D&D (2024) December 1st UA Spell changes

[Chaosmancer]

Neither is what you are incorrectly claiming that I'm saying.

The way it works is that WotC has calculated X amount of damage and damage prevention on average spread out over the adventuring day. If they've calculated it at 20 points of prevention(arbitrary number), then it doesn't matter if it's 4 points from your healing spell, 8 points from barbarian resistance, and 8 points from the fighter's second wind or any other combination of 20. 20 is it.

They know all the 1st level abilities, 2nd level abilities, etc. and they calculate those in when figuring out balance. Looking at your healing spell in isolation the way you are doing is worthless when figuring out whether things are balanced or not. Balance doesn't work that way.

Are you joking right now? That isn't how they balance the game. They CAN'T balance it that way. For it to be balanced this way a group of 4 Paladins would have to have identical damage mitigation to a group of 4 sorcerers. And they don't. And they didn't balance it by saying that Sorcerers deal more damage, so that makes up for the Paladins having more healing and better saves.

And I'm not looking at the spell in isolation. I'm looking at it while considering CR, spell slots, average monster damage design, and average hp. You keep acting like all I did was look at 1d8+wis mod and say "that can't be enough!" But that isn't what I did.

You haven't yet shown there to be a problem, let alone gotten to the point where we should be looking at solutions.

Yes, yes I did. And even if I didn't, this conversation started with an acknowledgement by multiple parties that healing in 5e is too weak.

And you are looking at it in isolation, rather than as a whole with every other party member and all of their abilities.

Maybe that is because there is no possible way to predict what the rest of the party looks like, or what abilities they have.

If it's all fighters, then they have multiples of their abilities and those will be greater than a single fighter with a single ability. WotC isn't you, though. They have to balance groups of 4 against the monsters, and see if the totality of abilities is good.

So, 4 second winds is equal the ability to cast the Heal Spell 4 times? Because if you take the correct combination of abilities, the clerics can deal 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis every round for a fight, while still having the Heal spells, so is that really balanced against 4 fighters with no feats?

Or, and this might be a little out there, they don't actually consider every possible scenario and balance based on the consideration that any weak ability in the party will be paired with a stronger ability used by a different party member. Because that's stupid.

Then you fail. You will never achieve anything resembling balance if you continue to white room compare single classes and abilities to the game. This is a group game, not an individual one and is not balanced around the individual.

I haven't failed yet. No reason to believe that it will all suddenly collapse after the years of me doing it.

If I kill the monster before it would have done 12 points of damage to you, I in effect healed you for those 12 points. High DPR classes "heal" by doing increased damage. It's not a difficult concept.

I put heal in "" for a reason. You can't reasonably have thought I was literally saying they were healing.

You have not "in effect" healed me at all. Because you have no knowledge that that monster was going to deal 12 damage. Maybe it was going to deal zero damage. Maybe 5 damage. Maybe 30 damage.

And sure, "If I kill the monster, it can't hurt me" is a concept. But it isn't the concept of a HEALER. If it was, then Assassins would be the premier healers of any game. But they aren't, they are in a category called "Damage per Round" or DPR. Healing is a different category, because DPR =/= healing. You don't just get to redefine things and pretend you are right.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Ah yes, the "death is the best status effect" approach. It's irksome, but that's how the game has been designed for awhile. Have everyone optimize to end combats quickly and you'll never notice how shabby in combat healing is.

Too bad so many of us noticed how shabby in-combat healing is.

 

[Maxperson]

Are you joking right now? That isn't how they balance the game. They CAN'T balance it that way. For it to be balanced this way a group of 4 Paladins would have to have identical damage mitigation to a group of 4 sorcerers. And they don't. And they didn't balance it by saying that Sorcerers deal more damage, so that makes up for the Paladins having more healing and better saves.

Balance is a range, not an exact number.

Yes, yes I did. And even if I didn't, this conversation started with an acknowledgement by multiple parties that healing in 5e is too weak.

That's certainly an opinion. It's not fact, though.

So, 4 second winds is equal the ability to cast the Heal Spell 4 times?

