The advantage of lightning bolt over fireball is that you can deliver the high damage more easily without hitting allies. Potentially, you can hit multiple targets, but that's secondary. As an evoker, there is little reason to choose LB over FB except for the much less frequently resisted damage type.
As a cone, you lose all the advantages that lightning bolt has and add the disadvantage that positioning becomes very important to use the spell effectively without hitting allies.
Ever notice how almost NO ONE chooses Lightning Bolt when they could pick up Fireball instead? Why is that? I think it's because Lightning Bolt is extremely difficult to aim, compared to Fireball's ease and efficiency. The problem is really bad with the default "square circles" rule, and almost as bad when you play with the optional rule of "every 2nd diagonal is 10 feet" (which I do, because I really hate square circles).
My fix? Take a page from Emperor Palpatine's book and make Lightning Bolt a 50' cone instead of a 100x5' line. It alters the feel of the spell a bit, and even makes Lightning Bolt slightly edge out Fireball in terms of absolute area covered.... but that was already the case, wasn't it? Lightning Bolt has the potential to hit 100 squares as written, compared to the 64 (default) or 52 (if you use the alternate rule on diagonals) of Fireball.... but good luck catching more than 2 people in one. Make it a cone, and all of a sudden you've got an interesting choice on your hands, and both spells become meaningful.
Thoughts?
Fireball isn't just 64 squares of death, it also happens 150 feet away. Meanwhile, the offficial guidelines on AOEs on DMG pg249 say that you should assume a fireball hits 1/5 its radius in creatures (or double that - 1/5 its diameter - if you obey the rules for cubes, and since default grid rules render fireball a cube, you probably should). That's 4 creatures using the sphere rules, 8 using the cube rules. Lightning Bolt, using the same guidelines, hits 4 creatures, and the reason it's 4 and not 3 is because it's 100 feet, not 90 - length/3 rounding up means that 10 feet counts as a fourth creature.
So per the guidelines, if you want a cone that'll expect to hit 8 creatures like fireball will, since cones are size/10 rounding up, you need a minimum cone size of 75. For 4 creatures, it's 35.
I have no idea how you got 52 squares. There are four ways to apply a fireball to a grid:
Snap the center to a grid intersection and measure the diagonals, where each step counts as 1. This is an 8x8 square, or 64 squares.
Snap the center to a grid intersection and measure the diagonals, where each step counts as 1, then 2, then 1. That's 3 squares diagonally. Then you have to fill in the other squares, but it's all very symmetrical, so we only need to consider 3 more cases; assuming you're starting at the origin of a Cartesian plane, so you know (3,3) is in the fireball and (4,4) isn't:
(4,1) is 4 squares away and in the fireball.
(4,2) is 5 squares away and not in the fireball - (3,2) is 4 squares away, with no range left.
(4,3) is 5 squares away and not in the fireball - (3,3) is 4 squares away, with no range left.
So that's a 6x6 square with 2 additional grid spaces per side, or 36+2*4=44 grid spaces.
Tokens: In the case of a sphere, this is method 1. So 64 squares.
Template: Snap the center to a grid intersection and measure accurately; touching any part of a square touches the whole square. The only squares you can't reach with this method are the 4 corner squares of the original 64, so this is 60 squares.
Anyway. I think a 50 foot cone is a reasonable step in the right direction, but I'd want to do some playtesting - I don't trust the DMG guidelines at all. Cones are the weirdest AOE shape in the book, and the only shape for which the token AOE method diverges from the standard method. I'd be sure to playtest them with all 4 methods.
Don't forget to rename it as making a cone would be a lightning field not a bolt.
Personally, I prefer the bolt. I don't care if it only hits one enemy. It's so much easier and way more cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Lightning bolt is inferior to fireball but a less resisted damage type which is the tradeoff. What you're proposing turns it basically into cone of cold except with lightning. Slightly smaller radius and slightly less damage for a 3rd level slot instead of a 5th level slot.
My wizard prefers lightning bolt for personal reasons. He does not use fire magic of any kind other than the control flames cantrip. But that is due to his backstory. For a more Cone affect I believe Cone of Cold is 5th level, albeit it's a little weaker (8d8 at 5th level vs Fireballs 10d6 at 5th level). If my character did not have the fear/aversion to fire he would have likely chosen Fireball, but alas the backstory I wanted to play didn't work with fireball.
