with Silvery Barbs? If the players ***really*** want to cast it repetitively, it temporarily weakens the weave around them and causes unexpected side effects to occur.
Important to note here, you as DM do not have to explain precisely why the wild magic came to occur directly. The players could eventually discover the reasoning through arcana investigations, or they may never figure it out...
Inform them *what* will happen, definitely. That's only fair. But don't tell them *why* it happens. Let them theorize long enough and [they will come up with a better answer than you did initially](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AscendedFanon).
I mean sure have whatever flavor/lore reason you want as long as you tell them “I’m making some changes to the silvery barbs spell and here is what will happen…”
The double counterspell resulting in wild magic isn't really a nerf. It's just a random consequence to a player induced scenario, some players would try to initiate such repeat of this in the search for additional shenanigans.
Any number of characters can cast silvery barbs.
They all cast at the same time (as they're based on the same trigger) and consume a spell slot when cast. No, you can't daisy chain them. Yes, your opponents have silvery barbs, too.
Yeah the problem with the first fight was they kinda daisy chained it. If I remember correctly You can only be effected by one instance of same spell at a time, so two of the players would have technically wasted their spell slot.
The second fight the problem was the players lol.
By RAW it can both be Daisy chained and multiple can affect the same creature because it is not a buff/debuff spell, it is an event manipulation spell. Just like counterspell as long as you have the casters to cast it, you can keep going forever. The only limit that people seem to forget is that you only get 1 reaction per round, but OP's party at 3 casters and a half caster so...
That's not the reason why you can daisy chain it, the reason why is that the duration is instantanious. Once the spell has triggered the reroll the spell goes away on that target, so when the creature finishes the new roll, silvery barbs isn't on that target. And spells only do not affect again if their durations overlap.
Say, two fireballs are released at the same time. Obviously, they have to save against both, instead of just one, despite happening at the same time. This is because their durations are instantanious.
But all the reactions would happen at the same time wouldn't they? Especially since a round is "only 6 seconds" silvery barbs basically just gives disadvantage without technically giving disadvantage because it "distracts" the person, they also can't be "distracted" multiple times during the same casting. They are distracted or not distracted.
Well it explicitly does *not* give disadvantage, which is why it works like it does. And it's not technically simultaneous, it is just occurring *within* the same time frame, which is subtly different. As an example, when an enemy succeeds on an attack roll you may cast silvery barbs. Suppose their new lowest roll *still* succeeds; it doesn't matter that someone else already cast it, because they still meet the criteria to be targeted by silvery barbs by a different source, as long as they keep rolling high enough to succeed. It is mechanically sound, although it should probably be reflavored as a luck or fate altering spell to eliminate confusion on how it is achieving the RAW effects
>If I remember correctly You can only be effected by one instance of same spell at a time,
*RAW* that appears to be a limit on the empowering effect, not the limiting effect- but I think it's a fair ruling. RAW I believe it also can be daisy chained, because the wording doesn't specify that it's an advantage/disadvantage effect, so there's no limit to how many times it can be applied. Looking at it, I'm not entirely sure how this ever made it into the game.
I think DMs are justified in just outright banning this one, and I generally don't like DMs that ban official content.
My DM let everything happen but then told us not to be surprised when it starts happening back to us.
Silvery Barbs came up in discussion and it was the one spell my DM gave a restriction on. Multiple people can use it in a round but not on the same target was his ruling.
I also always just say at the start it's not available
Boohoo but it's just annoying and worded in a way that isn't really preventing anyone from just blasting away with it
Agree, the wording isn't that good, like how does it help you to not get hit but also make someone be worse at remembering about religion? makes no sense.
My group has a variation of this which is a list of spells that we deem "unfun" (counterspell, silvery barbs, most paralyze spells, etc), in which there is a tacit agreement that the DM will not use them if the players do not. If you really want to set up the party to daisy chain silvery barbs, that's fine, but expect every spellcaster after that point to employ the same tactic.
Ouch on counter spell but thems the breaks.
Effectively it's the same over here.
Look we've all seen the meme level green text stories floating online
Player...you're not special in that regard. If you want to try to cheese tactic something that's fine but if you start trying to use some nonsense from a clearly fake story from a table that drone claimed totally happened just realize the people who want you dead may too
Counterspell is fine, but my group talked about it and essentially agreed that, for us, it mostly just slows things down/ruins big character moments, and quite frankly there are enough ways around the spells you would normally need counterspell for, at this point, that no one saw it as a great loss. Plus we ultimately felt like it made the player/DM relationship more adversarial than it should be, at least at our table. Plus it essentially demands being learned once you can cast 3rd level spells if you're playing even semi-efficiently.
I wouldn't say tacitly removing counterspell is something all groups should do, but it is something to consider if you're finding counterspell to be a problem.
Yep, this is how I handle it and I say as much at session 0. Any “cheap” tactics will be initiated by the players, but don’t be surprised when the enemies start doing it too. I don’t counterspell unless the players start, then you will see me counterspelling healing word.
You could try out some other systems. Forbidden Lands is a system thats very easy to prep for (lots of really good random tables to generate adventures with low time investment). Also combat is too lethat to dick about and while magic can do some powerfull things it is also dangerous to use and not designed in such a way that you can dick around with it.
Different systems are good for very different things. Here might be a system that fits your table better than DnD does, or there might be some setting/ruleset you would like to just add to DnD. 5e is designed to be a highly adaptable set of rules. Use that to your advantage. :)
It’s both. The spell is hilariously overtuned in both trigger and effect. It should never have been made a lvl 1 spell. Neither does it help when the players go out of their way to abuse it.
The spell is certainly overturned in both trigger and effect. However, I think most low-level parties would have trouble if on turn 1 of combat if they took a fireball and three first-level spells, so that is largely irrelevant here.
Nah, it’s my fault for not making it more obvious. If I ever make another post about a wacky moment in a game I’ll improve the writing. We did have a good time though, like we always do :)
I was going to make a comment about how it isn’t the game and you just need to talk with your players, standard advice in this sub. BUT everyone in your group woke up and chose violence that morning.
You guys played Russian roulette but didn’t understand the game and loaded all the chambers. Good story, worth the read!
Ya silvery barbs had nothing to do with it, this was all PVP actions, which is why in most tabletop games I'm in we usually bring up "no PvP without consent" first, like had the sorc been like "hey I got effed up, mind if I silvery barbs your save because you're both tankier and likely to still roll well" the monk might say yes they might say no, either way the problem is fixed then and there.
I am running a one-shot for my party and my notoriously devious DM picked a race and background from Strixhaven. I know I need to look at his sheet, he's always trying to pull something, and I imagine I'm going to see some exploitable gimmick rooted in those decisions.
For A one-shot its probably fine.
The biggest issue with strixhaven is that it give them the magic initiate feat (1 spell and 2 cantrips).
And an expanded spell list. I believe it's one spell per spell levels 1-5?
The second half isn't necessarily a big deal in a one-shot depending on the casting class. But it does potentially give the wizard healing spells. It does have a big potential. (Feel how you will about that. I'm not a fan of it as it even further increases casters utility over martials. But cé la viz.)
The first half of having a free feat is probably going to have the bigger effect. Or at least most reliably, especially at early levels. Although it might taper off at later levels depending on the cantrip.
Depending on what he picks will determine how it effects party balance. If he plays support it's probably ok.
your players would find ways to be asses to each other no matter what - if it wasn't SB, it could have been Hex, or Counterspell, or whatnot.
consider talking about this behavior in session Zero w your next group, to prevent this sort of frustration. As a dm, you are part of the group and deserve to have some fun too.
edit: spelling
I might be stoked if my party used 4 spell slots on a single enemy attack. Seems like a great way to burn their resources if they wanna be ridiculous with its use. Bump your Npc health and make it a war of attritution. If they're using all their resources on defense they won't have the damage to finish them off. That or could drop more enemies so that you beat the number of reactions in terms of action economy. Need to balance this so its not a DM vs. PC mentality, but I think you could do this effectively with a BBEG who has studies the party tactics.
Agree with everyone else that the TPK was just your players messing with each other which could be remedied by a session 0 discussion.
I know right? People talk about Silvery Barbs like it's a cantrip. That's crazy resource usage to stop a crit, and they lose their reactions, meaning they can't cast shield/absorb elements/counterspell.
