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

[Chaosmancer]

Which is why there are these rules for crafting and craftsmen and skilled labor, etc. Its not just wealth, its also time. And while changing the weather is cool and flavorful especially for a druid, its not as impactful for most adventures as having a precast leveled spell prepared on you at all times.

So why is there not a single spell that says "it takes you one year to learn this spell" if time til you can use it is part of the balance?

Why is it balanced for the DM to say "And a year passes, while you carve the statue of yourself" and then the spell can be used forever, but it isn't balanced for the DM to say "Okay, you spent the gold and got the statue" and then the spell can be used forever? The same amount of game time passed, and the impact on the story could be identical. Or are you going to try and claim that DM style is part of the balance now on top of time and gold?

Let's just agree to disagree on the power of an unenhanced EB. I still think being the best of the worst isn't a crowning acheivement.

Has this literally just been you think all damage cantrips are terrible?

 

[Asisreo]

So why is there not a single spell that says "it takes you one year to learn this spell" if time til you can use it is part of the balance?

Why is it balanced for the DM to say "And a year passes, while you carve the statue of yourself" and then the spell can be used forever, but it isn't balanced for the DM to say "Okay, you spent the gold and got the statue" and then the spell can be used forever? The same amount of game time passed, and the impact on the story could be identical. Or are you going to try and claim that DM style is part of the balance now on top of time and gold?

The immediacy of the acquisition of the statue with regards to the adventure. Sure, it might be an aside in play time, but it still limits when, how, and where in the adventure you can acquire what you seek.

And that can give the player a sense of accomplishment. Its fun to have a long-term goal and put effort into it and eventually see the gradual fruits of your labor.

I mean, new players will absolutely understand that's how the game works. I guarantee if you have a game with completely new players and tell them that's how spells work, they won't think its a huge burden or a headache. In fact, I had several players excited to have taken a spell with a costly component and have it on the backburner. Or even to go on a quest to retrieve it. And no, new players aren't going to think they're being dragged around by someone else. Most of the time, they want their peers to be as strong as possible as well.

Has this literally just been you think all damage cantrips are terrible?

When you compare the at-will damage of 22 at level 17+ to literally any other at-will damage abilities, it's obvious that we're looking at the highest of the low values.

Rangers, Fighters, and Rogues beat that at-will damage easily.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The immediacy of the acquisition of the statue with regards to the adventure. Sure, it might be an aside in play time, but it still limits when, how, and where in the adventure you can acquire what you seek.

Unless the DM says it doesn't. You are making this "balance" argument based entirely on DM fiat.

And that can give the player a sense of accomplishment. Its fun to have a long-term goal and put effort into it and eventually see the gradual fruits of your labor.

What fruits of what labor? Even at your most "realistic" the player or the character aren't doing anything beyond spending money and waiting. What possible sense of accomplishment can you get out of that? You haven't DONE anything.

I mean, new players will absolutely understand that's how the game works. I guarantee if you have a game with completely new players and tell them that's how spells work, they won't think its a huge burden or a headache. In fact, I had several players excited to have taken a spell with a costly component and have it on the backburner. Or even to go on a quest to retrieve it. And no, new players aren't going to think they're being dragged around by someone else. Most of the time, they want their peers to be as strong as possible as well.

And I've played with new players who wanted to keep going on the adventure, not have to go on some random side-quest for some random trinket just so they can use their abilities. Because it isn't about "can I obtain a statue of myself" it is about stopping the BBEG or whatever their goal as a party is.

And new players might assume there is a reason, but I notice you abandoned your position to instead argue about how new players will be okay with it and think its neato. Every player I've ever had who takes a spell, wants to use the spell, not have the spell so they can wait multiple levels until they are allowed to use it. And the non-casters don't even know about it, because they don't care about it. Why should they? Unless the caster starts trying to guide them into going and looking for this random trinket, and in which case, the players are equally likely to me and ask "do we really have to stop and do this?"

When you compare the at-will damage of 22 at level 17+ to literally any other at-will damage abilities, it's obvious that we're looking at the highest of the low values.

Rangers, Fighters, and Rogues beat that at-will damage easily.

