Talk:Bone Crushing Hug (5e Spell)

This is like a bone collector fireball. I don't know if this should be a druid spell or not, seems pretty overpowered for a druid spell, maybe a ranger spell? or just keep it a bone collector spell. If Barbarians or Monks had a spell, this would be the one. Arquebus (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2020 (MST)

Too powerful, this is a difficult idea to pull-off, it's to situational but I think that a druid causing 10d6 damage in any way is too much, maybe this could be used in reaction to more situations but causing 5d6 --SpikeSunshine (talk) 14:37, 3 March 2022 (MST)

I'm really interested in what other sorts of situations and effects this might include. It can be more interesting. Also if we keep this as a druid spell we need to rename it 'Bearhug' or 'Bear Hug'. Arquebus (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2022 (MST)

{{wording|The grammar is a bit weird. "If the the caster was grappling, this ends" and "and if the grapple was theirs, it ends" are all weirdly phrased and probably should be clarified.}}

wording changed. Arquebus (talk) 13:43, 9 March 2022 (MST)

{{needsbalance|As much damage as a fireball on a failed save, stuns for 1 round, halves movement speed for a very long time, and is CAST AS A REACTION. For a 3rd level spell, it is very strong.}}

damage reduced. This may seem too powerful for a reaction, but it is a usually a reaction to an action by the caster, so it does not break action economy, like a normal reaction this powerful would. Arquebus (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2022 (MST)

It's still weird and ridiculously powerful. Usually on a spell like this, if a creature passes the save, they take half damage and suffer no other side effects. This kind of follows this, but having separate damage values for passing and failing is weird. In addition, if you fail the save, your movement speed is halved for a very long time. I mean, you cannot tell me that having your movement speed halved for 3 or 7 days, depending on how the spell is cast, is not a really strange and powerful effect. In addition, it's just super weird for a reaction spell. Usually reaction spells are defensive, and almost all of the time they are triggered by something. Here's my proposed changes: --MarshDASavage (talk) 19:37, 9 March 2022 (MST)

Bone Crushing Hug

3rd-level Transmutation
Casting time:	1 action
Range:	5 feet
Components:	V, S
Duration:	Instantaneous

You enhance your arms with bone-breaking strength and try to crush a creature nearby you. One creature of your choice within range must make a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, they take 5d6 bludgeoning damage, are stunned for 1 round, and their movement speed is halved for 1 minute. They may repeat the saving throw at the beginning of each of their turns, ending the effects on a success. On a successful save, they take half as much damage and suffer no other adverse effects. If you cast this spell on a creature you are grappled, they take 6d6 bludgeoning damage, and if they fail the save, they have disadvantage on the saving throws to end the effects.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 points per spell slot level above 3rd.

Bear Hug is usually a reaction to an action by the caster. Don't let the idea that this spell is a reaction confuse you. It usually requires an action by the caster, and this spell is a reaction to it. And Isn't magic itself weird? Arquebus (talk) 15:34, 9 March 2022 (MST)

I would rather that only the caster, so self rather than touch 5 feet. The spell you have described sounds like a different spell. May I create a page for that spell? Arquebus (talk) 15:40, 9 March 2022 (MST)

3.00

(2 votes)

...What? I have no clue what you mean by that. A reaction to an action by the caster? So, if the caster takes an action, the caster can then use their reaction during their main phase to cast Bone-Crushing Hug? That's not how reactions work. Reactions are taken in response to another creature performing an action. It would make more sense if they could cast it as a reaction to a creature trying to escape a grapple, but still, thematically it doesn't make a ton of sense. Also, my issues with it isn't the spell being odd- I've made plenty of odd spells, such as one that allows you to absorb all elemental damage and release it as a blast of force- it's the fact that it doesn't work mechanically.

