D&D 5E Glyph of Warding: Breaking the Concentration Rule

[Reynard]

EDIT: Nothing to see here. i missed the part about the glyphs being immobile, which greatly reduces their utility in my hypothetical. We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

So over here I have a thread about my PCs obliterating a solo monster. In writing a response there I realized that maybe we should talk about Glyph of Warding and its impact on the concentration rules.

According to the write up for Glyph of Warding, for a spell glyph if a spell requires concentration it instead simply lasts until the end of its duration. Glyph of Warding itself does not require that it is used offensively. So, for the cost of 200 gp and some materials, it seems that one could create envelopes or small boxes of concentration buff spells that are opened by the user. The spell goes off, targeting the character that opened the letter or box. That individual receives the benefits of the spell which lasts its full duration (usually a minute) without concern for concentration from the caster.

Is this correct? Am I missing something? Since GoW can be used to spell glyph any spell that is of the same level or lower than the glyph, this seems broken. Thoughts?

 

[schnee]

When you cast this spell, you inscribe a glyph that harms other creatures

That is where it is required to be used offensively.

 

[Alexemplar]

If you cast glyph on an envelope or box, it can't be moved more than 10 feet or else the glyph dissapears.

So you can't create a bunch of buffs and carry them around for you.

What you CAN do is sit in one spot and make multiple glyphs holding concentration spells over the course of several hours, have the desired persons activate them simultaneously and then go wherever and do whatever while they are under the effects of the concentration spells- however long that is.

 

[Reynard]

That is where it is required to be used offensively.

This raises an interesting question: does this constitute a "rule" in the spell. Nothing under the spell glyph section specifies the spell must cause damage or impose a negative condition. Obviously the intent of the spell is to "ward" but finding atypical uses for tools is pretty much what PCs do.

 

[schnee]

This raises an interesting question: does this constitute a "rule" in the spell. Nothing under the spell glyph section specifies the spell must cause damage or impose a negative condition. Obviously the intent of the spell is to "ward" but finding atypical uses for tools is pretty much what PCs do.

It says 'harms'. That's really cut and dried. It's meant to harm things. It says it, bluntly, in the beginning of the description, so it doesn't need to be restated later on.

Look, I'm not trying to pick on you, but this sort of thing you're doing now is why rules systems tend to grow over time. 'Rulings not rules' forces the writers to be concise, blunt, and basic, so they say 'this harms things'. Then, someone comes along and says, 'well, it says 'harms', but what really does 'harms' mean?'. Enough people do that, and then rules have to get more and more specific, didactic, and restrictive. Look at Wish. There's forty years of shenanigans boiled into that spell description.

Glyph of Warding a spell to save up harmful spells to hurt beings who aren't meant to be in a certain place. That's it. Anything else is home brew.

 

[Reynard]

It says 'harms'. That's really cut and dried. It's meant to harm things. It says it, bluntly, in the beginning of the description, so it doesn't need to be restated later on.

Look, I'm not trying to pick on you, but this sort of thing you're doing now is why rules systems tend to grow over time. 'Rulings not rules' forces the writers to be concise, blunt, and basic, so they say 'this harms things'. Then, someone comes along and says, 'well, it says 'harms', but what really does 'harms' mean?'. Enough people do that, and then rules have to get more and more specific, didactic, and restrictive. Look at Wish. There's forty years of shenanigans boiled into that spell description.

Glyph of Warding a spell to save up harmful spells to hurt beings who aren't meant to be in a certain place. That's it. Anything else is home brew.

I am a nefarious villain and I build a dungeon and fill it with monsters and traps. One of those monsters is a shambling mound. Another is a glyph of warding that does lightning explosive runes with the trigger "shambling mound goes to half hit points". Did I use the spell correctly?

 

[Alexemplar]

It doesn't say it has to be a harmful spell. The introductory description of the spell just states you create a glyph that harms other creature, which is likely a reference to the default use of the glyph: explosive runes.

This spell is only really super powerful if you have several hours and hundreds of gold to spend preparing and can determine the time and place of battle to the minute/second and couple hundred foot radius.

And if you have that much time, money, and control of the battle, you already have a massive edge, even without the glyphs.

 

[schnee]

I am a nefarious villain and I build a dungeon and fill it with monsters and traps. One of those monsters is a shambling mound. Another is a glyph of warding that does lightning explosive runes with the trigger "shambling mound goes to half hit points". Did I use the spell correctly?

Since it's a 'harmful' spell, not a buff, I'd not just allow it, I'd also call it extremely clever. Bravo.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Errata erased harm IIRC

 

[Reynard]

Errata erased harm IIRC

This is indeed the case.