Yup that was deliberate, but not specifically for game balance, but for the "feel" of the game. 9th level spells are often game-changing so they really ought to feel special, but casters just getting them at 17th level isn't special... It become mundane.... when those kinds of spells really should be the kind of thing that get cast only once in a campaign...
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?
No it's not a coincidence that all of these are on the wizard list.
I would note that the early discussion of D&D Next did have a solution for that type of problem, and it got almost completely dropped because of community resistance (only remaining spells are sleep and color spray). That was the idea of rolling effect dice; the power worked if you exceed the target's hit points.
In the end, the solution almost every CRPG has chosen for control effects is "only works on weak targets" -- which in turn tends to wind up with complaints about how CC only works on targets it's not worth bothering to CC. This is not an easy thing to balance out. You can make the situation a bit better by adding partial effect (crippling on weak targets, either a weak effect or very short duration on strong targets), though bounded accuracy and making saves against every attribute has grossly limited the tools for solving this (if the boss has all its saves 5 points higher than the mooks, duration is normally self limiting).
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.
If the return to the old system would give me the sheer raw power and utility of 2nd edition, I would sign for it immediately. But then the complaining about the power of Wizards and budget Wizards AKA Sorcs would really start. So many Save or Die spells, Mordenkainens Disjunction (Drool), Damage Spells that succeeded the max hp of most critters, Stone Skin that was God Mode, yeah I want that back. If only to annoy the people who complain about the power of high lvl Casters.
If only to annoy the people who complain about the power of high lvl Casters.
Why do they complain about it?
And is it all high level casters, or only high level full casters?
They complain because they think that martials at high lvl are useless and casters too strong. Something that I find hilarious. And yes, full casters. A lot of the time when you go deeper they don't use components, wave away a lot of the requirements that keep Wizards in check like having access to spell scrolls to learn new spells or the sheer gold and time needed to copy them. All things in the rules but that are considered boring and restrictive.
D&D (leaving out 4e for the moment) has always had the 'linear fighter, quadratic wizard' problem: martial classes start out stronger and wind up weaker. 5e has definitely toned down this effect, but it's not gone.
It's also not clear if there's a solution that people would accept -- people want the game to have impressive spells, and also want martials to feel like people, not demigods, and these goals are probably incompatible with balancing casters and martial characters.
I think we have to also consider that we haven’t seen any monsters yet. The rationale for monsters not critting was some have recharge powers that are there versions of a “crit”. In that survey I said if they wanted to keep no crits for monsters most if not all need powerful recharge abilities. This can also be a way to limit spell caster power with legendary resistances. Maybe monsters at all tiers will have some way to mitigate caster power if it’s not just a damage issue
I think we have to also consider that we haven’t seen any monsters yet. The rationale for monsters not critting was some have recharge powers that are there versions of a “crit”. In that survey I said if they wanted to keep no crits for monsters most if not all need powerful recharge abilities. This can also be a way to limit spell caster power with legendary resistances. Maybe monsters at all tiers will have some way to mitigate caster power if it’s not just a damage issue
IME the best way to balance casters vs martials when you get to level 8+ is to have mooks with Counterspell and Dispel Magic to eat up the caster spellslots. If you take a standard Deadly encounter and add a number of pixies equal to double the number of full casters in the party, I find the encounter works quite well. It gives the casters a choice to use their high level slots early to try and get through the Counterspell, or to instead wait and try to kill the pixies by other means first. Plus casters can use positioning to try to avoid the Counterspell. Rather than Legendary Resistances which are just straight "No you can't" to the casters.
I think we have to also consider that we haven’t seen any monsters yet. The rationale for monsters not critting was some have recharge powers that are there versions of a “crit”. In that survey I said if they wanted to keep no crits for monsters most if not all need powerful recharge abilities. This can also be a way to limit spell caster power with legendary resistances. Maybe monsters at all tiers will have some way to mitigate caster power if it’s not just a damage issue
IME the best way to balance casters vs martials when you get to level 8+ is to have mooks with Counterspell and Dispel Magic to eat up the caster spellslots. If you take a standard Deadly encounter and add a number of pixies equal to double the number of full casters in the party, I find the encounter works quite well. It gives the casters a choice to use their high level slots early to try and get through the Counterspell, or to instead wait and try to kill the pixies by other means first. Plus casters can use positioning to try to avoid the Counterspell. Rather than Legendary Resistances which are just straight "No you can't" to the casters.
