D&D 5E Starter Set Character Sheet Revealed!

[DDNFan]

Oh snap! Precedented!

You're completely missing the point.

If the only way in 5th edition to gain this ability is through the fighter chassis, that's how people will get it.

Eberron feat didn't have prerequisites, so anyone could take it. Then it's either unbalanced on its own, and can be banned easily, or it isn't an it isn't a problem. By my own playtesting experience, it can be a problem when you can offload 2 daily spells in rapid succession. If it isn't unbalancing, why didn't they give a similar ability to mages? Eldritch knights are going to be very popular in 5th edition, I guess.

I like multiclassing when there are lots of viable options. Not when there is only take this, because any other choice is super weak in comparison. I find it surprising that so many compain about classic wizard power due to their spells, yet fail to realize that having the ability to be twice as powerful when you can offload such a huge burst of energy than your opponents or other single classed mages, and suffer little drawback (Giving up your 20th level capstone isn't a very big penalty for having the ability to nova so spectacularly throughout the duration of the entire campaign), is much worse.

I actually don't think it's overpowered for fighters. I like that fighters can get something nice and be able to whoop some behind once in a while. But when the mage can swoop in and steal his best stuff for a 2 level dip, and benefit his main class better than probably any other MC combination, then I start to wonder what the devs were smoking when they let this slip through. Did they not have any powergamers playtesting this edition? I don't think I would ever play a mage who didn't multiclass just for this ability, even if he wasn't interested in wearing heavy armor or going into melee. Extra HP and saves are a nice bonus, but being able to nova any two of your spells from your ever increasing spell list? Yes, please! I'll take that. Each and every time.

 

[YRUSirius]

Just houserule it then! My god...

-YRUSirius

 

[Mistwell]

You're completely missing the point.

I think it comes with a rule about not being able to cast two spells in a single round (separate rule).

Eberron feat didn't have prerequisites, so anyone could take it. Then it's either unbalanced on its own, and can be banned easily, or it isn't an it isn't a problem. By my own playtesting experience, it can be a problem when you can offload 2 daily spells in rapid succession.

Well I am pretty sure you cannot cast two spells in 5e, so that isn't an issue.

If it isn't unbalancing, why didn't they give a similar ability to mages?

They gave it to one class, and from this you conclude it was not given to other classes because it would have unbalanced them? You realize this logic applies to every single unique ability for every single class in the game, right?

I actually don't think it's overpowered for fighters. I like that fighters can get something nice and be able to whoop some behind once in a while. But when the mage can swoop in and steal his best stuff for a 2 level dip,

If you cannot use it to cast two spells in one round, would that solve your concerns?

 

[DDNFan]

Well I am pretty sure you cannot cast two spells in 5e, so that isn't an issue.

If you cannot use it to cast two spells in one round, would that solve your concerns?

I'm 100% sure of that based on this character sheet, which states that you get two actions, no ifs ands or buts.

Unless there is a special caveat somewhere that negates the use of Action Surge as written on that sheet, that is. But I think that is doubtful, because it would be simpler to merely change the base wording. Most abilities are self-contained, and the structure of the rules is generally very straightforward in 5th edition (except for stuff like Second Wind, which is so far in the playtests the only example of stamina affecting your HP total, which makes it stick out like a sore thumb). If there was a restriction on spellcasting I believe they would have changed the base wording to simply getting two actions instead. Rather, the ability even adds an extra line we haven't seen before, to add a possible extra bonus action as well, and that's for stuff like Ki or dual wielding and who knows what else. So if anything, the ability is more powerful and versatile than it was in the playtests, because bonus action could mean a bunch of things, not just attacks.

For a wizard who hoards his spells for the right moment, it's the ultimate nova card. For a wizard who doesn't hoard his spells normally but still needs to blast + get away (through a fly spell or an extra casting of invisibility), it's extremely potent. I can think of dozens of situations in my gaming career where as a wizard, I would have had a much easier time decimating a situation.

It's not just I who thinks it's unbalancing for wizards to cast two spells in one round, it's embedded in the design of the Haste spell. I'm pro-wizard, but I don't like having to multi into fighter to get this very low hanging fruit every time. As an intelligent player who plays intelligent PCs, I think it would be stupid for my wizard PCs to never not take two levels of fighter for all the front-loaded goodness such a dip provides the very squishy base wizard. It gets harder to estimate if it's worthwhile to take any more levels of fighter after that, even eldritch knight, unless you want to melee or fire arrows imbued with spells (which would imply trying to get to 5th level fighter and take arcane archer feat). In which case it makes sense for eldritch knight subclass, but then you lose your 9th level spells.

Looking forward to seeing what the specifics are of eldritch knight now. That's going to be one heckuva popular choice I think.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm 100% sure of that based on this character sheet, which states that you get two actions, no ifs ands or buts.

A single line in the spell section that read "A caster cannot for any reason cast more than one spell in a round" would kill a lot of potential broken combos.

Lets see if that line appears in the rules first.

Besides, the current record is four separate spells in 3.5 (Shapechange into a choker. Then use your standard action to cast one, the choker's extra standard action to cast two, action surge to cast three, and then quicken spell the fourth.) All it takes is two feats and a high-level caster. THAT is going nova.

 

[Obryn]

A single line in the spell section that read "A caster cannot for any reason cast more than one spell in a round" would kill a lot of potential broken combos.

Lets see if that line appears in the rules first.

Besides, the current record is four separate spells in 3.5 (Shapechange into a choker. Then use your standard action to cast one, the choker's extra standard action to cast two, action surge to cast three, and then quicken spell the fourth.) All it takes is two feats and a high-level caster. THAT is going nova.

It doesn't even need to be in Basic, since there's no multiclassing.

 

[Ichneumon]

Well I am pretty sure you cannot cast two spells in 5e, so that isn't an issue.

Going by the last How to Play document, this is in DM's call territory. There's no clear "one spell per turn" ruling, though the swift spell feature forbids the main action being used for spells or magic item activation. I'm hoping an upcoming Q&A will clear this up once and for all.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm 100% sure of that based on this character sheet, which states that you get two actions, no ifs ands or buts.

Yes, you get two actions, but if a different rule elsewhere said you can never cast more than one spell in a single round, even if another ability says you get multiple actions, would that satisfy your concerns. Because I think that is what they mentioned they are doing.

Unless there is a special caveat somewhere that negates the use of Action Surge as written on that sheet, that is. But I think that is doubtful, because it would be simpler to merely change the base wording.

It's actually easier to put it elsewhere, so it covers all potential abilities that can grant more than one action in a single round.

So again, assuming the "no two spells in one round" rule, would that resolve your main issues with this ability or not?

 

[Savage Wombat]

I'm 100% sure of that based on this character sheet, which states that you get two actions, no ifs ands or buts.

Considering that the fighter in question will at no point ever be casting spells, there's no need for his character sheet to reference whether he can cast two with this ability.

IF the core rules package does not address the two spells issue, your concerns are valid. Until then, I suspect you are overreacting to one sample character sheet.

 

[Mistwell]

Going by the last How to Play document, this is in DM's call territory. There's no clear "one spell per turn" ruling, though the swift spell feature forbids the main action being used for spells or magic item activation. I'm hoping an upcoming Q&A will clear this up once and for all.

Yeah it's that swift spell feature that I think was broken out into a general rule.