5 feet is within melee range. You could also say touch. A range of self doesn't really work here, as it just doesn't make sense why you would cast a bone-crushing hug on yourself. AS for your other point, it really isn't that different of a spell. It just can't be cast as a reaction against a creature you have grappled, and it doesn't destroy your movement speed for several days afterwards. Other than that, it is pretty much the same spell, just made to WoTC standards for a spell. If you want to make it a different spell, go ahead. --MarshDASavage (talk) 19:37, 9 March 2022 (MST)

Here is the bottom line. This spell is the Bone Collector Fireball. It is their main offensive spell. Nerfing too much it will destroy the Bone Collector class. If we have to say that only Bone Collectors can use it. That's fine. I dpon't want the class I spent so much time developing destroyed. If I have to make is a Bone Collector feature, or a Bone Collector spell I will. I just thought it would fit with the Druid class too. Perhaps I was wrong. If you think this is inappropriate for druid, we can remove druid from the list of casters. If you think this spell with modifications will work for druid, then we will make a 'Brea Hug' spell as you have described. Thanks. Arquebus (talk) 14:34, 10 March 2022 (MST)

...What? You're ignoring all of my concerns. I don't care if it's the Bone Collector class's main damage source. Just because it is designed for a certain class doesn't mean it has an excuse to be unbalanced. Plus, the Bone Collector has plenty of other damage sources, such as summoning and controlling skeletons to deal damage for them, Bonesword, Dragon's Breath, Inflict Wounds, Shadow of Moil, and plenty of other spells, not to mention the fact that they have some pretty decent armor & weapon proficiencies for a full caster. Besides, the class isn't designed to deal a bunch of damage in the first place. If you wanted to deal a ton of damage and still have pretty good features, you would play literally any other non-homebrew class. I'm here because it is unbalanced and doesn't even work mechanically. Even if it is a good source of damage for the Bone Collector, it isn't something they should use as a crutch. Also, if it is their version of fireball-levels of damage (which is a bad argument in the first place, the class isn't designed to deal a ton of damage), this spell deals just as much damage as Fireball if you are grappling, stuns for 1 round, and cripples a creature FOR SEVEN DAYS. Even if you aren't grappling, it's way too strong for a 3rd level spell. It also doesn't work very well mechanically, as I had said earlier. What does "The spell is cast as a reaction to the end of the caster's movement in a round," or "It usually requires an action, and this spell is a reaction to it" even mean? As I said earlier, reactions are taken as a response to an outside trigger, not something the caster does, so this entire idea doesn't work. Please, just listen to my concerns. I don't care if it's a main source of damage for the Bone Collector. It's no excuse for it to be incredibly strong and cripple an opponent for such a long time, and it's no excuse for it to be incredibly strange mechanically. Try taking a look at the spell design guidelines. That might help you to understand why I have so many issues with this spell. --MarshDASavage (talk) 16:45, 10 March 2022 (MST)

Thanks for reading the bone collector page. In response to your statements:

1. 1) I have reduced the damage twice. It now does as much damage as a number of second level spells. According the spell guide One target save halves damage: third level spell - (5d10) 27.5 points damage - Bone Crushing Hug at 6d6 does an average of 21 points of damage AND there has to be a grapple involved. I now think the damage is underpowered. Even at 8d6 it was par for third level damage.
2. 2) I have read your concerns.
3. 3) I have changed the spell to reflect most of them.
4. 4) Reactions do not specify that the event reacted to be from someone else. Please reread the rule on reactions. Reactions
5. 5) Are you being obtuse? The sentence "It usually requires an action, and this spell is a reaction to it" is there to describe to the DM and the players what generally happens. I have removed that sentence since it is confusing you. It was not in the original spell write-up and I put it there to try to help you understand the spell.
6. 6) Neither I nor you have the authority to decide what needs to be excused or whether something that needs to be excused is excused.
7. 7) It's not a crutch. It is a damage inducing spell.
8. 8) It is not a bad argument to have an ability that keeps the class from being much less powerful than other classes at the same level. It just makes sense to have a class that is not underpowered compared to other classes. This insight comes from play-testing the class. I do have to keep up with the power creep of other classes to make this class fun enough for someone to play. In a combat heavy campaign, the class needs to do a non-embarrassing amount of damage.
9. 9) The spell works fine mechanically, and has been play tested.
10. 10) The spell requires that the caster gets close and personal with the opponent, unlike other casters.
11. 11) "The spell is cast as a reaction to the end of the caster's movement in a round," is also a sentence inserted to try to explain the spell to you since you seem confused. I can remove that sentence also.
12. 12) I understand the 5e does not like the idea of long term damage. Is this really your main concern? I have changed the longer term damage to slowing the target by 5ft movement rather than halving it. According the spell guide: Although druid spells can be offensive, those that deal damage almost always do so over time. The doing so over time part of that is why the damage lasts a long time.