The problem with that is it seems like you are maliciously targeting spell casters and their players so you end up destroying their fun so the martials can feel good. I think there are ways to close the gap between martials and spell casters and everyone still have fun.
Edit: for some encounters that’s fine but too many times can be overboard. And I’m not suggesting that more creatures have legendary resistance, but abilities like these are ways to mitigate some of the power of spell casting. And in conjunction with scaling back some spells can help level things out.
The classic sword and sorcery solution is that all the big impressive spells have casting times (and/or other ritual requirements) too long to be practical to use in combat, giving time for the heroes to rush in and interrupt the big bad mid-spellcasting. That's great for NPC wizards, but for PCs "I never get to use my cool spells because the fight's over before I can cast them" doesn't play well.
The classic sword and sorcery solution is that all the big impressive spells have casting times (and/or other ritual requirements) too long to be practical to use in combat, giving time for the heroes to rush in and interrupt the big bad mid-spellcasting. That's great for NPC wizards, but for PCs "I never get to use my cool spells because the fight's over before I can cast them" doesn't play well.
What if more spells had a casting time of one turn rather than one action? They'd still be useful in combat, but they'd requires a short period of concentration. This would help add tension, and reinforce the martial's role of protecting the caster. The rule could be structured so that the spell is cast at the beginning of the caster's next turn, so the caster needn't lose an action by casting the spell.
The classic sword and sorcery solution is that all the big impressive spells have casting times (and/or other ritual requirements) too long to be practical to use in combat, giving time for the heroes to rush in and interrupt the big bad mid-spellcasting. That's great for NPC wizards, but for PCs "I never get to use my cool spells because the fight's over before I can cast them" doesn't play well.
What if more spells had a casting time of one turn rather than one action? They'd still be useful in combat, but they'd requires a short period of concentration. This would help add tension, and reinforce the martial's role of protecting the caster. The rule could be structured so that the spell is cast at the beginning of the caster's next turn, so the caster needn't lose an action by casting the spell.
I like this idea, but I will also add that we could probably change some spells to require multiple casters to cast. Like say wish might require 2 casters to both expend their 9th level slot, though only one needs to actually know the spell. That way, if no other full caster is in the party, a PC with wish needs to find an archmage NPC.
This is just an example to explain what I mean, and it doesn't have to be quite like that.
I think we have to also consider that we haven’t seen any monsters yet. The rationale for monsters not critting was some have recharge powers that are there versions of a “crit”. In that survey I said if they wanted to keep no crits for monsters most if not all need powerful recharge abilities. This can also be a way to limit spell caster power with legendary resistances. Maybe monsters at all tiers will have some way to mitigate caster power if it’s not just a damage issue
IME the best way to balance casters vs martials when you get to level 8+ is to have mooks with Counterspell and Dispel Magic to eat up the caster spellslots. If you take a standard Deadly encounter and add a number of pixies equal to double the number of full casters in the party, I find the encounter works quite well. It gives the casters a choice to use their high level slots early to try and get through the Counterspell, or to instead wait and try to kill the pixies by other means first. Plus casters can use positioning to try to avoid the Counterspell. Rather than Legendary Resistances which are just straight "No you can't" to the casters.
The problem with that is it seems like you are maliciously targeting spell casters and their players so you end up destroying their fun so the martials can feel good. I think there are ways to close the gap between martials and spell casters and everyone still have fun.
Edit: for some encounters that’s fine but too many times can be overboard. And I’m not suggesting that more creatures have legendary resistance, but abilities like these are ways to mitigate some of the power of spell casting. And in conjunction with scaling back some spells can help level things out.
Legendary Resistance does the same thing as enemies having Counterspell / Dispel Magic but it removes all strategic aspects to it. There is absolutely nothing a PC caster can do to try to get around a Legendary Resistance. Whereas specifically having mooks with Counterspell / Dispel Magic creates lots of strategic choices that PCs can take to try to get around them: The martials can choose to prioritize the mooks with CS/DM rather than the BBEG, casters can choose to find full cover where they can cast spells safely, casters can move out of range of the Counterspells, casters can use invisibility or obscurement to avoid Counterspell - or burn through slots in Counterspell duels.
