D&D (2024) 4/26 Playtest: The Fighter

[doctorbadwolf]

How to make spell more balanced: cannot move the next turn.

That’s more “how to make the spell a trap”.

You don’t need to nerf low level spells.

 

[Asisreo]

That’s more “how to make the spell a trap”.

You don’t need to nerf low level spells.

Low level spells are just as bad as the high level ones since they're far more spammable.

If all spells were of equal risk, then none of them would be traps.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Low level spells are just as bad as the high level ones since they're far more spammable.

If all spells were of equal risk, then none of them would be traps.

Sounds like a terrible play experience.

I mean seriously, you want Misty Step to have a downside of not being able to move the next turn? Who would even use that spell? That’d be a worse idea than just disengaging.

Most people don’t want to play a game that constantly punishes them for playing the magic guy.

And the game isn’t unbalanced at low levels, so no. I won’t even hypothetically okay a nerfing if all Spellcasting to be full of crappy risks and downsides that make it better to just avoid them most of the time, all to accomplish what?

 

[Asisreo]

Sounds like a terrible play experience.

I mean seriously, you want Misty Step to have a downside of not being able to move the next turn? Who would even use that spell? That’d be a worse idea than just disengaging.

Most people don’t want to play a game that constantly punishes them for playing the magic guy.

And the game isn’t unbalanced at low levels, so no. I won’t even hypothetically okay a nerfing if all Spellcasting to be full of crappy risks and downsides that make it better to just avoid them most of the time, all to accomplish what?

All to accomplish what others can't do. A Bonus Action teleportation was always too strong for no drawback, especially at lower levels. It still fulfills its goals to teleport into places you normally can't walk into or remove yourself from immediate danger. But now there's actually a price to pay for being in melee as a caster.

Its not like this would be the first TTRPG where spells come at a price, either. Using magic is still fun in those games too, its just that you have to actually use your brain rather than always having the answer to everything in your spellbook.

 

[Remathilis]

So the answer apparently is to allow fighters to do magical things at will but make magic users casting spells have drawbacks to using them?

I guess that's one way to flip caster supremacy on its head...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

All to accomplish what others can't do. A Bonus Action teleportation was always too strong for no drawback, especially at lower levels. It still fulfills its goals to teleport into places you normally can't walk into or remove yourself from immediate danger. But now there's actually a price to pay for being in melee as a caster.

Its not like this would be the first TTRPG where spells come at a price, either. Using magic is still fun in those games too, its just that you have to actually use your brain rather than always having the answer to everything in your spellbook.

Those games have completely different magic systems, as well. Applying their methods to dnds spells is just a terrible fit.

Also you read the post wrong. I asked what was being accomplished by nerfing magic.

The game isn’t unbalanced for most of the game. At most, martials need a boost in the last 6 levels or so.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Considering many response were "makes sense, why not?" I do think that's an honest representation. I was saying that such a situation would be absurd and the response I get are "No, but we actually do want that!" So its hard not to imagine that at least a select few people do believe rogues should be able to duplicate the Wish spell on a skill check.

So, are you aware that attacking an exaggerated caricature of a persons argument is called "a straw man" and is generally not considered good argumentation?

Think on that as you consider why "I want rogues to do supernatural things like steal from someone who's watching them" isn't really countered by "it isn't hard to imagine some people will want rogues to duplicate Wish on a skill check"

Eyebite was my example of a spell that doesn't just work and is a perfectly balanced spell that gets ignored for spells that do just work.

1) Eyebite isn't ignored, it is a great and plenty powerful spell.

2) It has a save, but other than that... it does just work.

Fireball just works since it guarantees damage and its range can avoid counterspell. Wall of Force just works as it forces the enemy to engage with it whether they have disintegrate or teleportation or not.

So... literally any damage spell that does damage on a miss is bad? I mean, I'll agree Wall of Force is a problem, but all spells that deal damage on a miss aren't bad spells.

Heck, Counterspell "just works" so it would be a bad spell, but you are bringing it up as a neccessary counter that fireball bypasses.

Well-designed spell: Teleport, risk of failure. Poorly designed spell: misty step, extremely reliable.
How to make spell more balanced: cannot move the next turn.

Um.... no? Misty step isn't unbalanced to begin with. It is an incredibly versatile movement ability, but it is not even close to broken. And making it so you can't move? That is insanity. It is only a 30 ft teleport. That means that you are still in range for any enemy to run over and hit you. You can't do anything clever with the spell, you are only going to use it in very limited circumstances which will make it so niche as to be pointless.

And Teleport is NOT designed well. A chance of failure is all well and good, but Teleport's mishap can quickly turn into a grinder that TPK's the party with no save. I mean, literally, all you need is for the villain to have layered an illusion or planted a false clue. Then they have a 50% chance of taking damage, with a new roll for a 50% chance to take damage. It would be far better designed if mishap wasn't an option, and you just ended up somewhere random, instead of risking grinding the party into dimensional paste.

