Reading some commentary on Banishment to day got me thinking about the classic trope of banishing something to another dimension, and how to express that in #DnD5e
The tricky thing is, banishment in most stories isn't a "the caster snaps their fingers, says a word, and their gone" kind of thing. I may have recently been reminded of this watching the Willow series on Disney Plus.
On one hand, you could fix this by just making the casting time longer, but having one spellcaster in the group dedicating their action to casting a spell for a longer period than most fights take doesn't seem like fun, or fit the playstyle.
So how do you make this dynamic? Well, it still ends up being a more complicated spell than most in 5e, but I think you could do something workable.
Let's assume Banishment takes an action, and then grants you a special bonus action, called "binding." A creature has to be bound before you can attempt to banish it.
If you know the creature's truename, and use it as part of the spell, it's automatically bound. The first time you bind the creature, it's susceptible to being banished, but you don't have to attempt to banish the creature then.
If you establish a second binding, the creature is now at disadvantage to resist the save to be banished. Yes, you are forcing it to make a normal save to be at disadvantage, but it makes sense since the denouement is the actual banishment.
Those extra bonus action bindings might also be handy for wearing down epic resistances as well. The main point is, the caster is only using their bonus action to advance the banishment, but it's also not a "one and done" spell.
Is this a good design? I have no idea, but I do think it flows more with the action of a D&D fight. If you really want to press the issue, you can bind the thing and attempt to banish it right away. Otherwise, you can attempt to make it stick.
This is definitely not a refined thought process, it's literally just what popped into my head as the neurons started firing in response to reading other posts.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jared Rascher (He/Him)

Jared Rascher (He/Him) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @WhatDoIKnowJR

Dec 18
So I'm seeing a lot of Monolithic "WotC doesn't want to do this" or "WotC doesn't care about this" comments in regard to a lot of trending points of conversation, and I think, once again, it's important to point out "WotC" in these instances isn't a monolith.
The people in charge of the profitability of the company have their goals, the people in charge of marketing the brands of D&D and Magic want certain things, and they want those things in context of the brands, not the specific games.
The people in charge of the actual game development and the success of the specific games want different things than all of those other folks, and have to balance those desires against what gets set as a company priority.
Read 18 tweets
Dec 16
Finally, finally got to play #DnD5e again tonight after being sick last time around. I'm probably going to jinx myself, but I'm feeling pretty good right now. At any rate, we had a few developments.
The PCs were trying to free a group of clerics that had been kidnapped by zealots of Ba'al, and each of the clerics had a magical trapped lock on them based on the Arcana of the Deck of Many Things.
Each cleric had a card's symbol that was antithetical to their religion showing, and they needed to be moved to the opposite of those symbols in order to free the cleric without triggering the trap.
Read 20 tweets
Nov 29
I've finished Chapter 7: Siege of Kalaman, which is the final "adventure" chapter of the book. One note, this can be a little confusing, because this isn't the Siege of Kalaman as described in the Dragonlance Chronicles, but an earlier point in the War of the Lance. "A" Siege.
Essentially, the PCs need to be able to infiltrate a location, but while they are waiting to have the means to do that, they end up encountering various elements of Red Dragonarmy forces that need to be repelled. In general, I like all of these encounters.
It does follow that same format that I'm not a fan of from previous chapters, where you have a list of encounters, and are told to run however many you want. But I can live with that, because I like them.
Read 23 tweets
Nov 29
For reasons, I've been flipping through some of my 3.5 Dragonlance books, and at the end of the section describing a region, there are Adventure Ideas. Why do I point this out?
Because SO MANY campaign setting sourcebooks still spend hundreds of pages detailing locations without pausing to say "this is what kind of adventures we're picturing for this location."
There are fascinating settings out there, even ones that are a lot of fun to read, but that are hard to digest or retain, because it might be a hundred pages of facts about a fictional place without letting us absorb the information creating emotional beats to hitch memory to.
Read 4 tweets
Nov 29
Shadow of the Dragon Queen Chapter 6: City of Lost Names read through:

Just finished up the next chapter of the adventure, and as per usual, I've got some thoughts on how it unfolded.
The opening section of this chapter, leading to the location that the PCs have been trying to find, is another of those callbacks that reminds me a bit of the original adventure and the Sla-Mori, the hidden path into Pax Tharkas.
There are four locations in this section, with three meant to be explored. The fourth is next chapter's problem, and to dissuade players from going there, it's the most heavily guarded.
Read 20 tweets
Nov 28
I know it's a bit out of date, as it ended with Eisner's departure, but every time I see someone talking about a Disney project that got screwed over in the promomtion phase, I think of Disney War, and how sometimes someone that wants a project to die tries to kill it indirectly.
This is definitely part of Disney corporate culture. When someone that is the head of this studio or that gets to make a decision that slides unded the radar of someone else in the company, this is how they kill a project that is already in the pipeline.
Sometimes it's about "I don't want the head of that division to look good," and sometimes it's "oh, shit, I didn't realize it was about that," but its a thing that definitely does happen at Disney. Someone wanted Strange World dead.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(