D&D 5E What is Over-Powered?

keterys · Feb 8, 2015

emdw45 said:
Level 5-9: Shapechanged forms lose some punch, but luckily for you, Conjure Animals just came online! And at level 7, so does Conjure Minor Elementals/Woodland Creatures! (As I read RAW, the spell doesn't let you choose which fey gets summoned, so the 8x Pixie cheese won't work unless your DM wants it to, but summoning eight other creatures still does great things for your HP pool and action economy.)

Summoning has so far proven awful in actual gameplay. Like 'Okay, so I cast a summon spell. They act on "*rolls initiative*" about half a round from now.' 'Okay, the bad guys hit you. Check concentration.' '*roll* They all disappear'.

'Okay, this time I cast it before the combat. Then I switch into a dire wolf and they won't know which one is me, and it'll be great. *rolls initiative* Okay, I act on 20 and they're on 10. I charge up to attack. And get hit. And lose concentration. Before the summons act even once. Again.' 'If it's any consolation, I had three guys with AE in this combat, so at most they'd have gotten one attack off.' 'None'.

Hussar · Feb 8, 2015

keterys said:
Summoning has so far proven awful in actual gameplay. Like 'Okay, so I cast a summon spell. They act on "*rolls initiative*" about half a round from now.' 'Okay, the bad guys hit you. Check concentration.' '*roll* They all disappear'.

'Okay, this time I cast it before the combat. Then I switch into a dire wolf and they won't know which one is me, and it'll be great. *rolls initiative* Okay, I act on 20 and they're on 10. I charge up to attack. And get hit. And lose concentration. Before the summons act even once. Again.' 'If it's any consolation, I had three guys with AE in this combat, so at most they'd have gotten one attack off.' 'None'.

That kinda sounds like a player problem though.

If you're dropping summons, why are you getting into combat? Isn't the whole point of summoning so that you don't get into combat? Particularly your second example. If you summon and they act on 10 and you act on 20, why on earth are you charging forward? That's just some very bad tactics. Should the system cover people who are tactically inept?

krunchyfrogg · Feb 8, 2015

That Moon Druid sure does seem powerful at lower levels, but I think the Fighter is this editions most powerful class.

You can choose to concentrate on a certain style of combat (two styles if you're a Champion), they have the most stat/feat bumps, and they are built to take advantage of the two feats that add +10 to damage, which are considered by many to be the best feats in the game.

keterys · Feb 8, 2015

Hussar said:
That kinda sounds like a player problem though.

It is definitely partially a player problem.

If you're dropping summons, why are you getting into combat?

In this particular instance, I'm pretty sure it's a moon druid who enjoys shapeshifting and wants to actually shapeshift. She's just trying to make that stop sucking (from the ridiculous highs of low levels).

If you summon and they act on 10 and you act on 20, why on earth are you charging forward?

Because dnd players hate giving up their turns to do nothing, and that was her other option.

That's just some very bad tactics. Should the system cover people who are tactically inept?

This is going to sound weird: but yes, it really should. It should reward those who are tactically savvy, but it should certainly cover the other end.

In both combats there was nothing she could do to both participate in the combat and avoid taking damage. In both combats, the summons acting on a different initiative from her resulted in them not going. In both combats concentration spells being trivial to take down meant they were taken down. Some of that's her, but only some. Even in the hands of a skilled player - in these particular combats - she wasn't going to get much mileage out of them.

Hussar · Feb 8, 2015

keterys said:
It is definitely partially a player problem.

In this particular instance, I'm pretty sure it's a moon druid who enjoys shapeshifting and wants to actually shapeshift. She's just trying to make that stop sucking (from the ridiculous highs of low levels).

Because dnd players hate giving up their turns to do nothing, and that was her other option.

This is going to sound weird: but yes, it really should. It should reward those who are tactically savvy, but it should certainly cover the other end.

Why wouldn't she have simply readied an action? Where was the rest of the party here?

See, to me, this is no different than any other character running up by themselves and getting clobbered. You KNOW that you're going to potentially lose the spell (note, the Con save DC is not terribly difficult - 10 or damage taken - might be difficult depending on what you are fighting I suppose) if you get smacked. If you deliberately run forward to engage and get smacked, that's on you. We're not talking Sun Tzu here, this is basic tactics.

