D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook preview: "New Spells"

[UngeheuerLich]

Not in my experience. The thing taken away hurts a lot more.

Yes. But 1 bad vs 3 good is usally accepted. Especially if one can see that it is overall better.
The paladin is a good example where wotc has nerfed smites, but given buffs in other things.
Or GWM and Sharpshooter.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes. But 1 bad vs 3 good is usally accepted. Especially if one can see that it is overall better.
The paladin is a good example where wotc has nerfed smites, but given buffs in other things.
Or GWM and Sharpshooter.

Sure, admittedly the math may hold up. I'm still unconvinced paladin fans are going to be cool with what happened to smite.

 

[ECMO3]

So what?

Disengage from shielded character, Shield spell is not a WoW "taunt" so you must bash on it while it lasts.

if 22 AC tank is now 27 AC, I'm sure there are more squishier PCs to whack on for that round.

Shield is the biggest problem in mid level campaigns where low level spell slots are not at a premium when playing with who lack imagination in terms of combat tactics.


If you are an 8th level party and the DM insists on whacking on your 27AC with attacks it is a problem. At high level it is less of a problem because monsters will blow right through that 27AC. A low levels it is not a problem because there are not enough slots to make it a problem.'

Also you don't need to disengage, if he used shield, he does not have a reaction and you (and every other enemy) are free to just walk around him and beat up on the squishy character in the back.

An even better tactic for the shield problem characters is to walk away without disengaging BEFORE they cast shield, preferably right after their turn. Then if they take an AOO on you turn around and wail them while they do not have a reaction. This really puts their PC in a bind because most high armor + shield spell characters are designed to tank and tie up enemies, by leaving them without taking an AOO you are really bypassing what their build is supposed to do, byb taking an AOO you and everyone later in the initiative order can attack shield spell free.

 

[ECMO3]

Why are you sidestepping the basic fact that if a player can trivially/cheaply attain the "cannot be hit" ability the game works (much) less well.

I think it works just fine. A bit annoying yes, but smart game play will beat it without even using specific encounter design (the latter can flat nullify shield)

Why contort yourself around this issue when the simple (and correct) solution is to make it substantially more costly to attain this ability?

Because that will not be a popular change for most and "contorting" yourself to adapt to PC tactics is pretty fun as a DM.

 

[ECMO3]

It sounds like you're saying that so long as the individual player's happy, that's all that matters to you.

It is a game, it is what should matter.

 

[ECMO3]

Shield is a spell that is very different depending on your character's setup and their role. I have a Hexblade/Sword Bard who uses it all the time. I'm right up in front hitting foes and setting up flanks for my allies (it's sort of my cheap Inspiration). For this character, I'd say the spell needs some work.

For my other character, a Bladesinger, I also have Shield, but I'm usually on other duty and not right up in front. It's for emergency situations. In that case, it's awesome when I need it, but I'm Counterspelling or Silvery Barbs-ing to help the team, so I don't need it.

I've seen the opposite in play. Bladesingers built specifically for melee combat, using spells exclusively to enhance melee combat are hands down the best tanks in the game at most levels.

 

[TwoSix]

It sounds like you're saying that so long as the individual player's happy, that's all that matters to you.

For a game I'm DMing? Of course. Making the players happy is what makes me happy. How can I wring any enjoyment from the game if my players didn't enjoy it?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Shield is the biggest problem in mid level campaigns where low level spell slots are not at a premium when playing with who lack imagination in terms of combat tactics.

The DM has enough on their plate without having to plan every encounter around a single overtuned spell (see also silvery barbs). "Git Gud" is insulting advice in a video game, it's equally insulting here.

God forbid you actually run a dungeon in Dungeons and Dragons, which often feature small quarters and 1-2 opponents, which are easily blocked in and made irrelevant by a 1st level spell.

 

[TwoSix]

I've seen the opposite in play. Bladesingers built specifically for melee combat, using spells exclusively to enhance melee combat are hands down the best tanks in the game at most levels.

The tension with Bladesinger is that they are easily the best gish subclass, but Wizarding is so much more useful than melee that even the best gish subclass is better off Wizarding if they can.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The DM has enough on their plate without having to plan every encounter around a single overtuned spell (see also silvery barbs). "Git Gud" is insulting advice in a video game, it's equally insulting here.

God forbid you actually run a dungeon in Dungeons and Dragons, which often feature small quarters and 1-2 opponents, which are easily blocked in and made irrelevant by a 1st level spell.

Then don't bother planning every encounter around it?

I'm reminded of when the Tunnel Fighter UA was being commented on, and people were FURIOUS about the idea that a character with that fighting style, and polearm master and sentinel could hold off a 15 ft hallway against any possible number of melee opponents! Which, at the time I pointed out... yeah, that's perfectly fine. That is what should happen when a character devotes a bunch of resources to specific gimmick.

Whether it is because they are an Eldritch Knight who grabbed the Defensive Fighting Style, is using sword and board, took warcaster to cast with a weapon, and uses the Shield Spell, or if it is a Bladesinger with high dex and high Int, who casts mage armor, activates blade song and then uses the Shield spell.... yes, they devoted a lot of resources into getting a very high AC. And at low levels they can't use it very often. And at high levels, enemies will still be capable of hitting them. So the "problem" is two builds at mid-levels... and yeah, I don't see that as much of a problem when the enemies can get past that high AC with different plans and strategies if you truly, truly need to cause hp damage to the target.

I've played with Shield builds. I've played with people who have Silvery Barbs, my current party has TWO characters with Silvery Barbs and we've still nearly TPK'd multiple times. Actually, the spell our DM hates the most (though Silvery Barbs is second) is the Wizard's Vortext Warp spell, something that essentially never gets mentioned as being game changing, but has been absolutely pivotal in multiple situations.

Can it be frustrating? Sure, it can. Just as it can be frustrating to have a Battlemaster Fighter/Oath of Vengeance paladin drop an action surge, Oath of Enmity, multiple smites with maneuver dice nova on my Boss monster and make them a greasy smear on the floor... but I don't think the correct move against that frustration would be to nerf action surge. The player built a character who was really good at one thing. They can be rewarded by being good at the thing they built themselves to be good at.