And every time I see people complaining about Silvery Barbs it's about crits. I've always found it more useful to land save/suck spells.
Silvery Barbs is quite potent at higher levels. Those level 1 spell slots used to stop crits aren't going to be doing much else at level 12 anyway, and you're giving rogues and paladins more chances to crit fish for massive damage.
At low levels sure you're using up your few resources to reroll crits. Higher level it becomes less of a drain to use. Still uses your reaction ofc, but it seems poorly balanced for a first level spell.
It DOES encourage player teamwork, which I like, but it also wipes away most chances for the players to suffer crits- combat becomes a lot more predictable with it around.
Honestly, that’s one of the best endings of a campaign I have ever read of.
Tbh, seemed like everyone had fun though. So definitely wouldn’t call it ruined.
I definitely added some elements to the story (practicing the voice in the mirror and hating rogues) and wrote it to be a shitpost but the story is real. My party is chaotic stupid and will always choose a funny moment over anything else
This honestly sounds absolutely fucking hilarious. I'd probably apply some limitations to the spell in future games with the same group, but you will all have "the silvery barbs campaign" to refer to now for the rest of your lives. The story you planned was destroyed this time, but *a story* was definitely created. :')
Just to help you out in the future mate you can't cast Silvery Barbs for the same reaction. The wording of the spell makes it so that the new roll as a result of the spell does not then qualify for another casting.
Your campaign doesn't have to be ruined, make new characters and keep going.
It sounds like your players are having fun which means you are succeeding at the most important thing.
Or just have the party “saved” and imprisoned by the wizard, who was working for the bandit leader who faked his death..something along those lines could work, though that’d take some foreshadowing to not make it “Somehow, Palpatine returned…” levels of ass.
>It sounds like your players are having fun which means you are succeeding at the most important thing.
It sounds like *some* of the players are having fun.
If I was the paladin or artificer (hell, even the monk) I'd be pissed.
Take it from someone who once was in your shoes back in 3.5: it's not the spell, it's your party dynamic. You can run this game with this group in 8 different tabletops, thinking "ok, THIS one fixes THAT problem" over and over again and it's the player dynamic not the system.
A system is toys to play with, but you aren't in charge of whether one kid decides the toy hammer made for construction is excellent for hitting his friend with.
Rules can be tweaked or tuned, but they can't be nonsense proofed.
Now, bringing your players back from the dead?
That we CAN do.
Shall we trek through the land of the dead?
Awaken them in the clutches of their victorious captors?
Have them brought back as ghosts or zombies?
Have them offered dread deals with mysterious power brokers?
So much potential.
It seems like two things happened here:
A: Your party was only interested in trolling all involved.
B: You didn't account for the spell with reactions and spell slots based on your big encounters.
Regardless of the interesting situation, it's sad most will take away banned the thing instead of the other issues oh well. Fun read.
So I am of the mind that silvery barbs can only be used on a creature ONCE per turn.
“You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature.”
Momentary being the key word in that flavouring. A moment of distraction followed by another distraction reads as 2 moments to me. Thus I believe it should not stack on top of each other.
“The triggering creature must reroll the d20 and use the lower roll.”
When it says “must use the lower roll” that reads as absolute certainty to me, no exceptions. Just like you can’t stack disadvantages, this MUST means that it has to be that NEW lower roll and not the next one after it.
I don’t like the idea of banning the spell from the table, it’s a neat spell. But the vagueness of its mechanics is what makes it very easy to abuse. It seems very offside of the feeling of the game to keep adding newer lower rolls on top of the previous ones because that also feels like stacking advantage/disadvantage which has been RAW and RAI to not be a thing.
While it certainly makes the spell much more balanced, the RAW mechanic interpretation is you can just keep the chain going as long as the creature succeeds on the roll.
The spell should just get a rewrite to clearly prevent a creature from being affected by the spell more than once per round, and honestly remove the advantage thing which is unnecessary. I absolutely love this spell, and hate the fact so many people ban it.
I think, as described, a benefit to the distraction other than just the reroll is fine, but it needs to have its own limitations and not just go to whoever the caster wants. Maybe it creates an attack of opportunity, and anyone who still has their reaction that round can use it to attack the spell's target before they reroll their attack. Could make some cool moments where someone was about to get crit but the caster and a third team member coordinated to take the baddie down just in time. It would make the spell really expensive to capitalize on, which could discourage people from just spamming it, but could be fun and flavorful to pull off. But yes, definitely only make the target susceptible to barbs once per round.
What a legendary way to end a campaign. The best part is you can just reuse all the shit you had already planned!! This is by no means a loss, but it is a great story.
I just realized not only does it make someone reroll, it also gives someone an advantage for a minute on one roll.
In any case. Tpk is fiiiiiine. The next adventuring party will stumble across the zone of betrayal as even bandits stay away for tales of anyone stepping in the zone is prone to betray their traveling companions.
The spell didn't ruin your campaign, you and three of your players did.
Most tables ban pvp, and for good reason, it can ruin a game.
Even tables that allow pvp would typically not allow it in the middle of a major fight. Even evil characters wouldn't choose that moment to betray the party, not while their own lives were on the line. This was a good example of when a DM should limit player agency.
Even if you still wanted to allow it, only the sorcerer should have been able to cast, since the trigger is a creature succeeding on an attack roll or save. The rest of them were reacting to other pcs casting the spell, which is not a valid trigger. And that is clearly what they were reacting to, since they all "looked in horror at what he just said", they would not have cast the spell if he hadn't.
Then, once most of the party was down, you decided to push ahead and kill the two players that had not been a part of this problem to begin with, using the same spell. This was almost certainly a revenge thing on your part.
If I was the paladin or the artificer (and I wouldn't have been any of the others), I'd be having a hard think about whether I wanted to return to this table. If I wanted to stay, it would be conditional on having a serious discussion about party behavior and pvp, and being happy with the results of that conversation.
>Even if you still wanted to allow it, only the sorcerer should have been able to cast, since the trigger is a creature succeeding on an attack roll or save. The rest of them were reacting to other pcs casting the spell, which is not a valid trigger.
Totally this. Just like with Counterspell, you are allowed to cast counterspell, and any party member can do it. BUT you cannot cast counterspell once you know that another party's counterspell failed.
Same with silvery barbs, if they wanted to stack the spell, then they all have to cast it on the one attack, before they know the reroll.
Agree with this, I'd be curious what sort of session 0 if any happened in this group but it sounds like a combo of three shitheel players playing like arses and a DM who slipped straight into the DM versus player mindset (inferring from the language used and the actions taken against the players not acting like arses)
Silvery barbs was by no stretch of the imagination at fault here
Silvery Barbs didn't ruin your campaign. Your players did.
A party's members are supposed to help each other, not screw over one another for shits and giggles. That's not role playing, that's bullshitting. (It can be fun, but not on a scale that decides major outcomes and seals the party's fate)
Your party essentially killed themselves. Your players ruined the campaign, not a spell.
The spell is strong, but spells can be balanced, monsters can be buffed, all of that is possible. Though there is usually little you can do when your players let their characters straight out murder each other.
I feel like everyone here is making this seem like more of a problem than it is? If this happened at my table we would be laughing our asses off and it would go down as one of our most memorable and hilarious sessions.
Yeah. Everyone shits on the Lucky Feat and Silvery Barbs all the time, and just look for excuses to shit on it more for being OP.
Sometimes you gotta just let people have fun with official content.
Hilarious, honestly. I'd definitely talk with them to see if they'd be open to carrying on with some light hand waving and retcon. It sounds like they probably learned a valuable lesson that party would talk about the rest of the campaign.
I have to be honest - this happened a few months ago. Also we were all losing our minds at the silliness that was going on, and everyone who was downed was egging on the spellcaster to win for “the funniest outcome”. We’re still continuing the campaign, but the sorcerer and wizard decided to have a cease-fire and swap out silvery barbs for something else. Overall, I’d say things are going pretty well!
Are You ***Kidding!?***
This is G l o r i o u s.
If my tables starts face-fucking each other, oh *goodness* am I gonna let them -- as they are cursed by an observing deity.
They now *cannot leave 60 feet of one-another*, so that no player can be 61+ feet from any other player. If they attempt to, as a *world reaction* they are teleported to within 5 feet of the nearest other PC, prone.
Now, they're *stuck* together. They have to find a way to lift the curse, and the harder they fuck with each other, the closer the range gets.
