D&D (2024) Playtest 8 Survey

[Dausuul]

I didn't even notice the schools, but "poison is necromancy" makes perfect sense if you think of the schools as character themes rather than mechanical functions of spells. Does this spell feel appropriate to a necromancer? Then it goes in necromancy. Whether it specifically involves draining life energy or creating undead isn't the point.

5E already has some of this; notice how spells that cause fear are necromancy, even though their function would seem to put them in enchantment. Doing schools this way makes it easier to ensure that each school is viable as a specialty.

This does cause one issue, which is the need for a really excessive number of spells to fill out eight schools. If 1D&D is going this route, it would be well served by returning to the AD&D approach where one spell could fall under multiple schools.

 

[Mephista]

IMO.

True Strike.
Make a weapon attack, but treat the d20 as a 15. The attack deals half the normal damage and can’t be increased in any way, such as sneak attack.
Level 5: the attack deals full damage.
Level 11: the die roll is a 20, making it a critical hit.
Level 17: deal max damage.

Oooh boy. This would be used to crit fish smites like mad. Its worse than Shocking Grasp on an average mage, decently on an Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger, and abusable on high level paladin or hexblade with that Smite feature.

 

[mellored]

Oooh boy. This would be used to crit fish smites like mad. Its worse than Shocking Grasp on an average mage, decently on an Eldritch Knight or Bladesinger, and abusable on high level paladin or hexblade with that Smite feature.

True Strike.
Make a weapon attack, but treat the d20 as a 15. The attack deals half the normal damage and can’t be increased in any way, such as sneak attack or smite spells.
Level 5: the attack deals full damage.
Level 11: the die roll is a 20, making it a critical hit.
Level 17: deal max damage.

Fixed.
And yeah, auto-damage that works againt high AC invisible targets should be a little bit worse than others.

It has it's clear niche.

 

[Dausuul]

On the survey... I was pretty harsh on the Bastion system. I did try to make clear that I support the idea of a stronghold mechanic, but I really don't like this implementation of it. It's way too fiddly and also way too focused on having everything feed back into your adventuring power. IMO, strongholds should be an additional way to exercise power in the world, a way to influence things without having to go personally smite somebody. This is the kind of thing players and DMs often have a little trouble translating into reality -- it's easy to get stuck in the mental "box" of the core rules, which are relentlessly focused on old-school quests and dungeon crawls -- and it would be super helpful to have some light mechanical support to get people over that hump. But it seems like the folks who designed the Bastion system were themselves stuck in that box.

(Or else my preferences are an outlier and most players don't even want to leave the box, in which case I expect other folks' survey responses will drown out mine and I'll just have to accept that the Bastion system is not for me.)

The cantrips I was generally positive on, with a couple of minor exceptions. I do find the behavior of the weapon cantrips (shillelagh and true strike) converting the damage type to be odd, particularly given the types chosen. Force for shillelagh I can sorta see, but radiant for true strike?

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

True Strike.
Make a weapon attack, but treat the d20 as a 15. The attack deals half the normal damage and can’t be increased in any way, such as sneak attack or smite spells.
Level 5: the attack deals full damage.
Level 11: the die roll is a 20, making it a critical hit.
Level 17: deal max damage.

Fixed.
And yeah, auto-damage that works againt high AC invisible targets should be a little bit worse than others.

It has it's clear niche.

While I am fine with the current UA version, I'll play designer too. The above seems a little fiddly and hard to word properly. What does "cannot be increased" mean? Do bonuses from Ability score modifier or feat bonuses work? Also, the difference between full and max damage might be confusing. How about the following?

True Strike - 1 Action
Make a weapon attack with a weapon you are proficient with, but do not make an attack roll. The attack automatically hits, though it can never be a critical hit. You deal damage normally.
Level 5: Apply your spellcasting ability modifier to the damage of the attack (on top of the modifier you already get.)
Level 11: Do not roll the damage dice for the weapon itself, rather it is maximized. This does not apply to any other additional damage dice tied to the attack.
Level 17: You may make a second weapon attack as part of this spell.

 

[Maxperson]

About the whole poison = necromancy thing...

I was actually thinking in terms of the Spore druid - they're all about mixing poison and necrosis, similar to Zuggtmoy. Demon queen of rot ends up being poisonous. So, if we're dealing with rot = poison instead of creating serpent venom, it'd make sense. Rabies probably counts as a poison too - I'm looking at you, Yeenoghu. But, yeah, disease falls under necromancy, doesn't it? That's poison...

Bad for your doesn't equate to poison, which is why we have poisons, venoms and diseases as separate things. There are things said colloquially to "poison the blood" that aren't poisons, but those aren't poisons. Also, the description doesn't describe rot or disease. It's simply sprays poison.