Are you serious right now?

Because if you take the correct combination of abilities, the clerics can deal 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis every round for a fight, while still having the Heal spells, so is that really balanced against 4 fighters with no feats?

Yes, because "for a fight" doesn't equal "for every fight" like fighters maintain. Fighters aren't behind in damage output. They're behind in the other two pillars.

You have not "in effect" healed me at all. Because you have no knowledge that that monster was going to deal 12 damage. Maybe it was going to deal zero damage. Maybe 5 damage. Maybe 30 damage.

And sure, "If I kill the monster, it can't hurt me" is a concept. But it isn't the concept of a HEALER. If it was, then Assassins would be the premier healers of any game. But they aren't, they are in a category called "Damage per Round" or DPR. Healing is a different category, because DPR =/= healing. You don't just get to redefine things and pretend you are right.

You clearly don't get it, so I'm going to let this drop.

 

[James Gasik]

Too bad so many of us noticed how shabby in-combat healing is.

Well that's the theory, anyways. I'm all for getting combats done with, but optimizing for damage alone is super boring for me.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Okay, what do we mean by "short burst healings"? That sounds the exact same as Cure Wounds to me, so what does this mean?

Snip

Disagree here, it would be less useful in combat (also, you made it smaller? Did you mean 3 x 3 squares?) if it only healed an area once per round. Everyone would have to group up into fireball formation instead of using 5e's movement rules to sweep in and out.

1. Short and powerful burst healing options (as suggested: spend up to 1 hit die per spell level on top).

2. Yes, 3 by 3 squares.
Maybe a buff and a nerf. Yes, you need to group up, but you don't have to worry about Attacks of Opportunities. In a fight, where you need constant healing, you probably want to stay in close formation anyway.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Balance is a range, not an exact number.

And? What, because it is a range you are right about your range of "consider everything all the time, assume it is all balanced, and therefore nothing needs to be improved" but my range of "we should be able to hit close to these benchmarks" is wrong? All you are doing is asserting "because barbarian's can rage, clerical healing is balanced" and other such nonsense, meanwhile I'm showing that one action (not one attack) from a monster of equal CR to character level (CR being the challenge rating for "a group of 4 of this level should be able to defeat this monster relatively easily) generally does enough average damage (a range) that a single action from a cleric cannot provide enough average healing (a range) to counter-act.

I have data. You have assertions that you are the most correct ever.

That's certainly an opinion. It's not fact, though.

Can you... disprove it? I've provided evidence backing up the claim, showing how actual healing abilities interact with the damage of monsters. You say it is false because rogues can sneak attack and kill enemies, and that should be counted as healing.

Are you serious right now?

You have asserted that the game is balanced so that healing abilities are balanced via party resources, damage dealing, and damage mitigation. So, a party of 4 high-level fighters with Second Wind should be equivalent to a party of 4 high-level clerics with Heal. That is your claim. If you think that is ridiculous, perhaps you have either so poorly presented your claim that you should revisit it, or you should begin to realize your claim has deep flaws.

Yes, because "for a fight" doesn't equal "for every fight" like fighters maintain. Fighters aren't behind in damage output. They're behind in the other two pillars.

Fighters can absolutely fall behind in damage output, even compared to clerics. Because while the claim is that "fighters can go all day" the truth is they cannot. They are limited by their HP, and to get enough fights per day to balance out the use of spells often takes a huge number of fights.

Heck, let's run the numbers real fast. I was using 11th level characters. Everything is balanced against everything, as per your claim.

To reach 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis the cleric needs to cast Spirit Guardians as 3rd and Spiritual Weapon at 4th, then using a weapon cantrip like booming blade. They can do this for three fights, three rounds per fight. I know there is a 1 round delay here, but we're just getting some baseline numbers to start with.

That would be (9d8+6) x 3 rounds or 139.5 x 3 combats or a total of 418.5 average damage. This is rough, spirit guardians is a save for half and an AOE after all, but hey, this gets us in the ballpark.