So, no, I don't feel that the mechanics should cover those at the other end. At least, not that far. Part of the combat game is tactical in nature. "I run straight at the enemies and the rules will allow me to succeed" is not tactics.

Manbearcat · Feb 8, 2015

Hussar said:
That kinda sounds like a player problem though.

If you're dropping summons, why are you getting into combat? Isn't the whole point of summoning so that you don't get into combat? Particularly your second example. If you summon and they act on 10 and you act on 20, why on earth are you charging forward? That's just some very bad tactics. Should the system cover people who are tactically inept?

I'm not sure this is correct. From what I'm reading here, @keterys is responding to the the position put forth that a Moon Druid (a shapeshifting spec that is meant to be wading into the melee and trading blows) has its waxing/waning melee prowess smoothed out by various class features/spells that find their way into its suite of abilities right when the Moon Druid's melee prowess wanes. If it is meant to supplement those waning periods, it should properly synergize with the Moon Druid's shtick (RAWR RIP FACES IN MELEE). If it doesn't properly synergize with his sthick (due to the Concentration mechanics and/or the nature of the D&D action economy or any other unforeseen issue), then it is in no way a supplement to a Moon Druid's waning melee prowess. And you're just left with an archetype that can't consistently perform up to par with its shtick. I don't think that is the player's fault. That is a system issue.

Monks and F/M's have suffered from this in the past in various iterations of D&D and the Moon Druid has kindred blood to them.

aramis erak · Feb 8, 2015

Gecko85 said:
Not sure I see why that's a problem. If every class was relatively equal to every othe class, at each level, then why even have classes? To me, each class has a trade off. Some are better at lower levels, some at higher levels, others more "pretty good" all the way through. Makes for interesting choices and interesting parties.

They're actually all pretty close most of the time. The tradeoffs are in how they do things, not how overall effective they are (excepting the low level moon druid). Wizards have the most spell flexibility, and pay for it with no depth once they run out of casting slots. Clerics and Bards have fewer spells to pick from, but more abilities. etc. Fighters only real boons are 1 extra action per combat†, 1d10+Level HP recovered once per combat†, and the best range of combat styles.

A party of any 4 single-class characters (with each of a different class) is going to have a pretty good range of abilities, and be able to handle most anything.

Gecko85 · Feb 8, 2015

aramis erak said:
They're actually all pretty close most of the time. The tradeoffs are in how they do things, not how overall effective they are (excepting the low level moon druid). Wizards have the most spell flexibility, and pay for it with no depth once they run out of casting slots. Clerics and Bards have fewer spells to pick from, but more abilities. etc. Fighters only real boons are 1 extra action per combat†, 1d10+Level HP recovered once per combat†, and the best range of combat styles.

A party of any 4 single-class characters (with each of a different class) is going to have a pretty good range of abilities, and be able to handle most anything.

Exactly my point.

Nergal Pendragon · Feb 8, 2015

Manbearcat said:
If it is meant to supplement those waning periods, it should properly synergize with the Moon Druid's shtick (RAWR RIP FACES IN MELEE).

No, it shouldn't. What it should do is focus on the druid's other abilities that give them increased tactical choices so that they still have options when their main focus fails to be of use. Otherwise, you have the one-trick-pony problem that made the Monk a bad class in 3E.

keterys · Feb 9, 2015

Hussar said:
Why wouldn't she have simply readied an action?

Because you can't ready both a move and a melee attack (one or the other), and moving up and readying would have been even worse than what she did.

Where was the rest of the party here?

Also charging the enemy position, under the vagaries of the initiative order.

The relevant information in that combat was that there were 4 enemies (3 half-dragons with a breath weapon mechanic, and a flame hurling guy) who all could have affected / included her in incidental damage without her realizing / in spite of the protection fighter near her.

D&D 5E What is Over-Powered?

keterys

First Post

Hussar

Legend

krunchyfrogg

Explorer

keterys

First Post

Hussar

Legend

Manbearcat

Legend

aramis erak

Legend

Gecko85

Explorer

Nergal Pendragon

First Post

keterys

First Post

Similar Threads