D&D (2024) Playtest 7 survey is now live.

[Mistwell]

2014 did a pretty good job at removing overpowered spells. But there are still way too many underpowered spells.

Underpowered spells dont break the game the way that overpowered spells do. But when there are too many underpowered spells compared to the other spells in the same slot, it increases the need for system mastery to avoid them. Also, the underpowered spells see less use. Because being a poor choice they arent really a choice, thus both waste space and diminish real choice. The underpowered spells also create confusion for the DM when the DM needs to adjudicate a feature based on how powerful it is while using the spell slots as a gauge.

It is the underpowered spells that need attention. I hope to see the playtest attend them.

I agree the 2024 wont remove any spells, but it can improve spell descriptions. The Jump spell is an example of a boost (rather than a nerf), turning a near-worthless spell into a fun spell, thus increasing choices among other good spells. I see no problem with changing the slot level of a spell − if that seems the best solution for a particular spell, it is also the simplest solution.

I agree I want them to fix some underpowered spells. But if they do not, it's less harm than not fixing the overpowered ones. You help address the caster/non-caster gap with underpowered spells at least.

I agree the jump spell is a great fixing of an underpowered spell and I hope they do more of that. I just don't think there is time for multiple playtests of that sort of thing. It either gets a thumbs up or it will default to the older underpowered version and most people just ignore that spell.

It's why I keep saying people should vote at least "Satisfied" if something is an improvement. Seeking perfection on this stuff is just another way of telling WOTC to move on to something else. We're voting for the lesser of two evils on most things at this point, and rejecting something is a vote for going back to the 2014 rules for that thing, not another iteration.

 

[Parmandur]

I am juat not sure that WotC hasn't already tested most the Spells that they plan to change

 

[Mistwell]

I am juat not sure that WotC hasn't already tested most the Spells that they plan to change

That is my sincere worry. How do you not test an alternative version of Shield, or the summon X creatures spells? They know both have serious issues.

 

[Parmandur]

That is my sincere worry. How do you not test an alternative version of Shield, or the summon X creatures spells? They know both have serious issues.

Well, we know that the Tasha's summons are replacing the 2014 PahB ones, per Crawford. And those pased playtesting muster recently. We may see something with Shiwld...but maybe not?

 

[OB1]

It would be more generic, but you can do it with abilities like this:

• School Specialization: Choose 1 school of magic (div, trans, etc etc). When you acquire new spells as wizard, you gain 1 additional spell of this school.
• School Enhancement: When you cast spells from your specialized school, gain +1 DC.
• etc

It would be too hard to generate the distinctive abilities you get right now (diviner vs abjurer feels quite different), but if you really want to boil down the 8 school specializations into 1 subclass you could do it, but it wouldn't be nearly as "cool" for some people as what we have in 2014.

I mean, really, why not make School Specialization a level 1 choice that grants the School Enhancement at level 5 and then make completely separate subclasses (War, Sword, Diplomat, Scholar) for the bulk of the subclass features.

 

[Remathilis]

I am juat not sure that WotC hasn't already tested most the Spells that they plan to change

I can't see that. If they are at all serious to fixing problems in the game, they NEED to fix those outlier spells. They have two UAs to do it in. Unless we're not getting much say in the fixing of Simulacrum.

 

[Parmandur]

I can't see that. If they are at all serious to fixing problems in the game, they NEED to fix those outlier spells. They have two UAs to do it in. Unless we're not getting much say in the fixing of Simulacrum.

I mean, what coutns as "problems in the game" might be a bit subjective. That's why they playtest continuously and do the surveys. Math fixes, like a hit die adjustment here or there, might not be something that they bother fixing. And something that some white board theorists consider a "problem" might not be on WotC radar as needing a change.

 

[mamba]

I can't see that. If they are at all serious to fixing problems in the game, they NEED to fix those outlier spells. They have two UAs to do it in. Unless we're not getting much say in the fixing of Simulacrum.

they might just balance in house instead of asking for feedback, presumably they do not need / want feedback on balance from the playtests anyway

 

[Stalker0]

I can't see that. If they are at all serious to fixing problems in the game, they NEED to fix those outlier spells. They have two UAs to do it in. Unless we're not getting much say in the fixing of Simulacrum.

If they are limited on time, then we need to really focus on spell levels 1-5. 6+ just doesn't see much actual play, except for BBEG type creatures (in which case, OP spells is the name of the game!).

As much as we all know simulacrum is hokey....how many tables actually see players even get access to the spell? A very small fraction.

 

[Yaarel]

Delete ALL costly gp spell components. Ideally delete spell components from spell description, and let each class (and sometimes subclass) determine how to cast spells.

Standardize when to save versus an enduring spell, such as: start of targets turn.


Treantmonk calls out the following spells as op (overpowered) and needing a nerf to fix it:

• ALL 2014 "conjure" spells reformat with recent "summon" design, pre-select

• Silvery Barb (Strixhaven)

• Ceremony (marriage is op if one-shot campaign, )
• Goodberries (removes hunger challenge, fix: heal only, upcast 5 berries)
• Shield (fix: promote to higher slot, or ac bonus vs the trigger only)
• Sleep (op at low tier, worthless at high, fix: 1 creature, Con save per turn, upcast)

• Heat Metal (fix: remove disadv, item hot, autodamage if holding or wearing)
• Pass without Trace (removes skill need, fix: +4 check, upcast +1)
• Spike Growth (fix: 1d6 entry but 3d6 max per round)
• Web (fix: promote to higher level, or save per turn, clarify fire damage)

• Fear (fix: save per turn)
• Hypnotic Pattern (fix: save per turn)
• Tiny Hut (invulnerable force construct op)
• Spirit Guardians (fix: difficult terrain, 2d6 + upcast d6)

• Black Tentacles (fix: save per turn)
• Polymorph (fix: pre-select, save per turn if unwilling, keep own hp and saves)

• Animate Objects (fix: make all attacks be Str, thus Tiny is +0 hit and damage)
• Wall of Force (invulnerable force construct op)

• Magic Jar (fix: spell end returns souls, cant use forms spells or shapechange)
• Planar Ally (fix: eliminate gp component, preselect, upto 24 hours concentration)
• Forcecage (invulnerable force construct op)
• Simulacrum (fix: target be Beast or Humanoid, save, cant cast or shift, cant rest)

• Feeblemind (fix: make "until dispelled", thus vulnerable to Dispel Magic and other antimagic)

• True Polymorph (fix: cant use forms spells or shapechange)
• Shapechange (fix: cant use forms spells or shapechange)
• Wish (fix: Action to duplicate lower slot spell, ends any enduring spell of same effect)

With regard to force constructs (Tiny Hut, Wall of Force, Forcecage), Treantmonk suggests ac and hp to destroy it. However, for flavor reasons, with regard to what a "force" is, I prefer to allow a hostile to push thru a force barrier while leaving the barrier itself intact, such as a Strength save each time to pass thru a force barrier.

Treantmonk recommends Wish removes the special "beyond" effect that a DM can adjudicate and twist, but to Wish for anything seems like part of the flavor.