D&D 5E 5th Edition -- Caster Rule, Martials Drool?

[TwoSix]

IM(limited)XP, and according to most of the play reports I've been seeing, limited spell slots do the job of preventing both of these from happening.

It's "I can be good in combat...OR I can kind of solve one of the other problems we have. Pick one."

I mean, 5e is explicit about what it's balancing noncombat on -- Exploration and Interaction. At the very highest levels, spell slots of levels 1-4 get pretty cheap, but the most effective spells even at that level don't really dominate either sphere. They're really useful, but they've got some key weaknesses.

I do cautiously agree with this. There comes a point where the relative versatility of the caster's spell slots can become outweighed by their relative scarcity. Just as a hypothetical, I think there would be few complaints about the caster's power if they were limited to one max level spell slot per long rest, and otherwise had to rely on cantrips and rituals. They would keep the versatility but simply lack the resources to adequately leverage it.

I'm not sure if 5e has restricted that efficacy enough, but it's such a solid improvement over 3.5/PF that I'm willing to cut it some slack.

It's also pretty clear that its days are 6-8 encounters long.

The best explicit Exploration and Interaction spells in Basic at level 9+, when those slots get pretty cheap, are probably Arcane Eye and Suggestion, respectively. And if you blow your 2nd and 4th level slots on those utility effects, and your 3rd and 1st level slots and your Arcane Recovery slots on trying to keep pace with Fireball, Mage Armor, and Magic Missile in combat (assuming you want to not be dead weight in a fight), hey presto, there's all of your disposable spells. You're left with a few higher-level cookies that you can bust out on occasion. On a 6-8 encounter day, this is not going to dominate. If your day is shorter, the caster will be more awesome, but the day's rest is comfortably in the hands of the DM in Basic (in the PH, the best solution to this is Tiny Hut, which is fully present on the material plane and thus basically a dinner bell to anything that finds adventurers delicious).

Which is why I really want to see the rest rules in the DMG. I've never been in a campaign with 6-8 encounters a day, in any combination of combat, interaction, and exploration. I think the most I've done in a single day is maybe 4.

More and more, I'm thinking my idea of making the daily rest at night a short rest, and a long rest as being something that requires an extended break and safety to be a better model for moving the game into the direction I want to take it.

 

[Dausuul]

I must say, though, I'm very leery of the amount of 'well at MY table' I've seen in these kinds of arguments - if the Fighter has a 30% chance to save against a dragon's fear aura, but both times you've fought dragons in your game he's made the save, is it still a problem? Of course. Would you, as a player, even know that that problem exists, given that the DM may well not have told you the DC of the save? Probably not.

Well, that's the reason it's good to hear people's experiences. The plural of anecdote is not data, but since we aren't in a position to do a scientific survey, multiple anecdotes are better than one anecdote. The more people chime in with their experiences, the more likely it is that mechanical issues will make themselves apparent.

 

[TwoSix]

Well, that's the reason it's good to hear people's experiences. The plural of anecdote is not data, but since we aren't in a position to do a scientific survey, multiple anecdotes are better than one anecdote. The more people chime in with their experiences, the more likely it is that mechanical issues will make themselves apparent.

To be fair, if your expectation for a high level fighter is "hardly ever scared by anything, even dragons", then you don't really need anecdotal evidence to know that a 30% chance of resisting fear isn't going to cut it.

 

[Dausuul]

To be fair, if your expectation for a high level fighter is "hardly ever scared by anything, even dragons", then you don't really need anecdotal evidence to know that a 30% chance of resisting fear isn't going to cut it.

Yes, but you do need anecdotal evidence to determine whether 30% is an accurate representation of the fighter's chances. What magic items does a fighter at that level typically have? What feats? (Resilient makes a huge difference here, and fighters get enough feats that they're likely to pick it up at some point.) What Wisdom score? How often are you going to have Indomitable available? Et cetera.

 

[KarinsDad]

IM(limited)
It's also pretty clear that its days are 6-8 encounters long.

The best explicit Exploration and Interaction spells in Basic at level 9+, when those slots get pretty cheap, are probably Arcane Eye and Suggestion, respectively. And if you blow your 2nd and 4th level slots on those utility effects, and your 3rd and 1st level slots and your Arcane Recovery slots on trying to keep pace with Fireball, Mage Armor, and Magic Missile in combat (assuming you want to not be dead weight in a fight), hey presto, there's all of your disposable spells. You're left with a few higher-level cookies that you can bust out on occasion. On a 6-8 encounter day, this is not going to dominate. If your day is shorter, the caster will be more awesome, but the day's rest is comfortably in the hands of the DM in Basic (in the PH, the best solution to this is Tiny Hut, which is fully present on the material plane and thus basically a dinner bell to anything that finds adventurers delicious).