Well-designed spell: Scrying, failure prevents use for another day.
Poorly designed spell: Find Familiar
Fix: Not a ritual, if familiar dies, lose significant amount of HP.

And how is Find Familiar poorly designed? Oh, because losing the 1 hp familiar doesn't ruin your character hard enough. Good Lord, just remove the spell from the game, because if it carried that sort of risk, there would be zero point to familiars. They'd just be flavor because you could never risk them leaving the camp.

And scrying is not a well-designed spell either. First off, scrying a location always works with 100% accuracy, which breaks your rule. But secondly, it only lasts 10 minutes. DM's don't tend to be jerks about it, but you get 10 minutes out of someone's day and you may learn... nothing. And you don't cast scrying when in a dangerous situation, so if you fail, waiting til tomorrow is usually painless and meaningless for any plot.

All of those are internally consistent with D&D lore, logic, and immersion via inherent magic. I've already said I'm fine with inherent magic in the fighter but let's be sure to call a spade a spade.

Right, I don't think many people have a problem with the inherent magic, I think when they say "no magic" they are talking spells. Which is why I avoid calling it magic, because it gets confusing to have magic that isn't magic. Which is what inherent magic IS. It is just special physics that we call magic so people don't start harping about it makes no sense.

I can see that you're confused because nothing you just said is what I said whatsoever.

Firstly, the cleric in the example didn't use Raise Dead. They used True Ressurection. I never said anything abour Raise Dead and I don't know where that spell even came from.

You didn't say True Ressurection either. You said ""My deity saw my faith and answered my prayer. With divine intervention, they were able to heal."" If you meant True Ressurection... why didn't you say it? You just left it free to interpretation, and only NOW are you having a problem with the interpretation.

I think surgical skill equal to True Ressurection is nonsense.

Sure

There's no way to explain how a character can bring back the dead with pure surgery without the assistance of some form of magic.

False. Like "the real world disagrees with you" levels of false.

Now if the rogue understood, say, the magical essence of life and was able to use thread imbued with magic that he discerned because he's that good, I can understand that.

But simply brute-forcing the "he's that good" explanation into a mechanic for a game just doesn't work on an immersive level once questions arise.

So, how did Doctor Frankenstein bring the stitched together corpse of Adam to life? It wasn't magic. It wasn't lightning in the original book. So what happened?

You are just forcing this to be magic... because you insist it needs to be magic. But you aren't understanding the difference of the physics of the world. Magic as "background radiation" means that EVERYTHING is magic. There is no "non-magical thread" because the thread exists in a world where every living thing is bombarded by magical energy since conception. The difference we call "magical" and "non-magical" is purely a matter concentration.

And again, this whole thing reeks of an issue with Western Fantasy. The TOOLS must be special, because the person cannot be. Well, to heck with that. Why can't the person MAKE the tools special? Why do I need magical thread to do what I can do through my mythical levels of skill? The original conceptions of magic were BASED in skills. They were "you learned the skills and art to do this amazing thing" This is where wizardry comes from, it is a learned skill. Yet even at the highest levels of skill, you insist on making it about magic. Because yes, "he's that good" CAN work as an explanation for a mechanic in a game where people ask immersive questions. They just have to be willing to realize that the physics of a mythical land aren't real world physics.

Its not like this would be the first TTRPG where spells come at a price, either. Using magic is still fun in those games too, its just that you have to actually use your brain rather than always having the answer to everything in your spellbook.

Come off it. No, more limitations and punishments do not mean you "actually have to use your brain." It means you do less. The bigger the risks, the fewer chances people take. It doesn't lead to creativity, because creativity is a risk. It leads to rote, practiced, guaranteed things.

Trust me, I get annoyed that casters can easily pull out solutions, but that's mostly because they are the only ones who can. The risk of failure is large enough people look to the guaranteed option of spells, and that is frustrating because I want other options. Not because I want to make spells so painful and unreliable that we are forced to go with other plans. Because that's just as bad and boring.

 

[Asisreo]

So the answer apparently is to allow fighters to do magical things at will but make magic users casting spells have drawbacks to using them?

I guess that's one way to flip caster supremacy on its head...

So long as casters keep their ability to create endless clones of themselves and summon gamebreaking creatures and fly and teleport, the fighter being able to magically enhance his strength isn't going to flip anything.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So long as casters keep their ability to create endless clones of themselves and summon gamebreaking creatures and fly and teleport, the fighter being able to magically enhance his strength isn't going to flip anything.

It isn’t supposed to flip anything.

It lets them also do incredible things. That’s it.

 

[Asisreo]

So, are you aware that attacking an exaggerated caricature of a persons argument is called "a straw man" and is generally not considered good argumentation?

Think on that as you consider why "I want rogues to do supernatural things like steal from someone who's watching them" isn't really countered by "it isn't hard to imagine some people will want rogues to duplicate Wish on a skill check"

That sounds appropriate for 7th level, not 17th level. I want high level thieves to steal someone's identity and memories,

Stealing intangibles is not anything lower than epic boon territory. That that was an epic destiny in 4e. That’s way more powerful than meteor swarm.

