D&D 5E Not Much Ado About Bless

[James Gasik]

That thread was huge and I explained at length why it is broken. If you're not convinced, then you're not convinced. Do you understand the strategies that the best poker players use? I don't. They could tell me and I would have no way of knowing whether they were lying and I wouldn't even be able to implement the strategies because I would still not understand them.

Either it won't be a problem at your table in which case great, or it will and then you will have learned something and can change it.

Well I hadn't read the thread here, because I assumed from glancing at it that it was mostly the same as similar threads on the topic I saw elsewhere. If you do have a deep analysis, however, I'll go check it out, and maybe I'll grok the reason for the fuss.

Most of the arguments I'd seen to date were based on how people felt about the spell, and you can't get much data from emotion.

 

[abirdcall]

Yes. However, when I'm told what is fun for me is wrong, I raise an eyebrow. And this thread isn't even about what is fun or what is broken, merely me noting "hey this effect seems strong, why isn't it?".

And people have told me what they think. How this turned into me telling people that I'm right, and they're wrong, or that I'm somehow the fun police, has me baffled.

And when my attempts to debate a point or show my opinion are met with "the game is great because people like it", that's not very useful to me.

I guess it would help if you quoted people instead of just saying 'people say.'

 

[James Gasik]

I guess it would help if you quoted people instead of just saying 'people say.'

Yeah but then I'm calling people out, which isn't really what I want to do. I abhor drama, I just want to talk about the game in a constructive way.

 

[Hussar]

Leaving this rather strange tangent behind, no, Bless isn't particularly game breaking, nor is it breaking bounded accuracy.

At best, as was mentioned, you're only getting a couple of extra hits over the course of a combat. Heck, say it's five hits. With all the bonuses in, we'll say an extra 100 points of damage. WOWSERS, totally breaking the game.

Now, this cost a concentration slot, so, we're not casting something like Spirit Guardians. Which can easily do 100 points of damage over the course of a combat without any problems at all. Multiple targets and a couple of failed saves over the course of a combat and Spirit Guardians makes Bless look pretty small. And, note, that 100 points of extra damage is probably the absolute maximum that Bless will do. In reality it's far, far less.

Given that the wizard drops a fireball for well over 100 points of damage (spread over multiple targets) without making an attack roll, why would you have an issue with Bless?

I really think this is one of those "gut feeling" sorts of things. If you truly believe it's having a huge impact, you need to actually track it in game over a few sessions. Compare a combat without bless to a combat with bless and see just how much of a difference it is making. I'll bet dollars to donuts that the difference is relatively minor and probably in keeping with any other 1st level concentration spell.

 

[James Gasik]

There's actually another thread in a similar vein, which is what sparked the idea for this thread, where a poster computed the value of a +1 higher Strength bonus. And I pointed out you can have Bless up for any fight you want it after awhile, which grants a larger bonus, and might be easier to track it's effect over time.

 

[Mistwell]

Here's a simple one, based on a point I made in another thread. Why don't more people complain about Bless?

You really should, when you consider it can affect the three heaviest hitters in a party and can last a whole combat. The effect it has on bounded accuracy is absurd once you get to the point a Cleric can consider using it in every combat.

Reasons people might not complain:

Clerics aren't casting Bless (that's my Healing Word spell slot!).
There's too much other stuff going on to really notice Bless.
It requires concentration (either as a reason not to cast, or it can fall off if the Cleric is hit).
It's hard to notice it's effect in small sample sizes (was that fight easier because of Bless? How much easier?

Because it's really not as powerful as it looks.

If a battle lasts three rounds, and you have 5 PCs, then casting Bless 1) removes one round of actions from the cleric, or 20% of actions in that round therefore 7% of all actions in that combat, and 2) decreases the potency of the other two actions the cleric can choose from that battle as they can no longer cast a concentration spell that round. All so you can increase the potency of attack rolls by 12.5% (unless the cleric loses concentration) which isn't going to help he Wizard or Bard casting the spell with the saving throw.

