Yes, but they are also easy to not screw up at the same time. Sorcerer is the most complicated because of both the high floor and the high ceiling. Wizard, bard and druid have high ceilings but their skill floors are just as low if not lower than the warlocks, in other words you can be effective with them without too much thought and it is hard to completely mess them up and make bad wizards, bards or druids.
The skill floor for a sorcerer is "I play a draconic sorcerer and I learn evocation spells". The skill floor for a wizard is "I play an evoker and I learn evocation spells". The draconic sorcerer, because they get innate durability boosts, is easier to play than the evocation wizard. You can either ignore metamagic (just use your sorcery points to buy more spell slots) or use the super straightforward ones like empowered spell.
The skill ceiling for sorcerer, due to a small number of spells known and a relatively mediocre spell list, is not particularly high, and metamagic is rarely much of a game changer.
This isn't the floor, the floor goes lower than this for wizard. Leaving this floor for sorc is harder because there isn't a lot of flexibility in the number of spells known. It is easy to "mess up" a sorcerer, it is IMPOSSIBLE to "mess-up" a wizard without trying to do so on purpose.
Sorcerer takes actual planning about their spells. Having a limited number of spells with a lot of slots and a lot of options combined with options that synergize only with certain spells creates complications. less spells =/= less complication it can be the opposite if you can't freely change them.
Sorcerer: you have to think once per level. At other times you have 2-15 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Wizard: you have to think once per long rest. At other times you have 4-25 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Yes, sorcerer requires more thinking when you level up. At every other time, wizard requires more.
Sorcerer takes actual planning about their spells. Having a limited number of spells with a lot of slots and a lot of options combined with options that synergize only with certain spells creates complications. less spells =/= less complication it can be the opposite if you can't freely change them.
Sorcerer: you have to think once per level. At other times you have 2-15 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Wizard: you have to think once per long rest. At other times you have 4-25 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Yes, sorcerer requires more thinking when you level up. At every other time, wizard requires more.
Again completely incorrect. Meta-magics can't be changed either you have to think 5 or 6 level in advance when selecting your meta-magics about what spells you are going to pick up later. Otherwise you could be picking meta-magics that are good for the spells you currently have, but change them as you go. You pick ONE spell from a choice of 100, and then you also have to choose if you are going to trade them. This also comes with the choice of using font of magic. When a wizard picks their spells they get to pick a vast majority of the ones they have available to them, they have probably tried all of them at some point so they don't have to think about what is useful all that much. "are you in a place with water? take control water." it isn't hard for a wizard to figure out when to swap a spell out because they are still going to have the rest of their staples prepared because they get enough spells prepared to do that. Combined with the ability to cast rituals WITHOUT them needing to be prepared means your selections can be even lower. Further AFTER the day starts the wizard now just gets to worry if they have the right spell. If they do, they cast it, maybe they UP-cast it, but that is the only decision point now.
Sorcerers after the day starts now get to make all new decisions. Every time they cast a spell they now have to think if it is appropriate to add a meta-magic. Once they are out of sorcery points they have to consider eating a spell slot for more sorcery points or using that slot for a spell. When they run out of a spell slot they have to consider creating another spell slot with the sorcery points they have. Meaning the Sorcerer has more decision points throughout the day in addition to more decisions on level up. When selecting spells wizards can pick things for specific scenarios, sorcerers have to pick spells that can cover a variety of scenarios, so now they have to also be creative with their spells rather than nearly always having the perfect one for the job like the wizard or druid will have thanks to their greater number of preparations.
Sorcerers are the most complicated spell caster, if you do not find them complicated, great you probably do not find ANY class complicated. Though this changes a little with clockwork soul and aberrant mind because of the extra spells known, but 2 subclasses from Tasha's mostly designed to fix the classes shortcomings does not a class make.
Sooooooooo...................sorcerers are complicated because they have FEWER choices and FEWER decision points than any other caster. And having fewer decisions makes them more complicated.
Right.
I give up. Language is supposed to have a fixed meaning. Nobody can have a discussion with somebody who just invents whole new meanings for words out of whole cloth.
Everyone keeps trying to convince each other that their side is the 'right' one and the other side is delusional or worse. But the real issue is that everyone has different definitions of complexity. You're all correct. The things that you define as complex are complex to you. But they're not the same things. Until people stop trying to prove each other wrong, this thread will run into 300 posts of the same unproductive arguments as the last one.