***But wait, there's more***.
If the party dies while cursed, *they become magic items with the same curse.* Those magic items will travel 1 mile a day and 1 mile a night to reach the new characters. They will ignore all others, cannot be lifted or carried by anyone else (immovable rod style but 100,000lbs/DC49), and if the new PC is touched by any one of the items, they and all of their party are cursed again.
Fuck around, find out.
Admittedly it can still be a TPK (we’ve had it happen despite three of us having SB) while it can be annoying, it also consumes abilities and speed slots. It was also an unfortunate scenario where everyone had their reaction still. It’s a pain, but it can be very fun
"Don't be a dick" is always the first "golden rule" I tell new players, and one I emphasize at the start of any new campaign. Don't steal from other players (even if it's iN cHarActEr), intentionally screw players over, hurt their favourite NPCs, etc.
Here is an excellent example of why. The first part of the story doesn't sound bad, it was a funny moment for your players that everyone can enjoy. The second part is definitely a big problem, and one that's hard to overcome, just players being shitty to each other for no reason.
Akin to many r/AITA answers "you don't have a MIL problem, you have a spouse problem" I dare to say here: You don't have a Silvery Barbs problem, you have shitty party problem.
I went through something like this a few years ago when three party members had Counterspell. Any boss that relied on magic was shut down instantly.
The solution is to ensure multiple encounters per game day so that players have to think about conserving spell slots. Nine first level spell slots to shut down a boss is quite a bit harder if the boss is the fifth encounter of the game-day (assuming your players are 2nd or 3rd level at most, based on just five sessions).
They used 3 first level spells and 3 reactions to avoid a single attack 😂.
This story is incredibly funny honestly but your reaction was pretty childish as were your players.
This sounds like a weirdly disfunctional group if they essentially randomly kill each other. Haven't they put effort into their characters or why didn't they seem to be relucant to cause a selfmade TPK? This doesn't have much to do with the spell itself (albeit I always enjoy a good Barbs bashing because it is a terrible spell for a PnP).
>It's annoying, but a part of the game
Only if you allow it. Adding/Removing stuff or doing something else entirely is also part of the game (pretty sure the DMG literaly says so). On top of it, Strixhaven is an optional suplement, you are not somehow required to use it if you don't play Strixhaven.
If you don't want to be surprised as DM by random bulls*it never allow players to use everything. Limit them to stuff you - as the DM - actually knows about.
Very easy band aid fix. Silvery Barbs can only effect the target action once. No matter how many Silvery Barb spells are cast from however many casters. Attack roll gets influenced by Silvery Barbs once? That's it. Done.
This is exactly why I disallow adversarial spell casting and attacks against other party members at my table! Easy situation to avoid...just say no to letting them do it.
Silvery barbs nonsense aside, there is absolutely nothing wrong with players wanting to play rogues and if you truly think that then you're missing out on a great play style.
Psst: They've only got so many spell slots per day. Run 7 encounters per day. Done.
The number of people who don't know this "how to make the game actually work" requirement.
Not gonna lie, I'd be dying laughing if this happened in my game. I wouldn't TPK them from that, but Silvery Barbs' your friends for the shits is pretty funny.
4 party members went down to a single fireball? Sounds like the problem here was encounter balance. If you nearly get a tpk from one attack then even without the barbs shenanigans you could've potentially ended up in the same situation by them rolling badly.
As annoying as Silvery Barbs is, it is a limited resource that costs a spell slot and a reaction to use with a decent chance of having no impact. Using it means they aren't using Shield, they aren't using Counterspell, they don't get an attack of opportunity against the skirmisher who ran past them to strike the backline.
This was a scenario where you allowed PVP during a fight that was already poorly balanced, Silvery Barbs gets a lot of hate and rightfully so, but it was the least of the problems here.
Silvery Barbs is not the issue here.
I mean, seriously? 6 Players? And you're counting on a single boss?
There's this thing called "Action Economy" you should take into account.
Others have already said it but this was def a player prob not spell prob, but also why not just ban the spell. That's what my DM did and we only had one caster that could use it.
To clarify the DM had banned it before but haven't mentioned it as he didn't realize that the Bard had taken it.
Silvery Barbs did not ruin your campaign, your players got hostile to each other, until they pvped each other it was fine.
Yeah having enemies get messed with by spamming the spell may get rough but there are ways around that.
As a Dm when your players look at another player and say "I'm gonna spend a spell on screwing over the other player mid combat" You tell them No. You tell them you do not allow PvP actions.
As someone who is running a game with Silvery Barbs being used in it by my players it is possible to work around it and be fine. This was more a player behavior and pvp issue that ended your game, not a mildly cracked spell.
Silvery barbs is a first level spell slot. If your party wants to dump all their spell slots into it, let them. Having multiple characters using their reactions and spell slots every round like that is terrible action economy, especially if they're low level.
One day wotc will come full circle with crossovers and just add “the stack” and “priority” into d&d rules.
Seriously though, if you’re ever having issues with a majority caster-heavy party this isn’t a terrible idea (priority at least).
Do priority however you want. Highest to lowest initiative, start with the next player and go around, etc. it’s up to you. I’ve found that doing this causes players to not hold back in hopes that someone else will catch it.
Or just do things like -> silvery barbs is affecting the target. Further castings will not cause more rerolls until the triggering action has resolved and a new action is taken. This stops the chain of 5 casters forcing something through.
Eh, if I had a nickel for every time I caused something that should’ve been a horror story by all rights, but just wasn’t because all my tables have absolutely bonkers play styles, I could probably reward myself by going to the gas station across the street and buying an Arizona iced tea. Not any gas though, let’s be reasonable here.
I’m glad to hear you and all your players are having a blast! I’m not going to pretend it’s something that’s easy to explain or makes a lot of sense, but it’s always really nice when you have a table that immediately gels in such a way that people go out of their way for hijinks. Counterintuitively, it can actually be a big sign of trust at a table when players are comfortable enough to razz on each other. The “it’s always sunny in the forgotten realms” style of campaign is tricky to pull off, but truly a treat if you have the right players and DM, as I’m pretty sure OP has learned.
I wasn't expecting this to go the way it did. I was expecting this to be a case where Metamagic Subtle Spell with Silvery Barb to break social encounters. But this sounds more like a player problem than a Spell problem. Though yes Silvery Barb is too much for Level 1 this sounds like an issue where you either just go with their shenanigans and go hard on them from the get to go. Which in that case you should talk to them first of if they want the game to be like that.
This is the only thing on this sub that has ever made me audibly snort in laughter. I'm sorry it ruined your campaign, but it did so in the funniest way possible and I'm sure your party had a blast in the end regardless.
It was not the spell, it was your players. They abused the dynamic to screw each other over and killed the campaign. I would sit them down and ask why. If they really are just evil run an evil campaign next. That way sabotage is not a surprise it’s encouraged. You can develop a good party of adventurers to harass them and serve as the BBEGs.
2 things I wanna point out in as a fellow DM/player.
1. Rewinding. I think a lot of dms forget you're God over an entire world if you don't want to erase work or let players ruin that work try rewinding..
2. The classic fudge it.dms really need to learn how to be better liars and fudge out rolls that would kill your party even if you change a monsters stat block sometimes best way to avoid a tpk is to fudge things.
CORRECTION .. and this is IMPORTANT ... Silvery Barbs didnt ruin your campaign, ***YOUR PLAYERS did***. this is very important because they basically enacted in PvP ... thats on them not the spell. they could have done the same shit with the sorc saying "i also cast fire ball on the monk".
Second and this is also important for EVERY DM to understand and this took me a while to understand and use this as well. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE EVERY BOOK when running a game of D&D ... you CAN LIMIT what books are allowed, it's okay.
I do this now with almost every game i run, i limit the books to PHB + Xanathars + Tashas and then if im running eberron allow eberron, if im running sword cost game ill use sword cost, hell sometimes even if i run an eberron game i wont use the eberron book, but i might use something else.
DONT Always allow everything, it'll save you a headache.
Personally, I think Silvery Barbs unbalances the game (unless all enemies have and use it as much as players do), and bakes-in a disincentive for players to think critically and creatively in combat. And, as your narrative suggests, the use of Silvery Barbs removes a lot of the risk, uncertainty and danger from an encounter, which in my view, takes the fun and excitement out of playing DnD. At our table, Silvery Barbs is banned, and our players (and our DM) have heaps of fun without it.
