D&D 3E/3.5 5e: Is it really lower magic/less gonzo than 3e?

[Leatherhead]

Oh, as for the thread question:
5e is lower magic than 3e. Due to having less high level magic, and more limitations on magic in general including how many magic items or spells you can have running at the same time.
5e is arguably more "Gonzo" than 3e. Due to things like Cantrips, Rituals, Healing speed, and exception based rules philosophies.

 

[ccs]

I know Adventures in Middle-Earth modify 5e to be more low magic but...

Does vanilla 5e produce a more grounded swords-and-sorcery game than 3e?

Or does it preserve the high fantasy power level of previous games?

Or (worse, for what I want) does it ramp the power level up above what 3e provided?

Yes.
Yes.
And yes.

It can provide you whatever you care to put into it. Just like any other edition.

As for PF2? Don't write it off just yet. Get the playtest book. And even if you dislike what you see? Make sure to check back in another year to see how the final product actually turns out.

 

[Olive]

I'm sort of repeating what has been said upthread but while there's lots of magic in 5e, the magic is less essential. If you played a traditional fighter, rogue, cleric and wizard party (not chosing the arcance fighter and rogue types) in 5e really only at will cantrips would represent 'more' magic than 3e. Magic items are certainly less prominent and attunement makes a huge difference to that. I'm playign a wizard currently and it feels much more grounded as I have far fewer spells than the equivalent in 3e or PF.

That said, if you played different classes it might feel very different! 5e provides a wider range of options within the core rules than 3e in my opinion.

 

[Hussar]

Just a quick off topic quibble. Not sure where the above statement comes from.

Cantrips, they get Toll the Dead, ranged d8 or d12 damage with a will save.

1st Level they get inflict wounds, 3d10 damage, requires a hit but no save.

1st level also gets guiding bolt : decent range 4d6 damage AND gives advantage to the next hit.

2nd level gives spiritual weapon which, while it does less damage, is in every other way objectively better than the wizards 7th level spell mordenkainen's sword.

At least at low levels, they seem to do OK at damage dealing spells.

I wasn't really comparing 5e characters to other 5e characters. I was more referring to what clerics could do in 3e. Clerics in 3e, even in core, had a shopping list of combat spells from summoning all the way through to direct damage spells. And, if you went beyond core, the sky really was the limit.

I didn't mean to imply that clerics had no offensive spells. Just that they had been scaled WAY back from 3e.

 

[Li Shenron]

It's a bit confusing to talk about "high power" and "high magic" at the same time, but anyway...

Does vanilla 5e produce a more grounded swords-and-sorcery game than 3e?

Or does it preserve the high fantasy power level of previous games?

Or (worse, for what I want) does it ramp the power level up above what 3e provided?

Yes to all three!

The point is, with regard to "high magic", in 3e is near-impossible to avoid it, because the equipment by level and monsters stats dictates that you must have magic items, and presumably also of a few specific sorts. In 5e you have a much better chance to pull off a game with little or no magic items.

The second side of "high magic" refers to the commonality of spells. Not only 5e offers more spellcasters, but the cantrips of 5e mean that you can easily have 1st-level characters spamming magic every round. In 3e this was possible with wands, but generally not expected at very low levels. However, you don't have to always pick a combat cantrip, those cantrips were designed specifically to keep up with weapons, so choosing a crossbow instead of a combat cantrip is a pretty valid alternative. I suspect that the vast majority of players always choose combat cantrips, but it's not mandatory. Viceversa, spell slots are significantly less numerous than in 3e.

Thus because of these, IMO you can in 5e both have a less magical or a more magical campaign than 3e. It depends on what are the players' choices for their characters, and the DM's choices on magic equipment.

 

[gyor]

It's a bit confusing to talk about "high power" and "high magic" at the same time, but anyway...



Yes to all three!

The point is, with regard to "high magic", in 3e is near-impossible to avoid it, because the equipment by level and monsters stats dictates that you must have magic items, and presumably also of a few specific sorts. In 5e you have a much better chance to pull off a game with little or no magic items.

The second side of "high magic" refers to the commonality of spells. Not only 5e offers more spellcasters, but the cantrips of 5e mean that you can easily have 1st-level characters spamming magic every round. In 3e this was possible with wands, but generally not expected at very low levels. However, you don't have to always pick a combat cantrip, those cantrips were designed specifically to keep up with weapons, so choosing a crossbow instead of a combat cantrip is a pretty valid alternative. I suspect that the vast majority of players always choose combat cantrips, but it's not mandatory. Viceversa, spell slots are significantly less numerous than in 3e.

Thus because of these, IMO you can in 5e both have a less magical or a more magical campaign than 3e. It depends on what are the players' choices for their characters, and the DM's choices on magic equipment.

Few classes that have cantrips can use a crossbow effectively enough to compete with cantrips after fifth level.

 

[Zardnaar]

Few classes that have cantrips can use a crossbow effectively enough to compete with cantrips after fifth level.

He was talking about the 3.5 cantrips where a crossbow was often a better option.

Kind of like the dart in face cantrip in AD&D. it dealt 3d3 damage, the material component was 3 darts. Best cantrip in the game in 2E, better than staff in nuts (1d6), dagger in heart (1d4, 2d4 if you threw them), or the dig cantrip.


The dig cantrip was not very good as the material component was a shovel it made spamming it difficult although the components were not consumed in the casting of dig. Campfire (material component tinderbox) and martial light (material component torch) were used as well.

My wizard also could use the cure minor wounds cantrip. Once per long rest you could regain 1d3 hp, made the Cleric jealous as I did not have to go to god school to pull it off.

 

[Li Shenron]

Few classes that have cantrips can use a crossbow effectively enough to compete with cantrips after fifth level.

That's true... I think the idea was that after a certain level the spellcaster has enough spell slots so that she may not need to cast combat cantrips often. For a low-magic campaign, the crossbow alternative works great only in the first tier, then the second tier is probably the most difficult for a spellcaster. It then depends what is more important for the players: do they really want to play the low-magic campaign after all? It's not like other classes won't be facing some challenges too (martial characters will likely have little magic weapons and armors to play with, for instance).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Few classes that have cantrips can use a crossbow effectively enough to compete with cantrips after fifth level.

Actually, they hold up pretty well until around level 10. Crossbows let you add your Dexterity modifier to damage, and not all spellcasters gain an equivalent class ability. If you're choosing between 1d8+4 and 2d8, then only one of those is guaranteed to kill a goblin.

 

[Leatherhead]

Actually, they hold up pretty well until around level 10. Crossbows let you add your Dexterity modifier to damage, and not all spellcasters gain an equivalent class ability. If you're choosing between 1d8+4 and 2d8, then only one of those is guaranteed to kill a goblin.

That's not quite how it works out.
You aren't going to have a +4 in your secondary stat unless you are rolling stats. You are realistically looking at a +2, maybe a +3 if you have one of the races with a DEX boost. Then you have to figure in accuracy: Not only will you be hitting more often with your (higher than DEX) casting stat, numerous cantrips have the benefit of not requiring an attack roll, and thus ignoring the penalties of cover. Given that your own parties melee squad gives the enemy cover by simply being close enough to stab them, you are going to be sitting on an additional -2 to -5 penalty for crossbowing most of the time.