D&D 5E Should 5e have more classes (Poll and Discussion)?

[TwoSix]

I know that. But you are denying the target a saving throw and IIRC you have 10 rounds to deliver the spell. A monster with a low AC but decent saves would more likely be affected by your spells. Also, depending on the spell, if it is superior in damage to your attack, the action economy isn't really a sacrifice IMO.

Sure. I'm not disagreeing that it's a really good feature. It's a really strong, class-defining feature. If it was attached to a full caster with a stronger spell list, I'd probably say it was OP. But in this case, I'm not seeing a use case where it crosses over to OP.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I probably will Sunday during the football games.

Off-hand, just looking back through the spells quickly, something like Hold Person is a good example.

You cast Hold Person just before ambushing your enemies or busting down the door to a BBEG.
You hit. BAM! Auto-failed Hold Person and the target is helpless until the end of its next turn when (maybe) it will be free.
If you have any remaining attacks (which you would if you can cast Hold Person), they are now auto-crits. Any of your allies melee attacks are auto-crits.

Combine this with smites or sneak attack damage and oh boy!

That is why I think it is too strong as is. Just imposing disadvantage on the attack is powerful enough IMO. So, I hope you will definitely think it over more.

And a Grave Cleric can give an enemy vulnerability to all damage from one attack using an action. It's not the same, but it's similar. Forgoing an action to buff allies in a combat way such as imposing a condition is kind of the point.

I will think it over, but no promises.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Sure. I'm not disagreeing that it's a really good feature. It's a really strong, class-defining feature. If it was attached to a full caster with a stronger spell list, I'd probably say it was OP. But in this case, I'm not seeing a use case where it crosses over to OP.

Ok, let's move on to Fireball. Suddenly your attack does an automatic +28 damage? No save. Sorry, that is OP in my book. Also, you get weapon damage and multiple attacks at this point. FWIW, 28 damage translates into roughly a 5th level smite on average, but for only a 3rd level slot.

 

[TwoSix]

You cast Hold Person just before ambushing your enemies or busting down the door to a BBEG.
You hit. BAM! Auto-failed Hold Person and the target is helpless until the end of its next turn when (maybe) it will be free.
If you have any remaining attacks (which you would if you can cast Hold Person), they are now auto-crits. Any of your allies melee attacks are auto-crits.

I mean, that's true, but that's exactly the same situation as if ANY caster cast Hold Person. The only difference is that you get one extra attack on the held person. One extra attack after a spell is a nice class feature, for sure, but it's not overpowering.

And this is obviously playstyle specific, but fights where the party gets to pre-cast 1 minute duration spells are pretty rare for us.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Ok, let's move on to Fireball. Suddenly your attack does an automatic +28 damage? No save. Sorry, that is OP in my book. Also, you get weapon damage and multiple attacks at this point. FWIW, 28 damage translates into roughly a 5th level smite on average, but for only a 3rd level slot.

But it takes an action beforehand, and most often you have to hit yourself with the fireball.

 

[DND_Reborn]

And a Grave Cleric can give an enemy vulnerability to all damage from one attack using an action. It's not the same, but it's similar. Forgoing an action to buff allies in a combat way such as imposing a condition is kind of the point.

I will think it over, but no promises.

Yes, but it is only a couple times per short rest at best since it uses Channel Divinity, and it only applies to one attack. Yes, a powerful feature and encounter altering under the right circumstances, but not as much so IMO.

I'll be interested to see what revisions you make. One suggestion that would bring the power level a lot is as soon as you make a weapon attack, if you miss, the spell is expended (even if you miss). That would bring it down because if you miss, there is no auto-fail save and there could be bad consequences (like a fireball going off and affecting everyone in the area, including allies).

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yes, but it is only a couple times per short rest at best since it uses Channel Divinity, and it only applies to one attack. Yes, a powerful feature and encounter altering under the right circumstances, but not as much so IMO.

I'll be interested to see what revisions you make. One suggestion that would bring the power level a lot is as soon as you make a weapon attack, if you miss, the spell is expended (even if you miss). That would bring it down because if you miss, there is no auto-fail save and there could be bad consequences (like a fireball going off and affecting everyone in the area, including allies).

I'll think that over. I am currently more inclined to allowing them until the end of the turn after they attack before the spell is lost.

 

[TwoSix]

Ok, let's move on to Fireball. Suddenly your attack does an automatic +28 damage? No save. Sorry, that is OP in my book. Also, you get weapon damage and multiple attacks at this point. FWIW, 28 damage translates into roughly a 5th level smite on average, but for only a 3rd level slot.

But again, you're sacrificing an action to do that (before 11th level, and I do have concerns that the BA Spell Strike may be too strong). 2 attacks from a melee attacker is nearly as much damage as a unsaved fireball, and even more if you've taken something like GWM.

Plus, fireball does 14 damage on average even if they save, so making it an auto-fail only added 14 damage, not 28. 14 damage is only about a 2nd level smite, so the damage the Spell Strike is adding is fairly comparable, although you have to factor in smite's amazing action economy (it's free!) and the fact the gish just ate a fireball in the face. (I don't remember seeing that they were immune to the effects of the spell being triggered, although I should also review it.)

 

[DND_Reborn]

But it takes an action beforehand, and most often you have to hit yourself with the fireball.

Yep, but fire resistance is easy to get via race or other means, and again, you still get to save for half damage.

Look, I'm not going to argue it further. It is too strong IMO, take that for what you want. I can think of all kinds of ways to abuse this feature as it is written.

 

[Minigiant]

Exactly this. Paladins and Rangers use their spells and magic to get them on par with a fighter, and an arcane gish class should as well. An Eldritch Knight does have spellcasting, but it's limited, not used to power their attacks, and instead is used as a separate mode of combat.

Heck, the Eldritch Knight doesn't even enhance their combat ability with spella much as they are forced to make ~60% of their spells evocation or abjuration. It's more breadth than depth as most of their spells are more "in case the normal strategy doesn't work, I can do this decently."