My wizard is an abjuration wizard so he doesn't get the benefit of sculpted spells so it is actually easier to Aim a LB to avoid hitting my frontliners.
I prefer lightning bolt to fireball because of its maneuverability. I never have much trouble lining it up either. One time I took out three giants at once with one well placed one because they didn't realize the party had unwittingly maneuvered them into a straight line.
It also combos well with spells like Watery Sphere, if you're able to catch a few enemies to tee them up and then lightning bolt to knock em down.
The advantage of lightning bolt over fireball is that you can deliver the high damage more easily without hitting allies. Potentially, you can hit multiple targets, but that's secondary. As an evoker, there is little reason to choose LB over FB except for the much less frequently resisted damage type.
As a cone, you lose all the advantages that lightning bolt has and add the disadvantage that positioning becomes very important to use the spell effectively without hitting allies.
Lightning bolt doesn't have high damage. These spells only have high damage when they hit multiple targets.
Personally if I were to bother changing it I'd add little extras to it. For example give it a siege effect and have it do double damage to objects or certain objects. Or return its ability to reflect from 1e/2e but allow the wizard to cut its length short. This would allow picking up the occasional extra target, shoot around corners, and maybe say anyone who is in the path multiple times only takes damage once but is at a disadvantage on their saves.
Lightning bolt doesn't have high damage. These spells only have high damage when they hit multiple targets.
Compared to what? 8d6 damage is the highest of any 3rd level damage spell. While obviously they do their best damage when they hit more than one target, they're not exactly wasted when you can only hit one, especially if the alternative is not doing anything at all (as is often the case with Fireball after your allies are in the way).
Personally I prefer Lightning Bolt; it doesn't quite have the same horde clearing potential but the precision means it's a lot easier to use once frontline fighters are in melee combat.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Lightning bolt doesn't have high damage. These spells only have high damage when they hit multiple targets.
Compared to what? 8d6 damage is the highest of any 3rd level damage spell. While obviously they do their best damage when they hit more than one target, they're not exactly wasted when you can only hit one, especially if the alternative is not doing anything at all (as is often the cast with Fireball after your allies are in the way).
Personally I prefer Lightning Bolt; doesn't quite have the same horde clearing potential but the precision means it's a lot easier to use once frontline fighters are in melee combat.
Its 28ish damage if they don't save. Most decently built martial types focused on damage will beat that at level 5 and round after round. A rogue will likely be doing 18 no problem round after round a sharpshooter rogue will get 28ish at level 5 many rounds. And it gets worse every level as 28 falls further and further behind. Now 28 to 4 targets will be hard to beat for many more levels. Point being if its one target let people with consistent damage at the same level that costs them nothing or little to reach do the damage part, use your spells in ways to enhance or support that. If its one target the damage is just not high enough to justify using it, you have better options.
Lightning bolt doesn't have high damage. These spells only have high damage when they hit multiple targets.
Compared to what? 8d6 damage is the highest of any 3rd level damage spell. While obviously they do their best damage when they hit more than one target, they're not exactly wasted when you can only hit one, especially if the alternative is not doing anything at all (as is often the cast with Fireball after your allies are in the way).
Personally I prefer Lightning Bolt; doesn't quite have the same horde clearing potential but the precision means it's a lot easier to use once frontline fighters are in melee combat.
Its 28ish damage if they don't save. Most decently built martial types focused on damage will beat that at level 5 and round after round. A rogue will likely be doing 18 no problem round after round a sharpshooter rogue will get 28ish at level 5 many rounds. And it gets worse every level as 28 falls further and further behind. Now 28 to 4 targets will be hard to beat for many more levels. Point being if its one target let people with consistent damage at the same level that costs them nothing or little to reach do the damage part, use your spells in ways to enhance or support that. If its one target the damage is just not high enough to justify using it, you have better options.
Better options being "be a fighter or a rogue instead" in this case?
Your only other options for dealing damage are cantrips, which while "free" are low damage at 5th and all-or-nothing (as are martial character's attacks btw); again, not saying you should use it for single targets only that you can in which case it's basically guaranteed damage (at least half in most cases), which may be what you need in the moment.