Arquebus (talk) 07:18, 11 March 2022 (MST)

In response to your statements:

1.) The damage is actually fine. I wasn't concerned about the damage level as much as the damage level + the stunning effect + the movement speed reduction. The current damage is not underpowered if it stuns the target, and it would have been overpowered at 8d6.

2.) I have read over the reaction rules many times. It says it is a response to a trigger of some sort. Every single feature in every core rulebook that uses a reaction is a response to a trigger by another creature. shield is cast and the Defensive Duelist feature is activated as a response to being hit. counterspell is cast as a response to another creature casting a spell, and hellish rebuke is a response to taking damage. Uncanny Dodge is used as a response to taking damage, the Retaliation feature of the Path of the Berserker barbarian is used as a response to a creature dealing damage, and the Protection fighting style is used as a response to another creature being attacked. Even the two most common reactions are just like this- opportunity attacks are a response to a creature fleeing, and the ready action is an if-then statement that is a response to an outside source meeting a condition. Even the description of the reaction heavily implies it is a trigger by an outside source. To have a spell like this be cast as a reaction is just strange and goes against what a reaction should be in D&D. A reaction isn't a response to the caster performing a certain task, it's a response to a trigger of some sort caused by another creature. In no instance is a reaction ever used or even implied to be used by a creature as a response to something that same creature does.

3.) Also, there isn't a clear-cut answer to what it is in response to. All reactions are in response to something occurring. The Body Slam part of it has a clear "trigger"- the caster moving their full movement speed, which I have huge issues with already, see point two- but the Reaction to Grapple has no clear trigger. What triggers the casting of the spell? Them grappling someone? Them being grappled? A creature they are grappling trying to break the grapple? If you really want it to stay as a reaction, there needs to be a clear-cut trigger for the grapple form of the spell, and it needs to make sense.

4.) I am not obtuse. I understand the intention of the spell perfectly. Just because I understand what the spell is trying to do and how it is supposed to work doesn't mean it isn't poorly worded, it doesn't mean it doesn't work mechanically, and it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be fixed.

5.) If nerfing the spell completely destroys a class like you said it would, it's a crutch. Nerfing fireball to 6d6 certainly hurts the wizard a little, but it is still a solid class with lots of different powerful spells.

6.) In addition, it doesn't make it much less powerful than other classes. The Bone Collector basically controls the entire action economy, with how many skeletons they can summon and control. It doesn't completely destroy the class to nerf this one spell.

7.) Yes, the long-term damage is my main concern. Usually there is some way to resist it or dampen the effect. Halving movement speed would be fine- if it were for about a minute. My recommendation is, if you want to make a spell that does that kind of long-term damage, make that the spell's only effect, and give it a way to damped the effects. A spell that halved a creatures' movement speed for a long time (say, 3-7 days) would be an interesting spell- if it was a 4th level spell, on its own, and gave the creature a chance to do the saving throw again once every day or something like that. Removing 5 feet of movement speed is a tiny effect, but I still really don't like how long it lasts.