I always hid my Tiny Hut in the woods.


I'm suspecting that you are right on the 6-8 encounters at high level, but lower level is a totally different story.

Once to 5th level, the melee types might be taking out foes nearly as quickly with their extra attacks or extra damage, but the spellcasters are going to be squeezed.

Cantrips will no longer cut it at all. A single attack with a weapon will no longer cut it. In order to be effective at higher levels, casters will need to cast a minimum of one spell every combat. This includes divine casters as well as arcane casters. Fine at level 20 with 22 spells, not so fine at level 8 with 12 spells being shared across 6 to 8 encounters (that could be 2 spells per encounter in 3 round encounters, but does not take into account anything other than combat spells).

Divine casters will also get squeezed with the same old "cast a cure" or "cast another spell" syndrome. If not casting cures, then 6-8 encounters is out of the question because PCs are heavily damaged. If casting cures, then 6-8 encounters is out of the question because the divine casters are mostly using weapons that do a little more damage than a cantrip. If somewhere in between, then 6-8 encounters is out of the question due to lack of resources (i.e. the divine caster cannot both cure and cast worthwhile spells in 6-8 encounters because he does not have that many spells).

For all of people's worries that casters rule and martials drool, I think that martial PCs have their own significant edge. Casters have to conserve, or else they become totally ineffective as opposed to partially ineffective in combat (i.e. those rounds where they are casting cantrips, big fricking deal ). Martial types can be effective every round and can go for as many encounters as the resources of the rest of the party allow them to.

I suspect that encounters will tend to be 3-4 at tier one plus 1 encounter per tier (i.e. 6-7 at tier 4) because not only will the healing demands increase as levels get higher, but so will the casting of spells for utility purposes.

Getting lucky and damaging foes before they can damage you can help that, but a single ambush at any level can suck up a lot of resources.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I do cautiously agree with this. There comes a point where the relative versatility of the caster's spell slots can become outweighed by their relative scarcity. Just as a hypothetical, I think there would be few complaints about the caster's power if they were limited to one max level spell slot per long rest, and otherwise had to rely on cantrips and rituals. They would keep the versatility but simply lack the resources to adequately leverage it.

I'm not sure if 5e has restricted that efficacy enough, but it's such a solid improvement over 3.5/PF that I'm willing to cut it some slack.

I'm generally on board with the idea of severely curtailing spellcaster slot access. I think it was a smart idea for 5e to go in this direction. There's another angle the balance works on, though: the spells themselves have been hit in the face repeatedly with a nerf bat for the most part.

Maybe, like with the slots, not in every case enough, but when you see a spell like Polymorph and your reaction is "Meh...", I think 5e is doing a really good job in putting the kibosh on some of the most infamous spells from previous e's. There's ways to unlock lock-down effects, scrying is for the most part just a slightly safer scouting mechanism, buffs take a lot of effort, summoning is pretty intensive.... The 5e wizard is still versatile as heck, but the peaks of power are a lot less high than they once were. The valleys are lower, too, thanks to things like cantrips and arcane recovery.

Which is why I really want to see the rest rules in the DMG. I've never been in a campaign with 6-8 encounters a day, in any combination of combat, interaction, and exploration. I think the most I've done in a single day is maybe 4.

It's roughly the same encounters/day as 4e was, which tells me that this is a magic number for them for some reason. At any rate, if you're going to clear out a dungeon floor, 6-8 encounters "feels" about right, and you have enough scenes for a good narrative arc (with 2 short rests/day as "intermission")...it's a lot of breathing room.

But heck, in 4e, our average encounters per day in practice was more like 1-2 for most of the groups I played in than the 6-8 that it should've been by the maths. And mostly that just meant easier encounters.

Ultimately, # encounters/day is a highly variable number in practice, as the end of the day is a thing the DM lets happen when the narrative pace feels about right most of the time. 6-8 probably works OK for a dungeon, but outside of one, or in the wilderness? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

More and more, I'm thinking my idea of making the daily rest at night a short rest, and a long rest as being something that requires an extended break and safety to be a better model for moving the game into the direction I want to take it.