Single target spells like Chromatic Orb don't deal as much damage, and need to hit to deal any at all, Magic Missile deals significantly less (but hits automatically with few defences against it), and so-on.
The only other options really are debuffs, charm etc. but these are save-or-suck and highly situational.
Of course the value of Lightning Bolt goes up with more targets, two or more make it a steal, but there's nothing wrong with using it against a single target when you need to bring one down, and this is something you can't easily do with Fireball without hitting allies or going Evocation specifically to mitigate it.
Besides which, the thread is supposed to be comparing Fireball and Lightning Bolt; my entire point is that the precision of Lightning Bolt is an advantage, because it lets you target only enemies when there's a risk of friendly fire with indescriminate blasts.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Better options being hasting the fighter, hold person, tashas laughter, levitate on the enemy, yes they are save or suck or buffs but that is better than just doing the same damage a fighter will do without blowing your 3rd level spell. And the value of 28 damage goes down fast past 5th level, while the cost of the slot is at its highest then. Single target damage is almost always a bad call for a mage. There can be some super fluke situation where the enemy has 28ish hit points left and its attack is super devastating and the initiative order is such you are right before it etc. But that does not make it good damage, its mediocre damage at a high cost that happened to be the right call at that specific juncture.
While i totally agree that damage spells are not the optimal use for Spellslots your argument that 28 is not high damage seems contradictory if you compare it to a rogue damagedealer built (beeing a rogue, taking a dedicated feat for damage...). This rogue has to hit with a -5 penalty to deal the same damage as a lightningbolt or no damage at all. Lightning Bolt will always deal at least 50% of it's damage. At Level 5 a Lightning Bolt is comparable damageoutput to other pure Damge-builts with a potential higher peek then meele contenders if you hit 5-8 other creatures (i know that's unlikely). It's still a waste of a spellslot because battlefield control is better then dealing damage, but it is still high damage.
There should be also an Acid Ball spell for those ""moments of panic"", huh ????
There's Vitriolic Sphere, it's a higher level and does less up-front damage and on-successes damage than a 4th level Fireball, but does more damage against enemies that fail, and with a less resisted damage type.
I love it on my acid/necrotic themed sorcerer, though it has the same drawbacks as fireball with being a large blast (can only really use it in the opening round, and only if the rest of the party stay out of the way, though the character is neutral evil and has inflicted friendly fire before to discourage "everybody plays as a lone wolf who rushes in like an idiot" syndrome). But yeah, lacks the precision of Lightning Bolt.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
While i totally agree that damage spells are not the optimal use for Spellslots your argument that 28 is not high damage seems contradictory if you compare it to a rogue damagedealer built (beeing a rogue, taking a dedicated feat for damage...). This rogue has to hit with a -5 penalty to deal the same damage as a lightningbolt or no damage at all. Lightning Bolt will always deal at least 50% of it's damage. At Level 5 a Lightning Bolt is comparable damageoutput to other pure Damge-builts with a potential higher peek then meele contenders if you hit 5-8 other creatures (i know that's unlikely). It's still a waste of a spellslot because battlefield control is better then dealing damage, but it is still high damage.
Not really.Though honestly comparative damage is not super important, my end point is the real issue.
The rogue isn't a top damage dealer, they are a mix of utility and damage. And the rogue is doing that round after round and while they are at -5,. they may have advantage due to their stealth and they likely get 2 shots at it eventually.(crossbow expert, if shooting for this I personally would go with a option where you got a feat at level 1 and take it then with sharpshooter at 4, but I don't want to talk balance about a super optimized for this build) And this is literally just level 5, every 2 levels the rogue is getting another d6 and if they can wrangle a reaction attack their damage even gets higher.. A fighter type could totally miss sure, but they will likely hit somewhere between 20 and 40 damage a round, again at level 5 when fireball is at its peak efficiency.
Even if we just compare to the rogue this is your best slot at these levels. Maybe beating the rogue 's round after round damage one round by 10 while using your best slot isn't good damage. Its laughably bad damage in that context.