8.) My recommendation is have it half movement speed for 1 minute and the creature gets to repeat the saving throw at the beginning of each of their turns. If you want to keep it as a reaction, make it a reaction to a creature trying to break the grapple if they are grappling a creature. If they don't cast it as a reaction, make it a full action. It would still be a really strong 3rd-level spell to deal 6d6 damage, stun a creature for 1 round, and then potentially halve their movement speed for a full combat encounter. --MarshDASavage (talk) 10:35, 11 March 2022 (MST)

1) I agree, 6d6 plus stun does make sense as an equivalent damage to 5d10.

2) RAW allows reaction to your own actions, even though there are no examples of this in the game. I want to keep this quirk in the spell.

3) I have included your wording in the spell to make the reaction trigger clearer.

5) I play tested this class in a campaign where the amount of damage a PC did was almost the only thing that mattered in the game. This spell was a reaction to playing in that campaign where all the other PCs were doing massive damage every round, and the bone collector was doing very little. The class has lots of depth and different power spells, but the campaign had little depth and very little scope for the use the bone collectors other power spells. So I built this spell to make the bone collector playable in a hack and hack game. Nerfing this spell is in the context of a min/max hack and hack campaign. I see that now.

6) I don't remember including any spells for skeleton summoning, only skeleton animation. The hack and hack campaign I play tested it in had no skeletons to animate.

7) I have a pet peeve with D&D 5e. You can be nearly killed on one day, and be completely fine the next morning. That bothers me and makes no sense to me. I think it makes 5e more of a game and less of a story to immerse yourself into. It makes sense that some damage would be longer term. But I realize I can not fix 5e with one spell that has longer term effects.

8) Halving movement for 1 minute makes sense. Perhaps making a con save every minute to regain normal movement also makes sense since D&D 5e has no concept of long term damage :(

Arquebus (talk) 23:19, 11 March 2022 (MST)

1.) I can understand why you want to keep the reaction to your own action in. I'm still not a huge fan of it, but hey, homebrew is about bending the rules. If it works for you, then it works for you.

2.) Thanks for including my wording. Part of what bothered me about the spell was is was phrased very different than most spells. I would recommend removing the bullet points and making each spell effect a whole chunk, as usually that is how it is phrased in the RAW. However, this is a tiny nitpick, and you could keep it how it is now and it would be just as clear.

3.) In a hack-and-slash campaign with no skeletons to animate, the bone collector really doesn't shine. A lot of its features are more social interaction, and its combat features are mainly for controlling the action economy through skeleton animation. In a game where combat is the main focus, I can see why it would really need a very powerful damage spell. However, most campaigns are a combination of combat and social interaction and/or have skeletons to animate. In those instances, a very powerful damage spell would not be necessary for the bone collector, as it gets to have all of its elements shine through. It makes a lot more sense to me now why you insisted that the bone collector needed a super powerful damage spell like this one was.

4.) I made a mistake in my phrasing there. Skeleton animation, not summoning, is what I meant.

5.) I agree that there should be more long-term damage in D&D. If you want to make a more long-term damage focused D&D campaign, then this spell would be great, so long as you made other spells do long term damage as well. However, since most campaigns are more short-term damage focused, having it run for only a minute makes more sense for an open spell. Maybe we should create a variant rule to compensate for long-term damage. (I'd be totally willing to work together with you on that, if you're interested.)

6.) If you want to keep a more long-term damage effect and still not be unbalanced for shorter campaigns, maybe making the damage last up to an hour, with them making a Constitution save every 1-10 minute(s) would make sense.

7.) I'm really glad we could come to a peaceful resolution. I'm sorry if I seemed frustrated, rude, stubborn, or obtuse at times. I was getting kind of frustrated earlier, and if I seemed rude or angry, that's why. I'm glad we didn't have to get to an edit war, and I'm very glad we had a peaceful resolution. --MarshDASavage (talk) 17:09, 12 March 2022 (MST)