D&D 5E Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll

[ECMO3]

Yea it's that ruling that is unusually lenient. In my games the component pouch would be attached to the belt for easy access. It would be 'the container' and wouldn't be in a container itself and so couldn't be grabbed per the additional rules. It would be attached to the caster so couldn't just be taken away via normal mage hand rules either. At the minimum there would be a check there and that really depends on how it's envisioned being tied on. I mean I suppose if some mage did keep his component pouch in a pocket, I would allow it to be taken from that pocket - but that's a big if.

Keep in mind a Rogue Mage Hand is invisible. I think the intent would be for the belt to qualify as a container. It is pretty clear I can steal his component pouch if it is in his pocket or buried in a backpack, but I can't steal it if it is hanging on his belt? That makes no logical sense. The component pouch itself certainly is a container too, so I can remove the components from the pouch if the DM wants to be such a hardarse.

There is a check, it is in the description of mage hand legerdemain. It is SOH countered by perception. I never suggested this was automatic and I agree if stealing something was automatic that would be a lenient DM. That said I am going into that with 16 dex minimum and expertise, so it is usually successful.

I think it is pretty clear what is intended, they intend the Rogue to be able to do the things with the hand he would normally do with a SOH check himself. Most (all) DMs would allow a Rogue to try to pickpocket someone and steal his component pouch if he was next to him invisible and trying to swipe something off a belt is far less complicated than trying to pick a lock.

 

[ECMO3]

If you are fighting once a day the encounter will be significantly longer than 3 rounds.

Not in my experience, nor in most of the official WOTC campaigns with a lot of overland travel.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think the intent would be for the belt to qualify as a container. Itis pretty clear I can steal his component pouch if it is in his pocket or buried in a backpack, but I can't steal it if it is hanging on his belt? That makes no logical sense.

If it's hanging on his belt it's attached to something that's attached to him. Makes logical sense to me. One might could unattach it from him, but that's going to be DM call on how well it's attached. If the DM rules it can be then it's probably not a SOH check to do this either, probably a straight dex check with the possibility of disadvantage due to the movement in combat complicating things.

The component pouch itself certainly is a container too, so I can remove the components from the pouch if the DM wants to be such a hardarse.

Agreed, but removing a single component from a component pouch won't usually help much - and that's all you can remove via the AT rules - a single object.

There is a check, it is in the description of mage hand legerdemain. It is SOH countered by perception. I never suggested this was automatic and I agree if it was free that would be a lenient DM. That said I am going into that with 16 dex minimum and expertise.

That SOH check is only to do something unnoticed. Which isn't really going to matter as he will notice it's missing very soon from seeing it floating in the air or from trying to use it and it not being present.

 

[FrogReaver]

Not in my experience, nor in most of the official WOTC campaigns with a lot of overland travel.

Most of our encounters have been a single encounter a day and they go 4-6 rounds usually.

 

[Undrave]

At some point I'll look at and give you my opinion of your Warlord.

Wait until the next version (V6), it'll be better by then. It'll eventually pop-up once I get working on it...

YES!!! Best trap idea ever. Giant Electromagnet. Props for the idea. I will be using this sometime in the future.

Hahaha, well, enjoy it then!

Yea. There's something to be said about 4e design being simple in certain ways.

The 'sameyness' people complained about had the benefit of making it super easy to build a support character and be confident that, regardless of party composition, the bonus you're granting would be useful. I think it's partally why so many support characters in 5e feel so zestless. Clerics are boring, the Bard feels better off debuffing than buffing, the Battlemaster is more appreciated for those extra 1d8 his maneuver tack on... I actually had fun with my Sheppard Druid for a while but I always went for the Bear Totem for the temp HP because it just felt like the best option by default. The other totems could have come into play in other situatons but the situation just never arose. Those temp HP are ALWAYS going to be useful.

 

[ECMO3]

If it's hanging on his belt it's attached to something that's attached to him. Makes logical sense to me. One might could unattach it from him, but that's going to be DM call on how well it's attached. If the DM rules it can be then it's probably not a SOH check to do this either, probably a straight dex check with the possibility of disadvantage due to the movement in combat complicating things.

Like I said it is far less complicated to lift it off his belt than to do multiple thing in the description. The intent is to allow him to use it for the same things a Rogue could use SOH for if he was standing next to him.

Could an invisible Rogue standing next to the wizard try to lift the pouch if you were DM? Then why can't the hand?

Agreed, but removing a single component from a component pouch won't usually help much - and that's all you can remove via the AT rules - a single object.

Most DMs would allow him to try to take the pouch, but if they didn't componets would usually be treated like a single object for this purpose, just like ball bearings or caltrops. Reach in grab the components and go.

That SOH check is only to do something unnoticed. Which isn't really going to matter as he will notice it's missing very soon from seeing it floating in the air or from trying to use it and it not being present.

Well considering the hand can only move 10 pounds, if it is noticed the wizard can stop it. I think that is the idea. Just like if a thief tries to use a slight of hand to life a purse (as described in the PHB). If the thief fails and he is noticed he does not get the purse right? If the hand fails and is noticed it does not get the pouch.

Regardless if he passes the check he will absolutely not notice it floating in the air because that is what the rules say - he will not notice and that is the whole idea of the mechanic. Why would noticing the pouch floating be any different from noticing anything else that was stolen from him floating in the air? He will notice when he reaches for it next turn of course. As DM explain this anyway you want , "the hand deflty shifts to avoid the wizards eyes as it loops around behind his back with the pouch", "or you whistle to get his attention as the hand slinks away the other direction" or if you are not that creative - "its magic"

If you do not allow this you are nerfing the intention of this ability. Why would it be in there if they did not intend fpor players to use it?