Honestly even compared to your fire bolt another 17 damage is nice sure, but is 17 damage worth my 3rd level slot, is 17 more damage from your 3rd level slot your highest spell slot good damage for that expenditure, I don't think so. There are niche circumstances where it will be worth it, but that doesn't make the damage good. You are basically a little more than 1 round ahead on your normal damage, is that worth your highest slot to you. If you are solo or something maybe, but normally I just don't see it.
Again at these levels once its hitting a group 28 damage adds up, and can turn the tide, it may save the fighter multiple rounds of attacks and stop attacks from multiple foes from even happening. Heck even at higher levels with enough enemies its worth it, 1 less attack required to kill them per enemy on 10 enemies saves a lot of time for everyone else. And using your 3rtd level slot becomes less big of a deal as time goes on.
For one dude though, just not worth it. Its 17 damage more than a fire bolt, for it to be worth it that 17 damage needs to be why they died before they got an attack off, and the attacks that enemy would have launched would need to do more than a 3rd level slots worth of resources in damage on average. Maybe that comes up a lot in your games, but I've personally almost never seen that confluence of events, like maybe against a giant that was just perfectly low enough that a lightning bolt would have made the difference, and well they hit stupid hard so it made the difference, but its rare to see imo. Though I'm just talking mechanically, its pretty sweet to lightning bolt some dude so I'd do it myself just because its fun.
This seems a bit off-topic; the OP isn't asking how efficient these spells are with lower numbers of safe targets, they're asking about the balance between the two (why you would pick one over the other) or how you would change them.
Damage type and easier aiming are definitely in the favour of lightning bolt, and it doesn't matter if hitting only 1-3 targets isn't as efficient for your spell slot economy, because the point is that you can do it at all (or are less likely to hit allies if you do). Meaning you can use lightning bolt in more cases than fireball when what you want/need to do is deal damage.
One is better for hordes, one is more targeted/targetable and has a less resisted damage type.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Fireball is my go-to option when playing Evokers or high initiative Wizards (War Wizard, Chronurgist and vHumans with Alert feat). It’s easier to setup and avoid friendly-fire when you go before melee allies move.
Lightning Bolt is my reliable choice of blasting when playing Wizard not optimized for damage or initiative, like regular Diviners, Enchanters, Abjurers, Necromancers and the like. It’s much more party friendly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The advantage of lightning bolt over fireball is that you can deliver the high damage more easily without hitting allies. Potentially, you can hit multiple targets, but that's secondary. As an evoker, there is little reason to choose LB over FB except for the much less frequently resisted damage type.
As a cone, you lose all the advantages that lightning bolt has and add the disadvantage that positioning becomes very important to use the spell effectively without hitting allies.
my wizard uses lightning bolt over fireball all the time.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Fireball isn't just 64 squares of death, it also happens 150 feet away. Meanwhile, the offficial guidelines on AOEs on DMG pg249 say that you should assume a fireball hits 1/5 its radius in creatures (or double that - 1/5 its diameter - if you obey the rules for cubes, and since default grid rules render fireball a cube, you probably should). That's 4 creatures using the sphere rules, 8 using the cube rules. Lightning Bolt, using the same guidelines, hits 4 creatures, and the reason it's 4 and not 3 is because it's 100 feet, not 90 - length/3 rounding up means that 10 feet counts as a fourth creature.
So per the guidelines, if you want a cone that'll expect to hit 8 creatures like fireball will, since cones are size/10 rounding up, you need a minimum cone size of 75. For 4 creatures, it's 35.
I have no idea how you got 52 squares. There are four ways to apply a fireball to a grid:
Anyway. I think a 50 foot cone is a reasonable step in the right direction, but I'd want to do some playtesting - I don't trust the DMG guidelines at all. Cones are the weirdest AOE shape in the book, and the only shape for which the token AOE method diverges from the standard method. I'd be sure to playtest them with all 4 methods.
Don't forget to rename it as making a cone would be a lightning field not a bolt.
Personally, I prefer the bolt. I don't care if it only hits one enemy. It's so much easier and way more cool.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Lightning bolt is inferior to fireball but a less resisted damage type which is the tradeoff. What you're proposing turns it basically into cone of cold except with lightning. Slightly smaller radius and slightly less damage for a 3rd level slot instead of a 5th level slot.
