Which are the lower-level spells (1st- through 3rd-level) that you really like, but just don’t scale well at higher levels? For example, sleep can be an awesome spell for a 1st through 4th level caster to use because it’s often even worth upcasting with a 2nd-level spell slot, but using a spell slot of 3rd-level or higher often just feels like a waste under all but the most niche of circumstances. What spells would you put on the list of spells that underachieve at higher levels?
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
This is one of the challenges that I fundamentally have a hard time with under the “spell slot system” and is why we worked so hard on the spell point stuff we are using.
it is T so much that they don’t scale well, it is that they are often very niche spells that get used in very simple and predictable ways.
Alter Self is a good example of another one of the problems, which is that it gets swapped out for a “more powerful version”, typically polymorph or shape change — bit this underestimates the value of the spell.
another factor is that all spells, not just low level ones, tend to not “improve” over time or with greater practice. This is more of a mechanical issue, though.
animal friendship, animal messenger, magic aura, bark skin, bless (and similar buffs that only add more people, not make improve the buff).
That kind of thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Small disclaimer for my choice: I grew up playing table top wargames before table top rpg's so have no problem with lots of critters on the field and rolling lots of dice to resolve their actions...having said that...
Conujure Animals and Summon Lesser Demons, even choosing the CR2 options and casting at higher levels they tend not to be worth it, although 36 CR1/4 beasts or 24 CR1/4 Demons suddenly appearing could be funny if you don't mind using that lovely 9th level spell slot but defintely feels more like a spell that a BBEG uses to bog down the heroes while it makes an escape. If creature summoning spells were rituals with consumable materials similar to Find Familiar then you might have some more usage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
But what are you expecting from a first level spell at higher levels beyond being niche? Stopping a weakened, fleeing enemy at 120' with essentially guaranteed "damage" (while still keeping them alive) is not going to come up all that often, but it is still as useful as 90% of other first level spells at higher tiers. Sure Shield, Silvery Barbs, and a few others are much more commonly useful, but it still retains some relevance.
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
But what are you expecting from a first level spell at higher levels beyond being niche? Stopping a weakened, fleeing enemy at 120' with essentially guaranteed "damage" (while still keeping them alive) is not going to come up all that often, but it is still as useful as 90% of other first level spells at higher tiers. Sure Shield, Silvery Barbs, and a few others are much more commonly useful, but it still retains some relevance.
I’m not really “expecting” anything more from it at all. I’m just curious about people’s opinions on the subject and what other spells they find falling into the same boat. This isn’t a “let’s complain about spells” thread, or a “how to fix these spells” thread, more of a “let’s just identify these spells and talk about them” thread.
Ooh, aid is another example. At 3rd level when one can take the spell, an extra 5 HP can be the difference between life and death saving throws for up to 3 PCs. But by 5th level the spell is kinda pointless unless I’m seriously missing something.
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
But what are you expecting from a first level spell at higher levels beyond being niche? Stopping a weakened, fleeing enemy at 120' with essentially guaranteed "damage" (while still keeping them alive) is not going to come up all that often, but it is still as useful as 90% of other first level spells at higher tiers. Sure Shield, Silvery Barbs, and a few others are much more commonly useful, but it still retains some relevance.
I’m not really “expecting” anything more from it at all. I’m just curious about people’s opinions on the subject and what other spells they find falling into the same boat. This isn’t a “let’s complain about spells” thread, or a “how to fix these spells” thread, more of a “let’s just identify these spells and talk about them” thread.
I guess all I am saying then, is that I am not disappointed in how Sleep scales, as I still find it situationally useful. Sorry if I was leading the discussion in a direction that was not desired, as think it is a good topic.
I definitely like Hideous Laughter, and certainly might like it more if it would scale up to include more targets like Hold Person does (although yet again, it can stay relevant in higher tiers even without scaling). I like the premise of essentially all spells scaling, excepting those whose usefulness is already maintained at higher tiers by their nature (yet again, Shield and Silvery Barbs are good examples of the latter). Of course, determining which spells fit into which category (needing scaling or not) is rather subjective.
