A Case For Bad Spells 

Simple solution; just give the creatures from the GM side magic items that negate or remove the downsides.

@@soundrogue4472 That is an interesting idea. I usually just homebrew them to be more balanced, but it might be more fun for my pc's to see some enemies use an OP version of those crap spells, then get to loot the gear and use those OP spells themselves.

@@CatacombD bingo

Its a neat gimmick to pull in 'standoff' situations, like you're in hostile negotiations and the enemy casts true strike on you like a shot over the bow of a ship.

The biggest problem with True Strike for me is that most valid uses of it just... aren't a problem for a naturally spellcasting character. Imagine you've got an ogre or some other large melee beatstick monster. Say it's out of melee of its target and doesn't want to dash in to hand over free flanking to his opponent. Casting True Strike in this situation would be valid if you're looking to spend your action offensively without getting out of position... but true strike is a spell and therefor not a good fit for these creatures. Any creature that casts spells has a better option than True Strike at range.

Witch Bolt's damage on subsequent turns doesn't scale with spell level. Witch bolt cast at 5th level does 5d12 up front and 1d12 on subsequent turns. That's an average of 32.5 damage up front and 6.5 on subsequent turns. Fireball cast at the same level does an average of 35 damage instantly...to everything that fails its saving throw in a 20 ft. radius sphere, and half as much to those that succeed. It really is just bad unfortunately. A spell storing ring is better filled with auxiliary castings of Shield, Silvery Barbs, Absorb Elements, and similar staple defensive spells in my opinion.

I was thinking about commoner npcs when I said to give it to someone else, because of action economy it's usually the best thing to do with these offensive magic items because player characters already have good stuff to do@@carsonm7292

If you have truestrike, you have other spells in 100% of cases, so just attack them twice

Auto hits often have unforseen consequences. It's a good idea, but use with caution.

I saw an *AWESOME* interpretation of Witch Bolt recently that *tethers* the target and the caster and forces them to stay within 30 feet of each other. It deliberately leaves how to break this condition kinda vague besides LoS, some official wording on how to break it would be nice, but I like the concept that either A: it just DOES NOT break unless the bolt is interrupted, and/or B: It doesn't break unless you leave the area by *forced* movement. Otherwise you have go in and punch the shit out of them, either way it *forces* a "FACE ME" lockdown situation so long as the caster holds concentration. Your friends can go in and shove you out (anyone can do this!) or try to pummel the caster, making it an awesome GM tool but it also has some crazy player interactions too. Imagine you're falling off a cliff and YOU WITCH BOLT SOMEONE to (depending on how the GM rules it) either save yourself from falling OR drag them down with you. Or maybe it works both ways and you could save a friend who's falling! Can they endure the brutal charge of a lightning bolt long enough to be rescued? Do you risk the death saving throw fails to save their life from certain doom? Can you hold witch bolt on a flying target to keep them from flying away? *Can you tether yourself to a blue or bronze dragon to stay on its back no matter how fast it flies?* I absolutely love the way it recontextualizes that spell by turning the constant beam into something with movement control properties no matter how you rule it.

Ok I could see the argument on that one

All fun and games until it turns out the caster was a gish all along lmao

No, it cant be. An assassin is sneaky. He is an unseen attacker and has a surprise round on which he lands crits. Unseen attacker gets an advantage for not being seen. Casting spells gives away position, ruining the whole approach. Advantages dont stack for extra bonus

@@murderyoutubeworkersandceos I'm meaning once the battle starts. First round, advantage from surprise. Second round, cast true strike while finding a good position, third round strike with advantage again. Keep the advantage going once they've lost their stealth

@@jacksmythe2187 cunning action hide

@@murderyoutubeworkersandceos Do any NPCs have cunning action?

@@jacksmythe2187 what r they gonna do? Cunning perception?

Thanks

I especially like that because it sets up what them monsters action is likely to be next turn without it costing the monster a turn to do so.