DO IT. COME ON. YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO.

I sincerely <3 short-rest-is-a-night's-rest. I find long-rest-is-a-week's-rest works well in conjunction with the downtime mechanics: you can do a Downtime Thing when you take a long rest. I'm adopting training rules, so if a PC wants to gain a level, they also need to do it during their downtime. Thinking of some ways to expand the downtime mechanics, as well. I fit my adventures into week-long chunks.

It might mess with the pacing a bit for an adventure meant to be shorter, but it's nothing a few find-and-replace time units can't fix.

I always hid my Tiny Hut in the woods.

Woods have goblins in them. And giant spiders. And green dragons. And dire wolves. And neighborly treants who drop by to ask for some sugar for their tea OH MY GOD THEY ARE DRINKING THE BLOOD OF LEAVES THESE ARE CANNIBAL TREANTS!

...At any rate, a tiny hut in the woods is not necessarily any more effective than a tiny hut in a dungeon, and neither is game-changingly more effective than making a camp out of sticks and a tinderbox.

I'm suspecting that you are right on the 6-8 encounters at high level, but lower level is a totally different story.

I dunno, even at first level, Arcane Recovery keeps you topped off with one first-level spell after every short rest. While that's pretty much 1 round out of the ~10 rounds you'll have to survive until your next Arcane Recovery, that one round is still gonna be pretty sweet. If low-level casters find themselves wanting to sleep more, I suggest they consider growing a pair and not being such a delicate snowflake princess about not constantly spamming magic missile.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

For all of people's worries that casters rule and martials drool, I think that martial PCs have their own significant edge. Casters have to conserve, or else they become totally ineffective as opposed to partially ineffective in combat (i.e. those rounds where they are casting cantrips, big fricking deal ). Martial types can be effective every round and can go for as many encounters as the resources of the rest of the party allow them to.

Hmmm, I'm not sure I buy this being a big "restriction" on "casters" in general, rather on "whichever caster has to blow most of their resources on healing" - which was always an issue in 1/2/3E (unless one went the wand of CLW route). It was also why Cleric was an unpopular class (IME). 1 spell/encounter minimum at higher levels, for, say, a Wizard, who has 15+AR spells/day at L10 doesn't seem very onerous.

Also Warlock's EB w/AB is as powerful as most martials, so not all cantrips are born equal. Further, Paladins and arguably Rangers aren't "all that" without their magic.

 

[KarinsDad]

I dunno, even at first level, Arcane Recovery keeps you topped off with one first-level spell after every short rest. While that's pretty much 1 round out of the ~10 rounds you'll have to survive until your next Arcane Recovery, that one round is still gonna be pretty sweet. If low-level casters find themselves wanting to sleep more, I suggest they consider growing a pair and not being such a delicate snowflake princess about not constantly spamming magic missile.

Not the point. First off, Arcane Recovery (and Natural Recovery) is once per day.

Second, wizards are not the main issue when it comes to encounters per day.

Clerics and Druids are the main issue (although other pure spell casters do have the issue).

Bards aren't. Rangers aren't. Paladins aren't. They all get extra attack plus enough heals to keep themselves up and maybe a little left over for other PCs.


Cleric and Druids will either have to heal, cast a real spell, or use a weapon/cantrip.

Sure, at low level, using a weapon is fine. But as the HD of monsters increases, it starts taking more and more rounds for a cleric/druid to take out a single foe. Weapon damage does not increase. To hit increases very infrequently and monster AC tends to increase with it (ditto for monster saves)

While the non-spell casters and semi-spell casters and monsters are doing more damage per attack, the pure spell casters (except for Bard) are not. At low levels, 6-8 encounters means one spell every few encounters. Even at level 6 with 10 spells, divine PCs could use one spell per encounter in 6-8 encounters. But they are also swinging inferior weapons the rest of the rounds of those encounters and they are expected to heal the barbarians and fighters and rogues. In an 8 encounter day using one spell per encounter, how exactly is the 6th level cleric or druid supposed to heal up the barbarians and fighters and rogues for 8 encounters with 2 total spells?

Sure, everyone gets their HD back each day during short rests. But, that is almost white noise. It's 1 or 2 encounters of healing for most PCs (except ones not getting attacked). Where does the healing for the other 5 or 6 encounters come from in a 6-8 encounter day?