Most of the direct damage spells, where adding one more die is pretty underwhelming. I understand it from a design perspective, if an upcast shatter is as good as fireball, then what’s the point of fireball? And I’d second aedorsey about the buffs that add another target like bless. I like their idea of an option, like add another target or add an extra d4. But that might be a bit more complex than the general 5e design philosophy.
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
But what are you expecting from a first level spell at higher levels beyond being niche? Stopping a weakened, fleeing enemy at 120' with essentially guaranteed "damage" (while still keeping them alive) is not going to come up all that often, but it is still as useful as 90% of other first level spells at higher tiers. Sure Shield, Silvery Barbs, and a few others are much more commonly useful, but it still retains some relevance.
I’m not really “expecting” anything more from it at all. I’m just curious about people’s opinions on the subject and what other spells they find falling into the same boat. This isn’t a “let’s complain about spells” thread, or a “how to fix these spells” thread, more of a “let’s just identify these spells and talk about them” thread.
I guess all I am saying then, is that I am not disappointed in how Sleep scales, as I still find it situationally useful. Sorry if I was leading the discussion in a direction that was not desired, as think it is a good topic.
I definitely like Hideous Laughter, and certainly might like it more if it would scale up to include more targets like Hold Person does (although yet again, it can stay relevant in higher tiers even without scaling). I like the premise of essentially all spells scaling, excepting those whose usefulness is already maintained at higher tiers by their nature (yet again, Shield and Silvery Barbs are good examples of the latter). Of course, determining which spells fit into which category (needing scaling or not) is rather subjective.
Oh, no worries neighbor, no need to apologize at all. Conversations meander, that’s part of their nature. I just wanted to be clear that I wasn’t really complaining about the spell or anything, just considering it is all.
Yes, hold person is an excellent example of a spell that definitely does hold up well at higher levels, I can totally justify expending a 5th-level spell slot to upcast that sucker. It’s useful both in and out of combat, and being able to stack targets like that is of great use.
This is one of the challenges that I fundamentally have a hard time with under the “spell slot system” and is why we worked so hard on the spell point stuff we are using.
it is T so much that they don’t scale well, it is that they are often very niche spells that get used in very simple and predictable ways.
Alter Self is a good example of another one of the problems, which is that it gets swapped out for a “more powerful version”, typically polymorph or shape change — bit this underestimates the value of the spell.
another factor is that all spells, not just low level ones, tend to not “improve” over time or with greater practice. This is more of a mechanical issue, though.
animal friendship, animal messenger, magic aura, bark skin, bless (and similar buffs that only add more people, not make improve the buff).
Most of the direct damage spells, where adding one more die is pretty underwhelming. I understand it from a design perspective, if an upcast shatter is as good as fireball, then what’s the point of fireball? And I’d second aedorsey about the buffs that add another target like bless. I like their idea of an option, like add another target or add an extra d4. But that might be a bit more complex than the general 5e design philosophy.
Yeah, I agree about those buff spells. How often does one need to bless more than 4-6 creatures at a time at most? I get it, being able to just stack d4s on top of each other if the bonus scaled like that would be stupid broken. However, there’s gotta be a better way than just adding targets.
Most of the direct damage spells, where adding one more die is pretty underwhelming. I understand it from a design perspective, if an upcast shatter is as good as fireball, then what’s the point of fireball? And I’d second aedorsey about the buffs that add another target like bless. I like their idea of an option, like add another target or add an extra d4. But that might be a bit more complex than the general 5e design philosophy.
This pretty much sums up my thoughts on most upcasts as well. The benefit is negligible and often there are better options. The alternate rule suggestion, to add a bonus to it, (I would maybe offer +1 per spell level for Bless, so the d4 +x with x being the number of slots upcast) sounds like a great way to keep lower level spells relevant. I also agree it adds a large level of complexity to spellcasting that does grind against 5e's intended simplicity. I think offering such things as optional, to add to the fun is a good idea, even if it comes in as table rules. Maybe not so much for new players, but certainly those who have played a few games would be able to manage that extra bit of thinking and tracking.