My wizard prefers lightning bolt for personal reasons. He does not use fire magic of any kind other than the control flames cantrip. But that is due to his backstory. For a more Cone affect I believe Cone of Cold is 5th level, albeit it's a little weaker (8d8 at 5th level vs Fireballs 10d6 at 5th level). If my character did not have the fear/aversion to fire he would have likely chosen Fireball, but alas the backstory I wanted to play didn't work with fireball.
My wizard is an abjuration wizard so he doesn't get the benefit of sculpted spells so it is actually easier to Aim a LB to avoid hitting my frontliners.
I prefer lightning bolt to fireball because of its maneuverability. I never have much trouble lining it up either. One time I took out three giants at once with one well placed one because they didn't realize the party had unwittingly maneuvered them into a straight line.
It also combos well with spells like Watery Sphere, if you're able to catch a few enemies to tee them up and then lightning bolt to knock em down.
Lightning bolt doesn't have high damage. These spells only have high damage when they hit multiple targets.
Personally if I were to bother changing it I'd add little extras to it. For example give it a siege effect and have it do double damage to objects or certain objects. Or return its ability to reflect from 1e/2e but allow the wizard to cut its length short. This would allow picking up the occasional extra target, shoot around corners, and maybe say anyone who is in the path multiple times only takes damage once but is at a disadvantage on their saves.
My personal fix was that any creature flying has disadvantage on the save.cone is neat too
Compared to what? 8d6 damage is the highest of any 3rd level damage spell. While obviously they do their best damage when they hit more than one target, they're not exactly wasted when you can only hit one, especially if the alternative is not doing anything at all (as is often the case with Fireball after your allies are in the way).
Personally I prefer Lightning Bolt; it doesn't quite have the same horde clearing potential but the precision means it's a lot easier to use once frontline fighters are in melee combat.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Its 28ish damage if they don't save. Most decently built martial types focused on damage will beat that at level 5 and round after round. A rogue will likely be doing 18 no problem round after round a sharpshooter rogue will get 28ish at level 5 many rounds. And it gets worse every level as 28 falls further and further behind. Now 28 to 4 targets will be hard to beat for many more levels. Point being if its one target let people with consistent damage at the same level that costs them nothing or little to reach do the damage part, use your spells in ways to enhance or support that. If its one target the damage is just not high enough to justify using it, you have better options.
Better options being "be a fighter or a rogue instead" in this case?
Your only other options for dealing damage are cantrips, which while "free" are low damage at 5th and all-or-nothing (as are martial character's attacks btw); again, not saying you should use it for single targets only that you can in which case it's basically guaranteed damage (at least half in most cases), which may be what you need in the moment.
Single target spells like Chromatic Orb don't deal as much damage, and need to hit to deal any at all, Magic Missile deals significantly less (but hits automatically with few defences against it), and so-on.
The only other options really are debuffs, charm etc. but these are save-or-suck and highly situational.
Of course the value of Lightning Bolt goes up with more targets, two or more make it a steal, but there's nothing wrong with using it against a single target when you need to bring one down, and this is something you can't easily do with Fireball without hitting allies or going Evocation specifically to mitigate it.
Besides which, the thread is supposed to be comparing Fireball and Lightning Bolt; my entire point is that the precision of Lightning Bolt is an advantage, because it lets you target only enemies when there's a risk of friendly fire with indescriminate blasts.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Better options being hasting the fighter, hold person, tashas laughter, levitate on the enemy, yes they are save or suck or buffs but that is better than just doing the same damage a fighter will do without blowing your 3rd level spell. And the value of 28 damage goes down fast past 5th level, while the cost of the slot is at its highest then. Single target damage is almost always a bad call for a mage. There can be some super fluke situation where the enemy has 28ish hit points left and its attack is super devastating and the initiative order is such you are right before it etc. But that does not make it good damage, its mediocre damage at a high cost that happened to be the right call at that specific juncture.