It comes from (typically divine) spellcasters who then cannot use decent weapons, nor can they cast as many non-healing spells as arcane pure spellcasters. For all the whining about how versatile and powerful spell casters are, I don't see people whining when they heal the non-spellcasters.


Since the game is mostly played at the level 1 to 10 range, divine casters are mostly the workhorses of encounters per day. Sure, an arcane caster can add in an extra few encounters by nova-ing and decimating a few encounters, but very few players are willing to go for more encounters at mid levels with single digit hit points because the party ran out of heals.

Healing is the main throttle of encounters per day and if divine casters are healing, they are not getting to cast their other spells as much.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Healing is the main throttle of encounters per day and if divine casters are healing, they are not getting to cast their other spells as much.

It was ever thus. Except in 4E (and kinda 3E due to wand of CLW).

 

[TwoSix]

I'm generally on board with the idea of severely curtailing spellcaster slot access. I think it was a smart idea for 5e to go in this direction. There's another angle the balance works on, though: the spells themselves have been hit in the face repeatedly with a nerf bat for the most part.

Maybe, like with the slots, not in every case enough, but when you see a spell like Polymorph and your reaction is "Meh...", I think 5e is doing a really good job in putting the kibosh on some of the most infamous spells from previous e's. There's ways to unlock lock-down effects, scrying is for the most part just a slightly safer scouting mechanism, buffs take a lot of effort, summoning is pretty intensive.... The 5e wizard is still versatile as heck, but the peaks of power are a lot less high than they once were. The valleys are lower, too, thanks to things like cantrips and arcane recovery.

Yea, I do agree with that. There are some outliers (cough...Contagion...cough...True Polymorph...man, it's dusty in here!), but that appears to me to require merely some judicious use of the nerf-bat, not a full-scale system overhaul. The flying invisible mirror-imaged lockdown artist of 3e fame is dead, thank goodness.

It's roughly the same encounters/day as 4e was, which tells me that this is a magic number for them for some reason. At any rate, if you're going to clear out a dungeon floor, 6-8 encounters "feels" about right, and you have enough scenes for a good narrative arc (with 2 short rests/day as "intermission")...it's a lot of breathing room.

That's more my issue. My campaigns really never have anything approaching a dungeon, they're all wilderness exploration and/or urban-based.

Ultimately, # encounters/day is a highly variable number in practice, as the end of the day is a thing the DM lets happen when the narrative pace feels about right most of the time. 6-8 probably works OK for a dungeon, but outside of one, or in the wilderness? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Super duper campaign and even individual player dependent, really. I DM with a pretty light hand. There's stuff over here, or you can try to stop that over there, or just go do your own research for a while. Only occasionally will I ambush you with time traveling god robots (and that's campaign specific).

DO IT. COME ON. YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO.

OH MY GOD I WANT TO DO IT SOOO BAD!

I sincerely <3 short-rest-is-a-night's-rest. I find long-rest-is-a-week's-rest works well in conjunction with the downtime mechanics: you can do a Downtime Thing when you take a long rest. I'm adopting training rules, so if a PC wants to gain a level, they also need to do it during their downtime. Thinking of some ways to expand the downtime mechanics, as well. I fit my adventures into week-long chunks.

I think it's great for adventure pacing. It makes spell selection matter even more, because you can just take a quick break and rejigger your spell selection to fit the scenario. Requiring a place of safety encourages the PCs to have more interaction with the environment, which then gives even more hooks into the party. Finding and saving a small village that's next to the Evil Castle of Castle-like Evil becomes an adventure in and of itself, because it's the only likely place that doesn't require a week's travel to get your long rest.

Additionally, lengthening the recharge time for some spells can only help to balance certain, ahem, interesting situations, like a necromancer's zombie horde.

I like the idea of adding in training time for new levels. I'd probably make it the character's new level in weeks, which heads off the "zero-to-demigod" in 6 weeks issue. And I like any rule that requires characters to not necessarily be murderhobos, but to benefit from having an attachment to civilization.

It might mess with the pacing a bit for an adventure meant to be shorter, but it's nothing a few find-and-replace time units can't fix.

One can always adjust the adventure if you need a greater frequency of ability to use. Consumables, for one. Why not encourage the use of downtime to craft some healing potions? During the adventure, pass out some wands with a few charges, or some extra scrolls, or heck, maybe some mana potions. Or maybe you can find your campaign's equivalent to a Zelda fairy pond. It worked for Scott Pilgrim, after all.