Something to consider, however, might be for classes who don't get a wide variety of spells (Sorcerer anyone?) picking, say Chromatic Orb as their "chosen" blasting spell allows them to pick more utility or control, or even buffing spells, instead of constantly trying to have the new best blasting spell. With limited spells to choose from, you want to try and get as much mileage out of your choices. Upcasting a lower level is a way to spread your abilities out at the slight cost of not quite being as damaging as a higher level choice might have been.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Most of the direct damage spells, where adding one more die is pretty underwhelming. I understand it from a design perspective, if an upcast shatter is as good as fireball, then what’s the point of fireball? And I’d second aedorsey about the buffs that add another target like bless. I like their idea of an option, like add another target or add an extra d4. But that might be a bit more complex than the general 5e design philosophy.
This pretty much sums up my thoughts on most upcasts as well. The benefit is negligible and often there are better options. The alternate rule suggestion, to add a bonus to it, (I would maybe offer +1 per spell level for Bless, so the d4 +x with x being the number of slots upcast) sounds like a great way to keep lower level spells relevant. I also agree it adds a large level of complexity to spellcasting that does grind against 5e's intended simplicity. I think offering such things as optional, to add to the fun is a good idea, even if it comes in as table rules. Maybe not so much for new players, but certainly those who have played a few games would be able to manage that extra bit of thinking and tracking.
Adding a second, alternative way to upcast a spell might be “too complicated for 5e,” but if the spell just simply worked that way it should be fine. After all, false life is an example of a currently existing spell that works of of the 1d4+X model, and in that case it’s by 5s, which is inherently more complex than simply adding 1 each time.
Having put a lot of effort into our point based magic system, and having some different structures to use around it, really led us down some interesting rabbit holes within the realm of spell design.
I am not very keen on the idea of rewriting spells as a whole, lol, but I also see spells in general as currently pretty unbalanced *in comparison to each other*. To the game in a broader sense, maybe -- I am noticing a slight shift in the way they are doing Arcane, Divine, and Primal in the UA stuff that suggests some intent to make each of those kinds of magic slightly different as an additional calculus in player selection.
A lot of the changes that *could* be done do indeed create much more complexity. Which was another rabbit hole, lol. And part of that is the underlying design basis (the so-called Vancian Magic) rubbing against the "Special Ability" system that lies beneath 5e design as well as some of the constraints on a system that has no real "rules of magic" set up. Or at least, none that I have seen, although I could likely deduce a few of them (though none of the Vancian rules work anymore, lol).
TO me, a 20th level caster should still be routinely using cantrips and first level spells. They should be the kinds of spells that lay the foundation for higher level ones -- each higher level building upon the simplest spells to create ever more complex ones such that at spell level 9 (and I note that with cantrips there are actually 10 spell levels, 0-9) those spells should be able to accomplish immense things.
I am not a fan of "wish" as a spell available to players, but the idea of it being a 9th level spell is exactly what I am thinking about in this sense -- and one thing I look at is the Tiers of Play description in the books. IF the highest tier is meant to have regional impact, then the spells should be regional level spells. Create vast wastelands, erase cities, that kind of thing, in terms of destructive ability, but also ensure an incredible harvest, alter the climate, improve the quality of artisanal products, and so forth.
Which I say with an eye to some of my thoughts (from my players, admittedly) about how high level magic should have more risk, and take more time, and involve more effort (role playing and mechanically) than those 1st and cantrips -- and that,in turn, makes them just as rough.
Granted, I do see things through a lens of "Learning" and "Complexity" which is fairly odd -- an example is how when in school, you start with 101 level stuff and move up to post-graduate specialized courses. You can't get to those upper level courses without using the foundations you had tossed at you (most folks never realize this, of course, until they have). You can't really move to multiplication until you have addition, can't really move to division until you have multiplication, and so forth.
