D&D 5E (2014) Increasing spell power

[CapnZapp]

Again, somebody posts a reply telling us what we can discuss without actually adressing the OPs problem.

It is as if discussing what the discussion can be about is easier than discussing the actual issue. Go figure.

 

[Sunseeker]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION] Save or stick has not been nerfed. We were spoiled by 3rd allowing us to raise our stats so high as to make a save impossible, and we were spoiled by 4th by being able to raise our defenses so high as to make a stick impossible. 5th is probably where the math should be, but it's by no means perfect. We are literally looking at the first attempt by Wizards to get a system that was previously so far out of line as to be absurd back into alignment that is naturally, no matter how many playtests, going to take some time.

5E is basically a game of two people who know nothing about each other trying to figure out what the other guy's weakness is. Sometimes its obvious and you'll get an easy stick v. your highest DC. Sometimes it isn't, sometimes they'll just roll well/badly. There's a LOT more luck, especially at lower levels then I think there has been, at least recently, in D&D.

So, @OP: don't change anything. Help your player get better at making his spells stick, but don't adjust the rules.

 

[MarkB]

Again, somebody posts a reply telling us what we can discuss without actually adressing the OPs problem.

It is as if discussing what the discussion can be about is easier than discussing the actual issue. Go figure.

You were the one who started trying to dictate what was on-topic in this discussion. Are you the only one allowed to do that?

 

[CapnZapp]

You were the one who started trying to dictate what was on-topic in this discussion. Are you the only one allowed to do that?

Now you are full-on having a discussion about the discussion rather than the topic. I won't have it.

 

[CapnZapp]

5E is basically a game of two people who know nothing about each other trying to figure out what the other guy's weakness is. Sometimes its obvious and you'll get an easy stick v. your highest DC. Sometimes it isn't, sometimes they'll just roll well/badly. There's a LOT more luck, especially at lower levels then I think there has been, at least recently, in D&D.

So, @OP: don't change anything. Help your player get better at making his spells stick, but don't adjust the rules.

But if it's all up to luck, how can you get better at making the spell stick?

 

[CapnZapp]

I can see the case of turning Hold Person into a damage-enabling spell, but I can also see Hold Person coming across as weak if you want to use it the old way, as a way to remove somebody from the fight and to deal with later.

Perhaps Hold Person then should have been renamed?

Perhaps there is room for a Hold Person that does not give advantages to attacking the victim, but in return makes the victim unable to participate in the combat for longer?

I'm bringing this up, since the response to the OP seems to be "the spell is used for something else now, change the way you use it and it's fine".

In effect, the old Hold Person has been sneak-removed, no?

 

[Sunseeker]

But if it's all up to luck, how can you get better at making the spell stick?

I didn't say it was all on luck. I said it was more on luck than it has been in the last two editions.

 

[CapnZapp]

I didn't say it was all on luck. I said it was more on luck than it has been in the last two editions.

Fair enough.

How many rounds do Hold Person need to "stick" for the casting to be worthwhile?

If the spell is used to deny the opposition the target's actions, I would say three. If everybody can and will gang up on the target, perhaps two.

Thing is with the new edition the spell becomes better with level, since your save DC outpaces the monsters saves. At least if you cast intelligently, meaning at low-wis targets.

If I may exaggerate slightly:

At low levels, Hold Person has only a 50% chance of succeeding. But at mid- to high levels, this can shoot up to perhaps 75%. (Yes, casting it against level-appropriate foes)

The benefit is vastly more than 25%, since you make repeated saves. Let me show you.

The probability that a spell affects a target 1, 2 and 3 rounds are...

At 50% chance of saving: 50%, 25% and 12%.
At 25% chance of saving: 75%, 56% and 42%.

So while it is easy to think "75% is half as much more than 50%, so the spell is worth 1,5 times as much", the reality is that the spell is worth more than twice as much or even four times as much, depending on how many rounds it needs to stick for you to consider it.

So if I too advise the OP to wait and play more, this is based not so much on assuming it isn't used right, but more on how 5th Edition scales save DCs with your level, not the spell's level. And "bounded accuracy" visavi mediocre monster saves! Taken together, this can make a spell more valuable instead of less (as was the case in previous editions).

If you do make the spell more powerful (such as by your suggestion to not allow the save in round #1) you should probably also make an exception to the way save DCs increase with level. For instance, your variant always has a save DC 13 that never increases (from ability score or proficiency).

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Also: bane exists.

 

[redrick]

I can see the case of turning Hold Person into a damage-enabling spell, but I can also see Hold Person coming across as weak if you want to use it the old way, as a way to remove somebody from the fight and to deal with later.

Perhaps Hold Person then should have been renamed?

Perhaps there is room for a Hold Person that does not give advantages to attacking the victim, but in return makes the victim unable to participate in the combat for longer?

I'm bringing this up, since the response to the OP seems to be "the spell is used for something else now, change the way you use it and it's fine".

In effect, the old Hold Person has been sneak-removed, no?

If I remember correctly, spells like Suggestion and Command work in this way. And, of course, Sleep. These are spells that allow you to remove a character from combat without any follow-up saves, but any hostile action taken against that character ends the effect of the spell.

And, while it's much higher level, Banish is a great spell for taking a character entirely out of the action.