Moon Beam can be used with forced movement for combos so it has that going for it;
It also only triggers at the start of an enemy turn which makes it useless against any enemy with movement-based Legendary Actions (like all dragons have), and has the potential for anti-combos with a careless or unstrategic party (e.g. the bard blasting the enemy out of your moonbeam to avoid an AoO as they run away, or using Dissonant Whispers thinking they are "focus firing" them). Moonbeam is good but it's not a must-have, same with Call Lightning. They are both well balanced spells IMO.
Eh, I consider them to be on the weaker end. Moonbeam can be a bit more useful when you compare it to the other options that Druid has, but I often find the spell being abandoned at higher levels unless the group is expecting shapeshifters or if something is weak to radiant. Also, you are wrong on that it only triggering at the start of an enemy's turn. It also triggers when a creature enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn. So you could shove someone into the moonbeam and they will take damage, then on their turn if they are not out of it, they would take the damage again.
Call Lightning is also in kind of a similar boat. I wouldn't call them well balanced spells personally.
Like you would never use it against an adult or ancient dragon, especially with how dragons tend to have high con saves.
Exactly, but that's why they are well balanced spells. Moonbeam is good in many situations, great in a few situations, and bad in some situations - this mean it is actually a choice whether you prepare it or not and whether you use it or not compared to other spells. It being abandoned at higher levels is also evidence it is well balanced because low level spells should be outclassed by higher level spells otherwise there is no feeling of progression as characters gain higher level spells.
Same goes with Call Lightning, usually it is good, sometimes it is great, sometimes it is useless, and you don't keep using it forever.
A spell that is always great is actually a bad spell b/c it takes away choices and diversity of play - because it is always the right answer - it also kills the feeling of progression for the character. If you're a cleric and casting Spirit Guardians every combat from level 5-13 is the most optimal choice then that is a bad thing, it makes cleric boring and repetitive and means there is no point to having the 20 other damage spells on the cleric spell list exist in the game at all...
Again I disagree. There is nothing wrong for having spells that would work in a general use loadout. You can't prepare every situational spell; the general strategy is to have a set of spells that are useful for general usage and swap them out for more situational spells if you can scout out ahead of time.
Fact is, I haven't found anyone who has found cleric to be repittive or boring. We still have choice in our spells because there are enough spells that are good in general use to have diversity because spells are for more thah just combat, but utility as well. So with that in mind, I disagree with the notion that Spirit Guardians is a bad spell; I say it is one if the better designed spells and one of the more fun ones to use.
Also, you also have to consider the spell lists each spell is on. It is flawed to compare moon beam to spiritual weapon and call lightning to spirit guardians because generally, they are not going to be on the same character due to be on different spell lists. What spell list a spell is on matters as you have to consider the class that is using the spell as well. Clerics are the usual users of Spirit Weapon and Spirit Guardians while Druid are the usual users of Moon Beam and Call Lightning.
Mana, after seeing a lot of your posts, I think many of those posts can be summed up as: "I think casters are totally fine as is, and nothing about them needs to change."
In other words, I have yet to see an opinion you have that deviates from that core point, which makes for somewhat repetitive arguments.
That doesn't necessarily make your arguments valid or invalid. It's just an observation I've made over time.
Because I am of the opinion that things should be buffed up. Commonly used Spells like Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians are within the intended power level for 5E. As long as we keep that intended power level in mind, we should be fine to buff things to match that power level. I find the overall power level for PC's in 5E to be in a good spot and nerfing the top will change that overall power level. There is no room in my argument for any deviation at the moment, especially when a lot of what I want to see are martial buffs due to how a lot of this discussion will spells is due to the caster v martial divide.
I mostly agree with mana in that it should be more about buffing the other classes and not nerfing casters. IMO this is especially true in that the in combat balance isn't that far off and nerfing the casters utility to be as bad as a fighters would remove why most people want to play a caster. But, I do think its wrong to think there are no spells outside the games balance for the level. For example wall of force is the only no save crowd control at that level, spells should have saves. Spells that I basically think I can't use as a DM vs most parties in a straight encounter are probably too good outside maybe disintegrate which isn't powerful but you don't use as you have the players hit points so you are kind of metagaming. Sure I can have plot device reasons to use wall of force when trapping the entire party so the antagonist can escape, or whatever. But using it like a player would where I cordon off two players, kill them and then wait longer than a minute then finish off the rest, or take off with the bodies so I get a nice rest in when the party comes later with depleted forces.
As a DM though I'd have no problem casting spiritual weapon or guardians at the party.
I find the overall power level for PC's in 5E to be in a good spot and nerfing the top will change that overall power level.
The power level for PCs in 5e is significantly too high relative to the power level of monsters, particularly at higher levels. Now, I wouldn't mind seeing monsters be more powerful than they are in 5e, I don't actually find high level monsters terribly epic, but it's a lot easier to beat down a few overperformers than to update every high CR monster in the game.
Fact is, I haven't found anyone who has found cleric to be repittive or boring. We still have choice in our spells because there are enough spells that are good in general use to have diversity because spells are for more thah just combat, but utility as well. So with that in mind, I disagree with the notion that Spirit Guardians is a bad spell; I say it is one if the better designed spells and one of the more fun ones to use.
Also, you also have to consider the spell lists each spell is on. It is flawed to compare moon beam to spiritual weapon and call lightning to spirit guardians because generally, they are not going to be on the same character due to be on different spell lists. What spell list a spell is on matters as you have to consider the class that is using the spell as well. Clerics are the usual users of Spirit Weapon and Spirit Guardians while Druid are the usual users of Moon Beam and Call Lightning.
That's anecdotal testimony, which honestly isn't worth a lot. Most of us, and I'd wager yourself included, don't play with that many other people. Then you get into the weeds of how many actually play specific classes and your sample size becomes that much smaller.
Fact is, spirit guardians is a ludicrously powerful spell for its level. A movable, 15-foot radius AoE with selective targeting that turns your character into a blender. And let's not forget the difficult terrain on top of all that. Combined with spiritual weapon, the cleric is just a walking death machine. It's so basic that literally every cleric can do it. And they're used together precisely because of the effect of spirit guardians. You need to be close to use both. A cleric with the Tempest Domain doesn't need to, because call lightning has a massive range and area of effect. But then they're not using their bonus action, and players don't like not doing things. And why call down a storm when most battlefields aren't that large?
The fact that not every class can combine those spells is irrelevant. Some can, and for at least a little while with this playtest some will be. Any twilight cleric, or paladin with either Oath of the Ancients of Oath of the Watchers, can have both moonbeam and spiritual weapon. Tempest clerics and paladins with Oath of the Open Sea can have both call lightning and spirit guardians. There are bards to consider. And, at the end of the day, multiclassing still exists. Even without that, everything still flows along a spectrum. All 2nd-level spells should be about the same power. Ditto for like spells of each level. A scant few, like fireball and lightning bolt, are intentionally overpowered. They're the exceptions which prove the rule.
