D&D 5E Double casting feedback? (with concentration limits)

[Quickleaf]

What is the problem you are trying to solve?

I'm experimenting with the goal of increasing the way 5e encourages player creativity. In this particular instance, that's about creativity in spellcasting (I'm more holistically asking that question across a wide swath of the game, not just spellcasting – just for purposes of fruitful conversation, I drilled down to one instance under that umbrella).

Not a "problem" per se, but that's my big tent goal with many of my house rules.

I love games where there's less "let me look at my sheet for what I'll do" (what we could call convergent thinking) and more providing the fuel for unexpected combinations/ideas (divergent thinking). Trying to bring more of that into 5e.

To sum up my layman's understanding of the neuroscience & psychology, creativity is strongest when we are able to flip between convergent (memory, pragmatism, problem-solving) and divergent (out of the box, reframing the paradigm, unexpected) thinking.

For example, I have a house rule about "creative upcasting" – it's a fun house rule, but I noticed some players wouldn't use it, and still figuring out why exactly, but my limited observation was the players who didn't use it were the ones who struggled most with divergent thinking.

To compare the two house rules, it's the difference between "You can make any main course dish you want, modifying any of the recipes you know" (creative upcasting) versus "You can make any main course dish you want by combining two ingredients you have" (dual casting).

I think the latter is encouraging more convergent / divergent switching.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm experimenting with the goal of increasing the way 5e encourages player creativity. In this particular instance, that's about creativity in spellcasting (I'm more holistically asking that question across a wide swath of the game, not just spellcasting – just for purposes of fruitful conversation, I drilled down to one instance under that umbrella).

I think they key issue here is that, right now, Full Casters are better than other PCs in the two non-combat pillars, but actually fairly equal to them in the combat pillar.

What you're proposing would mean that they were also more powerful in the combat pillar, and at that point, pretty much all other classes might as well give up and go home.

However, I do think there's a way to do this, and I think @DND_Reborn nailed it - charge them a spell slot that's one higher than the combined slots of the spells. That seems fair given the massive advantage they get from the action economy (remembering that most combats in 5E only last 3-4 rounds, getting an advantage there is huge).

And say only let Sorcerers do this, myself. At least to start with. It makes much more sense for Sorcerers, because their casting comes from inside, and they already have metamagic which modifies spells in other ways. I'd consider charging a Feat to let non-Sorcerers do it.

 

[Mort]

I think they key issue here is that, right now, Full Casters are better than other PCs in the two non-combat pillars, but actually fairly equal to them in the combat pillar.

What you're proposing would mean that they were also more powerful in the combat pillar, and at that point, pretty much all other classes might as well give up and go home.

Pretty much, yes.

However, I do think there's a way to do this, and I think @DND_Reborn nailed it - charge them a spell slot that's one higher than the combined slots of the spells. That seems fair given the massive advantage they get from the action economy (remembering that most combats in 5E only last 3-4 rounds, getting an advantage there is huge).

Remembering how good the Haste spell was (3e), I suspect it's not enough!

Being able to completely trump the action economy and generally end fights in half the time? That's worth A LOT!

And say only let Sorcerers do this, myself. At least to start with. It makes much more sense for Sorcerers, because their casting comes from inside, and they. already have metamagic which modifies spells in other ways. I'd consider charging a Feat to let non-Sorcerers do it.

Honestly, I would be curious to see how this goes and could see implementing it if everyone picked casters anyway (or to actively state this as an experiment and HAVE everyone pick casters).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Remembering how good the Haste spell was (3e), I suspect it's not enough!

Being able to completely trump the action economy and generally end fights in half the time? That's worth A LOT!

I was kind of thinking the same thing but I did the math on a couple of spells, and as they have to be two different, not the same spell twice, I think it'd probably be okay.

Like, say 2 1st level spells, you could do Magic Missile and Chromatic Orb, which is 3d4+3+3d8, which sounds cool, but it's a 3rd-level slot, and a 3rd-level spell is something like Fireball doing 8d6 to an area,

I think the DM would have to say it was experimental and be prepared to veto any particularly obnoxious combinations that came up though, because we're never going to think of everything unless you pay us a lot of money to go through lol.

Hmmmm that said you could do Fireball and Lightning Bolt at the same time for a 7th-level slot, which would be 16d6 to the targets hit by both, more than the 12d6 of an immediately detonated Delayed Blast Fireball, which doesn't seem right (esp. as things can go really wrong with DBF).

Maybe it also needs the restriction that only one of the spells can be a damage spell? (Healing is less of an issue - if anything current in-combat healing in 5E is undertuned.)

TLDR: Restrict to a max of 1 spell that does damage and don't let them use the same spell twice, whatever it is.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Remembering how good the Haste spell was (3e), I suspect it's not enough!