This is a game where a mid-level character can faceplant to the ground from the highest tower in the land and walk it off. Any non-magical realism left the moment people started receiving class levels.

This is roughly what I responded to that led to the Paladin example. People talking about stealing memories as a rogue.

Stealing someone's wallet without them noticing is a funny trick. Completing an entire heist by yourself flawlessly is a near impossible feat. Stealing the hoard of an ever-vigilant dragon is a mythical feat. Stealing the kingdom's treasure from a nation's distance away is just magic. And stealing abstract ideas or intangible concepts is just looney toons logic.

And I said this.

1) Stealing an abstract idea is not looney toons logic, it is mythological logic. Anansi the Spider attempted to steal all the wisdom in the world. He did end up getting all of the stories of the world from the Sky God Nomi (sp?). Fey stealing names is common in all sorts of myths. This is literally just... mythology.

You replied with this.

Actually I think it's pretty damn awesome if someone went "How did you do that?" and he turned and went "I'm the best damn surgeon in the world". It's just as cool if not cooler than "Welp, just going to use my spell slot here to raise you up no problem". You can put all the fancy words behind it, but actually putting a skill check on it is way more exciting and rewarding because it shows the strength of the player and their expertise than just "Ah, well, I have this spell slot I can burn..."

And this is where this kind of opinion is going to be holding martials back from being interesting: you can describe anything as being fantastical, and when you only let magic enter that realm, you pigeonhole martials into a tiny box compared to the open world that magic allows for. It's just the wrong mindset and no amount of "reliability" is going to make martials catch up because you are limiting them to the mundane no matter what.

And I got this reply from the paladin example.

I'm not going to be gaslight into being told that "Nobody said these things" when they're in this very thread right now.

You didn't say True Ressurection either. You said ""My deity saw my faith and answered my prayer. With divine intervention, they were able to heal."" If you meant True Ressurection... why didn't you say it? You just left it free to interpretation, and only NOW are you having a problem with the interpretation.

I thought it was really obvious since that was the only spell that could do that outside of maybe Wish and the literal cleric feature Divine Intervention. The former not being a spell a cleric can cast and the latter isn't a spell either. But okay, my bad for not being clear that the cleric used True Ressurection. I don't see what the distinction adds.

False. Like "the real world disagrees with you" levels of false.

Let me clarify this as well: decapitation levels of dead, not heart stopped for a few minutes.

So, how did Doctor Frankenstein bring the stitched together corpse of Adam to life? It wasn't magic. It wasn't lightning in the original book. So what happened?

Can we be done with the book club? The explanation was "Frankenstein discovered the secrets of life after studying." Makes for a good enough explanation for a horror, not for an interactive medium where the audience and characters are the same.

You are just forcing this to be magic... because you insist it needs to be magic. But you aren't understanding the difference of the physics of the world. Magic as "background radiation" means that EVERYTHING is magic. There is no "non-magical thread" because the thread exists in a world where every living thing is bombarded by magical energy since conception. The difference we call "magical" and "non-magical" is purely a matter concentration.

And again, this whole thing reeks of an issue with Western Fantasy. The TOOLS must be special, because the person cannot be. Well, to heck with that. Why can't the person MAKE the tools special? Why do I need magical thread to do what I can do through my mythical levels of skill? The original conceptions of magic were BASED in skills. They were "you learned the skills and art to do this amazing thing" This is where wizardry comes from, it is a learned skill. Yet even at the highest levels of skill, you insist on making it about magic. Because yes, "he's that good" CAN work as an explanation for a mechanic in a game where people ask immersive questions. They just have to be willing to realize that the physics of a mythical land aren't real world physics.

Fine, he's so good he works the thread in such a way that the natural magic in all things leaks out of it and he revives the dead. I'm fine with that too. I'm really not as strict as people in this thread think I am about it.

Again, I really don't care whether the rogue is magical and can teleport into the shadows. I just don't want to act like magic wasn't partially responsible as an explanation.

Come off it. No, more limitations and punishments do not mean you "actually have to use your brain." It means you do less. The bigger the risks, the fewer chances people take. It doesn't lead to creativity, because creativity is a risk. It leads to rote, practiced, guaranteed things.

Not everyone plays like you do. Some people revel in the risks and actually like to have high-risk high-reward scenarios and spells really fits that well. But currently casters are low-risk high-reward and that makes them the defacto better option. And martials are high-risk low-reward.

All I'm trying to do is shift it to high-risk high-reward casters and low-risk low-reward martials. With low-rewards still being firmly in the fantastic, but not at the "request a God to directly enter the battlefield."

Or hey, maybe we can make spellcasters low-risk low-reward and the martials are high-risk high-reward and they're doing the crazy stuff. I don't really care. But if the whole game is low-risk, low-reward it can be boring as then everyone begins breezing through everything with minimal risk and minimal challenge.