Ranger with no magic items, no feats, and no spells. 2d8+10 = 19 damage. You want to include feats and spells? Then things rapidly change on both fronts.

But more than that, you can't declare the best cantrip worthless just because you don't like cantrips. That is ridiculous.

 

[Asisreo]

Unless the DM says it doesn't. You are making this "balance" argument based entirely on DM fiat.

Sure, but balance has always been at the DM's mercy.

What fruits of what labor? Even at your most "realistic" the player or the character aren't doing anything beyond spending money and waiting. What possible sense of accomplishment can you get out of that? You haven't DONE anything.

Its an investment, which people do feel accomplishment from by just taking the investment itself.

And I've played with new players who wanted to keep going on the adventure, not have to go on some random side-quest for some random trinket just so they can use their abilities. Because it isn't about "can I obtain a statue of myself" it is about stopping the BBEG or whatever their goal as a party is.

And new players might assume there is a reason, but I notice you abandoned your position to instead argue about how new players will be okay with it and think its neato. Every player I've ever had who takes a spell, wants to use the spell, not have the spell so they can wait multiple levels until they are allowed to use it. And the non-casters don't even know about it, because they don't care about it. Why should they? Unless the caster starts trying to guide them into going and looking for this random trinket, and in which case, the players are equally likely to me and ask "do we really have to stop and do this?"

I haven't abandoned anything. I still think its a balancing factor.

If a player feels like they don't want to have a dead-weight spell, they can always wait until after they've gotten the component before adding the spell to their list. That's something obvious that comes up when you actually talk to your players.

And I really can't stand it as a player when a DM is so afraid of inconveniencing me that they skip over game mechanics and interesting things just because it might make me a little sad. The DM doesn't need to coddle players like they can't understand how long-term goals work. And the players don't need the DM to ignore perfectly legitimate hooks just because they're afraid for the players.

If you sit down with the players like adults and say "hey, if you want to shapechange, you'll need to go on a quest. If you don't want to, that's fine. There's plenty of other spells you can choose." Or "well, the jade circlet will need to be crafted so you won't be able to use it on this adventure but maybe the next adventure you can add it to your spells known/prepared and have access to it."

And your players won't crumble like wet noodles because they can understand how games and adventures work. Its honestly disrespectful that DM's think they constantly have to baby their players or else the players will die. If your games are so boring and one-note that a side-quest threatens the fun, then the game wasn't in great form to begin with.

You don't see people crying about side-quests in skyrim or oblivion because they understand that it will make them more powerful.

 

[Asisreo]

Ranger with no magic items, no feats, and no spells. 2d8+10 = 19 damage. You want to include feats and spells? Then things rapidly change on both fronts.

But more than that, you can't declare the best cantrip worthless just because you don't like cantrips. That is ridiculous.

I didn't say all cantrips are worthless. I'm saying they're scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of damage.

And I don't have all the books on me, but I'm almost certain every Ranger's subclass gives them an at-will bump to damage.

 

[Kinematics]

So, if WotC does go more heavily in on resistances in the next iteration of the Monster Manual, would that sufficiently increase the value of Sorcerous Burst? If something like 1/3 of the monsters you encounter are resistant to whatever single-element cantrip you have, are you better off with a cantrip which you can always tune to be unresisted, even if it's nominal average is lower?

Generally cantrips have damage tiers of:

• 1d10: Full damage, no riders
• 1d8: A minor rider, such as the slow effect of Ray of Frost
• 1d6: A major rider, such as the disadvantage of Frostbite
• -1 die tier for non-arcane spells, such as Vicious Mockery

The exploding dice effect means Sorcerous Burst is higher than a standard d6, but a bit below a standard d8. Do you think they anticipate that damage resistances are going to be significant enough that it puts the benefit of changing up the damage type at about the tier of a minor rider, or a bit more?

 

[Remathilis]

So, if WotC does go more heavily in on resistances in the next iteration of the Monster Manual, would that sufficiently increase the value of Sorcerous Burst? If something like 1/3 of the monsters you encounter are resistant to whatever single-element cantrip you have, are you better off with a cantrip which you can always tune to be unresisted, even if it's nominal average is lower?