So, a fighter with 20's in stats, sword and board, would get 3d8+21 x 3 rounds or 103.5 per fight. Which means the fighter needs a 4th fight to catch up.

But, oops, the Cleric is in that 4th fight too, and they still have 2nd level slots and can deal 5d8+6 per round for another three fights. Which is another 256.5 damage, so over 6 fights I've got 675. Fighter after 6 fights is still half a fight behind. So we'd need to go into a 7th fight. Of course, the cleric still has two 5th level slots...


And yes, I'm discounting that first round of cleric spellcasting for those first three combats, I'm also assuming that you are using an AOE to hit a single target. I'm discounting accuracy, but I'm also discounting save for half and the rider on the weapon cantrip.

And remember, HP is the resource for how long the fight can go. The fighter may start with slightly more (+1 from the cleric before accounting for Con mod) but they heal much less. 16.5 every two fights, compared to the Cleric getting back 70. Which means you need FOUR second winds, which if we assume a short rest every two fights means you need 8 fights for the Fighter to heal as much as the cleric can in a single go.


So, again, I'm not sure that these things are really balanced like you seem to think they are.

You clearly don't get it, so I'm going to let this drop.

Right, I'm the one who doesn't understand.

 

[Chaosmancer]

1. Short and powerful burst healing options (as suggested: spend up to 1 hit die per spell level on top).

Ah, I thought that was different than the hit dice consideration

2. Yes, 3 by 3 squares.
Maybe a buff and a nerf. Yes, you need to group up, but you don't have to worry about Attacks of Opportunities. In a fight, where you need constant healing, you probably want to stay in close formation anyway.

I don't really see much of a buff here. Instead of healing anyone who can reach the spirit, it ends up being a tight 10 ft area. And while opportunity attacks are lessened, you also have lost the freedom to move and hit targets how you want to hit them.

I could be wrong, but it just feels overall like a nerf. Clustering like that is very very rough, especially for a d6 healing once per round.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I could be wrong, but it just feels overall like a nerf. Clustering like that is very very rough, especially for a d6 healing once per round.

It adds up and healing spirit scales very well with spell level. Use it as a 3rd level spell and you heal 2d6 per turn (like aura of vitality), which is quite good if you can use it over 3 turns or more (after 3 turns you have negated a whole fireball of damage with a single cast of a 3rd level spell).
Seems about right for me. And again, powerful bursts of healing (a little bit buffed cure wounds) should also be viable (3d8+4) is lousy...

 

[Maxperson]

And? What, because it is a range you are right about your range of "consider everything all the time, assume it is all balanced, and therefore nothing needs to be improved" but my range of "we should be able to hit close to these benchmarks" is wrong?

They have the numbers. You don't. You just have feelings that something is off, and feelings aren't a reason to change things.

All you are doing is asserting "because barbarian's can rage, clerical healing is balanced" and other such nonsense, meanwhile I'm showing that one action (not one attack) from a monster of equal CR to character level (CR being the challenge rating for "a group of 4 of this level should be able to defeat this monster relatively easily) generally does enough average damage (a range) that a single action from a cleric cannot provide enough average healing (a range) to counter-act.

Right. One(mine) actually deals with balance. The other(yours) is a white room isolated comparison that does not. Your minor healing spell is not intended to counteract what you are comparing it to. If it was, it would.

I have data. You have assertions that you are the most correct ever.

Data when used incorrectly isn't anything at all. Basically you have a poll and are spinning the numbers to suit your desires, but WotC has the actual play balance to consider, not your feelings on the matter.

Can you... disprove it? I've provided evidence backing up the claim, showing how actual healing abilities interact with the damage of monsters. You say it is false because rogues can sneak attack and kill enemies, and that should be counted as healing.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence that there is anything wrong with balance. You've taken two isolated things and compared them in a white room and declared that something is ubalanced based on a white room situation that doesn't deal with entire party vs. adventuring day balance.

You have asserted that the game is balanced so that healing abilities are balanced via party resources, damage dealing, and damage mitigation. So, a party of 4 high-level fighters with Second Wind should be equivalent to a party of 4 high-level clerics with Heal.