This was just 5 hours ago, but I'll say it again. If everyone keeps trying to argue that their opinion is somehow the more valid and correct opinion, you're going to spend another 500 posts repeating the same fights for no reason. Literally no one is going to change their mind about what they find complex or interesting. Because 'interesting' is subjective and 'complex' means something different to everyone talking.
Complex could mean:
Rules to learn to play a class
Choices to make during character creation/level up
Choices to make during play
Permanent choices feeling difficult to get right
Flexible choices feeling overwhelming
Extra counters to track like spell slots, points, and dice
Numerous modifiers to apply situationally
Mechanically detailed rules
Explicit options with specific uses
Vague options that require interpretation
Options contained in the class itself
Options scattered over many books
Unique options for a class
Generic options for everyone
Hidden meta interactions
Options that sound good but aren't
Rules that don't play the way you expect them to
White room optimization
Real world application
Differences in DM styles and games
And so on...
And then you add on to of that the fact that complexity is seen as a positive thing for some and a negative for others. Because everyone is taking about a different kind of complexity. And everyone is just trying to move the complexity they DON'T like into a realm they are comfortable with. Or move the complexity they DO like to the forefront.
These threads are going absolutely nowhere because everyone is arguing about different things. Everyone is convinced they're right and the other side just needs to be told it enough times to change their mind. This game could be even more amazing if people could just take a minute to acknowledge each other as having their own experiences. Identify what you really mean when you describe an aspect you dislike. And look for common ground on how to fix it in a way that doesn't dismiss another person's problems.
Or maybe everyone just likes to argue for the fun of it.
I'm here for some real productive discussions. But I'll check out now if it's just some weird form of entertainment to call each other wrong in circles forever.
Sooooooooo...................sorcerers are complicated because they have FEWER choices and FEWER decision points than any other caster. And having fewer decisions makes them more complicated.
Right.
I give up. Language is supposed to have a fixed meaning. Nobody can have a discussion with somebody who just invents whole new meanings for words out of whole cloth.
No, they have the SAME number of decision points with a similar number of options to choose from but the sorcerer gets LESS of those options available and the choices they make are more Permanent. They get to choose spells at the same levels wizards do, they have a nearly identical list of spells to choose, they get to choose HALF of them or less per level up. Meaning their choices are TWICE as difficult or more. Making them MORE complicated.
Here lets give an illustrated example. There are 100 doors, behind 20 of the doors is a prize, and the other 80 nothing. Mr. Wizard gets to open 50 of those 100 doors, while Mr. Sorc gets to open 20 of them. Which one has the more complicated and difficult decision to make about which doors to open?
Now lets go further Mr. Sorc also is done after those initial 20 doors. Mr. Wizard, well if he didn't like the 50 doors he opened, he can purchase for more doors to open. Mr. Sorcs choices were permanent, but Mr. Wizard wasn't locked out of the good choices and eventually could open all the doors and get all the prizes.
None of that is remotely related to the word "complicated". You don't like that known casters cannot back out of their choices, which is fine. But that doesn't make those choices more complex, it just means the choices have more weight. Weight is not equivalent to complexity. Language needs to be used correctly for anyone's words to matter. If you believe that the increased weight of a sorcerer's choices make them unfriendly to new players, sure. That's valid, though I disagree with it. But it does not remotely make sorcerers 'complicated'.
None of that is remotely related to the word "complicated". You don't like that known casters cannot back out of their choices, which is fine. But that doesn't make those choices more complex, it just means the choices have more weight. Weight is not equivalent to complexity. Language needs to be used correctly for anyone's words to matter. If you believe that the increased weight of a sorcerer's choices make them unfriendly to new players, sure. That's valid, though I disagree with it. But it does not remotely make sorcerers 'complicated'.
: difficult to analyze, understand, or explain.
When you have a similar number of options but can only take half as many of them your options are more difficult to analyze. Thus, by definition shown above. More complicated.
Edit: consisting of many interconnecting parts or elements; intricate.
Wizards spells are all individual spells and are not naturally interconnecting. Meta-magic and font of magic however, are interconnected with spells and thus by definition 2 yes sorcerers are more complicated than wizards. By both definitions Sorcerers are more complicated than any other spell caster because no other spell caster has its abilities being intrinsically interconnected.
