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

[James Gasik]

Yeah, I remember PS and PO.

PS was an absurdly good utility spell. You could literally change forms every round, and you weren't limited to animals. You only got locomotive abilities, but this was broadly defined (EGG uses the example of turning into a black pudding to squeeze under a door). In this respect, the 5e version is significantly nerfed.

IMO, the way EGG tried to balance PO, in particular, was pretty bad. Sure, it was something that you didn't generally want to cast on an ally due to the System Shock check to avoid instant death. It could permanently turn them into basically anything, however, so note how EGG had to include a sentence into the spell description saying that creatures prefer their own forms and don't want to be polymorphed. My guess is because some evil wizard player tried to polymorph their henchmen into an army of dragons. I guess that "restriction" doesn't apply to a wizard who casts PS on himself? A spell description that tries to tell me what a character wants or doesn't want is... questionable at best.

Moreover, while the system shock vs death and the check to maintain your mind made it definitely risky to use against allies, it made it significantly stronger than it otherwise would have been against enemies. Not only did the BBEG have to make a save or suck, it came with the risk of death and losing their ability to think like an intelligent creature!

I think that 5e Polymorph is one of the less-well balanced spells in the edition, but IMO it's still leagues ahead of 1e PS and PO in terms of quality of design.

Hm. Total aside, but this brings up something I never considered. In AD&D, if I polymorph a monster, what the heck does it roll for system shock? Not many monsters state what their Con score is.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't think magic is too good (outside of a few specific spells, like LTH and Goodberry). I think it should be really good with restrictions and dangers in its use.

How about a system where you can choose between "safe and reliable" moderately powered magic, and "dangerous and risky" powerful magic?

 

[Micah Sweet]

How about a system where you can choose between "safe and reliable" moderately powered magic, and "dangerous and risky" powerful magic?

That could work.

 

[Undrave]

How about a system where you can choose between "safe and reliable" moderately powered magic, and "dangerous and risky" powerful magic?

A system like that would probably not even NEED a resource like spell slot.

A Firebolt cantrip is safe and reliable, but it only does minor damage, a Fireball spell would take longer to cast, and if its interrupted it blows up in your face. And even if you cast it properly, it might be too much exertion and you get a level of exhaustion that prevents you from trying difficult spell again until you rest.

Maybe the more big spells you cast, the more likely things are to go wrong.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Hm. Total aside, but this brings up something I never considered. In AD&D, if I polymorph a monster, what the heck does it roll for system shock? Not many monsters state what their Con score is.

I think the way we did it was the DM eyeballed what the monster's Constitution ought to be and used that. I don't recall whether there was an official rule for it.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Yup. Get rid of multiclassing and that problem goes away.

That's true insofar as it goes. But by the same reasoning if we simply get rid of casters all the issues with spellcasting go away...

 

[MrsMongoose]

A system like that would probably not even NEED a resource like spell slot.

A Firebolt cantrip is safe and reliable, but it only does minor damage, a Fireball spell would take longer to cast, and if its interrupted it blows up in your face. And even if you cast it properly, it might be too much exertion and you get a level of exhaustion that prevents you from trying difficult spell again until you rest.

Maybe the more big spells you cast, the more likely things are to go wrong.

Now that sounds like you want to play Ars Magica instead...

I wanted to ask also about someone telling me that x amount of spells are concentration now, so you can't even sustain a spell for rounds and cast the next one... can anyone elaborate?
(btw I play in a long-running 2e game atm, {and occasional PF1/other non-d20 stuff}, and it always really annoyed me about the aging some spells do...)

 

[billd91]

I think the way we did it was the DM eyeballed what the monster's Constitution ought to be and used that. I don't recall whether there was an official rule for it.

I think we rolled a Constitution score for the monster at that point on 3d6 and used whatever came up.

 

[Voadam]

Now that sounds like you want to play Ars Magica instead...

I wanted to ask also about someone telling me that x amount of spells are concentration now, so you can't even sustain a spell for rounds and cast the next one... can anyone elaborate?
(btw I play in a long-running 2e game atm, {and occasional PF1/other non-d20 stuff}, and it always really annoyed me about the aging some spells do...)

In 5e if you have one concentration spell going you can cast other spells, just not other concentration spells without dropping concentration on the first one.

It is a pretty elegant solution for those who consider the multiple ongoing buffs of 3e/Pathfinder to be a problem. It also limits a bunch of big save or suck spells such as hold person or dominate person.

 

[Vaalingrade]

That's true insofar as it goes. But by the same reasoning if we simply get rid of casters all the issues with spellcasting go away...

Delete the wizard.