I'm also not sure all the wine makers in D&Dland want to be accused of practicing necromancy everytime they make wine. Alcohol is an actual poison you know.

Another reason could be because of blood magic. I read a lot of vampire fiction, and making poison from blood magic is extremely common twist on blood magic when it shows up; it also shows up in the Vampire TTRPGs as an extension of blood magic. And I don't think anyone here would disagree that blood magic should fall under the Necromancy school.

I can see that, but that's very different from a poison spray.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Bad for your doesn't equate to poison, which is why we have poisons, venoms and diseases as separate things. There are things said colloquially to "poison the blood" that aren't poisons, but those aren't poisons. Also, the description doesn't describe rot or disease. It's simply sprays poison.

I'm also not sure all the wine makers in D&Dland want to be accused of practicing necromancy everytime they make wine. Alcohol is an actual poison you know.

I can see that, but that's very different from a poison spray.

Several disjointed thoughts...

It looks like there has been an ongoing shift to how Disease is portrayed in the game. It's being removed from class abilities, and monsters' disease abilities are often tied to the Poisoned condition. We'll see how far they go in 2024.

There is already a common consideration that drugs and alcohol are subtle poisons that don't deal immediate damage, rather can cause the Poisoned condition if enough is imbibed. It also narratively works with Dwarven Resilience makes dwarves less susceptible to alcohol. That can work for drugs too.

With Poison being such a commonly resisted damage type, I don't think I'd have a problem with "Poison" being enhanced to become a larger umbrella that includes drugs, alcohol, and disease, that if they were induced with magic, it could be necromantic magic. Aren't drug and alcohol addictions diseases? Aren't drugs and alcohol poisons? Blood alcohol poisoning? Blood of the Vine? As for necromantic vintners, if there was magical fermentation of biological matter into poison, that would be Necromancy! Woo! It all makes sense!

I know, I know. I'm waaaaay out there.

 

[Mephista]

True Strike.
Make a weapon attack, but treat the d20 as a 15. The attack deals half the normal damage and can’t be increased in any way, such as sneak attack or smite spells.
Level 5: the attack deals full damage.
Level 11: the die roll is a 20, making it a critical hit.
Level 17: deal max damage.

Fixed.
And yeah, auto-damage that works againt high AC invisible targets should be a little bit worse than others.

It has it's clear niche.

Eh... Not really sure it does have a niche then. Its average damage is roughly on par with Shocking Grasp (worse with any spell damage buffs), but lacks any kind of rider that makes it more useful (like removing Reactions on target). So, its strictly worse for an average mage.

Without the smites or sneak attacks, then no blade'locks or any of the various rogues will use it. That leaves Eldritch Knights, Bladesingers, and maybe clerics. That said, they're more likely to use the other blade cantrips, which do more damage on average.

 

[mellored]

Eh... Not really sure it does have a niche then. Its average damage is roughly on par with Shocking Grasp (worse with any spell damage buffs), but lacks any kind of rider that makes it more useful (like removing Reactions on target). So, its strictly worse for an average mage.

The "rider" is that it ignores invisibly, blindness, Dodge, and high AC. And enemies with just a few HP left.

Same as 3e, "you are not affected by the miss chance that applies to attackers trying to strike a concealed target" (i.e. disadvantage).

Not sure what other niche it you think it should have.

 

[Maxperson]

Several disjointed thoughts...

It looks like there has been an ongoing shift to how Disease is portrayed in the game. It's being removed from class abilities, and monsters' disease abilities are often tied to the Poisoned condition. We'll see how far they go in 2024.

There is already a common consideration that drugs and alcohol are subtle poisons that don't deal immediate damage, rather can cause the Poisoned condition if enough is imbibed. It also narratively works with Dwarven Resilience makes dwarves less susceptible to alcohol. That can work for drugs too.

With Poison being such a commonly resisted damage type, I don't think I'd have a problem with "Poison" being enhanced to become a larger umbrella that includes drugs, alcohol, and disease, that if they were induced with magic, it could be necromantic magic. Aren't drug and alcohol addictions diseases? Aren't drugs and alcohol poisons? Blood alcohol poisoning? Blood of the Vine? As for necromantic vintners, if there was magical fermentation of biological matter into poison, that would be Necromancy! Woo! It all makes sense!

I know, I know. I'm waaaaay out there.

Lots of good thoughts there, but of course I remain in the camp that it should not be necromancy. I can see how they might come to that conclusion, though.

As an aside, addiction is the disease, not the specific thing you are addicted to. Addiction to gaming for instance still falls into the disease category, despite(hopefully) no ingestion of games happening.