This is one of the reasons we adopted a "uniform damage" table rule that we have tweaked off an on and is generally used by all our DMs now. It makes Magic Missle a lot less exciting at 1st level, but it also places it in a position as a go to spell for combat because while the spell itself only gets a d4 for damage, it gets a bunch of d4 and more targets as you increase in level, and 20d4 is nothing to sneeze at.
Spells like Aid and Bless and similar, we are looking at from the perspective of "more complex, more powerful" as well -- and so the buffs granted improve as the caster improves -- a 17th level casting will give advantage and a +5 on rolls, as an example.
Now, the argument that we had about this was that it makes the PCs really powerful using "old to them" spells, and that challenges our whole Encounter building issue , but the DMs in our circle solve that by making encounters that really would instakill anyone under half the level of the encounter, no matter what they had, lol. And also, we give our encounters the same spells and special abilities.
So now those high level dragons have the same magic missile spell. Lastly, we do tend to treat CR as level -- and while all of us use different CR scales right now, that means that we have level 30 to level 50 monsters involved. Level Cap only applies to players in our games.
So we get our balance in other ways at the broader game level, and we addressed some of the shortcomings of those low level spells while also giving them scale.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I think that Burning Hands is probably the weakest spell when it comes to upcasting. Really just not worth even using a 2nd level slot for it.
Agreed, even frost fingers scales better than burning hands, even if it is a little less powerful at the start. Not to say that frost fingers scales well mind you, just better by comparison. What if, instead of 3d6+(1d6/slot level), burning hands dealt 5d4+(2d4/slot level) for damage? That’s still not the best trade off in terms of damage increase per slot level, but would it be enough to make it worthwhile?
Die Type by Spell Level: 0-1 = d4, 2-3 = d6, 4-5 = d8, 6-7 = d10, 8-9= d12
Number of dice by level of the Caster.
In systems that use metamagic adjustments, you can add in "increase die", so you could do the same with "casting using a higher level slot' -- turn that d4 MM into a d6 or higher.
It also resets some aspects of how those who "know magic" are generally better than those who don't, because of that deeper understanding, blah blah.
In terms of play, it also makes things a lot easier. Yes, it means fireball is less cool, and it cuts burning hands down a lot at low levels, but then it scales fast, and still allows for challenge.
We've been using this for about a decade or so, I think. Definitely from before 5e came out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
Yea - my point was that it isn't particularly niche, or at least it shouldn't be. Like I said, burn a 9th level slot for it, and you're putting 100+ HD to sleep on average.
Now, the norm for high level play is that you'd farely rarely have a use for that. Because I dunno, you'll be fighting demons and elementals and dragons and undead and so on, that don't sleep or are immune or have spell resistance of whatever.
Only I think that's wrong. If only because massive HP sponges lead to massively boring fights. And sleep isn't putting 'a few guards' to sleep. By that level, it knocks out the entire city guard.
It only becomes niche because WOTC, GM's and players alike have painted themselves into a corner, where any challenge must by necessity be larger - like, physically (and in HD) - than the last one. I know this is a minority opinion, but I'm serious: Larger enemies make for crappier games.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Guards and Wards is a nightmare spell for PCs to run into, no matter what level they are or who cast it. But they never think about what it means to have it used against them.
My "lazy dragon" with a CR of 30 in my game can devastate a party with that magic missile spell, or take most of them out with a sleep spell, or laugh maniacally when they strike him and he has burning hands active.
but the same thing can be said for a Hobgoblin and his Gang, lying in wait for the next passing merchant caravan or the semi-regular patrol of the Lord's Mounted Militia.
I complain about min-maxing , I know, but I also have to admit that using that same tactic against them, and knowing the weaknesses they have, is far more effective -- and can be very frustrating when the BBEG use low level spells instead of higher level ones.
