D&D General The Beautiful Mess of 5e

[Zaukrie]

If everything scaled..... Why not just reduce hit points?

 

[Zaukrie]

I'm really torn on this topic.

I feel that spells should scale better. Heck, most class features should scale better.

However, I don't believe that making spells MORE powerful is the fix that spellcasters need. It's limiting the power of a few gamebreaking spells.

In the panel, Hypnotic Pattern gets brought up. I find Hypnotic Pattern leads to degenerate play (as Matt Colville would say). You end up with a gaggle of mesmerized foes. Players gather around one of them and then slaughter them in a single turn. Then onto the next. And the next. Meanwhile, I'm very focused on if the players might do anything unintentionally that breaks the spell effect. Not particularly heroic or fun. The game does not need more spells like that.

Ya. Conditions need some kind of fix. Shut down spells can be very boring.

 

[SlyFlourish]

It's always interesting to see different experiences.

See, I play on VTT exclusively. Something like a Twilight cleric doesn't add any time at all - the Twilight Cleric player just clicks a button and can do it while other people are doing their turns without interrupting anything. So, there was no "new action" for me at all. I can see how this would be a PITA at the table though. It's largely why we never use summonings at the table - just too much of a PITA.

Great! So all it takes is computer code to run our tabletop RPG effectively... =)

 

[TheSword]

I thought it was a really interesting chat delivered in a really nice conversational style.

I was definitely surprised that Mike only adds 70% damage when estimating the extra damage from something being AOE. That feels extraordinarily low.

 

[James Gasik]

I thought it was a really interesting chat delivered in a really nice conversational style.

I was definitely surprised that Mike only adds 70% damage when estimating the extra damage from something being AOE. That feels extraordinarily low.

I think that might be because you don't often see large amounts of targets for AoE spells. If the system was built to actually allow your CR 1's and lower to be real threats, that might be different.

But not only am I only guess, that's just my experience, where low level foes are usually sitting with +3-5 to hit and are trying ACs of 17 and up regularly. Lots of die rolling, very little damage is being dealt.

The last time I tried using a horde of smaller foes, even with buffs like Bless to help boost their woeful attack bonuses, Fireball didn't shine nearly as much as Spirit Guardians or Moonbeam, able to inflict damage every turn.

 

[Yaarel]

I was definitely surprised that Mike only adds 70% damage when estimating the extra damage from something being AOE. That feels extraordinarily low.

When comparing the 5e 2014 spells that deal the most damage in their spell slots, they approximate the following amounts of damage:

• d8 x class level: single-target damage
• d6 x class level: multi-target damage

(Meteor Swarm is an outlier, with 20d6 bludgeon + 20d6 fire at slot 9. But it corroborates the high end of 20d6 multi-target damage when cast by a level 20 Wizard.)

d6 versus d8 works out so that multi-target damage deals 78% of single-target damage.

But it depends on the methodology. So if also counting the other spells that I consider subpar for their slots, 70% seems a reasonable estimate.

 

[cbwjm]

But not only am I only guess, that's just my experience, where low level foes are usually sitting with +3-5 to hit and are trying ACs of 17 and up regularly. Lots of die rolling, very little damage is being dealt.

Hobgoblins definitely slowed down a game in the past. Players with only +4 to +5 to hit and not a huge amount of AoE, hobgoblins with +3 to hit and an AC of 18 made me revise them to be without the shield to drop their AC to 16. Still had some long slow battles.

 

[James Gasik]

Hobgoblins definitely slowed down a game in the past. Players with only +4 to +5 to hit and not a huge amount of AoE, hobgoblins with +3 to hit and an AC of 18 made me revise them to be without the shield to drop their AC to 16. Still had some long slow battles.

It probably has more to do with my players than anything else. If there's some "average 5e D&D player" out there, I don't think I've ever run a game for such, lol.

 

[Charlaquin]

+1 for Mearls's statement of "role playing games aren't actually games, they're activities."

I agree that they aren’t games, but I don’t think they’re activities either. RPGs are game creation engines. You can use those engines to create games, or to create non-game activities, but on their own they’re not either.

 

[Yaarel]

I agree that they aren’t games, but I don’t think they’re activities either. RPGs are game creation engines. You can use those engines to create games, or to create non-game activities, but on their own they’re not either.

I consider roleplaying games to be an "ecology". A robust game engine is like building a successful self-sustaining biodome.