D&D 5E Teleport /fly /misty step the bane of cool dungeon design is RAW in 5E

DeJoker said:

Really I have never seen them do anything but mildly tweak this casting system -- and the tweaks they used were often horrible mainly because they were extreme partials of what they (imo) should have done. However your point of they did it for marketability reasons is basically what I said "we are just going to copy/paste it as is as that speeds things up for publication purposes" okay maybe not exactly but all I have to add is -- instead of fixing it properly we will just make some really small tweaks the rest we will just copy/paste as is

Click to expand...

Except it's not copy pasting with the goal of speeding things up for publication purposes. The D&D core spellcasting mechanics have changed in each edition- some more radically than others. They not only tend to tweak the core system between editions, but they also regularly introduce variants and entirely new systems; with 4e obviously being the largest departure the core spellcasting system has made since it was introduced. The issue is that the more radical change(s) never gain traction. At worst, they seem(ed) to push large segments of the existing player base away or make them apathetic.

That's why 5e went back to a more vancian system (with the usual minor tweaks). All their attempts at completely overhauling the system have ended up being less well received than they had hoped. It's not that WOTC refuses to make changes or innovations regarding D&D's spellcasting system. It's just that at this point, they're kind of stuck with the Vancian-ish system because if they change things too much, significant segments of their customer base reject it for not being "D&D enough".

And it gets hard to justify to the execs why they should still be pumping money into D&D if its making less money due to flagging player interest.

Honestly if you think these abilities ruin cool dungeon designs, I think you nee to rethink about being a dm. Most of these power have been ther from the beginning of the game. I have no problem whatsoever as a dm letting my players use and/or abuse these powers. If it makes the players feel cool or op, Im down. And there are hoestly plenty of ways to counter these powers if needed.

Valetudo said:

Honestly if you think these abilities ruin cool dungeon designs, I think you nee to rethink about being a dm. Most of these power have been ther from the beginning of the game. I have no problem whatsoever as a dm letting my players use and/or abuse these powers. If it makes the players feel cool or op, Im down. And there are hoestly plenty of ways to counter these powers if needed.

Click to expand...

Not really though. Most of these effects were limited to the wizard, once upon a time, and a fairly high level one at that. Once upon a time, clerics got virtually no travel effects (Word of Recall being about the only one) and druids didn't get very many and then, pretty limited use ones (the only flying effect, other than shape change of course, that druids got was Chariots of Susstarre and that was a very high level spell).

What has changed now in 5e is that it's not unusual to have 80% of the PC's spell capable. Instead of having two spell capable PC's in the group (the cleric and the MU, one of which had no travel spells), you now have entire groups which are spell capable, and many of the spells lists have travel spells.

Basically, these spells which negate skill checks, have become so common in groups that there is little to no actual resource cost to use them. It's all part and parcel to 5e D&D being such a very, very high magic game. For DM's like me, who prefer a much lower magic game, it makes the base game somewhat problematic.

I, personally, just don't like it when the caster (which is now pretty much anyone in the group) plays the magical trump card over every obstacle. Because it becomes cyclical. You put in obstacles in the adventure, the players trump with magic, the first reaction is for every player to look at their spell list to see how they can overcome this obstacle instead of actually doing any interacting with the setting itself. And, because they do overcome obstacles this way, the DM stops putting in the obstacles, because, well, what's the point if they're just going to skip them anyway?

Hussar said:

...

I, personally, just don't like it when the caster (which is now pretty much anyone in the group) plays the magical trump card over every obstacle. Because it becomes cyclical. You put in obstacles in the adventure, the players trump with magic, the first reaction is for every player to look at their spell list to see how they can overcome this obstacle instead of actually doing any interacting with the setting itself. And, because they do overcome obstacles this way, the DM stops putting in the obstacles, because, well, what's the point if they're just going to skip them anyway?

Click to expand...

That's why I personally prefer the classes with limited lists of spells known as opposed to being able to swap out their repertoire every time they rest. Sure a Warlock or Sorcerer may know X spell, but that ability becomes a known quantity and knowing it means they give up other tricks so while they may become "the teleport guy" and may use it in a variety of creative ways to resolve multiple issues, it's part of their schtick and not just one of a near endless number of tricks they can pull out of left field on you.