It's not a bad spell in that context, but it's not a "you really should cast it" spell. It has its uses, but it isn't a must use spell and I find the utility of Bless drops off pretty rapidly as you gain levels and have more competition for your concentration slot.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Because it's really not as powerful as it looks.

If a battle lasts three rounds, and you have 5 PCs, then casting Bless 1) removes one round of actions from the cleric, or 20% of actions in that round therefore 7% of all actions in that combat, and 2) decreases the potency of the other two actions the cleric can choose from that battle as they can no longer cast a concentration spell that round. All so you can increase the potency of attack rolls by 12.5% (unless the cleric loses concentration) which isn't going to help he Wizard or Bard casting the spell with the saving throw.

It's not a bad spell in that context, but it's not a "you really should cast it" spell. It has its uses, but it isn't a must use spell and I find the utility of Bless drops off pretty rapidly as you gain levels and have more competition for your concentration slot.

This is spot on man. We always forget the opportunity cost and what we could do instead.

my group uses this spell occasionally—-but honestly other options are often equally effective.

would it even be worth casting if it was a plus one? Which brings me to the next point: sometimes bless is only a plus one.

 

[Stoutstien]

Yes bless is a good spell. it the best use of the action, spell slot, and concentration until 3rd lv spells one into play and even then it holds it own. On brand for cleric spells in 5e honestly. Not flashy but works.

Does it break anything? No. While impactful it doesn't even get in the same realm of the stuff that can make the game unplayable or unfun.

Does it effect bounded accuracy? Again no. First off bounded accuracy has nothing to do with the systems design to limit stacking of numbers. Most of them were just shifted to be automatically included to simply the math and limit the need for DMs to memorize the exact attack bonuses and other factors when tossing an encounter together. Bounded accuracy doesn't care if the party is using bless or not. If anything it is adamant to the fact it will never be necessarily.

the only hard cap in the game is the ability score maxes and that was probably added with no regard what so ever to BA.

 

[Oofta]

Yes. However, when I'm told what is fun for me is wrong, I raise an eyebrow. And this thread isn't even about what is fun or what is broken, merely me noting "hey this effect seems strong, why isn't it?".

Has anyone said that? That what is fun for you is wrong? Really?

And people have told me what they think. How this turned into me telling people that I'm right, and they're wrong, or that I'm somehow the fun police, has me baffled.

And when my attempts to debate a point or show my opinion are met with "the game is great because people like it", that's not very useful to me.

But you aren't just saying that the game isn't for you. It's not a big deal if the game doesn't work for you, it can't work for everyone in existence. The fact that you keep insisting that because it doesn't work for you it is therefore a poor quality game is the issue. I enjoy the game. I think it's the best version of the game ever released, even if it does still have it's share of warts. Insisting that my thinking the game is of high quality and fun is somehow wrong is the problem.

Meanwhile absolutely no one is telling you that you are wrong not to like something millions of other people enjoy. They're just rejecting the idea that it's low quality because you don't get to define quality for every other individual.

 

[Hussar]

Yes bless is a good spell. it the best use of the action, spell slot, and concentration until 3rd lv spells one into play and even then it holds it own. On brand for cleric spells in 5e honestly. Not flashy but works.

Does it break anything? No. While impactful it doesn't even get in the same realm of the stuff that can make the game unplayable or unfun.

Does it effect bounded accuracy? Again no. First off bounded accuracy has nothing to do with the systems design to limit stacking of numbers. Most of them were just shifted to be automatically included to simply the math and limit the need for DMs to memorize the exact attack bonuses and other factors when tossing an encounter together. Bounded accuracy doesn't care if the party is using bless or not. If anything it is adamant to the fact it will never be necessarily.

the only hard cap in the game is the ability score maxes and that was probably added with no regard what so ever to BA.

See I very much disagree. Command, for example can completely shut down an opponent for a round, forcing it to move through opportunity attacks (which count at least as much as a single round of a bless bonus) and plug something way out of position.

Granted it’s language dependent but it is a hugely impactful spell.

Just as a single example.