While i totally agree that damage spells are not the optimal use for Spellslots your argument that 28 is not high damage seems contradictory if you compare it to a rogue damagedealer built (beeing a rogue, taking a dedicated feat for damage...). This rogue has to hit with a -5 penalty to deal the same damage as a lightningbolt or no damage at all. Lightning Bolt will always deal at least 50% of it's damage. At Level 5 a Lightning Bolt is comparable damageoutput to other pure Damge-builts with a potential higher peek then meele contenders if you hit 5-8 other creatures (i know that's unlikely). It's still a waste of a spellslot because battlefield control is better then dealing damage, but it is still high damage.
There should be also an Acid Ball spell for those ""moments of panic"", huh ????
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
There's Vitriolic Sphere, it's a higher level and does less up-front damage and on-successes damage than a 4th level Fireball, but does more damage against enemies that fail, and with a less resisted damage type.
I love it on my acid/necrotic themed sorcerer, though it has the same drawbacks as fireball with being a large blast (can only really use it in the opening round, and only if the rest of the party stay out of the way, though the character is neutral evil and has inflicted friendly fire before to discourage "everybody plays as a lone wolf who rushes in like an idiot" syndrome). But yeah, lacks the precision of Lightning Bolt.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Not really.Though honestly comparative damage is not super important, my end point is the real issue.
The rogue isn't a top damage dealer, they are a mix of utility and damage. And the rogue is doing that round after round and while they are at -5,. they may have advantage due to their stealth and they likely get 2 shots at it eventually.(crossbow expert, if shooting for this I personally would go with a option where you got a feat at level 1 and take it then with sharpshooter at 4, but I don't want to talk balance about a super optimized for this build) And this is literally just level 5, every 2 levels the rogue is getting another d6 and if they can wrangle a reaction attack their damage even gets higher.. A fighter type could totally miss sure, but they will likely hit somewhere between 20 and 40 damage a round, again at level 5 when fireball is at its peak efficiency.
Even if we just compare to the rogue this is your best slot at these levels. Maybe beating the rogue 's round after round damage one round by 10 while using your best slot isn't good damage. Its laughably bad damage in that context.
Honestly even compared to your fire bolt another 17 damage is nice sure, but is 17 damage worth my 3rd level slot, is 17 more damage from your 3rd level slot your highest spell slot good damage for that expenditure, I don't think so. There are niche circumstances where it will be worth it, but that doesn't make the damage good. You are basically a little more than 1 round ahead on your normal damage, is that worth your highest slot to you. If you are solo or something maybe, but normally I just don't see it.
Again at these levels once its hitting a group 28 damage adds up, and can turn the tide, it may save the fighter multiple rounds of attacks and stop attacks from multiple foes from even happening. Heck even at higher levels with enough enemies its worth it, 1 less attack required to kill them per enemy on 10 enemies saves a lot of time for everyone else. And using your 3rtd level slot becomes less big of a deal as time goes on.
For one dude though, just not worth it. Its 17 damage more than a fire bolt, for it to be worth it that 17 damage needs to be why they died before they got an attack off, and the attacks that enemy would have launched would need to do more than a 3rd level slots worth of resources in damage on average. Maybe that comes up a lot in your games, but I've personally almost never seen that confluence of events, like maybe against a giant that was just perfectly low enough that a lightning bolt would have made the difference, and well they hit stupid hard so it made the difference, but its rare to see imo. Though I'm just talking mechanically, its pretty sweet to lightning bolt some dude so I'd do it myself just because its fun.
This seems a bit off-topic; the OP isn't asking how efficient these spells are with lower numbers of safe targets, they're asking about the balance between the two (why you would pick one over the other) or how you would change them.
Damage type and easier aiming are definitely in the favour of lightning bolt, and it doesn't matter if hitting only 1-3 targets isn't as efficient for your spell slot economy, because the point is that you can do it at all (or are less likely to hit allies if you do). Meaning you can use lightning bolt in more cases than fireball when what you want/need to do is deal damage.
One is better for hordes, one is more targeted/targetable and has a less resisted damage type.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Fireball is my go-to option when playing Evokers or high initiative Wizards (War Wizard, Chronurgist and vHumans with Alert feat). It’s easier to setup and avoid friendly-fire when you go before melee allies move.
Lightning Bolt is my reliable choice of blasting when playing Wizard not optimized for damage or initiative, like regular Diviners, Enchanters, Abjurers, Necromancers and the like. It’s much more party friendly.