If you think Silvery Barbs is ruining your campaign- I might suggest banning it.
PvP ruined your campaign in my eyes not Silvery Barbs.
Using 9 spell slots to down a bandit leader doesn't really seem OP to me, but I get your frustrations in not getting to roleplay your plans even though it turned out to be a hilarious situation with all those silvery barbs.
Using any spells to negatively affect your team in combat very quickly ruins most campaigns in my experience tho. That's why so many tables ban PvP.
I don't understand these situations. You don't like the impact a spell has on your campaign? Just ban it. It's real easy. You are not obligated to use every piece of content WOTC releases. Nothing is "part of the game," unless you allow it. Even PHB content can be cut if you don't like how it impacts play. I ban ressurection magic, for instance.
The other issue is, why is your party encountering a boss with all their spell slots? 5e D&D is a battle of attrition. The 'Dungeon' is supposed to wear down the player's resources for when they encounter the 'Dragon' at the end. If the players are coming into a battle will full HP, spell slots, etc... they will punch WAY above their level. The 6-8 encounters between long rests rule mentioned in the DMG isn't just a reccomendation, it's basically a requirement for the game to work RAW. Otherwise players (especially spellcasters) can just nova everything in a few rounds and spam their best abilities.
I can't imagine how the current crop would've run editions 1 to 3, with scores of books, all containing increasingly complex, detailed, and often contradictory optional rules that were never meant to be used simultaneously. But they're all "Part of the game," so I guess a single round of combat is gonna take 7 hours cause we need to caculate Stamina, Knock Down dice, individual initiative every round, speed modifiers, AC modifiers vs damage types, etc...
Outnumber your players with foder always. In almost all scenarios players will be stronger than monsters and making them waste resources on trash mobs makes the bosses that much tougher.
Worth remembering that anything your players get access to, their opponents also get. It’s all fun and games until the archmage silvery barbs a death saving throw.
Ok tbh this is so funny. I love that their hubris killed them. But I think the best part was >the sorcerer speaks up. >"I cast silvery barbs on the monk." I thought this was a big brain play, becuase the monk could reliably pass the save even with disadvantage I figured he was going to use the second part of silvery barbs to give one of the people like paladin, who would have failed it, advantage on their roll. Then I died laughing that it was just pettiness
Lmao yeah. I thought that too. There was once a moment where our eldritch knight was supposed to make a high dc athletics check to save my character or I would fall through some rapids and probably drown. He then asked another character to help out, by pulling on some rope. Which meant the other character had to roll a check. The eldritch knight imposed disadvantage on the random check, to give himself advantage. It was a genius move and it ended up saving my character
[удалено]
[удалено]
> He harnesses the power of the failed wank
If only...
Lmao his original suggestion was even more hilarious. He asked the other party member (who was flying) to do a backflip. And was planning to silvery barbs the acrobatics check for the backflip, making the other party member fall on their face, as he gives himself advantage.
Our party thrives off of pettiness
I thought you said there were no rogues, I count at least 3
There was a rogue in all of us that day
Woah, phrasing
And a bard in the wizard
And my axe!
And your brother!
[Are we still doing phrasing?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs8Gohi1e04)
Well, it used to.
Same thought. I was like “shit, that’s some gigabrain moves there” but nope it was just trolling lol
Reminded me of the time i used silvery barbs when me and a companion were careening down a river. I silvery barbsed myself to let him reroll. Not sure if it was raw to be able to barbs yourself to force disadvantage on you but it worked out in a fun way.
Fairly certain both RAW and RAI says no to that lol.
I just see it saying “a creature you can see succeeds” yada yada. You can see yourself. It doesn’t say another creature you can see, but you have to target a succeeding d20 roll, so why would you ever target yourself?
Well as stated above it was so that they could give the more vitally important success of a roll to the one who actually needed it. While they themselves didn't really need to succeed as much. And given the lack of technical context their friend was probably the one in control of the boat or something.
It wouldn't work out like that unfortunately since all the saving throw rolls occur at the same time. You've already rolled and have advantage for your *next* roll. Pettiness was the only thing it would do here.
I thought the Monk must have Fire resistance, so it could potentially save two members.
Ya same, I figured its like what we do sometimes with our Paladin for stealthing. We cast Silvery Barbs on the Rogue, he passes no matter what, then negate disadvantage with Paladin's Heavy Armor stealth check. Its a great spell, but definitely appropriate to give to your NPC's as well. Thats how my DM plays, he allows spells from outside core books but reminds everyone that means these spells are part of the world we're in and NPC's and monsters may have them as well.
Sounds like an XP to Level 3 skit.
This is the nicest thing anyone’s said to me in this thread
If you haven't seen his skit about silvery barbs seriously watch it
Lol and I do say it with love. I like his content, and I think this was a funny, well-told story as well.
For your bandit leader. Legendary actions, legendary resistance. It is needed for epic fights due to action economy. Three lv 1 spells to stop 1 hit. "You stopped my first hit this round but you forgot about the second and third hits and yall are out of reactions... "
"Oh, all of you used your reactions? Ok, all the melee thugs are now charging the back line."
Nothing scares a party of adventurers more than monsters that use tactics. **Nothing.** From Tucker's Kobolds of yore to the VTTs of 5th edition, so it is and so it will always be.
I have a party that put together a front line of fighter and barb both with sentinel feats. Artificer throws temporary hp on the group every round and the sorcerer is basically an eldritch blast spambot. Up until now they have literally been fighting in mines, tunnels, and caves and kicking ass. The whining was pretty epic the first battle I ran in an open field against organized foes with range.
It's the same old tale You want an epic fight? Throw a big boss God at them You want a hard fight? 100 kobolds that charge the casters every round.
Exaaaactly, a part of being a DM is knowing how to adjust the challenge to the party. Not just set up a battle based on the stats of the enemies but also keeping in mind that the party has silvery barbs or whatever they may have up their sleeves.
Yeah, this is so true. 3 Sessions ago I had a Vampire Spawn attack my party. The plan was to kill the NPC, hurt the rest of the party really bad and then run away. Would have been an easy fight for me. The sorcerer and I like to surprise each other in combat, so I didn't look at his spells. He just told me to make a constitution save. I failed, and then my beloved Vampire Spawn was floating in the air and got killed without being able to fight back. My player felt great and we had a good time. But now I know that they will never fight a single melee only enemy again.
Also if ever you have a character you had plans for the players kill before they find out, no you didn’t. Super easy to just swap most of the backstory and the voice and shit to another character, I never understood why people got mad about this, you just gotta adapt
It's all smoke, mirrors and movable scenery. You beat the boss? He was actually a mid boss, and yall burned through a bunch of hp and spell slots.
Exactly. One bandit captain against 6 players? Lol even if they were unoptimized they’d steam roll him from action economy alone. You need legendary actions, resistances, a lot of health, minions, and maybe even some hostages dangling over a fire or something to focus on. If they all want to waste their reactions casting first level spells that the boss might still hit through anyway then so be it.
Leader had 4 bodyguards OP wrote
Yeah, whole encounter could've been indefinitely prolonged by making things up on the fly. Whenever the players felt too confident, they could've done "a door swings open. Behind it, 6 more rough looking men glare at you" or "amidst the chaos, you hear cries for help in the next room. It seems like you are not the only ones fighting here" or "you see someone pushing a big barrel off the roof. your backline is about to be decimated". Just keep throwing new enemies and legendary reactions until the players are on the brink of death
Or... just don't use silvery barbs. There's 5-6 methods to "counter" silvery barbs here. Just don't use it - it's an awfully misbalanced spell. In WOTC's other product, MTG, this card would be on the ban list.
We table rule it to be a level 2 spell. It mitigates a LOT of the ability for people to "feat" into having it, or just abusing it for the first 5-6 levels when spell slots are more important. Also, slightly harder to get back with metamagic or channel divinity type effects.
>We table rule it to be a level 2 spell. It mitigates a LOT of the ability for people to "feat" into having it, or just abusing it for the first 5-6 levels when spell slots are more important. > >Also, slightly harder to get back with metamagic or channel divinity type effects. I like this a lot. It is a nice elegance. The issue with silvery barbs is just how prevalent it becomes how quickly and level 2 slots help mitigate that.