Edit 2: in terms of new players, I don't think you have ever admitted to anything being "unfriendly" for new players so I honestly don't take much stock in your opinion on that front. Though it always depends on that new player, if they are someone that deep dives into things they aren't going to have an issue with any class. If they are just sitting down for the first time and haven't read the rules for any of it they are probably going to have a rough time with most classes. It depends on the player and the people teaching more than anything. Its just some classes have more pitfalls.
No, I don't automatically assume anyone new to a hobby is a lobotomized zombie that requires multiple years of careful coaching before they can understand the most basic of essentials in that hobby. D&D is not rocket science, especially current D&D. Anyone with any sort of gaming background should be able to pick up on the basics after a few sessions, and even people without any background in gaming at all can be coached by a DM with a relative minimum of fuss.
You know what's more important than ensuring new players aren't confused? Ensuring new players are having fun. That means letting them play what they want to play, helping them make sound choices when they need that help, and guiding them with the benefit of experience. Not making all their choices for them, forcing them to play things they don't want to, or insisting they're too dumb to be trusted with the game they're trying to break into.
No, I don't automatically assume anyone new to a hobby is a lobotomized zombie that requires multiple years of careful coaching before they can understand the most basic of essentials in that hobby. D&D is not rocket science, especially current D&D. Anyone with any sort of gaming background should be able to pick up on the basics after a few sessions, and even people without any background in gaming at all can be coached by a DM with a relative minimum of fuss.
You know what's more important than ensuring new players aren't confused? Ensuring new players are having fun. That means letting them play what they want to play, helping them make sound choices when they need that help, and guiding them with the benefit of experience. Not making all their choices for them, forcing them to play things they don't want to, or insisting they're too dumb to be trusted with the game they're trying to break into.
I agree with basically all of this, no one is saying that new players are this way. For some players it DOES take years, but that isn't because they are dumb or need years of coaching, it is because the level of investment they put in. This is an rpg, meaning story and imagination is as much a reason people get into it as mechanical reasons. I have played with people have played for years who still don't know what half their cleric or ranger spells do because they can't be bothered to figure it out, they don't need a coach and one wouldn't help them if you gave them one it would just make them want to play less. They pick spells they think look good and then never change them and enjoy describing what their character does. They are still effective because 5e is a very simple game in general. I know players who picked up the game for the first time and on their first session knew every rule inside and out. It is different investment levels. Having fun is important, it isn't FUN to feel like you aren't effective at what you wanted to be effective at.
No one has suggested new players are dumb, but we do acknowledge that some classes take more investment and time to learn and be effective than others. If a new player puts in the investment to learn their class they will be fine no matter what class they pick nothing in 5e is so complicated that an hour of time couldn't get them up to speed. But if they are sitting down at the table, have read nothing and pick classes because the name sounds cool they are going to need a little hand holding until they get invested enough to read up on their class, and some people never get that, instead they learn enough by doing that they start absorbing the info. Failing to acknowledge this doesn't make you some paragon of trust for new players, it ignores the barriers to entry that actually exist. It ignores how daunting looking at the PHB can look for a new player who doesn't realize they don't need to read the entire thing cover to cover to be ready to play the game. It is ok to acknowledge that some classes are more difficult to learn than others. It is also ok to acknowledge that 5e is, by its nature, a pretty simple game.
My first three characters I ever made back in AD&D (I had no gaming experience and computer games were not a thing so, yeah, Monopoly was basically it) we’re Elven Fighter/Magic-Users. Why? Because my friends who had been playing for a while said I should. And this was when you had to not only pick your spells and hope you could learn them, but had to choose what spell went into what spell slot. New players can grasp more than some are giving credit for.
If anything I could see toning down the power of some spells, but at the same time, spell slots are limited so you just can’t keep casting away. I don’t know if limiting them more is the way to go, but if damage is the problem then reducing that can help (they did it to GWM so it’s not out of the realm of possibility) or changing how control, buff, debuff, etc spells work might help. Especially at higher levels.
I don’t believe spellcasters need to be simplified.
My first three characters I ever made back in AD&D (I had no gaming experience and computer games were not a thing so, yeah, Monopoly was basically it) we’re Elven Fighter/Magic-Users. Why? Because my friends who had been playing for a while said I should. And this was when you had to not only pick your spells and hope you could learn them, but had to choose what spell went into what spell slot. New players can grasp more than some are giving credit for.
