D&D (2024) D&D 5.11 - the time of big change is over

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

No. Because fireball is spot on.

I have never heard this opinion before... I thought almost everyone thought it was too much damage over too much area for a 3rd level spell

 

[Parmandur]

I'm hopeful that they'll realize that, if we assume a situation where 2014 and 2024 rules are meant to be used concurrently, they'll realize that the changes they should make are tweaking underperforming spells up in power. As tuning a high performing spell down simply means that people will have more reason to go back to the 2014 rules.

"That's power creep" is the obvious reply, but that's inevitable if you accept a conclusion that both versions of the rules are meant to be in play. If they try to make the 2024 rules the "balanced" version, they're implicitly casting the previous rules as unbalanced, and thus subtly promoting the 2024 rules as a "new edition".

Spells are one of the main areas that WotC has been comfortable issuing errata: I wouldn't wager that they feel a great need to rebalance in general at this point.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have never heard this opinion before... I thought almost everyone thought it was too much damage over too much area for a 3rd level spell

I kinda share this opinion and I believe other do also. It is true that fireball does more damaging (as does lightning bolt) than other spells at level and more relatively than other direct damage spells.
It is my view, that this overdamage is not a problem nor is it really overpowered. The really powerful spell are the control spells. Spells that steal actions, give advantage/disadvantage and other status effect are a much more useful use of a spell slot than dealing damage.
Fireball has its place as a mook clearer but spells like; stinking cloud, hypnotic pattern, slow, banishment are all more potent and have a bigger impact on a combat than direct damage spells.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have never heard this opinion before... I thought almost everyone thought it was too much damage over too much area for a 3rd level spell

Have you played 3e?

Damage spells were so underpowered, barely scratching fighters and so on, that save or die/suck was the best way to play.

I can see going down to 7d6. fewer than that and it is not worth the slot more often than not.

Remember that hitpoints inflated since AD&D 2e where the spell did 5d6 to 10d6 damage. Wizards had only 1d4 hp and a bonus to hp of +0 more often than not. So 5d6 vs 5d4 hp was quite ok. 5d6 vs 6+ 4d6+10 hp does not look that good.

That said, I could see a overall reduction of HP for monsters. Then going down to 6d6 might be ok.

The large area is a hindrance more often than it is a boon.

 

[Zaukrie]

I was hoping for bigger changes than previewed, so I'm a bit disappointed by this (and I agree, changes look small). That said, I'm not angry or sad or mad, just wanted more. ToV looks like it might do what I want. The monsters sure look interesting anyway.

I've noodled doing my own version of the rules, bringing in even more 4e (there is more in 5e than most admit), but that's so much work for so little reward....

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

Have you played 3e?

yes I started playing with my Dad's 3e books

Damage spells were so underpowered, barely scratching fighters and so on, that save or die/suck was the best way to play.

yup... at 8 I knew SOD or SOS was better then damage.

Remember that hitpoints inflated since AD&D 2e where the spell did 5d6 to 10d6 damage. Wizards had only 1d4 hp and a bonus to hp of +0 more often than not. So 5d6 vs 5d4 hp was quite ok. 5d6 vs 6+ 4d6+10 hp does not look that good.

I have heard this before and I have looked back at 2e. It looks to me like 100hp was god like in Ad&D 1e and 2e but in 5e that's a 10th level melee build if you power game it or a 14th level melee build if you don't.
My first warlock hexblade in 5e had 100+hp at level 11, and my articer (armor had it at 9th if I you counted my ability's to use aid every mornings, or 10th if you don't

 

[HammerMan]

I have heard this before and I have looked back at 2e. It looks to me like 100hp was god like in Ad&D 1e and 2e but in 5e that's a 10th level melee build if you power game it or a 14th level melee build if you don't.
My first warlock hexblade in 5e had 100+hp at level 11, and my articer (armor had it at 9th if I you counted my ability's to use aid every mornings, or 10th if you don't

I started in 2e in 90s
A fighter with 9d10 (plus 9x con bonus that was much harder to get) plus 3 per level over 9th could end 20th level with less then 100hp but that would be weak.

Breaking 100ho was a big deal in 2e. But it wasn’t impossible in the teens for levels.

There was also a barabarian hand book for a d12 hd class.

To get +1 hp per HD you needed a 15 con non fighters maxed at +2 at 16 or 17 I don’t remember but I remember a 19 is +5 cause I hit that ONCE.

So a lot of characters just had HD no con bonus. Even most fighters had 1 or 2

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

don’t remember but I remember a 19 is +5 cause I hit that ONCE.

I thought 18 was the cap in AD&D that you could not get a 19.

 

[mamba]

“That's power creep" is the obvious reply, but that's inevitable if you accept a conclusion that both versions of the rules are meant to be in play. If they try to make the 2024 rules the "balanced" version, they're implicitly casting the previous rules as unbalanced, and thus subtly promoting the 2024 rules as a "new edition".

There is a difference between being able to play both versions and not promoting the newer rules at all.

I would expect more balance, that some might counteract that by using an older version is no reason not to

 

[mamba]

Yep. Which ultimately means we won't be going back to the 5E14 format for subclass feature distribution, we'll be adjusting and re-arranging them just like they did for these playtests. The only different being that rather than every class being 3, 6, 10, 14, you'll have some with that and others with like 3, 7, 11, 15... 3, 6, 11, 14... 3, 5, 10, 15... or whatever combos they want.

ugh, if you rearrange them anyway, then put them all on the same levels at least