The design team is currently banking on the idea that adjusting spiritual weapon will force a change in preparation and tactics across the board. And I hope they're right.
Fact is, I haven't found anyone who has found cleric to be repittive or boring. We still have choice in our spells because there are enough spells that are good in general use to have diversity because spells are for more thah just combat, but utility as well. So with that in mind, I disagree with the notion that Spirit Guardians is a bad spell; I say it is one if the better designed spells and one of the more fun ones to use.
Also, you also have to consider the spell lists each spell is on. It is flawed to compare moon beam to spiritual weapon and call lightning to spirit guardians because generally, they are not going to be on the same character due to be on different spell lists. What spell list a spell is on matters as you have to consider the class that is using the spell as well. Clerics are the usual users of Spirit Weapon and Spirit Guardians while Druid are the usual users of Moon Beam and Call Lightning.
That's anecdotal testimony, which honestly isn't worth a lot. Most of us, and I'd wager yourself included, don't play with that many other people. Then you get into the weeds of how many actually play specific classes and your sample size becomes that much smaller.
Fact is, spirit guardians is a ludicrously powerful spell for its level. A movable, 15-foot radius AoE with selective targeting that turns your character into a blender. And let's not forget the difficult terrain on top of all that. Combined with spiritual weapon, the cleric is just a walking death machine. It's so basic that literally every cleric can do it. And they're used together precisely because of the effect of spirit guardians. You need to be close to use both. A cleric with the Tempest Domain doesn't need to, because call lightning has a massive range and area of effect. But then they're not using their bonus action, and players don't like not doing things. And why call down a storm when most battlefields aren't that large?
The fact that not every class can combine those spells is irrelevant. Some can, and for at least a little while with this playtest some will be. Any twilight cleric, or paladin with either Oath of the Ancients of Oath of the Watchers, can have both moonbeam and spiritual weapon. Tempest clerics and paladins with Oath of the Open Sea can have both call lightning and spirit guardians. There are bards to consider. And, at the end of the day, multiclassing still exists. Even without that, everything still flows along a spectrum. All 2nd-level spells should be about the same power. Ditto for like spells of each level. A scant few, like fireball and lightning bolt, are intentionally overpowered. They're the exceptions which prove the rule.
The design team is currently banking on the idea that adjusting spiritual weapon will force a change in preparation and tactics across the board. And I hope they're right.
Actually, I would say I've played with a relatively large group of people owing to the fact that I regularly played in AL and embraced the whole drop in drop out style feature of AL, especially with Online AL. My Table Top club when I attended college also had me play with a variety of people. Not one of the many groups I've played with had an issue with the power level of Spiritual Weapon nor Spirit Guardians. Both of those spells felt perfectly in line with the intended power level of 5E at a variety of tiers.
If anything, I believe the weaker spells should get buffed to be more on par with spells like Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians. The current One DnD version of Spiritual Weapon on the other hand feels useless. I rather just concentrate on Bless as having a 1d4 bonus to attack rolls and saving throws would likely better for both DPR and survivability. There are many other spells that make better use of your concentration and the improved upcasting does nothing to change that.
I find the overall power level for PC's in 5E to be in a good spot and nerfing the top will change that overall power level.
The power level for PCs in 5e is significantly too high relative to the power level of monsters, particularly at higher levels. Now, I wouldn't mind seeing monsters be more powerful than they are in 5e, I don't actually find high level monsters terribly epic, but it's a lot easier to beat down a few overperformers than to update every high CR monster in the game.
If you are using the CR, that would be why. CR doesn't exactly work properly at higher levels and often requires you to wing it a bit. I would say it is better to revisit monsters at those higher CR's because I do feel that they need a bit of rework in general. In general I feel like the CR calculations could use a relook at.
Also, if magic items were used, which they likely are, then that throws an even bigger wrench in CR.
So it is honestly better to rework CR and monsters because player characters are in a better spot than CR and monsters game design wise.
I mostly agree with mana in that it should be more about buffing the other classes and not nerfing casters. IMO this is especially true in that the in combat balance isn't that far off and nerfing the casters utility to be as bad as a fighters would remove why most people want to play a caster. But, I do think its wrong to think there are no spells outside the games balance for the level. For example wall of force is the only no save crowd control at that level, spells should have saves. Spells that I basically think I can't use as a DM vs most parties in a straight encounter are probably too good outside maybe disintegrate which isn't powerful but you don't use as you have the players hit points so you are kind of metagaming. Sure I can have plot device reasons to use wall of force when trapping the entire party so the antagonist can escape, or whatever. But using it like a player would where I cordon off two players, kill them and then wait longer than a minute then finish off the rest, or take off with the bodies so I get a nice rest in when the party comes later with depleted forces.
As a DM though I'd have no problem casting spiritual weapon or guardians at the party.
Wall of Force absolutely needs a nerf as well, and more so than SW/SG but IMO other spells being better isn't a reason not to nerf other too-powerful spells. SG is so easy to fix (just like adding concentration to SW) -> simply change the damage condition to: "You can use your action to cause damage to each creature of your choice in the area."
For Wall of Force, I think the only solution is to make it required to be a straight line or a semi-circle (not a dome) like all the other wall spells.
It's also why giving Banishment a save each turn is good. I played in a game where the DM used Banishment on my character on the enemy's first turn. The caster of the spell had Shield and high AC so my allies all failed to hit them the next round and gave up trying to break concentration. Fortunately the DM accidentally gave me a save at the end of each turn or I would have spent the entire combat banished doing nothing at all. As it was, it still took me 3 rounds to break free.
A good spell should be fun both when used by the players, and when used on the players.
I mostly agree with mana in that it should be more about buffing the other classes and not nerfing casters. IMO this is especially true in that the in combat balance isn't that far off and nerfing the casters utility to be as bad as a fighters would remove why most people want to play a caster. But, I do think its wrong to think there are no spells outside the games balance for the level. For example wall of force is the only no save crowd control at that level, spells should have saves. Spells that I basically think I can't use as a DM vs most parties in a straight encounter are probably too good outside maybe disintegrate which isn't powerful but you don't use as you have the players hit points so you are kind of metagaming. Sure I can have plot device reasons to use wall of force when trapping the entire party so the antagonist can escape, or whatever. But using it like a player would where I cordon off two players, kill them and then wait longer than a minute then finish off the rest, or take off with the bodies so I get a nice rest in when the party comes later with depleted forces.
As a DM though I'd have no problem casting spiritual weapon or guardians at the party.
Wall of Force absolutely needs a nerf as well, and more so than SW/SG but IMO other spells being better isn't a reason not to nerf other too-powerful spells. SG is so easy to fix (just like adding concentration to SW) -> simply change the damage condition to: "You can use your action to cause damage to each creature of your choice in the area."