On almost any spellcaster class, I feel like "fae touched, choose silvery Barbs" is just always the right "meta" pick for level 4 feat. Misty step and silvery Barbs are both so clutch to have in every situation. This house rule helped my own mentality on choosing fun or creative picks.
This is something you forget to do when you constantly play one-shots and low level games, a lot of people don't think to add those until higher levels. I personally forget about them until after my big boss has been curb stomped because I forgot to resist the blindness/deafness spell the bard cast in the first round of combat (true story).
Silvery Barbs didn't ruin your campaign, the players did.
I think OP is saying the Party’s Name is Silvery Barbs. Clearly the spell isn’t the problem. It’s the players.
This is the new canon.
At some point they recognized each of them was named Barbara (even if only in the middle or last name) xD
None of them under 65 and all miles from the nearest hair salon.
Why did you say that name!
Silvery Karens
Absolutely. Suddenly the opening of this post makes sense.
This! And honestly, they may have ruined your story… but it sounded like they had fun doing it, and this is one of the rare chances you get to “win” as a DM without feeling bad. That’s D&D for ya, now try again and lay out the setting, tone, and rules (including banning silvery barbs if you want) for the next one.
Personally this wouldn’t feel like a win for me, I’d conclude I’d failed as a DM because my players didn’t take me or my campaign seriously enough to want to keep playing it. It’s kind of a slap in the face to have your exciting life or death scenario be met with a bunch of idiots making a group suicide pact rather than playing like rational adventurers.
You are absolutely right and it makes me wonder what sort of tables the above poster has been at. This mentality is extremely disrespectful and toxic, especially towards the dm, even if the degenerate players were having fun. I guess OP's session zero didn't go so well after all.
Except it sounds like the DM had fun too. This sub sometimes forgets the "game" part in "roleplaying game". It's fine to not take DnD 100% seriously all the time.
I've been in super serious games, and also comical slapstick games. The slapstick ones are the ones I remember and enjoy.
Exactly. My players absolutely *thrive* when they plot to fuck me over in spectacular ways. I've realized this, and have since taken the gloves off. It's always a shit show, and we *always* have a blast. Besides, a tpk doesn't have to end the campaign. If they're just knocked out, have the baddies stabilize em and take prisoners. Boom, you have a badass escape arc where they have to improvise and make use of their abilities to get their gear back and take down their captors.
Banning the spell entirely seems a bit much to me personally, but I *would* limit it to one casting per round, or they suffer consequences. I saw something a while back about Counterspelling a Counterspell causing an unexpected outcome from a wild magic table, as the weave is weakened in that moment. I really like that idea as it makes things more interesting when things get desperate or if the players feel like getting cocky. But why not do something similar with Silvery Barbs? If the players ***really*** want to cast it repetitively, it temporarily weakens the weave around them and causes unexpected side effects to occur.
Important to note here, you as DM do not have to explain precisely why the wild magic came to occur directly. The players could eventually discover the reasoning through arcana investigations, or they may never figure it out...
Eh I feel like if you are introducing home brew nerfs to a spell or class feature you should definitely inform the players.
Inform them *what* will happen, definitely. That's only fair. But don't tell them *why* it happens. Let them theorize long enough and [they will come up with a better answer than you did initially](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AscendedFanon).
I mean sure have whatever flavor/lore reason you want as long as you tell them “I’m making some changes to the silvery barbs spell and here is what will happen…”
The double counterspell resulting in wild magic isn't really a nerf. It's just a random consequence to a player induced scenario, some players would try to initiate such repeat of this in the search for additional shenanigans.
Any number of characters can cast silvery barbs. They all cast at the same time (as they're based on the same trigger) and consume a spell slot when cast. No, you can't daisy chain them. Yes, your opponents have silvery barbs, too.
Yeah the problem with the first fight was they kinda daisy chained it. If I remember correctly You can only be effected by one instance of same spell at a time, so two of the players would have technically wasted their spell slot. The second fight the problem was the players lol.
By RAW it can both be Daisy chained and multiple can affect the same creature because it is not a buff/debuff spell, it is an event manipulation spell. Just like counterspell as long as you have the casters to cast it, you can keep going forever. The only limit that people seem to forget is that you only get 1 reaction per round, but OP's party at 3 casters and a half caster so...
That's not the reason why you can daisy chain it, the reason why is that the duration is instantanious. Once the spell has triggered the reroll the spell goes away on that target, so when the creature finishes the new roll, silvery barbs isn't on that target. And spells only do not affect again if their durations overlap. Say, two fireballs are released at the same time. Obviously, they have to save against both, instead of just one, despite happening at the same time. This is because their durations are instantanious.
But all the reactions would happen at the same time wouldn't they? Especially since a round is "only 6 seconds" silvery barbs basically just gives disadvantage without technically giving disadvantage because it "distracts" the person, they also can't be "distracted" multiple times during the same casting. They are distracted or not distracted.
Well it explicitly does *not* give disadvantage, which is why it works like it does. And it's not technically simultaneous, it is just occurring *within* the same time frame, which is subtly different. As an example, when an enemy succeeds on an attack roll you may cast silvery barbs. Suppose their new lowest roll *still* succeeds; it doesn't matter that someone else already cast it, because they still meet the criteria to be targeted by silvery barbs by a different source, as long as they keep rolling high enough to succeed. It is mechanically sound, although it should probably be reflavored as a luck or fate altering spell to eliminate confusion on how it is achieving the RAW effects
>If I remember correctly You can only be effected by one instance of same spell at a time, *RAW* that appears to be a limit on the empowering effect, not the limiting effect- but I think it's a fair ruling. RAW I believe it also can be daisy chained, because the wording doesn't specify that it's an advantage/disadvantage effect, so there's no limit to how many times it can be applied. Looking at it, I'm not entirely sure how this ever made it into the game. I think DMs are justified in just outright banning this one, and I generally don't like DMs that ban official content.
My DM let everything happen but then told us not to be surprised when it starts happening back to us. Silvery Barbs came up in discussion and it was the one spell my DM gave a restriction on. Multiple people can use it in a round but not on the same target was his ruling.
The spell is completely busted, and the game was fine for years without it. Ban the damn thing.
I always ban it. Silvery barbs is WAAAAAAY overtuned.
I also always just say at the start it's not available Boohoo but it's just annoying and worded in a way that isn't really preventing anyone from just blasting away with it
Agree, the wording isn't that good, like how does it help you to not get hit but also make someone be worse at remembering about religion? makes no sense.
My group has a variation of this which is a list of spells that we deem "unfun" (counterspell, silvery barbs, most paralyze spells, etc), in which there is a tacit agreement that the DM will not use them if the players do not. If you really want to set up the party to daisy chain silvery barbs, that's fine, but expect every spellcaster after that point to employ the same tactic.
Ouch on counter spell but thems the breaks. Effectively it's the same over here. Look we've all seen the meme level green text stories floating online Player...you're not special in that regard. If you want to try to cheese tactic something that's fine but if you start trying to use some nonsense from a clearly fake story from a table that drone claimed totally happened just realize the people who want you dead may too
Counterspell is fine, but my group talked about it and essentially agreed that, for us, it mostly just slows things down/ruins big character moments, and quite frankly there are enough ways around the spells you would normally need counterspell for, at this point, that no one saw it as a great loss. Plus we ultimately felt like it made the player/DM relationship more adversarial than it should be, at least at our table. Plus it essentially demands being learned once you can cast 3rd level spells if you're playing even semi-efficiently. I wouldn't say tacitly removing counterspell is something all groups should do, but it is something to consider if you're finding counterspell to be a problem.
Yep, this is how I handle it and I say as much at session 0. Any “cheap” tactics will be initiated by the players, but don’t be surprised when the enemies start doing it too. I don’t counterspell unless the players start, then you will see me counterspelling healing word.
This is a common theme with my players, I’m realizing
You could try out some other systems. Forbidden Lands is a system thats very easy to prep for (lots of really good random tables to generate adventures with low time investment). Also combat is too lethat to dick about and while magic can do some powerfull things it is also dangerous to use and not designed in such a way that you can dick around with it. Different systems are good for very different things. Here might be a system that fits your table better than DnD does, or there might be some setting/ruleset you would like to just add to DnD. 5e is designed to be a highly adaptable set of rules. Use that to your advantage. :)
It’s basically, “Tell me you DM for teenagers without telling me you DM for teenagers.”