[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] and [MENTION=18674]Alex[/MENTION]empler -- Ever since 2nd Ed I have been using a magic systems that allowed all spell casters to be dynamic with their spells and I have not had a single issue with creating challenges for them. So this in and of its self does not make a show stopper, it just a measure of what kind of challenges you put in front of them. Some of my challenges have to do with following the right lead because if you pursue A then you cannot pursue B and weighing the pros and cons even if you used magic to know what they all were is not always that easy -- if you pursue A then these good and bad things might happen but if you pursue B then these other set of good and bad things can happen ... which do you pursue ... well most of the time they want to pursue both or even worse if there is more than just 2 options .... I had to remind my group once what their original mission was as they had totally forgot about it while dealing with all the other things they had found along the way. The challenge does not have to be physical in nature that is just limitation you place on yourself -- granted I created numerous physical challenges and if the players figure out a why to use their magic in a unique way to get around that obstacle more power to them but usually it was a challenge that you could not just throw a magic spell at to solve you had to figure out a way to use some magic in an unusual way to do something like that. Thus while they did end sometimes throwing magic at it as you say it was not like they pulled out their multi-tool and bang it was done.

Conversely I would have to ask what would you do if the genre was superheroes ?? They technically all have some kind of magic and some are extremely versatile with that magic and many of them can fly or use other means of strange forms of movement that normal people could never do. That genre is no different than this one in a general sense you have to deal with similar issues and such and you have a certain set of tools to do that with. So why limit yourself as a GM by limiting your players on what they can and cannot do -- if its fun for the players (which btw is what the main point of the game is to begin with) then let it be. I only put out restrictions based on certain game concepts that I have in mind but when I do that I almost always make an alternate path that allows them to do something that is pretty much the same thing but with a slightly different aesthetic veneer. To clarify that -- let us say for certain reason no one can fly without wings that is the concept -- so I create an alternate race(s) that have wings so that if someone wants to have the coolness of being able to fly they take one of those races or if they do not then they do not. And the list goes on and on... instead of pumping so much energy into figuring out how to say No to your players .... why not pump that energy into figuring out how to say yes to them instead.

I have had players in almost every game system outline something that by the straight up mechanics could not be done, but I had to agree with them as a player it could be fun -- and even if I did not necessarily agree with that I had to acknowledge it seems they would have fun with this and who am I to judge -- so I would within game balance sit down and figure out how I could say yes to them -- this often meant I had to tweak a class or a race or a something else in order to get what they wanted or something really close to what they wanted. Now before I seem like I toot my horn about how great I am -- I will say I may have just as many failures at this as I have had successes but most of the failures have been with unreasonable expectations of the player and their (imo) inability to see past the surface of things. I was running a game where I stated upfront that I had only 2 magic paradigms and if you wanted to play a class with one of those other paradigms that I would figure out how to slide it into one of the 2 existing ones but I had players that simply wanted that to add that 3rd paradigm regardless of what I did to create the basic concept of what they said they wanted to play. So you win some and you lose some but for the most part I generally do not have to say no to my players all that often because frankly most of the things they can do I can just as easily counter by doing something else and do it in a manner that is not just nerfing it -- aka putting up an anti-magic field to shut down magic is IMO a lame way to go about stopping the magic solution, not saying it cannot be used under specific circumstances but I have heard of DMs doing it for almost all the situations. Why give them a bit of coolness unless you are going to let them be cool with it?

*coughs and steps down off of soap box* Sorry I sometimes get a bit carried away with that subject.

I'd totally be up for a "What's your favorite magic/power system (D&D or otherwise)" thread. Not particularly keen on going too much further into the subject in this thread, though.

Hussar said:

Not really though. Most of these effects were limited to the wizard, once upon a time, and a fairly high level one at that. Once upon a time, clerics got virtually no travel effects (Word of Recall being about the only one) and druids didn't get very many and then, pretty limited use ones (the only flying effect, other than shape change of course, that druids got was Chariots of Susstarre and that was a very high level spell).

What has changed now in 5e is that it's not unusual to have 80% of the PC's spell capable. Instead of having two spell capable PC's in the group (the cleric and the MU, one of which had no travel spells), you now have entire groups which are spell capable, and many of the spells lists have travel spells.

Basically, these spells which negate skill checks, have become so common in groups that there is little to no actual resource cost to use them. It's all part and parcel to 5e D&D being such a very, very high magic game. For DM's like me, who prefer a much lower magic game, it makes the base game somewhat problematic.