 

[Fanaelialae]

1. It has a longer range than counterspell. So does sickening radiance.
2. You get a 2nd slot that can be used for it at level 15.
3. This is just one example of a strong caster spell combo.


It doesn't have to be fool proof. I'm not saying it's the end all be all of everything. It's an example of the kind of power casters can acheive that martials cannot.

Also, what I would really like to know is if enemies can circumvent the Wizards Tactics what are they doing to the Greatsword swinging Barbarian or Fighters tactics...


It's really not that many caveats and it's a single example. The point being that this illustrates the kind of power martials lack. With 2 casters in the party the 'combo' can be pulled off by level 9. Wall of Force often works just as well as forcecage. If the combo can work on even 20% of tough solo enemies I'd say that's enough to make my case.

Exactly. It's NOT the end all be all of everything.

The things that people tend to forget about casters is that your spells prepared and slots are limited. And if you're a spells known caster, forget about it. You're not preparing every great spell for every eventuality. If you prep the right one for the right situation, you're golden! Forcecage is a fantastic spell. I'm pretty sure I took it for my lore bard a few years back. But if you prep the wrong spells, you suck. You might as well have left a spell unprepared if you prepped Forcecage and you're facing a creature that's too big for it. Moreover, that's a 7th level spell so odds are fairly good you did not prep an alternate, so now your optimal use for that slot is to upcast a lower level spell.

Martials tend to be much more reliable in my experience. They don't really have either the highs or the lows of casters. A caster might end a fight with a single spell. Or they might just stand there throwing cantrips the whole time because they're functionally useless, having prepped the wrong spells. I've rarely seen an encounter where a martial is functionally useless. People often bring up flying monsters, but if you're a martial you should always have a ranged weapon. Less effective is not ineffective.

As for why those high CR monsters don't mess with martials as much as casters, I think it's because high CR monsters have more abilities to counter casters than martials. Teleporting is useful for escaping a Forcecage or closing on a squishy mage. But a lot of these monsters are melee based to begin with so there's rarely much point in teleporting away from the martials (unless it's to go after a squishy caster). This might legitimately indicate that casters are in fact stronger than martials, but unless you're homebrewing the counters out of high CR creatures, they're effectively not.

 

[ECMO3]

Most of our encounters have been a single encounter a day and they go 4-6 rounds usually.

I don't think that is true for most campaigns and it certainly is not true for most published campaigns. Anything above 4 rounds is rare and usually a boss fight, and those typically do not happen on 1-fight days.

2-3 is average. 4 is uncommon. 5 or more is rare. If people in the party are surprised you can bump those numbers by 1, but those people can't act the first turn anyway.

 

[FrogReaver]

Like I said it is far less complicated to lift it off his belt than to do multiple thing in the description. The intent is to allow him to use it for the same things a Rogue could use SOH for if he was standing next to him.

Could an invisible Rogue standing next to the wizard try to lift the pouch if you were DM? Then why can't the hand?

I made the same ruling for the hand I would have made for the rogue. And this wouldn't be a SOH check. It would be a dex check

Most DMs would allow him to try to take the pouch, but if they didn't componets would usually be treated like a single object for this purpose, just like ball bearings or caltrops. Reach in grab the components and go.

Again, very lenient ruling.

Well considering the hand can only move 10 pounds, if it is noticed the wizard can stop it. I think that is the idea. Just like if a thief tries to use a slight of hand to life a purse (as described in the PHB). If the thief fails and he is noticed he does not get the purse right? If the hand fails and is noticed it does not get the pouch.

Slight of Hand is to take something from someone without being noticed. If the purse was attached to the Woman's belt, the most complicating factor wouldn't be not being noticed, it would be unattaching it from the belt - which is a dex check instead of a SOH check.

Regardless if he passes the check he will absolutely not notice it floating in the air because that is what the rules say - he will not notice and that is the whole idea of the mechanic.

No that's not. They say he won't notice the taking of it. Not that you can wave it in their face afterwards and they still won't notice.

Why would noticing the pouch floating be any different from noticing anything else that was stolen from him floating in the air? He will notice when he reaches for it next turn of course.

It wouldn't be any different. He could notice anything floating in the air in front of his face and would typically do so.

As DM explain this anyway you want , "the hand deflty shifts to avoid the wizards eyes as it loops around behind his back with the pouch", "or you whistle to get his attention as the hand slinks away the other direction" or if you are not that creative - "its magic"

The non-lenient ruling is: Give me a sneak check to see how well you accomplish that feat.

If you do not allow this you are nerfing the intention of this ability. Why would it be in there if they did not intend fpor players to use it?

No, you are overpowering the intention.

 

[Steampunkette]

@ECMO3
You're right. I was giving the Battlemaster -too much power-.

At level 3, that dude's got 4d8 that he can apply, once per attack, meaning once per round unless he's dual-wielding or using his one action surge, during those 6 rounds of combat between short rests (2 encounters, 3 rounds each).

Meanwhile the Hexblade can toss Hex out and get 6d6 over the same time period with 1 spell slot, and still have their second spell slot available. Y'know. Unless their concentration breaks. And also pick one unlucky target to get crit on a 19-20.

Or use Hold Person and just outright double their entire party's damage against one poor schmuck.

And by level 7, when that Battlemaster gets 2 attacks and 5 whole Superiority dice... the Warlock can pump out 12d6 with the same Hex spell in those 6 rounds between short rests and hold that concentration for up to 8 hours... Meaning across multiple short rests through the day, keeping their 2 spell slots for other uses during the post-short-rest fights.

It's kind of maddening, isn't it?