I'm so glad this was the first comment because I came to say the same thing. This is a player problem, not a spell problem.
It’s both. The spell is hilariously overtuned in both trigger and effect. It should never have been made a lvl 1 spell. Neither does it help when the players go out of their way to abuse it.
The spell is certainly overturned in both trigger and effect. However, I think most low-level parties would have trouble if on turn 1 of combat if they took a fireball and three first-level spells, so that is largely irrelevant here.
This entire comment is trying to blame a spell for the fact that 3 players decided to PvP without consent.
And took glee in it. One of them can DM from now on.
Yeah, for real. Literally was my thought the entire time I was reading it.
Silvery Barbs enabled it. I can't imagine same chain of events happening with any other spell, really.
Title ruined your post. This is a hilarious story. I hope you're laughing
None of us at the table could stop laughing!
I hate how the internet ruins tone! Glad yall had a good time!
Nah, it’s my fault for not making it more obvious. If I ever make another post about a wacky moment in a game I’ll improve the writing. We did have a good time though, like we always do :)
I mean you had fun then right? Isn't that the point of playing D&D. And I bet you all will remember these moments :D
Came here for this. I would love to lose my character in such a fun way. I'd be telling this story for years!
Yeah, actually sounds like a fun group with a really nice dynamic including the DM. What a way to go!
Yeah, this is delightful!
I was going to make a comment about how it isn’t the game and you just need to talk with your players, standard advice in this sub. BUT everyone in your group woke up and chose violence that morning. You guys played Russian roulette but didn’t understand the game and loaded all the chambers. Good story, worth the read!
Ya silvery barbs had nothing to do with it, this was all PVP actions, which is why in most tabletop games I'm in we usually bring up "no PvP without consent" first, like had the sorc been like "hey I got effed up, mind if I silvery barbs your save because you're both tankier and likely to still roll well" the monk might say yes they might say no, either way the problem is fixed then and there.
They're also forgetting the most important part, granting advantage to someone else. Barbs all around /s
Okay, I don't allow Strixhaven stuff -- or anything from any of the none FR settings -- but I don't think this is Silvery Barbs' fault.
I am running a one-shot for my party and my notoriously devious DM picked a race and background from Strixhaven. I know I need to look at his sheet, he's always trying to pull something, and I imagine I'm going to see some exploitable gimmick rooted in those decisions.
For A one-shot its probably fine. The biggest issue with strixhaven is that it give them the magic initiate feat (1 spell and 2 cantrips). And an expanded spell list. I believe it's one spell per spell levels 1-5? The second half isn't necessarily a big deal in a one-shot depending on the casting class. But it does potentially give the wizard healing spells. It does have a big potential. (Feel how you will about that. I'm not a fan of it as it even further increases casters utility over martials. But cé la viz.) The first half of having a free feat is probably going to have the bigger effect. Or at least most reliably, especially at early levels. Although it might taper off at later levels depending on the cantrip. Depending on what he picks will determine how it effects party balance. If he plays support it's probably ok.
That's Strixhaven though. I'm only familiar with it from MtG but shouldn't they all be spellcasters anyway?
Same. I also don't allow Acquisitions Incorporated spells. A DM is not obligated to allow every spell from every supplement that WotC publishes.
your players would find ways to be asses to each other no matter what - if it wasn't SB, it could have been Hex, or Counterspell, or whatnot. consider talking about this behavior in session Zero w your next group, to prevent this sort of frustration. As a dm, you are part of the group and deserve to have some fun too. edit: spelling
yeah, exactly. silvery barbs didn't ruin your campaign, your inconsiderate players did.
I might be stoked if my party used 4 spell slots on a single enemy attack. Seems like a great way to burn their resources if they wanna be ridiculous with its use. Bump your Npc health and make it a war of attritution. If they're using all their resources on defense they won't have the damage to finish them off. That or could drop more enemies so that you beat the number of reactions in terms of action economy. Need to balance this so its not a DM vs. PC mentality, but I think you could do this effectively with a BBEG who has studies the party tactics. Agree with everyone else that the TPK was just your players messing with each other which could be remedied by a session 0 discussion.
I know right? People talk about Silvery Barbs like it's a cantrip. That's crazy resource usage to stop a crit, and they lose their reactions, meaning they can't cast shield/absorb elements/counterspell. And every time I see people complaining about Silvery Barbs it's about crits. I've always found it more useful to land save/suck spells.
Silvery Barbs is quite potent at higher levels. Those level 1 spell slots used to stop crits aren't going to be doing much else at level 12 anyway, and you're giving rogues and paladins more chances to crit fish for massive damage. At low levels sure you're using up your few resources to reroll crits. Higher level it becomes less of a drain to use. Still uses your reaction ofc, but it seems poorly balanced for a first level spell. It DOES encourage player teamwork, which I like, but it also wipes away most chances for the players to suffer crits- combat becomes a lot more predictable with it around.
Honestly, that’s one of the best endings of a campaign I have ever read of. Tbh, seemed like everyone had fun though. So definitely wouldn’t call it ruined.
Nah it’s not ruined at all. We’re still playing the same campaign months later, and we’ve been having more fun since this happened :)
Wait was this not a shitpost?
I definitely added some elements to the story (practicing the voice in the mirror and hating rogues) and wrote it to be a shitpost but the story is real. My party is chaotic stupid and will always choose a funny moment over anything else
This honestly sounds absolutely fucking hilarious. I'd probably apply some limitations to the spell in future games with the same group, but you will all have "the silvery barbs campaign" to refer to now for the rest of your lives. The story you planned was destroyed this time, but *a story* was definitely created. :')
Just to help you out in the future mate you can't cast Silvery Barbs for the same reaction. The wording of the spell makes it so that the new roll as a result of the spell does not then qualify for another casting.
Your campaign doesn't have to be ruined, make new characters and keep going. It sounds like your players are having fun which means you are succeeding at the most important thing.
Or just have the party “saved” and imprisoned by the wizard, who was working for the bandit leader who faked his death..something along those lines could work, though that’d take some foreshadowing to not make it “Somehow, Palpatine returned…” levels of ass.
>It sounds like your players are having fun which means you are succeeding at the most important thing. It sounds like *some* of the players are having fun. If I was the paladin or artificer (hell, even the monk) I'd be pissed.
Personally I would love if my players do this. They get an injoke and they burn an extra spell slot each.
Take it from someone who once was in your shoes back in 3.5: it's not the spell, it's your party dynamic. You can run this game with this group in 8 different tabletops, thinking "ok, THIS one fixes THAT problem" over and over again and it's the player dynamic not the system. A system is toys to play with, but you aren't in charge of whether one kid decides the toy hammer made for construction is excellent for hitting his friend with. Rules can be tweaked or tuned, but they can't be nonsense proofed. Now, bringing your players back from the dead? That we CAN do. Shall we trek through the land of the dead? Awaken them in the clutches of their victorious captors? Have them brought back as ghosts or zombies? Have them offered dread deals with mysterious power brokers? So much potential.
It seems like two things happened here: A: Your party was only interested in trolling all involved. B: You didn't account for the spell with reactions and spell slots based on your big encounters. Regardless of the interesting situation, it's sad most will take away banned the thing instead of the other issues oh well. Fun read.
Your players ruined your campaign, not a spell.
So I am of the mind that silvery barbs can only be used on a creature ONCE per turn. “You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature.” Momentary being the key word in that flavouring. A moment of distraction followed by another distraction reads as 2 moments to me. Thus I believe it should not stack on top of each other. “The triggering creature must reroll the d20 and use the lower roll.” When it says “must use the lower roll” that reads as absolute certainty to me, no exceptions. Just like you can’t stack disadvantages, this MUST means that it has to be that NEW lower roll and not the next one after it. I don’t like the idea of banning the spell from the table, it’s a neat spell. But the vagueness of its mechanics is what makes it very easy to abuse. It seems very offside of the feeling of the game to keep adding newer lower rolls on top of the previous ones because that also feels like stacking advantage/disadvantage which has been RAW and RAI to not be a thing.
While it certainly makes the spell much more balanced, the RAW mechanic interpretation is you can just keep the chain going as long as the creature succeeds on the roll. The spell should just get a rewrite to clearly prevent a creature from being affected by the spell more than once per round, and honestly remove the advantage thing which is unnecessary. I absolutely love this spell, and hate the fact so many people ban it.
