Level Up (A5E) "Fixing" the wizard to help it's poor imitators

[Quartz]

I like the Concentration system as is.

 

[TheSword]

Removing concentration is about power, nothing else. Casters do not need more power. Simple.

 

[ThatGuySteve]

Agreed. It's a bit outdated. I imagined the gold cost was for the extra material components necessary to practice and learn the spell. But with the advent of arcane foci, that now seems irrelevant.

The cost for material components explanation doesn't even hold up as spells with costly components don't have an additional cost to scribe. Its just a hold over from earlier editions where gold was more important for buying magic items.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Removing concentration is about power, nothing else. Casters do not need more power. Simple.

I partially disagree; it's also about action management. There are many spells that require concentration unnecessarily, and makes them not worth using at all. I'm sure the designers didn't intend to make certain spells effectively worthless. A5e can make another pass and determine what spells are actually worth concentrating on, and either remove it from the others or discard the spell. Those kinds of changes were what I thought this was all about.

 

[glass]

I partially disagree; it's also about action management. There are many spells that require concentration unnecessarily, and makes them not worth using at all. I'm sure the designers didn't intend to make certain spells effectively worthless. A5e can make another pass and determine what spells are actually worth concentrating on, and either remove it from the others or discard the spell. Those kinds of changes were what I thought this was all about.

On the principle that "things should be the same, or they should be different", I would rather they leave out any spells deemed to be worthless rather than try to tweak them. By all means include new spells with similar niches, but nothing too close.

_
glass.

 

[Micah Sweet]

On the principle that "things should be the same, or they should be different", I would rather they leave out any spells deemed to be worthless rather than try to tweak them. By all means include new spells with similar niches, but nothing too close.

_
glass.

I respect that principle, but I don't think it's necessary, especially with the stand-alone game A5e is going to be designed to be. You're not going to be referencing two versions of the same spell. You're going to be using the new book.

 

[glass]

I respect that principle, but I don't think it's necessary, especially with the stand-alone game A5e is going to be designed to be. You're not going to be referencing two versions of the same spell. You're going to be using the new book.

It is intended to be used standalone or alongside the PHB. And either way, to be used with 5e adventures, bestiaries, etc.

_
glass.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is intended to be used standalone or alongside the PHB. And either way, to be used with 5e adventures, bestiaries, etc.

_
glass.

That's true, but any references in a 5e product to spells can be assumed to refer to the version in A5e if you're using it. I guess I still don't the confusion.

 

[TheSword]

I partially disagree; it's also about action management. There are many spells that require concentration unnecessarily, and makes them not worth using at all. I'm sure the designers didn't intend to make certain spells effectively worthless. A5e can make another pass and determine what spells are actually worth concentrating on, and either remove it from the others or discard the spell. Those kinds of changes were what I thought this was all about.

Can you give specifics?

Not everyone subscribed to Treantmonks ultra utilitarian approach to selecting wizards spells. Sometimes theme and circumstance make something else appealing.

 

[palikhov]

Can you give specifics?

Stoneskin, Barskin, Hail of Thorns, any smite spells - they must not have Concentration.