D&D 5E Anybody see a problem with Ray of Sickness auto-poisoning?

[doctorhook]

RAW, the 1st-level wizard spell ray of sickness deals 2d8 poison damage on a successful ranged spell attack, and on a hit, the target must make a Constitution save or be poisoned until the end of your next turn. In other words, the target has a chance to defend against the spell twice: once by dodging it, and then to avoid poisoning with a Con save. The spell is called "ray of sickness", but it doesn't really cause sickness (the poisoned condition) unless the target fails both chances to defend against it. Worst of all, the poisoning only lasts one round!

Does anybody see a problem with just skipping the Con save and saying this spell causes one-round poisoning automatically on a hit?

One step further, what are folks' thoughts on replacing the attack roll with a single Con save to avoid 2d8 poison damage and a one-round auto-poisoning?

Any input is welcome!

 

[Zardnaar]

Disadvantage on attack rolls and attribute checks is a big kick in the nuts for a lot of character classes. 2d8 damage and disadvantage is kind of annoying. PCs hate disadvantage.

 

[doctorhook]

Disadvantage on attack rolls and attribute checks is a big kick in the nuts for a lot of character classes. 2d8 damage and disadvantage is kind of annoying. PCs hate disadvantage.

Yeah, but it's only one round.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, but it's only one round.

Compare with Vicious mockery which is a cantrip, 1d4 damage and is only on the next attack. Hit a PC with this spell and if they have multiple attacks the disadvantage applies to all of them until the next turn. It is probably about right for a debuff spell.

 

[doctorhook]

Compare with Vicious mockery which is a cantrip, 1d4 damage and is only on the next attack. Hit a PC with this spell and if they have multiple attacks the disadvantage applies to all of them until the next turn. It is probably about right for a debuff spell.

Ehh, you've almost convinced me, but not quite. You seem be arguing that it would be too good when used against the PCs, but I'm still concerned that in its current form it's too weak for PCs to ever choose to use it for themselves.

 

[Tormyr]

I think that you will find that in most things 5e is balanced. If you look at the 1st level spells, you will find that some do something after a successful attack roll, some do something after a failed save and some do stuff after both. The first level spells that only have an attack roll or a save but not both are not as powerful as those that require both. if you want to remove the attack roll. I would suggest weakening the spell to match another level 1 spell that only uses a saving throw.

My personal thoughts would be to just let it be though.

 

[Zardnaar]

Ehh, you've almost convinced me, but not quite. You seem be arguing that it would be too good when used against the PCs, but I'm still concerned that in its current form it's too weak for PCs to ever choose to use it for themselves.

You would use it on things like Ogres or NPC spellcasters. It is also one of the few necromancer spells in the book for low level PCs. PC Necromancer using this spell siphoning hit points off NPCs for himself seems good yes?

The spell is a hybrid damage/control spell decent against single targets. If it prevents an NPC hitting you with a 3d10 inflict spell or a critical hit from a Bugbear/Ogre/Hobgoblin etc it has done its job IMHO.

 

[Stalker0]

I think that you will find that in most things 5e is balanced.

I can say, that while I hope this is the case, it is WAY too early to know that for certain. I am sure there will be balance issues....just as there has been in every edition.

 

[Tormyr]

I can say, that while I hope this is the case, it is WAY too early to know that for certain. I am sure there will be balance issues....just as there has been in every edition.

Sure, but preserving balance is a good idea when possible. I am sure there will be some imbalances that turn up, but adjusting the damage of a spell if the difficulty to take effect is lowered makes sense.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I agree it's a bit weak, you have to hit for the 2d8, then the save for disad for one round. All against only one target.

I think it would have been better as no damage, and simple Con save to avoid, or else poisoned until save (save end of every round). Concentration required, single target debuff. Perhaps this spell already exists, I'm not sure. I know hold person, which paralyzes otherwise works pretty much as above but is 2nd level. So 1st level I think this version would be ok for Ray of Sickness.