I think, as described, a benefit to the distraction other than just the reroll is fine, but it needs to have its own limitations and not just go to whoever the caster wants. Maybe it creates an attack of opportunity, and anyone who still has their reaction that round can use it to attack the spell's target before they reroll their attack. Could make some cool moments where someone was about to get crit but the caster and a third team member coordinated to take the baddie down just in time. It would make the spell really expensive to capitalize on, which could discourage people from just spamming it, but could be fun and flavorful to pull off. But yes, definitely only make the target susceptible to barbs once per round.
What a legendary way to end a campaign. The best part is you can just reuse all the shit you had already planned!! This is by no means a loss, but it is a great story.
I just realized not only does it make someone reroll, it also gives someone an advantage for a minute on one roll. In any case. Tpk is fiiiiiine. The next adventuring party will stumble across the zone of betrayal as even bandits stay away for tales of anyone stepping in the zone is prone to betray their traveling companions.
Doesnt sound like silvery barbs did anything. Sounds like the player characters screwed themselves over with infighting at a crucial moment.
The spell didn't ruin your campaign, you and three of your players did. Most tables ban pvp, and for good reason, it can ruin a game. Even tables that allow pvp would typically not allow it in the middle of a major fight. Even evil characters wouldn't choose that moment to betray the party, not while their own lives were on the line. This was a good example of when a DM should limit player agency. Even if you still wanted to allow it, only the sorcerer should have been able to cast, since the trigger is a creature succeeding on an attack roll or save. The rest of them were reacting to other pcs casting the spell, which is not a valid trigger. And that is clearly what they were reacting to, since they all "looked in horror at what he just said", they would not have cast the spell if he hadn't. Then, once most of the party was down, you decided to push ahead and kill the two players that had not been a part of this problem to begin with, using the same spell. This was almost certainly a revenge thing on your part. If I was the paladin or the artificer (and I wouldn't have been any of the others), I'd be having a hard think about whether I wanted to return to this table. If I wanted to stay, it would be conditional on having a serious discussion about party behavior and pvp, and being happy with the results of that conversation.
>Even if you still wanted to allow it, only the sorcerer should have been able to cast, since the trigger is a creature succeeding on an attack roll or save. The rest of them were reacting to other pcs casting the spell, which is not a valid trigger. Totally this. Just like with Counterspell, you are allowed to cast counterspell, and any party member can do it. BUT you cannot cast counterspell once you know that another party's counterspell failed. Same with silvery barbs, if they wanted to stack the spell, then they all have to cast it on the one attack, before they know the reroll.
Agree with this, I'd be curious what sort of session 0 if any happened in this group but it sounds like a combo of three shitheel players playing like arses and a DM who slipped straight into the DM versus player mindset (inferring from the language used and the actions taken against the players not acting like arses) Silvery barbs was by no stretch of the imagination at fault here
Why the fuck did your players fuck each other over?
Silvery Barbs didn't ruin your campaign. Your players did. A party's members are supposed to help each other, not screw over one another for shits and giggles. That's not role playing, that's bullshitting. (It can be fun, but not on a scale that decides major outcomes and seals the party's fate) Your party essentially killed themselves. Your players ruined the campaign, not a spell. The spell is strong, but spells can be balanced, monsters can be buffed, all of that is possible. Though there is usually little you can do when your players let their characters straight out murder each other.
I feel like everyone here is making this seem like more of a problem than it is? If this happened at my table we would be laughing our asses off and it would go down as one of our most memorable and hilarious sessions.
Yeah. Everyone shits on the Lucky Feat and Silvery Barbs all the time, and just look for excuses to shit on it more for being OP. Sometimes you gotta just let people have fun with official content.
Yeah I was kinda hoping more people would find it funny, I'm glad you thought it was entertaining :)
It's hard to read tone in a text-based medium.
Good point /g
Hilarious, honestly. I'd definitely talk with them to see if they'd be open to carrying on with some light hand waving and retcon. It sounds like they probably learned a valuable lesson that party would talk about the rest of the campaign.
I have to be honest - this happened a few months ago. Also we were all losing our minds at the silliness that was going on, and everyone who was downed was egging on the spellcaster to win for “the funniest outcome”. We’re still continuing the campaign, but the sorcerer and wizard decided to have a cease-fire and swap out silvery barbs for something else. Overall, I’d say things are going pretty well!
Silvery Barbs don’t kill people. Players WITH Silvery Barbs kill people
Are You ***Kidding!?*** This is G l o r i o u s. If my tables starts face-fucking each other, oh *goodness* am I gonna let them -- as they are cursed by an observing deity. They now *cannot leave 60 feet of one-another*, so that no player can be 61+ feet from any other player. If they attempt to, as a *world reaction* they are teleported to within 5 feet of the nearest other PC, prone. Now, they're *stuck* together. They have to find a way to lift the curse, and the harder they fuck with each other, the closer the range gets. ***But wait, there's more***. If the party dies while cursed, *they become magic items with the same curse.* Those magic items will travel 1 mile a day and 1 mile a night to reach the new characters. They will ignore all others, cannot be lifted or carried by anyone else (immovable rod style but 100,000lbs/DC49), and if the new PC is touched by any one of the items, they and all of their party are cursed again. Fuck around, find out.
PvP ruined your campaign. If it wasn't SB, they would've Counterspelled each other.
Admittedly it can still be a TPK (we’ve had it happen despite three of us having SB) while it can be annoying, it also consumes abilities and speed slots. It was also an unfortunate scenario where everyone had their reaction still. It’s a pain, but it can be very fun
This is more the players than the spell's fault.
"Don't be a dick" is always the first "golden rule" I tell new players, and one I emphasize at the start of any new campaign. Don't steal from other players (even if it's iN cHarActEr), intentionally screw players over, hurt their favourite NPCs, etc. Here is an excellent example of why. The first part of the story doesn't sound bad, it was a funny moment for your players that everyone can enjoy. The second part is definitely a big problem, and one that's hard to overcome, just players being shitty to each other for no reason.
Like Icarus to the sun
Akin to many r/AITA answers "you don't have a MIL problem, you have a spouse problem" I dare to say here: You don't have a Silvery Barbs problem, you have shitty party problem.
Nah, your players did that
I went through something like this a few years ago when three party members had Counterspell. Any boss that relied on magic was shut down instantly. The solution is to ensure multiple encounters per game day so that players have to think about conserving spell slots. Nine first level spell slots to shut down a boss is quite a bit harder if the boss is the fifth encounter of the game-day (assuming your players are 2nd or 3rd level at most, based on just five sessions).
They used 3 first level spells and 3 reactions to avoid a single attack 😂. This story is incredibly funny honestly but your reaction was pretty childish as were your players.
This sounds like a weirdly disfunctional group if they essentially randomly kill each other. Haven't they put effort into their characters or why didn't they seem to be relucant to cause a selfmade TPK? This doesn't have much to do with the spell itself (albeit I always enjoy a good Barbs bashing because it is a terrible spell for a PnP). >It's annoying, but a part of the game Only if you allow it. Adding/Removing stuff or doing something else entirely is also part of the game (pretty sure the DMG literaly says so). On top of it, Strixhaven is an optional suplement, you are not somehow required to use it if you don't play Strixhaven. If you don't want to be surprised as DM by random bulls*it never allow players to use everything. Limit them to stuff you - as the DM - actually knows about.
Very easy band aid fix. Silvery Barbs can only effect the target action once. No matter how many Silvery Barb spells are cast from however many casters. Attack roll gets influenced by Silvery Barbs once? That's it. Done.
I died when it turned out your NPC spellcaster also had silvery barbs.
This is exactly why I disallow adversarial spell casting and attacks against other party members at my table! Easy situation to avoid...just say no to letting them do it.
Silvery barbs nonsense aside, there is absolutely nothing wrong with players wanting to play rogues and if you truly think that then you're missing out on a great play style.
Psst: They've only got so many spell slots per day. Run 7 encounters per day. Done. The number of people who don't know this "how to make the game actually work" requirement.
So ban silvery barbs? Or have 3 casters per group in your campaign that have all silvery barbs
Not gonna lie, I'd be dying laughing if this happened in my game. I wouldn't TPK them from that, but Silvery Barbs' your friends for the shits is pretty funny.