Generally cantrips have damage tiers of:

• 1d10: Full damage, no riders
• 1d8: A minor rider, such as the slow effect of Ray of Frost
• 1d6: A major rider, such as the disadvantage of Frostbite
• -1 die tier for non-arcane spells, such as Vicious Mockery

The exploding dice effect means Sorcerous Burst is higher than a standard d6, but a bit below a standard d8. Do you think they anticipate that damage resistances are going to be significant enough that it puts the benefit of changing up the damage type at about the tier of a minor rider, or a bit more?

The problem is that exploding dice doesn't add enough reliable damage and the best cantrip in the game (EB) already bypasses most resistance (Force). In most situations, its a just xd6 damage. That's unimpressive. It's at best a minor rider. Which is why d8s would be a better choice. I can't think of any reason I would ever use this instead of ray of frost, fire bolt, or even chill touch unless I'm fighting something weak to thunder or something.

 

[Asisreo]

So, if WotC does go more heavily in on resistances in the next iteration of the Monster Manual, would that sufficiently increase the value of Sorcerous Burst? If something like 1/3 of the monsters you encounter are resistant to whatever single-element cantrip you have, are you better off with a cantrip which you can always tune to be unresisted, even if it's nominal average is lower?

Generally cantrips have damage tiers of:

• 1d10: Full damage, no riders
• 1d8: A minor rider, such as the slow effect of Ray of Frost
• 1d6: A major rider, such as the disadvantage of Frostbite
• -1 die tier for non-arcane spells, such as Vicious Mockery

The exploding dice effect means Sorcerous Burst is higher than a standard d6, but a bit below a standard d8. Do you think they anticipate that damage resistances are going to be significant enough that it puts the benefit of changing up the damage type at about the tier of a minor rider, or a bit more?

The problem is that exploding dice doesn't add enough reliable damage and the best cantrip in the game (EB) already bypasses most resistance (Force). In most situations, its a just xd6 damage. That's unimpressive. It's at best a minor rider. Which is why d8s would be a better choice. I can't think of any reason I would ever use this instead of ray of frost, fire bolt, or even chill touch unless I'm fighting something weak to thunder or something.

I actually think its possible that they might move to more force-resistant enemies. It might just be my hope, though to keep warlocks from being sorely affected, they may be able to add a "bypass force resistance" clause to agonizing blast.

Because I think if a creature is resistant to magic in general, then pure magical energy should be something they resist and it makes EB still good especially on a warlock, but it can give other cantrips the chance to shine.

 

[Stalker0]

So, if WotC does go more heavily in on resistances in the next iteration of the Monster Manual, would that sufficiently increase the value of Sorcerous Burst?

This is somewhat a false premise. This assumes that in a typical game, every monster in every encounter is a random spectrum from the MM. In other words it assumes, "if a third of the monsters in the MM have fire resistance, I will encounter fire resistance 1/3 of the time".

But that is rarely true. For example in your games you may fight way more kobolds than pit fiends. Or in a more themed adventure set, you may be fighting tons of undead, regardless of how many types their are in the MM.

So the value of such an ability is very campaign dependent. If you do face a wide variety of resistances, well being able to shift types is quite handy. If you fight kobolds all day, then you literally couldn't care less.

 

[Gorck]

The problem is that exploding dice doesn't add enough reliable damage and the best cantrip in the game (EB) already bypasses most resistance (Force). In most situations, its a just xd6 damage. That's unimpressive. It's at best a minor rider. Which is why d8s would be a better choice. I can't think of any reason I would ever use this instead of ray of frost, fire bolt, or even chill touch unless I'm fighting something weak to thunder or something.

The bolded part makes me wonder if the larger die size makes up for the fact that you now have a lower chance of rolling the max on each die and, therefore, rolling again. On a d6, you have a 16.7% chance of rolling a 6 on each die, but on a d8, you only have a 12.5% chance of rolling an 8. I'm no mathematician, so I wonder if the extra +1 average damage per die makes up for the lower chance of "exploding" on your roll.