Being able to completely trump the action economy and generally end fights in half the time? That's worth A LOT!

Having not played much 3E, I can't contribute how the Haste thing worked.

However, I think if we look at spell progression and how many spell slots there are, I can't see this being a big issue really.

Consider, that (with my total spell levels + 1 slot used idea), you couldn't even do this until 5th level (unless you want to include cantrips as 0-level, in which case it could be 3rd level).

If anything, you could limit it to only combining 5th-level spells or lower; so you couldn't do a 1st + 7th for a 9th level slot for example.

Frankly, when you get to using 6th and higher level slots (in tiers 3 and 4), I can't see much where two lower level spells will far outstrip the higher level slot.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

However, I think if we look at spell progression and how many spell slots there are, I can't see this being a big issue really.

Frankly, when you get to using 6th and higher level slots (in tiers 3 and 4), I can't see much where two lower level spells will far outstrip the higher level slot.

I think if you let two damage spells get combined it gets wonky, as I noted. Jumping up from 12d6 for a 7th level slot to 16d6 is pretty big. If you let people do the same spell twice it's even worse.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think if you let two damage spells get combined it gets wonky, as I noted. Jumping up from 12d6 for a 7th level slot to 16d6 is pretty big. If you let people do the same spell twice it's even worse.

Yeah, I noted the idea of fireball and lightning bolt in my first post. Although DBF is 12d6, it can get as high as 21d6, and frankly it is on the low-end of 7th level spells as far as damage goes. Especially when you remember the maximum damage is capped by one spell, so you aren't really doing 16d6 even, you are doing 16d6 with a max of 48 (max of 8d6).

But, if you compare such a combo to other 7th-level spells, such as delayed blast fireball (which only begins at 12d6, but can potentially do 21d6), finger of death (single target, but much more potential damage), firestorm (slightly lower average but a bit higher AoE), or prismatic spray (slightly less damage, but MUCH larger AoE); I think such a fireball / lightning bolt combo isn't OP really.

Such actual 7th level spells won't have the max 48 cap, but often due a bit less damage. However, their AoE is larger, in some cases much larger.

However, I think if it is really a concern there are easy ways to deal with it:
1. You cannot duplicate spells.
2. You cannot do two AoE spells.
3. You cannot overlap AoE spells.

Just off the top of my head...

 

[Blue]

What if a spellcaster could cast two spells on their turn, with the caveat that the total spell slot level couldn't exceed the maximum spell level they can cast, that only one of the spells can require concentration, and the maximum damage per round is capped at whichever spell deals more (or any) damage?

I am a bit leery because of how important action economy is in 5e.

Being able to get off, for example, a low level buff/debuff as well as a concentration-less spell is quite powerful. Spending an action on Bless is one of it's balance points, doing that and also any spell but your most powerful is quite good.

It also combines two of a caster's mid to low level slots which aren't all that impressive at the higher levels into the action economy of a single spell, which can be.

Certain classes being able to spend their resources quicker will lead to even more push for 5 minute working days, so I'd want to see something like "can not have can any spells the round previous".

Would we give a fighter an extra set of attacks as long as they didn't use a fighting style on any of them? The argument "it's not using any resources" is actually an arguement the other way, since resource-bound features already do more per action than at-will action, so it's doubling down on coolness and letting the steady-output people have nothing extra.

Would this house rule fit one of D&D 5e's classes better than others?

Now, this would be an interesting way that Sorcerers could break the normal rules of magic. Heck, even if it's just take out the limitation on spells when casting a bonus action spell - certain casters can heal and cast, and sorcerers can quicken plus cast something else.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, I noted the idea of fireball and lightning bolt in my first post. Although DBF is 12d6, it can get as high as 21d6, and frankly it is on the low-end of 7th level spells as far as damage goes. Especially when you remember the maximum damage is capped by one spell, so you aren't really doing 16d6 even, you are doing 16d6 with a max of 48 (max of 8d6).


Such actual 7th level spells won't have the max 48 cap, but often due a bit less damage. However, their AoE is larger, in some cases much larger.

However, I think if it is really a concern there are easy ways to deal with it:
1. You cannot duplicate spells.
2. You cannot do two AoE spells.
3. You cannot overlap AoE spells.

Just off the top of my head...

Good point, I'd forgotten the maximum damage thing already.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Good point, I'd forgotten the maximum damage thing already.

I expect a lot of people would forget it as well, which is more my concern and why I dropped the idea a couple years ago.

In order to really work and be close to balanced, there has to be a lot of components to remember. Given the design goals of 5E, if it is so complex to work, it probably isn't a great idea.

Sorcerers, for instance, already have Twinned Spell, but it has some specific limits. Such a concept as "simulcasting" would need to be rigidly controlled to even have a change at not being OP.