I womder that every time i read it

Or better range

Witch bolt needs at least 120 ft range and needs to work through total cover. So you can witch bolt someone and then continue doing damage through walls at them. That at least gives the spell a specific niche in that if you've got someone defending a choke point you can witch bolt them and force them to move or keep taking damage.

Id rather have the succesive uses scale in damage when upcast, because otherwise even as a bonus action the spell is going to be pretty bad at higher levels

because it would be pretty strong. Compare it to spiritual weapon, a level 4 spiritual weapon does 2d8+5 (need to hit first) and a level 4 witch bolt does 4d12 with an automatic hit. 2d8 + 5 averages 14 4d12 averages 26 It's a big difference

An early draft of this script I had an example of a monster that I like to use Witch Bolt with and a cursed dungeon that cast Crown of Madness on the players, unfortunately they kind of broke the flow of the video.

Martials deserve an at will bonus action truestrike in 5e, the game where martials are all F tier

That last example really reminds me of a moment in Divinity Original Sin 2 where you get the option to kiss a witch and she fills your throat with bugs

Everybody so creative... Theres no such thing as uncreative caster - only uncreative gms. Lemme feed glass to a construct during combat real quick... Lemme use telekinesis to drop down a stalactite on an enemy. But we r not in a cave. Much better use of my action than a fireball, fear, shivering touch, or magic jar...

Pathfinder 2 *really* puts that to the test with some of their spells. The spell lists are basically 50% real stinkers (Like a spell that sorts things, but is very explicit about what can be sorted, how much and in what way so that you DON'T use it in creative ways. Also it takes a minute to cast when sorting them manually could also take just as much time), damage spells barely better than just attacking with weapons and also heal.

B) Witch Bolt: Yes. Sounds awesome. Until you notice that the first d12 usually puts an enemy on Death's Door already, your ally kills the target and you lose the subsequent actions. Should have better cast a cantrip for the same effect of softening a target. Upcasting it makes no sense, there's much better damage spells in higher spell slot levels.

C) Image this: The enemy with the big club points at your wizard and uses... THE DASH ACTION. Suddenly, he stands right infront of the squishiest enemy. Congratulations: You just made a case for a spell in which literally the DASH action sets a better scene than casting a spell. You really shouldn't have done that. You ridiculed True Strike even more.

It in in the last paragraph "On your subsequent turns, you must use your action to maintain control over the target, or the spell ends. Also, the target can make a Wisdom saving throw at the end of each of its turns. On a success, the spell ends."

Someone else in here said that witch bolt is a great minion spell and thinking about it I can see what they mean. It's non-insignificant damage if you get hit with it, and it *does* force you to consider dealing with a trash mob (or at least move in a potentially less than ideal way) instead of the big bad, which is the whole objective of a minion

maybe try sorcerer

@@plzifan3773 Been down that road. Ask Joe about my sorcerer some time.

Players would just end up casting 2 spells that are actually good in their turn instead of any of those.

​@@jellybunz8357 So @derekburge5294 and I are in a Pathfinder 2 game an he very much prefers those mechanics to 5e

@@worthasandwich I see, well, the spell design in PF2 is vastly different to 5e's so it's still not an 1 to 1 comparison, but I get what he meant.

I don't really understand why you think the argument is stupid. Isn't it true that two dagger attacks are better than one dagger attack with advantage? Or is the point that it doesn't matter because a wizard wouldn't be doing attack rolls in the first place?

​@@josequiles7430If you're not in melee for the casting turn, you gain a positional advantage in some situations.

Ok. It's worse than casting firebolt twice, or any other cantrip.

And? IS it worse than two dagger attacks? (Hint: Yes.) Or, as you talk about the wizard: Is it better than doing any other cantrip that does damage twice instead of once?

@@josequiles7430 my point is that it's a weapon attack from a magic specialist. If you're put into the position where you actually need to do it, then it's actually best to try and guarantee a hit. Elf is actually proficient with longsword, give it a good magical sword at high levels as a wizard, now use its 10 strength to fight the dragon. You might only get one attack over two turns, but it's actually better than missing two attacks because you rolled average with low bonuses.