For Wall of Force, I think the only solution is to make it required to be a straight line or a semi-circle (not a dome) like all the other wall spells.
It's also why giving Banishment a save each turn is good. I played in a game where the DM used Banishment on my character on the enemy's first turn. The caster of the spell had Shield and high AC so my allies all failed to hit them the next round and gave up trying to break concentration. Fortunately the DM accidentally gave me a save at the end of each turn or I would have spent the entire combat banished doing nothing at all. As it was, it still took me 3 rounds to break free.
A good spell should be fun both when used by the players, and when used on the players.
Banishment in its current One D&D version is not worth taking period. It cannot even do its in lore objective reliably. If you can't get through the AC, you can always try targetting a Saving Throw.
Spiritual Weapon in its One DnD version is not worth using. Bless is a better use of your concentration. Spirit Guardian does not need a nerf either and needing an action to deal damage will probably make Bless a better use of your concentration in the vast majority of situations.
Also, disagree with the Wall of Force nerf. It is not widely available to begin with, with only wizard and specific subclasses being required to access it (aside from Bard). It is a really good spell, but still very well within the intended power level of 5E and has plenty of competition in the 5th level spell department. There are counterplays to it such as teleporting or simply breaking concentration.
The fact that there are players that can handle it is a sign that it is more of a case of player skill. You can give different groups the same characters and some groups will just handle various situations better due to being more experienced players. They can handle spells like Wall of Force being used against them, and can enjoy using tactics and counterplay against those spells. Why take away those options from them? If you don't think your players are experienced enough to handle them, replace it with other spells as the options exist.
So I really sat down, opened the document and re-read through the spell changes. I had been thinking a lot about Cleric spell load outs for my character and revising his playstyle now that I was the sole Cleric in the group.
Aid:
Temp hit points are already overused. Aid was unique and highly useful mainly BECAUSE it did not do temporary hitpoints. If anything there should be more spells like Aid, not more spells making temporary hit points.
Banishment:
The purpose of Banishment is to Banish a Extra-Planar entity back to its home plane and lock it away. The changes do not support that use case. I think having the ‘Save per turn’ is fine for creatures banished away from their home plane, but not for extra-planar creatures that are not meant to be in this one. So if the Creature Type is of the ones that would get Banished to their home plane after a minute, they make no saves to escape.
Barkskin:
This spell makes sense. The use of Temporary hit points makes sense in this regard as the regenerating bark over you is intended to protect you from harm. It does seem similar to Heroism but I don’t believe they share a common spell list, so its fine.
Guidance:
wonderful, the move to ‘reaction on a fail’ is just <chefs kiss>. I could see the need for a ‘once this makes a skill succeed’ you cant use the cantrip again for 10 minutes or until initiative is rolled, whichever comes first’ it is just a cantrip after all.
Prayer of Healing:
This is again, a wonderful compromise to provide players something they have been asking for. Short Rest on the move in a pinch. This is such a good spell that it becomes almost mandatory for Divine Spell casters at higher levels, not because its ‘too good’ but just because “what else are you going to use a second level spell slot on when you have access to 5 level ones”. When the party is level 9 a short rest in 10 minutes while moving is a crazy use of a 2 level spell. It’s the sort of spell that if the DM doesn’t like it for their game they should 100% just remove it from their worlds spell list. But having it in there by default is great.
Resistance:
See Guidance, fantastic.
Spiritual Weapon:
I don’t like the changes not for balance purposes but for the purpose of the spell. The purpose was to weaponize the Bonus Action of the Cleric so they don’t have to choose between contributing to the action and casting recovery or support magics. My suggestion would be to leave it the way it was BUT if you HAVE to add concentration then also enhance the Cleric feature Holy Order: Scholar to not require concentration when they cast it.
But seriously, just don’t change it at all. It’s a keystone spell to a specific Cleric Playstyle, one that becomes MORE viable in 1DD in it’s intended use case and less viable in situations where it’s not as useful.
Additional thought on Holy Orders based on Spiritual weapon
: Spiritual Weapon really got me thinking about the Holy Orders ability. I think it needs to be buffed up slightly to really support distinctive playstyles,
Defender: +You can use Wisdom instead of Strength when attacking with melee weapons.
Scholar: +You can cast Spiritual weapon without using a spell slot (or without using concentration if the proposed change goes through)
Thaumaturge: +You may use your Channel Divinity abilities as Bonus Actions instead of a Magic Action.
A good spell should be fun both when used by the players, and when used on the players.
Part of the problem here is that players often don't expect these spells to be used against them. It's fine to trap the enemies in a forcecage or take an enemy out of the fight for X rounds with banishment, but it's not so cute when the tables turn with these.
Very true! Had a few players get upset when their Hex-Sorc-adin with AC 22+5 and +5 and Advantage on all saving throws vs magic, was suddenly getting trapped in Wall of Force with a bunch of enemy minions or hit by Irresistable Dance. I had to explain to them that enemies aren't stupid, they aren't just going to keep hitting you with stuff with very little chance of success they will figure out another solution.
So I really sat down, opened the document and re-read through the spell changes. I had been thinking a lot about Cleric spell load outs for my character and revising his playstyle now that I was the sole Cleric in the group.
Half-agree on aid. Aid should have 1 minute casting time and retain the increase to max HP, it was bad that it could be used as a multi-target pickup from 0hp at such a low level, but having the increase to max HP made it unique compared to all the other temphp stuff. However, it should remain unique it that aspect and just give it to more classes rather than have more spells do something similar.
Disagree about Guidance and Resistance in OneD&D, they are far too powerful now and make Bardic Inspiration (the key stone feature of an entire class) and Bless (a 1st level spell) largely redundant. They are CANTRIPS they shouldn't be better than an already great 1st level spell. TBH I really wish they were both just removed from the game, they both feel super meta-gamey to me and lead to the player with them interrupting stuff that another player is doing which I find pretty rude and irritating at the table and constant requests to retcon stuff which breaks the flow of the game.
i.e. I find it incredibly annoying when the player with Guidance is constantly retconning that "actually they are over by player Y and cast Guidance on them" when I as player Y for a check, then if I ask a different player for a check suddenly the Guidance-having player interrupts to say they run over to that other character so they can use Guidance on them. Like... just let other players do stuff! It's not the end of the world to fail one skill check.
Now in OneD&D it's going to be the Guidance-having player constantly interrupting with "Did they fail? I can add guidance if they failed." Which again becomes super metagamey with things like searching for clues or looking for traps.
e.g. Mr.Rogue looks for traps and rolls a 15, I tell them they don't see any traps. Cleric suddenly pipes up with "did they fail the check? if so I can add Guidance". If I say 'Yes they failed' then I've told the players there is a trap, so even if adding guidance doesn't turn it into a success they still know there is a trap. If I say 'No' then now they know for certain that there isn't a trap, whereas before they were uncertain. It means it's impossible for me to really surprise them now, which is sad.
