Talk:Manus Semoto (5e Spell)

Move log 16:07 MarshDASavage talk contribs moved page Manus Semoto to Manus Semoto (5e Spell) ‎(No identifier tag. Seriously, people!)

Hey there, this is regards to the spell being moved. Honestly not sure how talk pages work on here but hopefully you see this. How do I add an identifier tag for this to be added onto the Warlock page for future reference? Thank you much!

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 20:26, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

Hey, this should already be on the 5e Warlock Spells list. It doesn't go on the actual warlock page, as that's purely SRD content and adding homebrew content to that is kinda sacrilege. Hope this solves the issue! --SwankyPants (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Ahh, gotcha! Thank you much for the clarification! c:

Cheers! --Ruffled Griffin (talk) 20:35, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

Hey there, so the d100 section is a vital part of the spell which is there in context to a homebrew patron within the setting and without it changes the spell completely + the range being restored to 60 feet as it is an offshoot of Eldritch blast? Would there be a way to restore it without undoing the rest of your edits SwankyPants? Thank you kindly!

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 20:51, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

Hey, sorry if that was a bit too quick to jump on the reformatting, but I was a bit concerned. As it stood, it was objectively better than EB, if the bonuses were slightly random. I tried to make it more of it's own thing while still leaving the niche of EB alone. Plus, the random benefits were kinda weird. You either move them(minor) or potentially restrain them(significant, too much for a cantrip). I tried to keep the general idea with the forced moving, without it being completely random. I hope you understand why.

As for restoring the old version, I'm not sure how great of a idea that is considering this stuff. --SwankyPants (talk) 22:00, 13 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Oh no that's totally valid, I'm still getting used to this site so the help is genuinely appreciated! c: Hmm, that's true. Perhaps if it were a restraint which ends at the end of the target's next turn; on the condition that three or more arms are used on a single target who then isn't affected by it for 24 hours if they fail their save. The patron in question is based on the hecatoncheires from Greek legend combined with the 7 deadly sins. The patron has multiple entities in a single body hence the d100 in an attempt to bring out separate aspects of the entity in question. the character is a bit odd but D&D beyond is difficult with edits on homebrew spells so I went to this site instead since I add hyperlinks to each spell on the player's spell sheets for speedy access.

Though, it is odd for a cantrip huh? maybe that effect can only be used a total of times equal to the Warlock's spell modifier?

Any additional recommendations would be appreciated! Keep on keepin' on! --Ruffled Griffin (talk) 21:10, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

If you want this to be limited use, it's probably just easier to make it a leveled spell, instead of a cantrip. Like, you make X amount of attacks, scaling based on spell level, and depending on the amount of times someone was hit, it incurs certain effects.

Making it usable an amount of times equal to your spellcasting ability modifier is certainly odd, considering no other cantrip does anything like that.

I wasn't aware of the origin, although that might explain some of the weirdness. Personally, I believe a proper spell would allow this concept to be better realized, not bound by normal cantrip power levels. What are your thoughts on doing that? --SwankyPants (talk) 22:19, 13 July 2021 (MDT)

---

See, initially, that was considered - and it would make sense to do so, but warlocks only have so many spell slots available to begin with. My issue being that I was hoping for this cantrip to behave as a staple of the character and something unique to them which could be utilized similar to an Eldritch Blast with reduced range and separate mechanics.

I do really like the idea that different effects would happen if it hit certain amounts, maybe as an alternative to the d100 table? If that were the case, would it be better to increase the total number of arms right off the bat with each hitting for 1d6 force with two hits on a single target resulting in either pulling the target 5ft or pushing them 5ft away, 4 hits doing something else and 6 restraining them for a single round?

Yeeeah, valid point. Shot in the dark d:

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 21:49, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

Maybe instead of being a cantrip, it could be an invocation that allows you to cast it infinitely at it's lowest level. Can still function as a staple for a warlock, but still maintain some form of higher power.

If we want it to stay as a cantrip, the "multiple attacks" kinda concern me, but maybe it could be made kinda like Shinsu Baang (5e Spell), although having extra bonuses attached to it could be another concern. Maybe the extra stuff can become invocations, making this a proper EB substitute? --SwankyPants (talk) 23:01, 13 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Oooh, the idea of it being an invocation at it's lowest level would be interesting. If that route were taken, how would you recommend the range, arms, damage and effects be managed as its lowest level form?

I was thinking about additional features adding more effects; multiple arms, ability to restrain, ignoring cover, things like that. If that were the case, would it be sensible to add it in addition to the above invocation concept, or is that too convoluted?

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 22:15, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

I'd say keep the range, make it three attacks that deal 1d8 force damage each, then effects if 2/4/6/8 hands hit. Every level could add 2 extra attacks. Having more invocations for you invocation-based mainstay feels odd, and I'm really not sure what you would do with it. --SwankyPants (talk) 23:22, 13 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Understood, that seems reasonable. To clarify, would it be three seperate attacks which could attack multiple targets within range? Additionally, as an invocation allowing for infinite castings at the lowest level, it would only benefit from the effects of this as opposed to anything cast at higher level?

yeaahh, seemed like a bit of a reach d:

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 22:34, 13 July2021 (PST))

---

Yeah, the idea is to make it comparable to Magic Missile, trading out consistent damage for certain effects if you hit. So yes, seperate attacks. And yeah, that would be the version you get from the invocation. Could have an upgrade that allows you to cast it at 2nd level, so it isn't eventually outranked by damage cantrips. --SwankyPants (talk) 07:14, 14 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Makes sense, thank you kindly for your assistance. I've gone ahead and edited the spell. When possible, may I ask you to check it over when time allows?

Additionally, from your opinion, when would be a good level to introduce a level 2 upgrade?

--Ruffled Griffin (talk) 08:58, 14 July 2021 (PST))

---

Maybe 11th level? So when cantrips start dealing better damage, you improve a bit. --SwankyPants (talk) 10:17, 14 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Seems reasonable, thank you much! Would it make sense to have the upgrade as a secondary invocation or more like the initial invocation upgrades at 11th level? --Ruffled Griffin (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2021 (PST))

---

I'd say attach it to the invocation that grants the spell. Probably just easier. --SwankyPants (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2021 (MDT)

---

Valid point, do you think increasing the spell's range out to a total of 60 feet would be reasonable as the invocation upgrades at 11th level? Ruffled Griffin (talk) 09:33, 14 July 2021 (PST))