I, personally, just don't like it when the caster (which is now pretty much anyone in the group) plays the magical trump card over every obstacle. Because it becomes cyclical. You put in obstacles in the adventure, the players trump with magic, the first reaction is for every player to look at their spell list to see how they can overcome this obstacle instead of actually doing any interacting with the setting itself. And, because they do overcome obstacles this way, the DM stops putting in the obstacles, because, well, what's the point if they're just going to skip them anyway?

Click to expand...

While I came down on the side of not limiting magic too much in this thread, magic trumping skills was a big pet peeve of mine in 3e.

5e at least is better than that eddition in that regard, because it's not quite as easy. Knock (a prime 3e offender) , for example, has serious downsides to the Rogue picking the lock.

I like to make sure the players feel/see the opportunity cost of using spells over skills. Though I will say the large proliferation of "useful" spells sometimes makes it tough. Guiding hand from the recent Unearthed Arcana, for example, is quite troubling. A 1st level ritual spell that allows the party to find most places and essentially ensures the party knows where they are at all times - that's a bit much for me.

Sent from my SM-G930V using EN World mobile app

DeJoker said:

/snip

Conversely I would have to ask what would you do if the genre was superheroes ?? They technically all have some kind of magic and some are extremely versatile with that magic and many of them can fly or use other means of strange forms of movement that normal people could never do. That genre is no different than this one in a general sense you have to deal with similar issues and such and you have a certain set of tools to do that with. /snip

Click to expand...

But, that's the point. I'm NOT playing a Supers game. I don't want to play a Supers game. Well, if I wanted to play a Supers game, then I would play that. Why does my favorite fantasy game have to look like Harry Potter with constant spell casting and the PC's armed with all these superhero effects?

Hussar said:

Frankly it's a game thing. What at will effect would you give a paladin or a ranger that has to be good enough to be at least equal to their attacks. The existing attack cantrips aren't going to cut it. No stat bonus to damage.

So what would these canttips actually be?

Click to expand...

This is a good point but....

1: The eldrich knight is a warrior too yet he gets cantrips
2: A lot of cantrips are valuable for their utility, not attack power.

Hussar said:

But, that's the point. I'm NOT playing a Supers game. I don't want to play a Supers game. Well, if I wanted to play a Supers game, then I would play that. Why does my favorite fantasy game have to look like Harry Potter with constant spell casting and the PC's armed with all these superhero effects?

Click to expand...

But ARE playing a supers game for that is what DnD has been from get go, basically a game of superheroes set in a fantasy past setting. You read all the things that Gygax and the rest put together the games they played, they were not playing some medieval world with a touch of magic their worlds were full of magic and basically magic in their worlds was just basically a superpower that was used for good by heroes and bad by the villains -- sure it evolved from miniature rules for fighting small scale combat but it evolved a lot from that even before they got to the 2nd Edition. To say you do not want to play a supers game is to say you do not want to play DnD at its core -- oh sure you can change it to fit just about most things and I have seen folks do it from extremely low scaled magic to way over the top magic and everything in between. But if you really do not want to play a superheroes game there are numerous other game systems out there that were built just for that -- personally I see no need to reinvent the wheel by ratcheting down the magic or beefing this up or mucking with for that reason.

When I make tweaks it is generally only to balance certain elements out for the game world that I am going to run and even then I have learned to keep the changes to a minimum either that or find a better system to run that covers the paradigm I am wishing to run. If I have to do a major overhaul of the system to meet my vision I am using the wrong system. It is why I am probably not going to take the magic system I have had since 2nd Edition and try to translate it into 5e as it has the major element that I have always sought with my magic system -- it got rid of the fire and forget process which was something I absolutely never agreed with and the sole reason that I created a magic system so many years ago.

Of course your welcome to agree to disagree as always but seriously if you are going to do a major overhaul of the game all I have to do is ask why do you not use a different game system one that is closer to what you are wanting. I have run numerous other systems all have the pros and cons but if you are wanting a magic poor game DnD is not the base you should be starting with as it has and will always be a magic rich game. It is like using the wrong tool for the job, sure you might be able to get by with it but often more than not you end up breaking the tool or whatever it was you were working on. Still to each there own I guess.