If anything I could see toning down the power of some spells, but at the same time, spell slots are limited so you just can’t keep casting away. I don’t know if limiting them more is the way to go, but if damage is the problem then reducing that can help (they did it to GWM so it’s not out of the realm of possibility) or changing how control, buff, debuff, etc spells work might help. Especially at higher levels.
I don’t believe spellcasters need to be simplified.
This brings up something I've been thinking about a lot recently too. How the Wizard has evolved since the first editions of the game.
An old 1st level Magic-User had ONE first level slot. There were no cantrips. They had to roll to see if they could even learn a spell first, with failure meaning you could never learn it. When you woke up in the morning, you picked the one spell you would use in that slot. Not the spells you had to choose from, but the one specific spell you were going to use. So you better pick correctly. And with 1d4 hit dice, bad weapon options, and the fact that you died when you hit 0 HP, very few Magic-Users survived more than a couple dungeons. It was an intersting meta explanation for the rarity of powerful Wizards in a world haha.
That's all you got. Your one spell for the day. You tried to hide behind tougher party members and hirelings until your one moment to (maybe) shine. And as you leveled up, you would find yourself still limited even more. Without a very high Intelligence, you didn't even have access to the highest levels spells. You still had to roll to learn all of them. And your Intelligence couldn't easily be raised as you leveled up. You were stuck with whatever you rolled at the start. You as the player might really only need to learn how one spell works each time you level up.
As DnD has evolved, the spell progression chart has gone through many iterations. Yet you still basically get access to the higher level spells at the same class levels. Second level spells at lvl 3, third at level 5, and so on. But it's gotten much more forgiving overall for the poor Wizard.
Everyone had Cantrips now, which honestly is a good thing for a player's fun. But it does change everything. You have something to do every turn. The healing rules and better HP mean it's much easier to survive. There's fewer limits on spells you can learn. There's no upper cap to spell level. You don't have to pick which spell goes in each slot. And your Intelligence is easy to raise.
So most of the limitations that were placed on Magic-Users for balance have been slowly erased over the years. They have more of the perks and almost none of the drawbacks. They are definitely more exciting to play, but their power has dramatically increased in quiet ways.
I'm not sure what the answer is. I doubt many people would be happy with going back to the old system. But there is something there to address.
I'd honestly love to see the scaling of spells / spell slots toned WAY down. By about level 10, casters have more spell slots than they know what to do with which IMO takes away all the challenge from the game and allows them to casually dominate all other classes -> it also makes it kind of pointless to give casters magic items since most caster-focused magic items provide extra spells / extra spell slots and they already have more than they know what to do with. I'd like to see something more like this:
I don’t know if altering the spell level progression is necessary. Spells could be toned down a bit.
What do you consider the most problematic spells causing the disparity between casters and martial? Damage spells? Control spells? Is it a matter that there are too many spells that cover too many situations?
If the problem stems more from damage spells then that can be addressed fairly simple by reducing the damage a little. But we haven’t seen the Warrior UA yet so we have no idea where they are going with them? Will they be buffed? Will weapons do more damage or have their weapon properties changed, like the Light weapon property, and give more versatility to martials? We don’t know.
I do think some better balancing is in order. But maybe my table plays a bit differently than others because my Druid has had many situations where I could have used more spell slots and ended up relying on cantrips at 12-14th level.
What do you consider the most problematic spells causing the disparity between casters and martial? Damage spells? Control spells? Is it a matter that there are too many spells that cover too many situations?
Control and utility. Spellcaster single target damage is meh, the big problem with spellcaster damage is that it eliminates the viability of swarms of monsters (you can use large numbers of ranged attackers, but large numbers of melee attackers are pretty well irrelevant once tier 2 comes along).
Polymorph is such an iconic spell. For both DnD and the general idea of a Wizard. But it sure can ruin an encounter. Nothing takes the drama out of a big battle quite like turning the boss into a fish.
This version of the spell is so much better than earlier ones but it still could use some work. Even if it just allowed a new save at the end of each monster turn could help a lot.
I'd still wish, for story purposes, for a wizard to be able turn someone into a newt. But they should be able to 'get better' on their own. Or maybe after they fail a certain number of saves in a row it becomes 'permanent' until some condition is met. That way you could still plausibly have a frog prince to rescue sometimes.