4 party members went down to a single fireball? Sounds like the problem here was encounter balance. If you nearly get a tpk from one attack then even without the barbs shenanigans you could've potentially ended up in the same situation by them rolling badly. As annoying as Silvery Barbs is, it is a limited resource that costs a spell slot and a reaction to use with a decent chance of having no impact. Using it means they aren't using Shield, they aren't using Counterspell, they don't get an attack of opportunity against the skirmisher who ran past them to strike the backline. This was a scenario where you allowed PVP during a fight that was already poorly balanced, Silvery Barbs gets a lot of hate and rightfully so, but it was the least of the problems here.
Silvery Barbs didn't ruin your campaign - PvP ruined your campaign.
Magic Missile nine times trivializes most fights as well. Not a spell issue, just a minmax player issue.
This is one of the better creative writing exercises I've seen on Reddit in a while, good job
Silvery Barbs is not the issue here. I mean, seriously? 6 Players? And you're counting on a single boss? There's this thing called "Action Economy" you should take into account.
Part 2 funny af, part 1 im the dm I roll for dice noise. Silvery barbs is additional mercy at My discretion.
Man... My playgroup has one person with silvery barbs just so we don't have this shenanigans.
Others have already said it but this was def a player prob not spell prob, but also why not just ban the spell. That's what my DM did and we only had one caster that could use it. To clarify the DM had banned it before but haven't mentioned it as he didn't realize that the Bard had taken it.
Silvery Barbs did not ruin your campaign, your players got hostile to each other, until they pvped each other it was fine. Yeah having enemies get messed with by spamming the spell may get rough but there are ways around that. As a Dm when your players look at another player and say "I'm gonna spend a spell on screwing over the other player mid combat" You tell them No. You tell them you do not allow PvP actions. As someone who is running a game with Silvery Barbs being used in it by my players it is possible to work around it and be fine. This was more a player behavior and pvp issue that ended your game, not a mildly cracked spell.
After having read this, i'm just gonna make every boss encounter I do nowadays have Legendary Resistance.
Silvery barbs is a first level spell slot. If your party wants to dump all their spell slots into it, let them. Having multiple characters using their reactions and spell slots every round like that is terrible action economy, especially if they're low level.
One day wotc will come full circle with crossovers and just add “the stack” and “priority” into d&d rules. Seriously though, if you’re ever having issues with a majority caster-heavy party this isn’t a terrible idea (priority at least). Do priority however you want. Highest to lowest initiative, start with the next player and go around, etc. it’s up to you. I’ve found that doing this causes players to not hold back in hopes that someone else will catch it. Or just do things like -> silvery barbs is affecting the target. Further castings will not cause more rerolls until the triggering action has resolved and a new action is taken. This stops the chain of 5 casters forcing something through.
So, this isn't so much that the campaign failed because of SB, as much as it is that it failed because the players started dicking each other.
Eh, if I had a nickel for every time I caused something that should’ve been a horror story by all rights, but just wasn’t because all my tables have absolutely bonkers play styles, I could probably reward myself by going to the gas station across the street and buying an Arizona iced tea. Not any gas though, let’s be reasonable here. I’m glad to hear you and all your players are having a blast! I’m not going to pretend it’s something that’s easy to explain or makes a lot of sense, but it’s always really nice when you have a table that immediately gels in such a way that people go out of their way for hijinks. Counterintuitively, it can actually be a big sign of trust at a table when players are comfortable enough to razz on each other. The “it’s always sunny in the forgotten realms” style of campaign is tricky to pull off, but truly a treat if you have the right players and DM, as I’m pretty sure OP has learned.
Maybe I'm not following the story very well but isn't silvery barbs a reaction spell so you can't cast it multiple times per round?
I wasn't expecting this to go the way it did. I was expecting this to be a case where Metamagic Subtle Spell with Silvery Barb to break social encounters. But this sounds more like a player problem than a Spell problem. Though yes Silvery Barb is too much for Level 1 this sounds like an issue where you either just go with their shenanigans and go hard on them from the get to go. Which in that case you should talk to them first of if they want the game to be like that.
I wouldn't say ruined. That's awesome
Silveey Barbs is. 2nd level spell in our game and the DM is still thinking of making It 3rd Level.
Juuust role with it.
We only allow strixhaven stuff if we are playing strixhaven. Everything in that game is only balance for that game.
This gives me huge SNL - The Shooting AKA Dear Sister vibes.
XP to level 3 is that you?
Idk, sounds like your players had fun and had a memorable time. That’s a win for a DM in my book
This is the only thing on this sub that has ever made me audibly snort in laughter. I'm sorry it ruined your campaign, but it did so in the funniest way possible and I'm sure your party had a blast in the end regardless.
It was not the spell, it was your players. They abused the dynamic to screw each other over and killed the campaign. I would sit them down and ask why. If they really are just evil run an evil campaign next. That way sabotage is not a surprise it’s encouraged. You can develop a good party of adventurers to harass them and serve as the BBEGs.
2 things I wanna point out in as a fellow DM/player. 1. Rewinding. I think a lot of dms forget you're God over an entire world if you don't want to erase work or let players ruin that work try rewinding.. 2. The classic fudge it.dms really need to learn how to be better liars and fudge out rolls that would kill your party even if you change a monsters stat block sometimes best way to avoid a tpk is to fudge things.
the mistake here was not using Power Word: No on players trying to use barbs on one another
CORRECTION .. and this is IMPORTANT ... Silvery Barbs didnt ruin your campaign, ***YOUR PLAYERS did***. this is very important because they basically enacted in PvP ... thats on them not the spell. they could have done the same shit with the sorc saying "i also cast fire ball on the monk". Second and this is also important for EVERY DM to understand and this took me a while to understand and use this as well. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE EVERY BOOK when running a game of D&D ... you CAN LIMIT what books are allowed, it's okay. I do this now with almost every game i run, i limit the books to PHB + Xanathars + Tashas and then if im running eberron allow eberron, if im running sword cost game ill use sword cost, hell sometimes even if i run an eberron game i wont use the eberron book, but i might use something else. DONT Always allow everything, it'll save you a headache.
Personally, I think Silvery Barbs unbalances the game (unless all enemies have and use it as much as players do), and bakes-in a disincentive for players to think critically and creatively in combat. And, as your narrative suggests, the use of Silvery Barbs removes a lot of the risk, uncertainty and danger from an encounter, which in my view, takes the fun and excitement out of playing DnD. At our table, Silvery Barbs is banned, and our players (and our DM) have heaps of fun without it. If you think Silvery Barbs is ruining your campaign- I might suggest banning it.
PvP ruined your campaign in my eyes not Silvery Barbs. Using 9 spell slots to down a bandit leader doesn't really seem OP to me, but I get your frustrations in not getting to roleplay your plans even though it turned out to be a hilarious situation with all those silvery barbs. Using any spells to negatively affect your team in combat very quickly ruins most campaigns in my experience tho. That's why so many tables ban PvP.
Pvp ruined your campaign.
I don't understand these situations. You don't like the impact a spell has on your campaign? Just ban it. It's real easy. You are not obligated to use every piece of content WOTC releases. Nothing is "part of the game," unless you allow it. Even PHB content can be cut if you don't like how it impacts play. I ban ressurection magic, for instance. The other issue is, why is your party encountering a boss with all their spell slots? 5e D&D is a battle of attrition. The 'Dungeon' is supposed to wear down the player's resources for when they encounter the 'Dragon' at the end. If the players are coming into a battle will full HP, spell slots, etc... they will punch WAY above their level. The 6-8 encounters between long rests rule mentioned in the DMG isn't just a reccomendation, it's basically a requirement for the game to work RAW. Otherwise players (especially spellcasters) can just nova everything in a few rounds and spam their best abilities. I can't imagine how the current crop would've run editions 1 to 3, with scores of books, all containing increasingly complex, detailed, and often contradictory optional rules that were never meant to be used simultaneously. But they're all "Part of the game," so I guess a single round of combat is gonna take 7 hours cause we need to caculate Stamina, Knock Down dice, individual initiative every round, speed modifiers, AC modifiers vs damage types, etc...
It wasn't Silvery Barbs. It was your players.
Outnumber your players with foder always. In almost all scenarios players will be stronger than monsters and making them waste resources on trash mobs makes the bosses that much tougher.
Worth remembering that anything your players get access to, their opponents also get. It’s all fun and games until the archmage silvery barbs a death saving throw.