Um, no. That was entirely you. I never, ever made that claim. If you wanted to actually get my claim correct(and you don't), you would have compared all of the abilities available to one 11th level group to another, and not deliberately twisted what I said compared a 1st level ability to a 6th level ability in a white room again and declared it to be what I am saying.

That is your claim. If you think that is ridiculous

I think your deliberate Strawman is ridiculous, too. We are in agreement!

Fighters can absolutely fall behind in damage output, even compared to clerics. Because while the claim is that "fighters can go all day" the truth is they cannot. They are limited by their HP, and to get enough fights per day to balance out the use of spells often takes a huge number of fights.

Clerics don't have all of their spells for combat. A group of 4 clerics will need use a good percentage of them for utility during the adventuring day, cratering their ability to dish out damage in combat. Again, you are white rooming things by incorrectly declaring that clerics will have all of their spells to use in battle.

To reach 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis the cleric needs to cast Spirit Guardians as 3rd and Spiritual Weapon at 4th, then using a weapon cantrip like booming blade. They can do this for three fights, three rounds per fight. I know there is a 1 round delay here, but we're just getting some baseline numbers to start with.

And if they do so, they're gimping themselves in utility outside of combat and will suffer for it. AND they have zeroed out their 3rd and 4th level slots in 3 out of 6-8 encounters for that adventuring day. Now they have 4 1st level spells, 3 2nd, 2 5th and 1 6th to divide up over 3-5 more encounters AND all utility for the day.

You also can't use Booming Blade unless fighters can use feats. All books outside of core are also optional and can't be assumed to be in play.

That would be (9d8+6) x 3 rounds or 139.5 x 3 combats or a total of 418.5 average damage. This is rough, spirit guardians is a save for half and an AOE after all, but hey, this gets us in the ballpark.

So, a fighter with 20's in stats, sword and board, would get 3d8+21 x 3 rounds or 103.5 per fight. Which means the fighter needs a 4th fight to catch up.

They're going to get 3-5 more, so...

But, oops, the Cleric is in that 4th fight too, and they still have 2nd level slots and can deal 5d8+6 per round for another three fights. Which is another 256.5 damage, so over 6 fights I've got 675. Fighter after 6 fights is still half a fight behind. So we'd need to go into a 7th fight. Of course, the cleric still has two 5th level slots...

So you ARE white rooming this into a situation that will never occur in actual game play and assuming that clerics only ever cast spells in combat.

Now try down 1/3 to half your spells AND having to heal yourselves with at least some of those slots instead of using all your slots for offense. You know, like actually happens in real world game play and not fake white room situations where spellcasters have 100% of their slots for utility and 100% of their slots for combat in order to show how they are better than squares both in and out of combat.

And remember, HP is the resource for how long the fight can go. The fighter may start with slightly more (+1 from the cleric before accounting for Con mod) but they heal much less. 16.5 every two fights, compared to the Cleric getting back 70. Which means you need FOUR second winds, which if we assume a short rest every two fights means you need 8 fights for the Fighter to heal as much as the cleric can in a single go.

Wait! You've used up every 2nd, 3rd, and 4th level spell on offense, then said you have 2 5th and a 6th for the last fight. Where are you getting this mythical clerical healing from? They have no slots to use any. You have spare the dying to stabilize the clerics that go unconscious and that's it.

Unless of course you want to take back a considerable amount of damage output so that you can actually heal and a considerable amount more for the utility you need to use out of combat in an adventuring day, in which case fighters action surge past you.

Right, I'm the one who doesn't understand.

Since you think that clerics have 100% of their spells for combat, 100% for healing, and 100% for utility, you clearly don't.

I'm also, given how you have twisted my claims and how you've used more than 100% of clerical spell slots, not going to trust your numbers as to how much fighters can dish out per fight.

 

[James Gasik]

You also can't use Booming Blade unless fighters can use feats. All books outside of core are also optional and can't be assumed to be in play.

Well, unless they're an Arcana Cleric. Or a High Elf.