I once played a game called 13th Age. This game was created by Rob Heinsoo and Jonathan Tweet, lead designers of 4th and 3rd editions of D&D respectively. It came out in 2013, about a year before the 2014 5E PHB. For me, this game represents a kind of a "road-not-taken" version of 5th edition D&D. Although the rules are very different from 5E as we know it, there are a lot of cool ideas here that could be adapted to to 5E or One D&D.
In 13th Age, as spell casters increased in level, they lost low level spell slots as they gained higher level ones. Because nearly all of the spells could be upcast, they could keep their old favorites or replace them with higher level spells as they chose. But they wouldn't have a large pool of low level spell slots not being used, and the overall number of spells they could cast would grow more slowly.
Meanwhile, martial characters would see their weapon damage increase with level. For example, what if a fighter could add their level to the amount of damage with every hit? Characters could also deal damage on a miss, just much less. So what if a martial character would deal ability modifier damage only on a miss? Maybe only on a nat 1 do they score no damage at all.
What do you consider the most problematic spells causing the disparity between casters and martial? Damage spells? Control spells? Is it a matter that there are too many spells that cover too many situations?
Control spells are the biggest culprits. Hypnotic Pattern, Banishment, Wall of Force, Forcecage primarily they just make it so hard to DM because they make combat extremely swingy, each one can be a "Nope" to combat that the DM spent an hour prepping and which the martials probably were looking forward to.
The other one is movement-spells, flight & teleportation can overcome so many challenges.....
This isn't the floor, the floor goes lower than this for wizard. Leaving this floor for sorc is harder because there isn't a lot of flexibility in the number of spells known. It is easy to "mess up" a sorcerer, it is IMPOSSIBLE to "mess-up" a wizard without trying to do so on purpose.
Sorcerer: you have to think once per level. At other times you have 2-15 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Wizard: you have to think once per long rest. At other times you have 4-25 spells (varying by level) to choose between.
Yes, sorcerer requires more thinking when you level up. At every other time, wizard requires more.
Again completely incorrect. Meta-magics can't be changed either you have to think 5 or 6 level in advance when selecting your meta-magics about what spells you are going to pick up later. Otherwise you could be picking meta-magics that are good for the spells you currently have, but change them as you go. You pick ONE spell from a choice of 100, and then you also have to choose if you are going to trade them. This also comes with the choice of using font of magic. When a wizard picks their spells they get to pick a vast majority of the ones they have available to them, they have probably tried all of them at some point so they don't have to think about what is useful all that much. "are you in a place with water? take control water." it isn't hard for a wizard to figure out when to swap a spell out because they are still going to have the rest of their staples prepared because they get enough spells prepared to do that. Combined with the ability to cast rituals WITHOUT them needing to be prepared means your selections can be even lower. Further AFTER the day starts the wizard now just gets to worry if they have the right spell. If they do, they cast it, maybe they UP-cast it, but that is the only decision point now.
Sorcerers after the day starts now get to make all new decisions. Every time they cast a spell they now have to think if it is appropriate to add a meta-magic. Once they are out of sorcery points they have to consider eating a spell slot for more sorcery points or using that slot for a spell. When they run out of a spell slot they have to consider creating another spell slot with the sorcery points they have. Meaning the Sorcerer has more decision points throughout the day in addition to more decisions on level up. When selecting spells wizards can pick things for specific scenarios, sorcerers have to pick spells that can cover a variety of scenarios, so now they have to also be creative with their spells rather than nearly always having the perfect one for the job like the wizard or druid will have thanks to their greater number of preparations.
Sorcerers are the most complicated spell caster, if you do not find them complicated, great you probably do not find ANY class complicated. Though this changes a little with clockwork soul and aberrant mind because of the extra spells known, but 2 subclasses from Tasha's mostly designed to fix the classes shortcomings does not a class make.
Sooooooooo...................sorcerers are complicated because they have FEWER choices and FEWER decision points than any other caster. And having fewer decisions makes them more complicated.
Right.
I give up. Language is supposed to have a fixed meaning. Nobody can have a discussion with somebody who just invents whole new meanings for words out of whole cloth.
Please do not contact or message me.
It has some limited uses (mostly enemies that cast darkness and are immune to it), but it's pretty underwhelming for a third level spell slot.
This was just 5 hours ago, but I'll say it again. If everyone keeps trying to argue that their opinion is somehow the more valid and correct opinion, you're going to spend another 500 posts repeating the same fights for no reason. Literally no one is going to change their mind about what they find complex or interesting. Because 'interesting' is subjective and 'complex' means something different to everyone talking.
Complex could mean:
Rules to learn to play a class
Choices to make during character creation/level up
Choices to make during play
Permanent choices feeling difficult to get right
Flexible choices feeling overwhelming
Extra counters to track like spell slots, points, and dice
Numerous modifiers to apply situationally
Mechanically detailed rules
Explicit options with specific uses
Vague options that require interpretation
Options contained in the class itself
Options scattered over many books
Unique options for a class
Generic options for everyone
Hidden meta interactions
Options that sound good but aren't
Rules that don't play the way you expect them to
White room optimization
Real world application
Differences in DM styles and games
And so on...
And then you add on to of that the fact that complexity is seen as a positive thing for some and a negative for others. Because everyone is taking about a different kind of complexity. And everyone is just trying to move the complexity they DON'T like into a realm they are comfortable with. Or move the complexity they DO like to the forefront.
These threads are going absolutely nowhere because everyone is arguing about different things. Everyone is convinced they're right and the other side just needs to be told it enough times to change their mind. This game could be even more amazing if people could just take a minute to acknowledge each other as having their own experiences. Identify what you really mean when you describe an aspect you dislike. And look for common ground on how to fix it in a way that doesn't dismiss another person's problems.
Or maybe everyone just likes to argue for the fun of it.
I'm here for some real productive discussions. But I'll check out now if it's just some weird form of entertainment to call each other wrong in circles forever.
No, they have the SAME number of decision points with a similar number of options to choose from but the sorcerer gets LESS of those options available and the choices they make are more Permanent. They get to choose spells at the same levels wizards do, they have a nearly identical list of spells to choose, they get to choose HALF of them or less per level up. Meaning their choices are TWICE as difficult or more. Making them MORE complicated.
Here lets give an illustrated example. There are 100 doors, behind 20 of the doors is a prize, and the other 80 nothing. Mr. Wizard gets to open 50 of those 100 doors, while Mr. Sorc gets to open 20 of them. Which one has the more complicated and difficult decision to make about which doors to open?
Now lets go further Mr. Sorc also is done after those initial 20 doors. Mr. Wizard, well if he didn't like the 50 doors he opened, he can purchase for more doors to open. Mr. Sorcs choices were permanent, but Mr. Wizard wasn't locked out of the good choices and eventually could open all the doors and get all the prizes.
None of that is remotely related to the word "complicated". You don't like that known casters cannot back out of their choices, which is fine. But that doesn't make those choices more complex, it just means the choices have more weight. Weight is not equivalent to complexity. Language needs to be used correctly for anyone's words to matter. If you believe that the increased weight of a sorcerer's choices make them unfriendly to new players, sure. That's valid, though I disagree with it. But it does not remotely make sorcerers 'complicated'.
Please do not contact or message me.
When you have a similar number of options but can only take half as many of them your options are more difficult to analyze. Thus, by definition shown above. More complicated.
Edit: consisting of many interconnecting parts or elements; intricate.
Wizards spells are all individual spells and are not naturally interconnecting. Meta-magic and font of magic however, are interconnected with spells and thus by definition 2 yes sorcerers are more complicated than wizards. By both definitions Sorcerers are more complicated than any other spell caster because no other spell caster has its abilities being intrinsically interconnected.
Edit 2: in terms of new players, I don't think you have ever admitted to anything being "unfriendly" for new players so I honestly don't take much stock in your opinion on that front. Though it always depends on that new player, if they are someone that deep dives into things they aren't going to have an issue with any class. If they are just sitting down for the first time and haven't read the rules for any of it they are probably going to have a rough time with most classes. It depends on the player and the people teaching more than anything. Its just some classes have more pitfalls.
No, I don't automatically assume anyone new to a hobby is a lobotomized zombie that requires multiple years of careful coaching before they can understand the most basic of essentials in that hobby. D&D is not rocket science, especially current D&D. Anyone with any sort of gaming background should be able to pick up on the basics after a few sessions, and even people without any background in gaming at all can be coached by a DM with a relative minimum of fuss.
You know what's more important than ensuring new players aren't confused? Ensuring new players are having fun. That means letting them play what they want to play, helping them make sound choices when they need that help, and guiding them with the benefit of experience. Not making all their choices for them, forcing them to play things they don't want to, or insisting they're too dumb to be trusted with the game they're trying to break into.
Please do not contact or message me.
I agree with basically all of this, no one is saying that new players are this way. For some players it DOES take years, but that isn't because they are dumb or need years of coaching, it is because the level of investment they put in. This is an rpg, meaning story and imagination is as much a reason people get into it as mechanical reasons. I have played with people have played for years who still don't know what half their cleric or ranger spells do because they can't be bothered to figure it out, they don't need a coach and one wouldn't help them if you gave them one it would just make them want to play less. They pick spells they think look good and then never change them and enjoy describing what their character does. They are still effective because 5e is a very simple game in general. I know players who picked up the game for the first time and on their first session knew every rule inside and out. It is different investment levels. Having fun is important, it isn't FUN to feel like you aren't effective at what you wanted to be effective at.
No one has suggested new players are dumb, but we do acknowledge that some classes take more investment and time to learn and be effective than others. If a new player puts in the investment to learn their class they will be fine no matter what class they pick nothing in 5e is so complicated that an hour of time couldn't get them up to speed. But if they are sitting down at the table, have read nothing and pick classes because the name sounds cool they are going to need a little hand holding until they get invested enough to read up on their class, and some people never get that, instead they learn enough by doing that they start absorbing the info. Failing to acknowledge this doesn't make you some paragon of trust for new players, it ignores the barriers to entry that actually exist. It ignores how daunting looking at the PHB can look for a new player who doesn't realize they don't need to read the entire thing cover to cover to be ready to play the game. It is ok to acknowledge that some classes are more difficult to learn than others. It is also ok to acknowledge that 5e is, by its nature, a pretty simple game.
My first three characters I ever made back in AD&D (I had no gaming experience and computer games were not a thing so, yeah, Monopoly was basically it) we’re Elven Fighter/Magic-Users. Why? Because my friends who had been playing for a while said I should. And this was when you had to not only pick your spells and hope you could learn them, but had to choose what spell went into what spell slot. New players can grasp more than some are giving credit for.
If anything I could see toning down the power of some spells, but at the same time, spell slots are limited so you just can’t keep casting away. I don’t know if limiting them more is the way to go, but if damage is the problem then reducing that can help (they did it to GWM so it’s not out of the realm of possibility) or changing how control, buff, debuff, etc spells work might help. Especially at higher levels.
I don’t believe spellcasters need to be simplified.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
This brings up something I've been thinking about a lot recently too. How the Wizard has evolved since the first editions of the game.
An old 1st level Magic-User had ONE first level slot. There were no cantrips. They had to roll to see if they could even learn a spell first, with failure meaning you could never learn it. When you woke up in the morning, you picked the one spell you would use in that slot. Not the spells you had to choose from, but the one specific spell you were going to use. So you better pick correctly. And with 1d4 hit dice, bad weapon options, and the fact that you died when you hit 0 HP, very few Magic-Users survived more than a couple dungeons. It was an intersting meta explanation for the rarity of powerful Wizards in a world haha.
That's all you got. Your one spell for the day. You tried to hide behind tougher party members and hirelings until your one moment to (maybe) shine. And as you leveled up, you would find yourself still limited even more. Without a very high Intelligence, you didn't even have access to the highest levels spells. You still had to roll to learn all of them. And your Intelligence couldn't easily be raised as you leveled up. You were stuck with whatever you rolled at the start. You as the player might really only need to learn how one spell works each time you level up.
As DnD has evolved, the spell progression chart has gone through many iterations. Yet you still basically get access to the higher level spells at the same class levels. Second level spells at lvl 3, third at level 5, and so on. But it's gotten much more forgiving overall for the poor Wizard.
Everyone had Cantrips now, which honestly is a good thing for a player's fun. But it does change everything. You have something to do every turn. The healing rules and better HP mean it's much easier to survive. There's fewer limits on spells you can learn. There's no upper cap to spell level. You don't have to pick which spell goes in each slot. And your Intelligence is easy to raise.
So most of the limitations that were placed on Magic-Users for balance have been slowly erased over the years. They have more of the perks and almost none of the drawbacks. They are definitely more exciting to play, but their power has dramatically increased in quiet ways.
I'm not sure what the answer is. I doubt many people would be happy with going back to the old system. But there is something there to address.
I'd honestly love to see the scaling of spells / spell slots toned WAY down. By about level 10, casters have more spell slots than they know what to do with which IMO takes away all the challenge from the game and allows them to casually dominate all other classes -> it also makes it kind of pointless to give casters magic items since most caster-focused magic items provide extra spells / extra spell slots and they already have more than they know what to do with. I'd like to see something more like this:
level 1 : 2x 1st
level 2: 3x 1st
level 3: 3x 1st, 1x 2nd
level 4: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd
level 5: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 1x3rd
level 6: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd
level 7: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 1x 4th
level 8: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th
level 9: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 1x 5th
level 10: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th
level 11: 3x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th
level 12: 4x 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th
level 13: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th
level 14: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 2x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th, 1x 7th
level 15: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 2x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th, 1x 7th
level 16: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 3x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th, 1x 7th
level 17: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 3x 4th, 2x 5th, 1x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th
level 18: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 3x 4th, 3x 5th, 1x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th
level 19: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 3x 4th, 3x 5th, 2x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th
level 20: 4x 1st, 3x 2nd, 3x 3rd, 3x 4th, 3x 5th, 2x 6th, 1x 7th, 1x 8th, 1x9th
No, Make it more complex. I like complexity. If it's too simple it's boring.
I don’t know if altering the spell level progression is necessary. Spells could be toned down a bit.
What do you consider the most problematic spells causing the disparity between casters and martial? Damage spells? Control spells? Is it a matter that there are too many spells that cover too many situations?
If the problem stems more from damage spells then that can be addressed fairly simple by reducing the damage a little. But we haven’t seen the Warrior UA yet so we have no idea where they are going with them? Will they be buffed? Will weapons do more damage or have their weapon properties changed, like the Light weapon property, and give more versatility to martials? We don’t know.
I do think some better balancing is in order. But maybe my table plays a bit differently than others because my Druid has had many situations where I could have used more spell slots and ended up relying on cantrips at 12-14th level.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Control and utility. Spellcaster single target damage is meh, the big problem with spellcaster damage is that it eliminates the viability of swarms of monsters (you can use large numbers of ranged attackers, but large numbers of melee attackers are pretty well irrelevant once tier 2 comes along).
Polymorph is such an iconic spell. For both DnD and the general idea of a Wizard. But it sure can ruin an encounter. Nothing takes the drama out of a big battle quite like turning the boss into a fish.
This version of the spell is so much better than earlier ones but it still could use some work. Even if it just allowed a new save at the end of each monster turn could help a lot.
I'd still wish, for story purposes, for a wizard to be able turn someone into a newt. But they should be able to 'get better' on their own. Or maybe after they fail a certain number of saves in a row it becomes 'permanent' until some condition is met. That way you could still plausibly have a frog prince to rescue sometimes.
I once played a game called 13th Age. This game was created by Rob Heinsoo and Jonathan Tweet, lead designers of 4th and 3rd editions of D&D respectively. It came out in 2013, about a year before the 2014 5E PHB. For me, this game represents a kind of a "road-not-taken" version of 5th edition D&D. Although the rules are very different from 5E as we know it, there are a lot of cool ideas here that could be adapted to to 5E or One D&D.
In 13th Age, as spell casters increased in level, they lost low level spell slots as they gained higher level ones. Because nearly all of the spells could be upcast, they could keep their old favorites or replace them with higher level spells as they chose. But they wouldn't have a large pool of low level spell slots not being used, and the overall number of spells they could cast would grow more slowly.
Meanwhile, martial characters would see their weapon damage increase with level. For example, what if a fighter could add their level to the amount of damage with every hit? Characters could also deal damage on a miss, just much less. So what if a martial character would deal ability modifier damage only on a miss? Maybe only on a nat 1 do they score no damage at all.
Control spells are the biggest culprits. Hypnotic Pattern, Banishment, Wall of Force, Forcecage primarily they just make it so hard to DM because they make combat extremely swingy, each one can be a "Nope" to combat that the DM spent an hour prepping and which the martials probably were looking forward to.
The other one is movement-spells, flight & teleportation can overcome so many challenges.....
Everything else is fine.