D&D 5E Spellcasting Bonus: can't we just lose it?

[hbarsquared]

So, seeing the presence of the "Spellcasting Bonus" in some columns for classes has been bothering me. It seems like an inelegant solution to just tack on these numbers.

Why not have all attack spells rely only on a DC, circumventing any need for a spellcasting bonus for any class? I took a second look at the recent spell list, too, and only found a total of four spells that even utilize this class-dependent bonus. (flame blade, flaming sphere, shillelagh, and spiritual weapon) In my opinion, flaming sphere can rely on a second saving throw, and the other three attack spells can instead rely on your regular (melee or ranged) attack bonus (including your Str/Dex modifier) + your magical ability modifier.

So, here's to less bookkeeping! I think having some DC spells dealing zero damage on a failed save (like some cantrips) is also a good direction.

 

[the Jester]

I think the spellcasting bonus also applies to your save DCs, doesn't it?

That's how my playtest game has been doing it, anyhow.

I agree that we should lose it, since there is no equivalent bonus to saves for being high level to equalize things, and your DCs are already increasing by virtue of ability increases.

 

[hbarsquared]

I didn't think so... (*goes to double-check*)

Ah, you're totally right. Missed that completely, somehow.

Well, I guess I don't mind it as much, but still annoying. I would still prefer to not have any type of attack roll associated with spells.

 

[DogBackward]

I would still prefer to not have any type of attack roll associated with spells.

That's the thing though... some spells make perfect sense as requiring an attack roll. Aiming a Ray of Frost or grabbing someone with Shocking Grasp is just as much a ranged or melee attack as any other attack. I don't like that they moved all but four of the spells to pure save DC effects. There's no reason for the change, and it makes far more sense to keep them as attack rolls.

 

[Falling Icicle]

That's the thing though... some spells make perfect sense as requiring an attack roll. Aiming a Ray of Frost or grabbing someone with Shocking Grasp is just as much a ranged or melee attack as any other attack. I don't like that they moved all but four of the spells to pure save DC effects. There's no reason for the change, and it makes far more sense to keep them as attack rolls.

+1.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'm forced to agree. When many of the spells in the packet required an attack roll, the spellcasting bonus made a lot of sense. And while I like the concept that a Wizard's spells become more difficult to avoid as he gains levels, I don't want saves to start increasing, so I'm not sure it's worth it.

Granted, the difference is only +5, but that still has an effect when the class is also getting ability score increases.

That said, if they just removed the bonus from Spell DCs, then I say leave it in and find opportunities to tie things into it.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I agree with Jeff and i'd rather see it go. Saves don't scale as fast as spellcasters DCs and it rapidly becomes a problem when increasing ability scores and Spellcasting Bonus. Most monsters don't have very high ability scores and thus low save modifier and many have even penalties, making Spellcasting strong.

If DCs were only set by the ability score modifier, it'd scale much slower and be more balanced.

 

[Li Shenron]

Spellcasting Bonus: can't we just lose it?

Yes we can. There's nothing inevitable or written in stone.

 

[hbarsquared]

That's the thing though... some spells make perfect sense as requiring an attack roll...

Ah... the path of perfect sense. A dangerous one to tread...

I agree, yes, some spells "make sense" as an attack roll.

But, to me, it makes more sense to have a unified, simplified, intuitive game mechanic.

If I use a weapon, it's an attack roll. If I use a spell, it's a save DC. Done.

I really don't want to go back and read through spell descriptions time and time again just to figure out if I need to make an attack roll, or how to determine if I hit or not.

 

[Evenglare]

It sounds as if you think "perfect sense" is a bad path? Why would you want rules that DONT make sense especially with relation to the game fiction? Why have unnecessary symmetry in all the spells if it makes no sense to do such a thing? Making an attack with a spell should encompass an attack roll.