The purpose of Banishment is to Banish a Extra-Planar entity back to its home plane and lock it away. The changes do not support that use case. I think having the ‘Save per turn’ is fine for creatures banished away from their home plane, but not for extra-planar creatures that are not meant to be in this one. So if the Creature Type is of the ones that would get Banished to their home plane after a minute, they make no saves to escape.
The problem there is you are assuming all creatures of a specific creature type originate from another plane of existence. Yet I've played in many HB setting that didn't have other planes of existence, and ones where many creatures of particular types weren't native to other planes of existence. One D&D Banishment makes sense to me, sure you can banish the creature back to its home plane, but it can choose to fight to stay from whence you banished it (You could potentially reduce the number of saves to say 3 like Contagion, or 2 like Flesh to Stone - though those are both significantly higher level). If the creature couldn't fight to return then why have the spell require concentration at all? Just make it instantaneous like Plane Shift but it only applies to creatures native to another plane.
OneD&D Banishment is an interesting take b/c it now depends on the lore and backstory of the situation. If the party encounters an extra-planar creature that has been trapped on the material plane by an evil wizard then that creature should choose to fail its saves vs Banishment and happily return home. Lots of extra-planar creature lore-wise really don't want to be on the material plane - even stuff like Beholders - really should choose to fail against Banishment.
You don't need to tell them whether or not they failed. If they detect something, they don't need to add the die. If they don't detect anything, whether or not there is a trap, let them add the guidance die.
Half-agree on aid. Aid should have 1 minute casting time and retain the increase to max HP, it was bad that it could be used as a multi-target pickup from 0hp at such a low level, but having the increase to max HP made it unique compared to all the other temphp stuff. However, it should remain unique it that aspect and just give it to more classes rather than have more spells do something similar.
Disagree about Guidance and Resistance in OneD&D, they are far too powerful now and make Bardic Inspiration (the key stone feature of an entire class) and Bless (a 1st level spell) largely redundant. They are CANTRIPS they shouldn't be better than an already great 1st level spell. TBH I really wish they were both just removed from the game, they both feel super meta-gamey to me and lead to the player with them interrupting stuff that another player is doing which I find pretty rude and irritating at the table and constant requests to retcon stuff which breaks the flow of the game.
i.e. I find it incredibly annoying when the player with Guidance is constantly retconning that "actually they are over by player Y and cast Guidance on them" when I as player Y for a check, then if I ask a different player for a check suddenly the Guidance-having player interrupts to say they run over to that other character so they can use Guidance on them. Like... just let other players do stuff! It's not the end of the world to fail one skill check.
Now in OneD&D it's going to be the Guidance-having player constantly interrupting with "Did they fail? I can add guidance if they failed." Which again becomes super metagamey with things like searching for clues or looking for traps.
e.g. Mr.Rogue looks for traps and rolls a 15, I tell them they don't see any traps. Cleric suddenly pipes up with "did they fail the check? if so I can add Guidance". If I say 'Yes they failed' then I've told the players there is a trap, so even if adding guidance doesn't turn it into a success they still know there is a trap. If I say 'No' then now they know for certain that there isn't a trap, whereas before they were uncertain. It means it's impossible for me to really surprise them now, which is sad.
The thing about aid is it's weird, and we should look at the whole package. Currently, it's +5 hp and max hp for 3 people for 8 hours, and you can increase that +5 by another +5 with a higher spell slot. The playtest versions makes it temp hp, but it affects 6 people and lasts until the end of your next long rest. I think we should think more on how it's intended to be used, rather than bitter we can't use it the same way as before.
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration, so if you have both in the party then the effects can stack. But the most important part is the timing. Previously, the 1-minute duration that required concentration made them far more difficult to use. They weren't cantrips you could bring out in combat, or at the end of searching a room or area that might take 10 minutes instead of just 1. And when you could use them, it slowed down the game to always have someone say they'd cast the spell in advance. Or, in the case of resistance, not learn the spell at all. This makes them real choices, because they're more useful and require a reaction. That's a net positive.
I get your concern with the spellcaster asking if they can use it all the time. Trust the DM to handle it.
That still doesn't solve the Guidance-having player metagaming/retconning to insert themselves into the scene of any other character as soon as that character is asked to make a check. e.g. most of the party sit down to heal up but the rogue who didn't take any damage starts searching for loot without them, suddenly the DM asks the rogue for a check and the Guidance-having player interrupts with: "Actually can I be helping the rogue look for loot, and give them guidance?", I usually relent and allow it but it always leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, maybe I just need to crack down on players and tell them no more often...
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration
Sure they work with BI and stack, but BI is now 2 uses per LR for 1d6 until level 5, and 3 uses of 1d8 per LR until level 7 - which is nothing compared to a 1d4 that can be used on every check and every saving throw for an entire adventuring day. A Wizard with Magic Initiate to get Guidance, Resistance, + Healing Word is now a better bard than a Bard... IMO that's a sad state of the game.
I think that guidance is still maybe a little bit too good... being able to add a d4 to 3-4 checks a day is quite amazing. Resistance is far too overpowered now, though. Reaction d4 to saves? Cantrip!?
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration
Sure they work with BI and stack, but BI is now 2 uses per LR for 1d6 until level 5, and 3 uses of 1d8 per LR until level 7 - which is nothing compared to a 1d4 that can be used on every check and every saving throw for an entire adventuring day. A Wizard with Magic Initiate to get Guidance, Resistance, + Healing Word is now a better bard than a Bard... IMO that's a sad state of the game.
They can only be used on D20 Tests that fail, and they're only worth it if the failure is within a specific margin of error. There's also more to being a bard than just healing word and bardic inspiration. Because, and let's be honest, you could have just said a cleric is a better bard than a bard.
Come off it.
P.S. Your formatting is obnoxious, by the way. The extra carriage returns are superfluous and only serve to stretch out the post and page.
I dislike new guidance, it seems too strong, but I have no good ideas for making it more reasonable and still usable. Maybe something like changing the bonus to 1d4/2.
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration
Sure they work with BI and stack, but BI is now 2 uses per LR for 1d6 until level 5, and 3 uses of 1d8 per LR until level 7 - which is nothing compared to a 1d4 that can be used on every check and every saving throw for an entire adventuring day. A Wizard with Magic Initiate to get Guidance, Resistance, + Healing Word is now a better bard than a Bard... IMO that's a sad state of the game.
They can only be used on D20 Tests that fail, and they're only worth it if the failure is within a specific margin of error. There's also more to being a bard than just healing word and bardic inspiration. Because, and let's be honest, you could have just said a cleric is a better bard than a bard.
Come off it.
P.S. Your formatting is obnoxious, by the way. The extra carriage returns are superfluous and only serve to stretch out the post and page.
Hence why I said a Wizard with the Magic Initiate feat, Bard now gets only a handful of spells that aren't on the Wizard spell list and can't get a lot of Wizard spells, of those Bard spells really only Healing Word comes up often. Though perhaps Sorcerer would have been better, since they also get the high Cha to be good in social situations. Bards really don't get anything special before level 10 except for BI and now BI is overshadowed by a pair of cantrips. If getting Magic Initiate entailed a significant cost it would still be fine, but with Magic Initiate as a 1st level feat..... why wouldn't a Wizard take it to grab the two best cantrips in the game and the best 1st level spell in the game (arguably)? Bard in One D&D will be like Ranger was in 5e, a discount Wizard/Sorcerer with a handful of other "meh" abilities.
*Shrug* I mean everything can be easily countered, just add +2 to the DC every savingthrow & ability check DC you ask from the party. But it's just further powercreep, already I DMed a skill challenge where the DCs were set at 23, 25, 28 and the party succeeded on 10/12 as a party of level 10 characters. If the game is going to continue this way, all the DCs need to be scaled up. DC 30 for a skill check isn't near impossible, it is barely Very Difficult for a party of level 9+ characters, and a minor inconvenience to level 20 characters.
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration
Sure they work with BI and stack, but BI is now 2 uses per LR for 1d6 until level 5, and 3 uses of 1d8 per LR until level 7 - which is nothing compared to a 1d4 that can be used on every check and every saving throw for an entire adventuring day. A Wizard with Magic Initiate to get Guidance, Resistance, + Healing Word is now a better bard than a Bard... IMO that's a sad state of the game.
They can only be used on D20 Tests that fail, and they're only worth it if the failure is within a specific margin of error. There's also more to being a bard than just healing word and bardic inspiration. Because, and let's be honest, you could have just said a cleric is a better bard than a bard.
Come off it.
P.S. Your formatting is obnoxious, by the way. The extra carriage returns are superfluous and only serve to stretch out the post and page.
Hence why I said a Wizard with the Magic Initiate feat, Bard now gets only a handful of spells that aren't on the Wizard spell list and can't get a lot of Wizard spells, of those Bard spells really only Healing Word comes up often. Though perhaps Sorcerer would have been better, since they also get the high Cha to be good in social situations. Bards really don't get anything special before level 10 except for BI and now BI is overshadowed by a pair of cantrips. If getting Magic Initiate entailed a significant cost it would still be fine, but with Magic Initiate as a 1st level feat..... why wouldn't a Wizard take it to grab the two best cantrips in the game and the best 1st level spell in the game (arguably)? Bard in One D&D will be like Ranger was in 5e, a discount Wizard/Sorcerer with a handful of other "meh" abilities.
*Shrug* I mean everything can be easily countered, just add +2 to the DC every savingthrow & ability check DC you ask from the party. But it's just further powercreep, already I DMed a skill challenge where the DCs were set at 23, 25, 28 and the party succeeded on 10/12 as a party of level 10 characters. If the game is going to continue this way, all the DCs need to be scaled up. DC 30 for a skill check isn't near impossible, it is barely Very Difficult for a party of level 9+ characters, and a minor inconvenience to level 20 characters.
I'd hardly call being locked out of half the spell schools, "only a handful of spell that aren't on the [arcane] spell list," and you're missing the point. These cantrips─because they're cantrips─have noticeable limitations.
They only work within 10 feet whereas Bardic Inspiration has a range of 60 feet. Using them to support the rest of the party means getting close, possibly in harms way.
Second, Bardic Inspiration has uses beyond mere ability checks and saving throws. It can boost a failed attack roll, heal, and fuel subclass features.
Third, they all compete for the reaction. Sorcerers and wizard may wish to save theirs for other defensive spells; like absorb elements and shield. That's an important balancing act to consider, and one the primal spellcasters (druid and ranger) already need to ponder.
As for your skill challenge, the highest modifier anyone can hope to have for such an ability check, sans magical enhancement, is +13. I don't know about your party's composition, but a 50%-75% shot at failing any single test is reasonable. The fact they passed 10 times means the dice were on their side or they burned resources. Possibly both, and that's kind of the point. We don't want to gate progress. Adventuring days are wars of attrition.
You mention the "intended power level of 5e", but what does that mean?
When looking at the overall balance of 5E, do those spells just completely break the game? Are other classes able to keep up and compete when those spells are used? That is what I am looking at. I found that spells like Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon don't warp the game's balance; they don't make cleric an unstoppable force. Other classes, even martials, have ways of keeping up in damage and are not completely invalidated by those spells existing.
So I really sat down, opened the document and re-read through the spell changes. I had been thinking a lot about Cleric spell load outs for my character and revising his playstyle now that I was the sole Cleric in the group.
Half-agree on aid. Aid should have 1 minute casting time and retain the increase to max HP, it was bad that it could be used as a multi-target pickup from 0hp at such a low level, but having the increase to max HP made it unique compared to all the other temphp stuff. However, it should remain unique it that aspect and just give it to more classes rather than have more spells do something similar.
Disagree about Guidance and Resistance in OneD&D, they are far too powerful now and make Bardic Inspiration (the key stone feature of an entire class) and Bless (a 1st level spell) largely redundant. They are CANTRIPS they shouldn't be better than an already great 1st level spell. TBH I really wish they were both just removed from the game, they both feel super meta-gamey to me and lead to the player with them interrupting stuff that another player is doing which I find pretty rude and irritating at the table and constant requests to retcon stuff which breaks the flow of the game.
i.e. I find it incredibly annoying when the player with Guidance is constantly retconning that "actually they are over by player Y and cast Guidance on them" when I as player Y for a check, then if I ask a different player for a check suddenly the Guidance-having player interrupts to say they run over to that other character so they can use Guidance on them. Like... just let other players do stuff! It's not the end of the world to fail one skill check.
Now in OneD&D it's going to be the Guidance-having player constantly interrupting with "Did they fail? I can add guidance if they failed." Which again becomes super metagamey with things like searching for clues or looking for traps.
e.g. Mr.Rogue looks for traps and rolls a 15, I tell them they don't see any traps. Cleric suddenly pipes up with "did they fail the check? if so I can add Guidance". If I say 'Yes they failed' then I've told the players there is a trap, so even if adding guidance doesn't turn it into a success they still know there is a trap. If I say 'No' then now they know for certain that there isn't a trap, whereas before they were uncertain. It means it's impossible for me to really surprise them now, which is sad.
The purpose of Banishment is to Banish a Extra-Planar entity back to its home plane and lock it away. The changes do not support that use case. I think having the ‘Save per turn’ is fine for creatures banished away from their home plane, but not for extra-planar creatures that are not meant to be in this one. So if the Creature Type is of the ones that would get Banished to their home plane after a minute, they make no saves to escape.
The problem there is you are assuming all creatures of a specific creature type originate from another plane of existence. Yet I've played in many HB setting that didn't have other planes of existence, and ones where many creatures of particular types weren't native to other planes of existence. One D&D Banishment makes sense to me, sure you can banish the creature back to its home plane, but it can choose to fight to stay from whence you banished it (You could potentially reduce the number of saves to say 3 like Contagion, or 2 like Flesh to Stone - though those are both significantly higher level). If the creature couldn't fight to return then why have the spell require concentration at all? Just make it instantaneous like Plane Shift but it only applies to creatures native to another plane.
OneD&D Banishment is an interesting take b/c it now depends on the lore and backstory of the situation. If the party encounters an extra-planar creature that has been trapped on the material plane by an evil wizard then that creature should choose to fail its saves vs Banishment and happily return home. Lots of extra-planar creature lore-wise really don't want to be on the material plane - even stuff like Beholders - really should choose to fail against Banishment.
I don't see anything wrong with aid being a multi-person pick up. It requires an action to do so. Mass Healing Word is a 3rd level spell and does the same thing but as a bonus action. So doing it as an action vs doing it as a bonus action seems like a pretty reasonable trade off between being a 2nd level spell and being a 3rd level spell.
I am assuming you are talking about One D&D's Guidance and Resistance, just fyi as I am going under that assumption for my argument. In no way do those cantrips redundant. First off, they can stack, that alone prevents Bardic Inspiration and Bless from being redundant. If you can stack the different effects together, then they will never make each other redundant. In 5E, Peace Cleric's Emboldening Bond does not make Bless redundant, in fact, I've seen plenty of groups stack the two together because if having an extra 1d4 was already amazing, have 2d4 is even better, and it gets even better if you can further stack it with Bardic Inspiration and Flash of Genius. Not to mention, Bardic Inspiration is a bigger die thus gives a bigger bonus on average and Bless lets you buff multiple people at once. I personally prefer 5E's guidance for being able to work on initiative and the limitations on how often you can benefit from it to make it a bit meh.
As for banishment. One D&D's Banishment is just a bad spell. Banishment already wasn't a high priority pick to begin with. Requiring concentration on top of needing the target to fail multiple saves and it being a 4th level spell and being single target, it really is not worth using in its current state. There are other spells, such as bless, that would be a much better use of your concentration.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Because I am of the opinion that things should be buffed up. Commonly used Spells like Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians are within the intended power level for 5E. As long as we keep that intended power level in mind, we should be fine to buff things to match that power level. I find the overall power level for PC's in 5E to be in a good spot and nerfing the top will change that overall power level. There is no room in my argument for any deviation at the moment, especially when a lot of what I want to see are martial buffs due to how a lot of this discussion will spells is due to the caster v martial divide.
I mostly agree with mana in that it should be more about buffing the other classes and not nerfing casters. IMO this is especially true in that the in combat balance isn't that far off and nerfing the casters utility to be as bad as a fighters would remove why most people want to play a caster. But, I do think its wrong to think there are no spells outside the games balance for the level. For example wall of force is the only no save crowd control at that level, spells should have saves. Spells that I basically think I can't use as a DM vs most parties in a straight encounter are probably too good outside maybe disintegrate which isn't powerful but you don't use as you have the players hit points so you are kind of metagaming. Sure I can have plot device reasons to use wall of force when trapping the entire party so the antagonist can escape, or whatever. But using it like a player would where I cordon off two players, kill them and then wait longer than a minute then finish off the rest, or take off with the bodies so I get a nice rest in when the party comes later with depleted forces.
As a DM though I'd have no problem casting spiritual weapon or guardians at the party.
The power level for PCs in 5e is significantly too high relative to the power level of monsters, particularly at higher levels. Now, I wouldn't mind seeing monsters be more powerful than they are in 5e, I don't actually find high level monsters terribly epic, but it's a lot easier to beat down a few overperformers than to update every high CR monster in the game.
That's anecdotal testimony, which honestly isn't worth a lot. Most of us, and I'd wager yourself included, don't play with that many other people. Then you get into the weeds of how many actually play specific classes and your sample size becomes that much smaller.
Fact is, spirit guardians is a ludicrously powerful spell for its level. A movable, 15-foot radius AoE with selective targeting that turns your character into a blender. And let's not forget the difficult terrain on top of all that. Combined with spiritual weapon, the cleric is just a walking death machine. It's so basic that literally every cleric can do it. And they're used together precisely because of the effect of spirit guardians. You need to be close to use both. A cleric with the Tempest Domain doesn't need to, because call lightning has a massive range and area of effect. But then they're not using their bonus action, and players don't like not doing things. And why call down a storm when most battlefields aren't that large?
The fact that not every class can combine those spells is irrelevant. Some can, and for at least a little while with this playtest some will be. Any twilight cleric, or paladin with either Oath of the Ancients of Oath of the Watchers, can have both moonbeam and spiritual weapon. Tempest clerics and paladins with Oath of the Open Sea can have both call lightning and spirit guardians. There are bards to consider. And, at the end of the day, multiclassing still exists. Even without that, everything still flows along a spectrum. All 2nd-level spells should be about the same power. Ditto for like spells of each level. A scant few, like fireball and lightning bolt, are intentionally overpowered. They're the exceptions which prove the rule.
The design team is currently banking on the idea that adjusting spiritual weapon will force a change in preparation and tactics across the board. And I hope they're right.
Actually, I would say I've played with a relatively large group of people owing to the fact that I regularly played in AL and embraced the whole drop in drop out style feature of AL, especially with Online AL. My Table Top club when I attended college also had me play with a variety of people. Not one of the many groups I've played with had an issue with the power level of Spiritual Weapon nor Spirit Guardians. Both of those spells felt perfectly in line with the intended power level of 5E at a variety of tiers.
If anything, I believe the weaker spells should get buffed to be more on par with spells like Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians. The current One DnD version of Spiritual Weapon on the other hand feels useless. I rather just concentrate on Bless as having a 1d4 bonus to attack rolls and saving throws would likely better for both DPR and survivability. There are many other spells that make better use of your concentration and the improved upcasting does nothing to change that.
If you are using the CR, that would be why. CR doesn't exactly work properly at higher levels and often requires you to wing it a bit. I would say it is better to revisit monsters at those higher CR's because I do feel that they need a bit of rework in general. In general I feel like the CR calculations could use a relook at.
Also, if magic items were used, which they likely are, then that throws an even bigger wrench in CR.
So it is honestly better to rework CR and monsters because player characters are in a better spot than CR and monsters game design wise.
Wall of Force absolutely needs a nerf as well, and more so than SW/SG but IMO other spells being better isn't a reason not to nerf other too-powerful spells. SG is so easy to fix (just like adding concentration to SW) -> simply change the damage condition to: "You can use your action to cause damage to each creature of your choice in the area."
For Wall of Force, I think the only solution is to make it required to be a straight line or a semi-circle (not a dome) like all the other wall spells.
It's also why giving Banishment a save each turn is good. I played in a game where the DM used Banishment on my character on the enemy's first turn. The caster of the spell had Shield and high AC so my allies all failed to hit them the next round and gave up trying to break concentration. Fortunately the DM accidentally gave me a save at the end of each turn or I would have spent the entire combat banished doing nothing at all. As it was, it still took me 3 rounds to break free.
A good spell should be fun both when used by the players, and when used on the players.
Banishment in its current One D&D version is not worth taking period. It cannot even do its in lore objective reliably. If you can't get through the AC, you can always try targetting a Saving Throw.
Spiritual Weapon in its One DnD version is not worth using. Bless is a better use of your concentration. Spirit Guardian does not need a nerf either and needing an action to deal damage will probably make Bless a better use of your concentration in the vast majority of situations.
Also, disagree with the Wall of Force nerf. It is not widely available to begin with, with only wizard and specific subclasses being required to access it (aside from Bard). It is a really good spell, but still very well within the intended power level of 5E and has plenty of competition in the 5th level spell department. There are counterplays to it such as teleporting or simply breaking concentration.
The fact that there are players that can handle it is a sign that it is more of a case of player skill. You can give different groups the same characters and some groups will just handle various situations better due to being more experienced players. They can handle spells like Wall of Force being used against them, and can enjoy using tactics and counterplay against those spells. Why take away those options from them? If you don't think your players are experienced enough to handle them, replace it with other spells as the options exist.
So I really sat down, opened the document and re-read through the spell changes. I had been thinking a lot about Cleric spell load outs for my character and revising his playstyle now that I was the sole Cleric in the group.
Aid:
Temp hit points are already overused. Aid was unique and highly useful mainly BECAUSE it did not do temporary hitpoints. If anything there should be more spells like Aid, not more spells making temporary hit points.
Banishment:
The purpose of Banishment is to Banish a Extra-Planar entity back to its home plane and lock it away. The changes do not support that use case. I think having the ‘Save per turn’ is fine for creatures banished away from their home plane, but not for extra-planar creatures that are not meant to be in this one. So if the Creature Type is of the ones that would get Banished to their home plane after a minute, they make no saves to escape.
Barkskin:
This spell makes sense. The use of Temporary hit points makes sense in this regard as the regenerating bark over you is intended to protect you from harm. It does seem similar to Heroism but I don’t believe they share a common spell list, so its fine.
Guidance:
wonderful, the move to ‘reaction on a fail’ is just <chefs kiss>. I could see the need for a ‘once this makes a skill succeed’ you cant use the cantrip again for 10 minutes or until initiative is rolled, whichever comes first’ it is just a cantrip after all.
Prayer of Healing:
This is again, a wonderful compromise to provide players something they have been asking for. Short Rest on the move in a pinch. This is such a good spell that it becomes almost mandatory for Divine Spell casters at higher levels, not because its ‘too good’ but just because “what else are you going to use a second level spell slot on when you have access to 5 level ones”. When the party is level 9 a short rest in 10 minutes while moving is a crazy use of a 2 level spell. It’s the sort of spell that if the DM doesn’t like it for their game they should 100% just remove it from their worlds spell list. But having it in there by default is great.
Resistance:
See Guidance, fantastic.
Spiritual Weapon:
I don’t like the changes not for balance purposes but for the purpose of the spell. The purpose was to weaponize the Bonus Action of the Cleric so they don’t have to choose between contributing to the action and casting recovery or support magics. My suggestion would be to leave it the way it was BUT if you HAVE to add concentration then also enhance the Cleric feature Holy Order: Scholar to not require concentration when they cast it.
But seriously, just don’t change it at all. It’s a keystone spell to a specific Cleric Playstyle, one that becomes MORE viable in 1DD in it’s intended use case and less viable in situations where it’s not as useful.
Additional thought on Holy Orders based on Spiritual weapon
: Spiritual Weapon really got me thinking about the Holy Orders ability. I think it needs to be buffed up slightly to really support distinctive playstyles,
Defender: +You can use Wisdom instead of Strength when attacking with melee weapons.
Scholar: +You can cast Spiritual weapon without using a spell slot (or without using concentration if the proposed change goes through)
Thaumaturge: +You may use your Channel Divinity abilities as Bonus Actions instead of a Magic Action.
Very true! Had a few players get upset when their Hex-Sorc-adin with AC 22+5 and +5 and Advantage on all saving throws vs magic, was suddenly getting trapped in Wall of Force with a bunch of enemy minions or hit by Irresistable Dance. I had to explain to them that enemies aren't stupid, they aren't just going to keep hitting you with stuff with very little chance of success they will figure out another solution.
Half-agree on aid. Aid should have 1 minute casting time and retain the increase to max HP, it was bad that it could be used as a multi-target pickup from 0hp at such a low level, but having the increase to max HP made it unique compared to all the other temphp stuff. However, it should remain unique it that aspect and just give it to more classes rather than have more spells do something similar.
Disagree about Guidance and Resistance in OneD&D, they are far too powerful now and make Bardic Inspiration (the key stone feature of an entire class) and Bless (a 1st level spell) largely redundant. They are CANTRIPS they shouldn't be better than an already great 1st level spell. TBH I really wish they were both just removed from the game, they both feel super meta-gamey to me and lead to the player with them interrupting stuff that another player is doing which I find pretty rude and irritating at the table and constant requests to retcon stuff which breaks the flow of the game.
i.e. I find it incredibly annoying when the player with Guidance is constantly retconning that "actually they are over by player Y and cast Guidance on them" when I as player Y for a check, then if I ask a different player for a check suddenly the Guidance-having player interrupts to say they run over to that other character so they can use Guidance on them. Like... just let other players do stuff! It's not the end of the world to fail one skill check.
Now in OneD&D it's going to be the Guidance-having player constantly interrupting with "Did they fail? I can add guidance if they failed." Which again becomes super metagamey with things like searching for clues or looking for traps.
e.g. Mr.Rogue looks for traps and rolls a 15, I tell them they don't see any traps. Cleric suddenly pipes up with "did they fail the check? if so I can add Guidance". If I say 'Yes they failed' then I've told the players there is a trap, so even if adding guidance doesn't turn it into a success they still know there is a trap. If I say 'No' then now they know for certain that there isn't a trap, whereas before they were uncertain. It means it's impossible for me to really surprise them now, which is sad.
The problem there is you are assuming all creatures of a specific creature type originate from another plane of existence. Yet I've played in many HB setting that didn't have other planes of existence, and ones where many creatures of particular types weren't native to other planes of existence. One D&D Banishment makes sense to me, sure you can banish the creature back to its home plane, but it can choose to fight to stay from whence you banished it (You could potentially reduce the number of saves to say 3 like Contagion, or 2 like Flesh to Stone - though those are both significantly higher level). If the creature couldn't fight to return then why have the spell require concentration at all? Just make it instantaneous like Plane Shift but it only applies to creatures native to another plane.
OneD&D Banishment is an interesting take b/c it now depends on the lore and backstory of the situation. If the party encounters an extra-planar creature that has been trapped on the material plane by an evil wizard then that creature should choose to fail its saves vs Banishment and happily return home. Lots of extra-planar creature lore-wise really don't want to be on the material plane - even stuff like Beholders - really should choose to fail against Banishment.
You don't need to tell them whether or not they failed. If they detect something, they don't need to add the die. If they don't detect anything, whether or not there is a trap, let them add the guidance die.
DMing:
Dragons of Stormwreck Isle
Playing:
None sadly.
Optimization Guides:
Literally Too Angry to Die - A Guide to Optimizing a Barbarian
The thing about aid is it's weird, and we should look at the whole package. Currently, it's +5 hp and max hp for 3 people for 8 hours, and you can increase that +5 by another +5 with a higher spell slot. The playtest versions makes it temp hp, but it affects 6 people and lasts until the end of your next long rest. I think we should think more on how it's intended to be used, rather than bitter we can't use it the same way as before.
The proposed changes to guidance and resistance are fantastic, and I hope they do the same for true strike. They work with bardic inspiration, so if you have both in the party then the effects can stack. But the most important part is the timing. Previously, the 1-minute duration that required concentration made them far more difficult to use. They weren't cantrips you could bring out in combat, or at the end of searching a room or area that might take 10 minutes instead of just 1. And when you could use them, it slowed down the game to always have someone say they'd cast the spell in advance. Or, in the case of resistance, not learn the spell at all. This makes them real choices, because they're more useful and require a reaction. That's a net positive.
I get your concern with the spellcaster asking if they can use it all the time. Trust the DM to handle it.
That still doesn't solve the Guidance-having player metagaming/retconning to insert themselves into the scene of any other character as soon as that character is asked to make a check. e.g. most of the party sit down to heal up but the rogue who didn't take any damage starts searching for loot without them, suddenly the DM asks the rogue for a check and the Guidance-having player interrupts with: "Actually can I be helping the rogue look for loot, and give them guidance?", I usually relent and allow it but it always leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, maybe I just need to crack down on players and tell them no more often...
Sure they work with BI and stack, but BI is now 2 uses per LR for 1d6 until level 5, and 3 uses of 1d8 per LR until level 7 - which is nothing compared to a 1d4 that can be used on every check and every saving throw for an entire adventuring day. A Wizard with Magic Initiate to get Guidance, Resistance, + Healing Word is now a better bard than a Bard... IMO that's a sad state of the game.
I think that guidance is still maybe a little bit too good... being able to add a d4 to 3-4 checks a day is quite amazing. Resistance is far too overpowered now, though. Reaction d4 to saves? Cantrip!?
DMing:
Dragons of Stormwreck Isle
Playing:
None sadly.
Optimization Guides:
Literally Too Angry to Die - A Guide to Optimizing a Barbarian
They can only be used on D20 Tests that fail, and they're only worth it if the failure is within a specific margin of error. There's also more to being a bard than just healing word and bardic inspiration. Because, and let's be honest, you could have just said a cleric is a better bard than a bard.
Come off it.
P.S.
Your formatting is obnoxious, by the way. The extra carriage returns are superfluous and only serve to stretch out the post and page.
I dislike new guidance, it seems too strong, but I have no good ideas for making it more reasonable and still usable. Maybe something like changing the bonus to 1d4/2.
Hence why I said a Wizard with the Magic Initiate feat, Bard now gets only a handful of spells that aren't on the Wizard spell list and can't get a lot of Wizard spells, of those Bard spells really only Healing Word comes up often. Though perhaps Sorcerer would have been better, since they also get the high Cha to be good in social situations. Bards really don't get anything special before level 10 except for BI and now BI is overshadowed by a pair of cantrips. If getting Magic Initiate entailed a significant cost it would still be fine, but with Magic Initiate as a 1st level feat..... why wouldn't a Wizard take it to grab the two best cantrips in the game and the best 1st level spell in the game (arguably)? Bard in One D&D will be like Ranger was in 5e, a discount Wizard/Sorcerer with a handful of other "meh" abilities.
*Shrug* I mean everything can be easily countered, just add +2 to the DC every savingthrow & ability check DC you ask from the party. But it's just further powercreep, already I DMed a skill challenge where the DCs were set at 23, 25, 28 and the party succeeded on 10/12 as a party of level 10 characters. If the game is going to continue this way, all the DCs need to be scaled up. DC 30 for a skill check isn't near impossible, it is barely Very Difficult for a party of level 9+ characters, and a minor inconvenience to level 20 characters.
I'd hardly call being locked out of half the spell schools, "only a handful of spell that aren't on the [arcane] spell list," and you're missing the point. These cantrips─because they're cantrips─have noticeable limitations.
As for your skill challenge, the highest modifier anyone can hope to have for such an ability check, sans magical enhancement, is +13. I don't know about your party's composition, but a 50%-75% shot at failing any single test is reasonable. The fact they passed 10 times means the dice were on their side or they burned resources. Possibly both, and that's kind of the point. We don't want to gate progress. Adventuring days are wars of attrition.
When looking at the overall balance of 5E, do those spells just completely break the game? Are other classes able to keep up and compete when those spells are used? That is what I am looking at. I found that spells like Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon don't warp the game's balance; they don't make cleric an unstoppable force. Other classes, even martials, have ways of keeping up in damage and are not completely invalidated by those spells existing.
I don't see anything wrong with aid being a multi-person pick up. It requires an action to do so. Mass Healing Word is a 3rd level spell and does the same thing but as a bonus action. So doing it as an action vs doing it as a bonus action seems like a pretty reasonable trade off between being a 2nd level spell and being a 3rd level spell.
I am assuming you are talking about One D&D's Guidance and Resistance, just fyi as I am going under that assumption for my argument. In no way do those cantrips redundant. First off, they can stack, that alone prevents Bardic Inspiration and Bless from being redundant. If you can stack the different effects together, then they will never make each other redundant. In 5E, Peace Cleric's Emboldening Bond does not make Bless redundant, in fact, I've seen plenty of groups stack the two together because if having an extra 1d4 was already amazing, have 2d4 is even better, and it gets even better if you can further stack it with Bardic Inspiration and Flash of Genius. Not to mention, Bardic Inspiration is a bigger die thus gives a bigger bonus on average and Bless lets you buff multiple people at once. I personally prefer 5E's guidance for being able to work on initiative and the limitations on how often you can benefit from it to make it a bit meh.
As for banishment. One D&D's Banishment is just a bad spell. Banishment already wasn't a high priority pick to begin with. Requiring concentration on top of needing the target to fail multiple saves and it being a 4th level spell and being single target, it really is not worth using in its current state. There are other spells, such as bless, that would be a much better use of your concentration.