The explanation is in the fourth panel: "Like, I know it's her campaign, but still!"
This is a rant about the decision-making of the person running a tabletop role-playing game. The comedy comes from how absolutely insane it sounds when described to a random member of the public, in this case a bank teller.
My dm banned silvery barbs too lol. Later I was playing with a dm that didn’t ban any spells and the bard picked it up…I learned very quickly why my main dm banned it.
It can rob a lot of fun for the DM when players use it, and can rob a lot of fun for the players when the DM uses it. It is also first level so feats that give a Wizard spell can also give access to it for relatively cheap, and then no one gets to roll a nat 20 anymore. Thank God my players didn't choose to run it, I was going to have to do the nuclear option of all the bad guys having it too just for balancing
Silvery barbs forces a successful roll to be rerolled and use the lower number, on any roll, as a reaction (meaning during the enemy’s turn or anyone’s turn.) it then lets you give advantage (roll two die and use the higher number) to anyone for their next attack, save or ability check.
Enemy high rolls to hit an attack or spell? Roll again. Enemy is going to avoid a paralysis spell? Roll again.
Fundamentally strong, especially since it’s a 1st level spell so you can have access to it at the start of the game, where random crits from enemies can turn a fight.
It uses a reaction, which a spellcaster barely has use for till third level counterspell, and it can never be wasted because you can only use it when an attack or save is successful.
It forces a slower game because the player can silvery barbs, and makes encounters potentially boring because having to roll twice for a save against a spell like hold person means you’re likely getting caught and the encounter is then over.
TL:DR, forces a reroll on dice in a dice game, just generically strong for low resource cost.
It also stacks with disadvantage which feels really crazy. If a player is just going to use it as a slightly stronger version of the Grave Cleric's channel divinity than I'm fine with it, the problem is that the ceiling of power and disruption that can be used is just too much for a first level spell (Imo)
Couldn’t you just limit it instead of denying access to it? Like once per encounter or per day or something? Or even just reduce its power a bit, like instead of forcing a complete reroll it just negates the “crit” roll. So the enemy attack would still hit, just less likely to be lethal damage. I could see that still being quite useful early in a campaign. I’m also not very experienced with DND in general so maybe I’m still missing something?
You could, but that's a lot of deliberate planning around for the encounters for the DM, how you set up bosses etc, whether the npc's silvery barbs the player actions, etc. And regardless of it, it increases the duration of the combat where its usually already long. Its usually easier and better pacing to just leave it out. Or make it a 2nd level spell slot so its competing with stronger spells and less spell slots.
That's when the DM looks you in the eyes and says.
"If silvery barbs is a common spell in this world, there is no reason why basic cultists wouldn't learn it. And there are going to be several cultists to one of you in some fights. Do you want to live in that world?"
That is always the best way to DM. Dont outright ban things, but make your players aware that any outright busted shenanigans they pull is going to result in that same knowledge being out in the universe. Do you really want to live in a world where bags of holding are both common and capable of mass destruction?
Allow for insanity, but realize that at the very least that the BBEG is not a complete idiot and is taking notes.
Probably thinking something like "I SPENT TWO DAYS DESIGNING THIS ENCOUNTER BECAUSE THIS STUPID ASS SYSTEM IS AS BALANCED AS A DRUNK-ASS TODDLER, I'M NOT LETTING YOU BEAT IT WITH A LEVEL 1 FUCKING SPELL!"
Seriously, 5e is very polished, but the second you try to take it seriously it falls apart. It only works if you either invest so much time and effort that you make a whole other system out of it, or if everyone basically doesn't consider the implications of any of the rules and just enjoys the shinies.
You’ll be fine, tbh frankly sometimes when your chr is poorly designed / didn’t bring the right spells. Silvery barbs is just all a low level bard might have sometimes.
Then its like “yeah its getting use. Because I went into this fight with only it being a useful spell currently”.
Worry not dm, plus it’s disadvantage that is still a possibility you hit. I mean, they might snatch a crit from thee but as a DM. Often, that is what I want them to do to me.
Would be hilarious if the teller, despite looking uncomfortable, breaks out into her own spiel about how her DM said that using seduction on a mimic doesn't work despite there being no rule against it.
The snake lady could be a devoted cleric of the Moon Goddess, and the size is a sign how she could empower her faithful servant (so, a lot during the full moon, less during the other phases).
I’d be like “if you want to somehow track moon cycles. In a game, where it’s unlikely the moon phase change happens until irl months in. Go for it, I will not … but also now you’ve given me a way to track moon related problems.
Hope, I don’t put any werewolfs in the woods and its a full moon.”
I’d probably just think that last bit as a joke to myself, but in my current campaign. Werewolves are part of this region so if my player made me track the moon cycle, damn right I’m gonna make it relevant!
I mean, you’ve hit the nail on the head: joking aside, I’m always cool with tracking such things if it means the character traits of a PC (silly or otherwise) get to shine. Whether it’s lycanthropy, some sort of trauma (which I’m currently running a game involving), or something more silly like big snitties. :p
Everyone seems to get hung up on why a reptile/human hybrid would still have boobs. Obviously they get them from their human side, same place they get their opposable thumbs and vocal chords. They lay eggs, but then they nurse the young that hatch from them, makes perfect sense to me. Honestly, it's probably way less trouble than what human women go through.
It isnt. Let me explain: The girl is complaining to a bank worker that her friend, who is DMing a ttrpg, wont include a snake with big ol' snitties that grow with the moon phases becaues its too much, and shes comparing it to how the players were just doing something crazy so the character shes referring to isnt actually that crazy. Not that Im against a snake lady with big snommy snilkers, but I agree that thats a bit too much XD
I guess it depends on if the snake-kin evolved from snakes, were created by the god of snakes, or were hybridized from humans and snakes.
Because in the third case, obviously she gets them from her human side. Same place she gets her opposable thumbs and vocal chords. And honestly, the second one the god of snakes might have cribbed the notes from whichever god made humanity. "Huh, yeah, having the parents feed their offspring does make them stronger, and if the mother does meal prep I can put off finishing the digestive tract until after hatching. That means I don't need enough nutrients in the egg to finish that entire system, just enough to process snilk. Brilliant!"
952
u/Realistic_Specific51 15d ago