D&D 5E Abandoning attunement and scaling back concentration

[Campbell]

In general I think we focus way too much on game balance in the equality of outcomes sense and not enough on providing compelling gameplay decisions for all players that make an impact on outcomes.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In general I think we focus way too much on game balance in the equality of outcomes sense and not enough on providing compelling gameplay decisions for all players that make an impact on outcomes.

Game balance /is/ about providing compelling gameplay decisions for all payers. "Should I use this option, which is strictly inferior to this other option?" Not exactly compelling.

I can't imagine how 'equality of outcomes' would even come into it. Too much randomization, too much situationality.

 

[jamesstreissand]

Game balance /is/ about providing compelling gameplay decisions for all payers. "Should I use this option, which is strictly inferior to this other option?" Not exactly compelling.

I can't imagine how 'equality of outcomes' would even come into it. Too much randomization, too much situationality.

Indeed, like "I shouldn't use Wall of Sand, because it keeps me from using Haste. I finally found a time where Wall of Sand might be useful, but Haste is still way better. Guess I'll just cast fireball until Haste runs out."

 

[Tony Vargas]

Indeed, like "I shouldn't use Wall of Sand, because it keeps me from using Haste. I finally found a time where Wall of Sand might be useful, but Haste is still way better. Guess I'll just cast fireball until Haste runs out."

Wall of Sand? That even sounds like it says 'useless' on the tin...
...hey google...
...oh, OK, not as bad as what I was thinking, I guess I was thinking "conjure pile of sand." ...more like "Extremely Localized, non-abrasive, Sandstorm" ...still, too different from Haste to readily judge strict inferiority.

 

[jamesstreissand]

Wall of Sand? That even sounds like it says 'useless' on the tin...
...hey google...
...oh, OK, not as bad as what I was thinking, I guess I was thinking "conjure pile of sand." ...more like "Extremely Localized, non-abrasive, Sandstorm" ...still, too different from Haste to readily judge strict inferiority.

Sorry dude, Haste and Wall of Sand share the most important similarity of all.
The concentration tag.
When you force me to choose between one or the other, they are necessarily compared against each other. Maybe a less experienced player picks wall of sand up accidentally, plays around with haste, etc, but eventually they realize "Haste almost always helps the barbarian kill stuff deader. Keeping people away with wall of sand barely works to begin with, that's not always what I want to do anyway, etc. Wait, I have to choose between the two? Haste."

We either need to vastly cut down on the number of concentration spells, or we need to adjust concentration in a way it can be played around with.
Luckily, the second one has already been found out

 

[Blue]

In general I think we focus way too much on game balance in the equality of outcomes sense and not enough on providing compelling gameplay decisions for all players that make an impact on outcomes.

Because only one of those is under the control of the mechanics.

The game balance in this point is between character classes - casters and non-casters. Even if no-casters are much weaker, a DM may be able to provide a compelling ways for them to contribute each and every scene. But the rules can't. The best the rules can do is aim for a place that over time (not within the same scene) each class has equal opportunities to shine.

A good DM providing opportunities to all players is a wonderful thing. That in no way absolves the designers from trying to provide all DMs, regardless of ability, with as much support to do that as possible.

 

[Blue]

I didn't say whether they were or were not. Simply that they had a more positive experience overall. No, it didn't throw off class balance either. More access to the spells locked behind concentration expressed itself far more in benefits to the party (conditions inflicted on enemies, healing for the party) than it did turn mages into a one man army (and I gave them plenty of tools to go that route if they wished).

I'm sorry, I flat out do not believe that in the game as a whole (not just at your table) that removing concentration would not provide a class balance problem. We have a lot of historical evidence from earlier editions. We have evidence in this edition about the changes to class balance with a 5 minute work day.

I'm glad it worked well at your table, but there is far too much showing balance issues with unrestricted casters for an anecdote about it not being a balance issue at a table to move that needle.

 

[Campbell]

Because only one of those is under the control of the mechanics.

The game balance in this point is between character classes - casters and non-casters. Even if no-casters are much weaker, a DM may be able to provide a compelling ways for them to contribute each and every scene. But the rules can't. The best the rules can do is aim for a place that over time (not within the same scene) each class has equal opportunities to shine.

A good DM providing opportunities to all players is a wonderful thing. That in no way absolves the designers from trying to provide all DMs, regardless of ability, with as much support to do that as possible.

Sure it is. You can absolutely design a game that provides martial characters and casters with compelling tools to make gameplay decisions with. Generally when you overly constrain the impact of using those tools you make actual gameplay decisions less meaningful.

The ability to distinguish yourself through skilled play of the game is cutoff as is your ability to punch above your weight class.

 

[Blue]

Sorry dude, Haste and Wall of Sand share the most important similarity of all.
The concentration tag.

Sorry dude, Haste and Wall of Sand's most important similarity is that they both take up a 3rd level slot. If one of them is underpowered, that's a problem with the spell, not with one subsystem associated with the spell.

In a perfect world, all spells of the same level are interesting and each has their own reasonable use cases. We don't live in a perfect world, we haven't reached that platonic ideal. That some are overpowered or underpowered is no more the fault of concentration then it is the fault that they both have V,S,M components.

 

[jamesstreissand]

Sorry dude, Haste and Wall of Sand's most important similarity is that they both take up a 3rd level slot. If one of them is underpowered, that's a problem with the spell, not with one subsystem associated with the spell.

In a perfect world, all spells of the same level are interesting and each has their own reasonable use cases. We don't live in a perfect world, we haven't reached that platonic ideal. That some are overpowered or underpowered is no more the fault of concentration then it is the fault that they both have V,S,M components.

Are you saying the fact they share a subsystem excluding a play from using them both isn't important compared to the fact they're both third level? I'm sure that sounded more clever in your head, but no, concentration is still their most important feature when a spellcaster considers spell selection.

Yes, it is the fault of concentration. If I can cast both wall of sand and haste, I'm not going to cast wall of sand every fight, but there are times when I will use it. If I'm forced to CHOOSE between the two, Wall of Sand doesn't get cast. Notice the point you keep ignoring; I'm forced to choose between the two, this or that, no modifying conditions involved. VSM components don't do that, and I'm shocked even a WOTC apologist pretends otherwise.

The spells are designed with the subsystem in mind, dude. Otherwise we wouldn't have an issue ripping it out entirely.