Not all my side are geniuses, but as a whole they didn't become a major threat to the world just existing -- they earned it by being the folks who almost won the big war.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Which are the lower-level spells (1st- through 3rd-level) that you really like, but just don’t scale well at higher levels? For example, sleep can be an awesome spell for a 1st through 4th level caster to use because it’s often even worth upcasting with a 2nd-level spell slot, but using a spell slot of 3rd-level or higher often just feels like a waste under all but the most niche of circumstances. What spells would you put on the list of spells that underachieve at higher levels?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I dunno - cast at 9th level, Sleep puts 21d8 hit dice of creatures to sleep. Sure, you could do other things with a 9th level spell slot, but if what you want is to put a lot of people to sleep, there's really no better alternative. How often do you need to put 100+ low levels mooks to sleep? Not often enough, I'd say. Really it should come up in every game: 'I put everyone here to sleep!'
Anyways, sorry, this isn't really my kinda discussion - I rarely, if ever, play anything above level 10 or 11 or some such.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
This is one of the challenges that I fundamentally have a hard time with under the “spell slot system” and is why we worked so hard on the spell point stuff we are using.
it is T so much that they don’t scale well, it is that they are often very niche spells that get used in very simple and predictable ways.
Alter Self is a good example of another one of the problems, which is that it gets swapped out for a “more powerful version”, typically polymorph or shape change — bit this underestimates the value of the spell.
another factor is that all spells, not just low level ones, tend to not “improve” over time or with greater practice. This is more of a mechanical issue, though.
animal friendship, animal messenger, magic aura, bark skin, bless (and similar buffs that only add more people, not make improve the buff).
That kind of thing.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Small disclaimer for my choice: I grew up playing table top wargames before table top rpg's so have no problem with lots of critters on the field and rolling lots of dice to resolve their actions...having said that...
Conujure Animals and Summon Lesser Demons, even choosing the CR2 options and casting at higher levels they tend not to be worth it, although 36 CR1/4 beasts or 24 CR1/4 Demons suddenly appearing could be funny if you don't mind using that lovely 9th level spell slot but defintely feels more like a spell that a BBEG uses to bog down the heroes while it makes an escape. If creature summoning spells were rituals with consumable materials similar to Find Familiar then you might have some more usage.
Yeah, like I said, it’s rather niche. It’s handy to put a few guards to sleep with a lower level slot, but to use it in a fight or something it’s only useful at the very end to capture someone alive for questioning, and only after you’ve all but killed the last one. Any time one would really wanna KO just the right enemy, they’ve usually got at least a handful of lower HP minions around or too many HP unless one really cranks the spell or both, and at that point there’s often better options. It’s a shame really.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
But what are you expecting from a first level spell at higher levels beyond being niche? Stopping a weakened, fleeing enemy at 120' with essentially guaranteed "damage" (while still keeping them alive) is not going to come up all that often, but it is still as useful as 90% of other first level spells at higher tiers. Sure Shield, Silvery Barbs, and a few others are much more commonly useful, but it still retains some relevance.
I’m not really “expecting” anything more from it at all. I’m just curious about people’s opinions on the subject and what other spells they find falling into the same boat. This isn’t a “let’s complain about spells” thread, or a “how to fix these spells” thread, more of a “let’s just identify these spells and talk about them” thread.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Ooh, aid is another example. At 3rd level when one can take the spell, an extra 5 HP can be the difference between life and death saving throws for up to 3 PCs. But by 5th level the spell is kinda pointless unless I’m seriously missing something.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I guess all I am saying then, is that I am not disappointed in how Sleep scales, as I still find it situationally useful. Sorry if I was leading the discussion in a direction that was not desired, as think it is a good topic.
I definitely like Hideous Laughter, and certainly might like it more if it would scale up to include more targets like Hold Person does (although yet again, it can stay relevant in higher tiers even without scaling). I like the premise of essentially all spells scaling, excepting those whose usefulness is already maintained at higher tiers by their nature (yet again, Shield and Silvery Barbs are good examples of the latter). Of course, determining which spells fit into which category (needing scaling or not) is rather subjective.
Most of the direct damage spells, where adding one more die is pretty underwhelming. I understand it from a design perspective, if an upcast shatter is as good as fireball, then what’s the point of fireball?
And I’d second aedorsey about the buffs that add another target like bless. I like their idea of an option, like add another target or add an extra d4. But that might be a bit more complex than the general 5e design philosophy.
