D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[Micah Sweet]

I won't speak for others, but IMO, bards and paladins are both ridiculous. Bards are almost-wizards that also have amazing skills, and can be made into passable fighters; they are good at everything. Paladins have access to almost the same toolset as a standard fighter, have spells and spell-like abilities that almost equal a full caster's, and can dump huge amounts of damage on command using smite, which refreshes every long rest (i.e. between most fights, in practice).

Bards aren't outright broken in combat because of opportunity costs, but they are massive spotlight hoggers (alongside druids). Paladins blow conventional martials out of the water in combat, in addition to having powerful utility magic.

Tell that to a bard or paladin player.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't really mind current D&D being superheroics, more than that high-level play is hard to make fun and challenging. A solution to the latter would be great, but keeping D&D a magic fueled power fantasy is fine by me.

Mostly because there are gazillions of lower-power fantasy games out there, it's not like anyone is forced to play 5e.

Except, you kinda are, unless you can get your whole group to learn a new system, or you're one of those rare groups of non-D&D players.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I have no problem conceiving of reskinning slot expended magical extra damage into a non-magical limited resource combat exertion to do extra damage. But smiting in 5e is more than just extra damage. Being just that non-magically martially good does not seem a sufficient explanation for the mechanics of radiant damage in 5e D&D.

Let’s try looking at this in a different way… At level 11, paladins get improved divine smite. Each of their attacks does an additional 1d8 radiant damage. One interpretation is that they are so holy, they are leaking holiness out of every orifice.

This isn’t magic. Improved divine smite works in an anti-magic field. It can’t be dispelled or counterspelled. It is part of the paladin’s nature.

Smites can work in the same manner. Particularly since the basic smite doesn’t even need to be “cast” the way other smites are.

Are you going to strip out the mechanical radiant damage type and say they are simply a different non-magical martial? Or do you have a non-magical explanation for the radiant effects? Such as say specialized anti-undead fighting techniques (hitting zombies in the head for kill shots, etc.)?

I prefer to leave that to the individual players. Maybe one will tie it to their weapon being blessed. Maybe another will tie it to their righteousness (the same way a monk’s ki empowers their extraordinary abilities). I would love it for a genasi paladin to tie it to the manifestation of their racial heritage and express it as fire, cold, lightning or acid damage instead.

 

[Hussar]

Except, you kinda are, unless you can get your whole group to learn a new system, or you're one of those rare groups of non-D&D players.

You keep repeating this but places like Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds routinely report that about 40% of their games played are not DnD 5e. Which means there are thousands and thousands of tables right there to play pretty much any game you like.

It’s not actually that hard to not play DnD.

 

[Hussar]

What classes are being changed? Everyone you change seems to be losing something. What are they getting in return, and how are your players taking it? Do they all play fighters and rogues?

I'm sorry, what you're doing is entirely out of my experience, and I want to know how you talked your players into allowing themselves to be so weakened.

I’m not that poster but when I ran my no caster campaign I just said no casters. Full stop. Nothing with a cantrip was the set standard.

Wasn’t too hard to sell the idea. The campaign didn’t really work but looking back at it now, that was due to all sorts of factors and not just this one.

I just had to stick to my guns during chargen.

 

[Lanefan]

Higher level PC's get to choose their equipment coming in - that's been pretty much standard since 1e. So, yeah, it was a 3e game where that was very much expected to choose your starting equipment. And since Rings of Sustenance are such a minor expense, it made perfect sense.

When I played 3e our items for characters joining at not-1st level were determined for us by the DM's dice or whim, with a push toward what the character could best use. Nothing was guaranteed.

Then again, @Lanefan, how often do you play instead of DM? I thought you were like me, pretty much permanent DM. It does create a very different perspective from players who rarely DM

These days it's 60% play, 40% DM.

 

[Mort]

You keep repeating this but places like Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds routinely report that about 40% of their games played are not DnD 5e. Which means there are thousands and thousands of tables right there to play pretty much any game you like.

It’s not actually that hard to not play DnD.

Lets see:

Didn't realize Call of Cthulhu was that popular!

Would have thought Pathfinder would have a higher share.

Just under 60% D&D (counting Pathfinder).

So right, about 40% not "D&D." Though finding a specific game that's not D&D (or apparently Call of Cthulhu) might prove challenging.

 

[Cadence]

You keep repeating this but places like Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds routinely report that about 40% of their games played are not DnD 5e. Which means there are thousands and thousands of tables right there to play pretty much any game you like.

It’s not actually that hard to not play DnD.

Edit: Ninja'd by @Mort

It feels like there's a big difference between "not DnD 5e" and "a particular not DnD 5e game except Call of Cthulhu, PF1e, and PF2e."

For Roll20 Q4 2021, it was 55% 5E. The next game is Call of Cthulhu which is 9.3% - but for all editions combined, and then it drops to 3.3% for PF1e, and 1.14% for PF2e and then the rest.

For Fantasy Grounds the latest I found was 2020 Q4 (I didn't look too hard). 71% 5E, then 7% PF1e, 6% PF2e, and then drops to for 3% Savage Worlds

 

[Cadence]

Lets see:

View attachment 261899

Didn't realize Call of Cthulhu was that popular!

Would have thought Pathfinder would have a higher share.

Just under 60% D&D (counting Pathfinder).

So right, about 40% not "D&D." Though finding a specific game that's not D&D (or apparently Call of Cthulhu) might prove challenging.

PF seems to be over at Fantasy Grounds?

 

[FrozenNorth]

What classes are being changed? Everyone you change seems to be losing something. What are they getting in return, and how are your players taking it? Do they all play fighters and rogues?

Fighters, rogues, barbarians, monks, artificers, sorcerers and warlocks aren’t touched, so that is half the classes there.

Rangers may get a power boost - the intention is for the new non-magical abilities to replace spellcasting.

Paladins get slightly nerfed. They get less versatility, since essentially, they lose the opportunity to use their spell slots for anything except smiting.

Wizards, Druids and Clerics get nerfed. Wizards will probably feel it the most. The Druids I’ve seen played either are Circle of the Moon and forget they can cast spells, or the other Circles and forget they can Wildshape. Either way, requiring them to use spell slots to Wildshape is unlikely to adjust their power level in practice. The Clerics I’ve seen played used their Channel Divinity very rarely, so once again, technically a nerf but not one that I believe will have a great impact.

Bards get nerfed, losing half their spell slots. This will likely impact them the most in combat, since they will have fewer spells to cast. Outside of combat, they are still the masters of the social pillar, and pretty good in the exploration pillar.

I'm sorry, what you're doing is entirely out of my experience, and I want to know how you talked your players into allowing themselves to be so weakened.

Two things: First, my players like trying new things, so they may be excited to try some of the proposed changes. Second, they can recognize that some classes are poorly balanced, so I don’t think they will object to nerfing the full casters.

One of my players expressed to me that he loved his bard character, but he felt frustrated about constantly holding back to avoid overshadowing the other characters. I think playing the new bard would be a relief to him.

These changes also enable a more low-magic campaign, and I suspect that like the OP, they may look forward to that. (This was also one of the drivers of the proposed changes: to facilitate the creation of a diverse party that wasn’t 50% spellcasters).