Plus it avoids the problem of the "no-save" spells being OP must-takes : i.e. Forcecage, Wall of Force, Telekinesis, Maze, Irresistable Dance - are not blocked by Legendary Resistance, but can be Counterspelled.
I don't find Wish to be especially overpowered. All it basically does is let you 'downcast' the slot to any lower level spell once a day. The part where it rewrites reality comes with a lot of caveats. The DM has control over what you can do, and what unintended consequences it has. You take a bunch of damage, and lose your Strength. And there is a 33% chance every time you do it that you can never do it again.
That last part is the biggest one. Most wizards will wait until there is literally no other hope before casting this spell and losing it forever. Or for a dramatically appropriate moment at the end of the campaign. It's usually something you cast exactly once.
The monkey's paw effect makes the caster even more cautious. I've used Wish as a story explanation for a 'curse' more often than a boon. But maybe this is just from my experience with using wishes more frequently in older editions, and the players regretting it far more than the DM. Everyone I know is very wary of messing with the power of a wish.
The Strength is a weird one, since the spellcasters who get Wish usually don't care about it. I would change that to a high level of Exhaustion in the new rules. That's more meaningful, and takes the wizard out of the rest of the day.
I might also make it require a rare component if used for something other than a lower level spell. That would give the DM even more control. And casting an unusual wish would take more planning. There would be a quest attached to it, or a high gold price, limiting is uses further. The only reason I'm not keen on the idea of requiring an extra caster is my personal campaigns rarely include anyone of that level outside of the party. If they do exist, they aren't going to be likely to help. That's more of a worldbuilding problem for me is all.
I can see some room for modification for sure. But overall I think Wish isn't the example we should be thinking of when talking about a Wizard's 'phenomenal cosmic power.'
As for Legendary Resistances, I think they were a great idea when they came out. They let a boss actually last a few rounds. But I agree they are a little too much 'all or nothing.' It doesn't feel good for anyone, the players or the DM. I would give it a bonus number instead, and make it a roll every time. Like:
Legendary Resistance +3 - Every time this creature is targeted with a spell it can roll a d20 and add its resistance modifier. The DC is equal to 10+the spell level. If the creature meets or exceeds the DC, it ignores the spell effect.
This would make it like a counterspell that's always active. Giving any player a chance to get any spell through, but no guarantees, and no set number of uses you have to chip away at until the monster is totally vulnerable. It could be limited further if you want. By either making it take a Reaction or a legendary action. Giving it a number of successes per day before its used up. Or just not having the bonus be too high.
Even low CR monsters could have this kind of resistance with low bonuses. It would work against spells that don't have saves. And it would make boss fights feel more fair.
I don't find Wish to be especially overpowered. All it basically does is let you 'downcast' the slot to any lower level spell once a day.
The part where it bypasses casting time, spell list, and material components is problematic.
Maybe, but that's easy enough to fix too in the next edition. Just don't let it do this things. I don't mind it, since it's once a day at a very high level. But if it's a problem there's an easy solution.
Until the furniture starts singing while serving dinner. :)
That would be lulzy and I would be fine with that, but Rules as Written, it isn't stated if the object can make sounds.
Haha, yeah it was just a joke. A poor one probably. The only kind I'm capable of.
Magic and worldbuilding interact in so many more ways than the spells do just inside combat. I've spent very long hours thinking of the implications. Even the smallest cantrips should change the world.
One day I'd like to run some kind of game where it's all fully explored. Where every element of the world is different just because magic exists. It's one of my favorite thought experiments.
I would say from a worldbuilding point of view, true polymorph is somewhat problematic when taken to its logical conclusion.
Because with it, you can turn objects into CR 9 or lower minions and have the transformation be permanent. Or you can turn important nobles into objects, and no-one knows what became of them because there's no body to find.
A common mistake people make about worldbuilding is assuming that PCs are the only ones capable of magic and the first people ever in the entire world to have come up with clever use of spells. Like there's not a single wizard with detect magic spell in the entire court.
A common mistake people make about worldbuilding is assuming that PCs are the only ones capable of magic and the first people ever in the entire world to have come up with clever use of spells. Like there's not a single wizard with detect magic spell in the entire court.
The problem is, having the NPCs be smart about spells often means the setting is completely disrupted and/or the game makes no sense. The big difference between PC and NPC spellcasters is that the DM can choose to have the NPCs ignore the broken options.
Honestly I think most of those spells really exist so that you CAN make an spellcasting arch villain. A wizard in a straight fight vs a party isn't going to last long. These spells make help make a reoccurring villain make sense in a world.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yup that was deliberate, but not specifically for game balance, but for the "feel" of the game. 9th level spells are often game-changing so they really ought to feel special, but casters just getting them at 17th level isn't special... It become mundane.... when those kinds of spells really should be the kind of thing that get cast only once in a campaign...
I would note that the early discussion of D&D Next did have a solution for that type of problem, and it got almost completely dropped because of community resistance (only remaining spells are sleep and color spray). That was the idea of rolling effect dice; the power worked if you exceed the target's hit points.
In the end, the solution almost every CRPG has chosen for control effects is "only works on weak targets" -- which in turn tends to wind up with complaints about how CC only works on targets it's not worth bothering to CC. This is not an easy thing to balance out. You can make the situation a bit better by adding partial effect (crippling on weak targets, either a weak effect or very short duration on strong targets), though bounded accuracy and making saves against every attribute has grossly limited the tools for solving this (if the boss has all its saves 5 points higher than the mooks, duration is normally self limiting).
If the return to the old system would give me the sheer raw power and utility of 2nd edition, I would sign for it immediately. But then the complaining about the power of Wizards and budget Wizards AKA Sorcs would really start. So many Save or Die spells, Mordenkainens Disjunction (Drool), Damage Spells that succeeded the max hp of most critters, Stone Skin that was God Mode, yeah I want that back. If only to annoy the people who complain about the power of high lvl Casters.
They complain because they think that martials at high lvl are useless and casters too strong. Something that I find hilarious. And yes, full casters. A lot of the time when you go deeper they don't use components, wave away a lot of the requirements that keep Wizards in check like having access to spell scrolls to learn new spells or the sheer gold and time needed to copy them. All things in the rules but that are considered boring and restrictive.
D&D (leaving out 4e for the moment) has always had the 'linear fighter, quadratic wizard' problem: martial classes start out stronger and wind up weaker. 5e has definitely toned down this effect, but it's not gone.
It's also not clear if there's a solution that people would accept -- people want the game to have impressive spells, and also want martials to feel like people, not demigods, and these goals are probably incompatible with balancing casters and martial characters.
I think we have to also consider that we haven’t seen any monsters yet. The rationale for monsters not critting was some have recharge powers that are there versions of a “crit”. In that survey I said if they wanted to keep no crits for monsters most if not all need powerful recharge abilities. This can also be a way to limit spell caster power with legendary resistances. Maybe monsters at all tiers will have some way to mitigate caster power if it’s not just a damage issue
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
IME the best way to balance casters vs martials when you get to level 8+ is to have mooks with Counterspell and Dispel Magic to eat up the caster spellslots. If you take a standard Deadly encounter and add a number of pixies equal to double the number of full casters in the party, I find the encounter works quite well. It gives the casters a choice to use their high level slots early to try and get through the Counterspell, or to instead wait and try to kill the pixies by other means first. Plus casters can use positioning to try to avoid the Counterspell. Rather than Legendary Resistances which are just straight "No you can't" to the casters.
The problem with that is it seems like you are maliciously targeting spell casters and their players so you end up destroying their fun so the martials can feel good. I think there are ways to close the gap between martials and spell casters and everyone still have fun.
Edit: for some encounters that’s fine but too many times can be overboard. And I’m not suggesting that more creatures have legendary resistance, but abilities like these are ways to mitigate some of the power of spell casting. And in conjunction with scaling back some spells can help level things out.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The classic sword and sorcery solution is that all the big impressive spells have casting times (and/or other ritual requirements) too long to be practical to use in combat, giving time for the heroes to rush in and interrupt the big bad mid-spellcasting. That's great for NPC wizards, but for PCs "I never get to use my cool spells because the fight's over before I can cast them" doesn't play well.
What if more spells had a casting time of one turn rather than one action? They'd still be useful in combat, but they'd requires a short period of concentration. This would help add tension, and reinforce the martial's role of protecting the caster. The rule could be structured so that the spell is cast at the beginning of the caster's next turn, so the caster needn't lose an action by casting the spell.
I like the Wish Idea!
Legendary Resistance does the same thing as enemies having Counterspell / Dispel Magic but it removes all strategic aspects to it. There is absolutely nothing a PC caster can do to try to get around a Legendary Resistance. Whereas specifically having mooks with Counterspell / Dispel Magic creates lots of strategic choices that PCs can take to try to get around them:
The martials can choose to prioritize the mooks with CS/DM rather than the BBEG, casters can choose to find full cover where they can cast spells safely, casters can move out of range of the Counterspells, casters can use invisibility or obscurement to avoid Counterspell - or burn through slots in Counterspell duels.
Plus it avoids the problem of the "no-save" spells being OP must-takes : i.e. Forcecage, Wall of Force, Telekinesis, Maze, Irresistable Dance - are not blocked by Legendary Resistance, but can be Counterspelled.
I don't find Wish to be especially overpowered. All it basically does is let you 'downcast' the slot to any lower level spell once a day. The part where it rewrites reality comes with a lot of caveats. The DM has control over what you can do, and what unintended consequences it has. You take a bunch of damage, and lose your Strength. And there is a 33% chance every time you do it that you can never do it again.
That last part is the biggest one. Most wizards will wait until there is literally no other hope before casting this spell and losing it forever. Or for a dramatically appropriate moment at the end of the campaign. It's usually something you cast exactly once.
The monkey's paw effect makes the caster even more cautious. I've used Wish as a story explanation for a 'curse' more often than a boon. But maybe this is just from my experience with using wishes more frequently in older editions, and the players regretting it far more than the DM. Everyone I know is very wary of messing with the power of a wish.
The Strength is a weird one, since the spellcasters who get Wish usually don't care about it. I would change that to a high level of Exhaustion in the new rules. That's more meaningful, and takes the wizard out of the rest of the day.
I might also make it require a rare component if used for something other than a lower level spell. That would give the DM even more control. And casting an unusual wish would take more planning. There would be a quest attached to it, or a high gold price, limiting is uses further. The only reason I'm not keen on the idea of requiring an extra caster is my personal campaigns rarely include anyone of that level outside of the party. If they do exist, they aren't going to be likely to help. That's more of a worldbuilding problem for me is all.
I can see some room for modification for sure. But overall I think Wish isn't the example we should be thinking of when talking about a Wizard's 'phenomenal cosmic power.'
As for Legendary Resistances, I think they were a great idea when they came out. They let a boss actually last a few rounds. But I agree they are a little too much 'all or nothing.' It doesn't feel good for anyone, the players or the DM. I would give it a bonus number instead, and make it a roll every time. Like:
Legendary Resistance +3 - Every time this creature is targeted with a spell it can roll a d20 and add its resistance modifier. The DC is equal to 10+the spell level. If the creature meets or exceeds the DC, it ignores the spell effect.
This would make it like a counterspell that's always active. Giving any player a chance to get any spell through, but no guarantees, and no set number of uses you have to chip away at until the monster is totally vulnerable. It could be limited further if you want. By either making it take a Reaction or a legendary action. Giving it a number of successes per day before its used up. Or just not having the bonus be too high.
Even low CR monsters could have this kind of resistance with low bonuses. It would work against spells that don't have saves. And it would make boss fights feel more fair.
Until the furniture starts singing while serving dinner. :)
The part where it bypasses casting time, spell list, and material components is problematic.
Maybe, but that's easy enough to fix too in the next edition. Just don't let it do this things. I don't mind it, since it's once a day at a very high level. But if it's a problem there's an easy solution.
Haha, yeah it was just a joke. A poor one probably. The only kind I'm capable of.
Magic and worldbuilding interact in so many more ways than the spells do just inside combat. I've spent very long hours thinking of the implications. Even the smallest cantrips should change the world.
One day I'd like to run some kind of game where it's all fully explored. Where every element of the world is different just because magic exists. It's one of my favorite thought experiments.
A common mistake people make about worldbuilding is assuming that PCs are the only ones capable of magic and the first people ever in the entire world to have come up with clever use of spells. Like there's not a single wizard with detect magic spell in the entire court.
The problem is, having the NPCs be smart about spells often means the setting is completely disrupted and/or the game makes no sense. The big difference between PC and NPC spellcasters is that the DM can choose to have the NPCs ignore the broken options.
Honestly I think most of those spells really exist so that you CAN make an spellcasting arch villain. A wizard in a straight fight vs a party isn't going to last long. These spells make help make a reoccurring villain make sense in a world.