Oh, no worries neighbor, no need to apologize at all. Conversations meander, that’s part of their nature. I just wanted to be clear that I wasn’t really complaining about the spell or anything, just considering it is all.
Yes, hold person is an excellent example of a spell that definitely does hold up well at higher levels, I can totally justify expending a 5th-level spell slot to upcast that sucker. It’s useful both in and out of combat, and being able to stack targets like that is of great use.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
&
Yeah, I agree about those buff spells. How often does one need to bless more than 4-6 creatures at a time at most? I get it, being able to just stack d4s on top of each other if the bonus scaled like that would be stupid broken. However, there’s gotta be a better way than just adding targets.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
This pretty much sums up my thoughts on most upcasts as well. The benefit is negligible and often there are better options. The alternate rule suggestion, to add a bonus to it, (I would maybe offer +1 per spell level for Bless, so the d4 +x with x being the number of slots upcast) sounds like a great way to keep lower level spells relevant. I also agree it adds a large level of complexity to spellcasting that does grind against 5e's intended simplicity. I think offering such things as optional, to add to the fun is a good idea, even if it comes in as table rules. Maybe not so much for new players, but certainly those who have played a few games would be able to manage that extra bit of thinking and tracking.
Something to consider, however, might be for classes who don't get a wide variety of spells (Sorcerer anyone?) picking, say Chromatic Orb as their "chosen" blasting spell allows them to pick more utility or control, or even buffing spells, instead of constantly trying to have the new best blasting spell. With limited spells to choose from, you want to try and get as much mileage out of your choices. Upcasting a lower level is a way to spread your abilities out at the slight cost of not quite being as damaging as a higher level choice might have been.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Adding a second, alternative way to upcast a spell might be “too complicated for 5e,” but if the spell just simply worked that way it should be fine. After all, false life is an example of a currently existing spell that works of of the 1d4+X model, and in that case it’s by 5s, which is inherently more complex than simply adding 1 each time.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Having put a lot of effort into our point based magic system, and having some different structures to use around it, really led us down some interesting rabbit holes within the realm of spell design.
I am not very keen on the idea of rewriting spells as a whole, lol, but I also see spells in general as currently pretty unbalanced *in comparison to each other*. To the game in a broader sense, maybe -- I am noticing a slight shift in the way they are doing Arcane, Divine, and Primal in the UA stuff that suggests some intent to make each of those kinds of magic slightly different as an additional calculus in player selection.
A lot of the changes that *could* be done do indeed create much more complexity. Which was another rabbit hole, lol. And part of that is the underlying design basis (the so-called Vancian Magic) rubbing against the "Special Ability" system that lies beneath 5e design as well as some of the constraints on a system that has no real "rules of magic" set up. Or at least, none that I have seen, although I could likely deduce a few of them (though none of the Vancian rules work anymore, lol).
TO me, a 20th level caster should still be routinely using cantrips and first level spells. They should be the kinds of spells that lay the foundation for higher level ones -- each higher level building upon the simplest spells to create ever more complex ones such that at spell level 9 (and I note that with cantrips there are actually 10 spell levels, 0-9) those spells should be able to accomplish immense things.
I am not a fan of "wish" as a spell available to players, but the idea of it being a 9th level spell is exactly what I am thinking about in this sense -- and one thing I look at is the Tiers of Play description in the books. IF the highest tier is meant to have regional impact, then the spells should be regional level spells. Create vast wastelands, erase cities, that kind of thing, in terms of destructive ability, but also ensure an incredible harvest, alter the climate, improve the quality of artisanal products, and so forth.
Which I say with an eye to some of my thoughts (from my players, admittedly) about how high level magic should have more risk, and take more time, and involve more effort (role playing and mechanically) than those 1st and cantrips -- and that,in turn, makes them just as rough.
Granted, I do see things through a lens of "Learning" and "Complexity" which is fairly odd -- an example is how when in school, you start with 101 level stuff and move up to post-graduate specialized courses. You can't get to those upper level courses without using the foundations you had tossed at you (most folks never realize this, of course, until they have). You can't really move to multiplication until you have addition, can't really move to division until you have multiplication, and so forth.
This is one of the reasons we adopted a "uniform damage" table rule that we have tweaked off an on and is generally used by all our DMs now. It makes Magic Missle a lot less exciting at 1st level, but it also places it in a position as a go to spell for combat because while the spell itself only gets a d4 for damage, it gets a bunch of d4 and more targets as you increase in level, and 20d4 is nothing to sneeze at.
Spells like Aid and Bless and similar, we are looking at from the perspective of "more complex, more powerful" as well -- and so the buffs granted improve as the caster improves -- a 17th level casting will give advantage and a +5 on rolls, as an example.
Now, the argument that we had about this was that it makes the PCs really powerful using "old to them" spells, and that challenges our whole Encounter building issue , but the DMs in our circle solve that by making encounters that really would instakill anyone under half the level of the encounter, no matter what they had, lol. And also, we give our encounters the same spells and special abilities.
So now those high level dragons have the same magic missile spell. Lastly, we do tend to treat CR as level -- and while all of us use different CR scales right now, that means that we have level 30 to level 50 monsters involved. Level Cap only applies to players in our games.
So we get our balance in other ways at the broader game level, and we addressed some of the shortcomings of those low level spells while also giving them scale.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I think that Burning Hands is probably the weakest spell when it comes to upcasting. Really just not worth even using a 2nd level slot for it.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Agreed, even frost fingers scales better than burning hands, even if it is a little less powerful at the start. Not to say that frost fingers scales well mind you, just better by comparison. What if, instead of 3d6+(1d6/slot level), burning hands dealt 5d4+(2d4/slot level) for damage? That’s still not the best trade off in terms of damage increase per slot level, but would it be enough to make it worthwhile?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Uniform damage:
Die Type by Spell Level: 0-1 = d4, 2-3 = d6, 4-5 = d8, 6-7 = d10, 8-9= d12
Number of dice by level of the Caster.
In systems that use metamagic adjustments, you can add in "increase die", so you could do the same with "casting using a higher level slot' -- turn that d4 MM into a d6 or higher.
It also resets some aspects of how those who "know magic" are generally better than those who don't, because of that deeper understanding, blah blah.
In terms of play, it also makes things a lot easier. Yes, it means fireball is less cool, and it cuts burning hands down a lot at low levels, but then it scales fast, and still allows for challenge.
We've been using this for about a decade or so, I think. Definitely from before 5e came out.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Yea - my point was that it isn't particularly niche, or at least it shouldn't be. Like I said, burn a 9th level slot for it, and you're putting 100+ HD to sleep on average.
Now, the norm for high level play is that you'd farely rarely have a use for that. Because I dunno, you'll be fighting demons and elementals and dragons and undead and so on, that don't sleep or are immune or have spell resistance of whatever.
Only I think that's wrong. If only because massive HP sponges lead to massively boring fights. And sleep isn't putting 'a few guards' to sleep. By that level, it knocks out the entire city guard.
It only becomes niche because WOTC, GM's and players alike have painted themselves into a corner, where any challenge must by necessity be larger - like, physically (and in HD) - than the last one. I know this is a minority opinion, but I'm serious: Larger enemies make for crappier games.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Creative opponents make for better games, imo.
Guards and Wards is a nightmare spell for PCs to run into, no matter what level they are or who cast it. But they never think about what it means to have it used against them.
My "lazy dragon" with a CR of 30 in my game can devastate a party with that magic missile spell, or take most of them out with a sleep spell, or laugh maniacally when they strike him and he has burning hands active.
but the same thing can be said for a Hobgoblin and his Gang, lying in wait for the next passing merchant caravan or the semi-regular patrol of the Lord's Mounted Militia.
I complain about min-maxing , I know, but I also have to admit that using that same tactic against them, and knowing the weaknesses they have, is far more effective -- and can be very frustrating when the BBEG use low level spells instead of higher level ones.
Not all my side are geniuses, but as a whole they didn't become a major threat to the world just existing -- they earned it by being the folks who almost won the big war.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds