D&D 5E Blees Still Broken/OP?

[ChrisCarlson]

Hmmm. I'm trying to figure out what you mean. Did you leave out a part of the quote you were responding to? I don't think anyone disputes what bless does.

I quoted exactly the part I was referring to. You claimed three (or more) PCs would have all their attacks and saves increased by an average of +2. That's not at all likely. All? Really? Bless has a duration of up to 1 minute and requires concentration. Both of those things have a huge impact on how likely a claric will be able to have it up for all of his allies' rolls. Not only because clerics in play also uses some of their spell slots for other necessary spells, but sometimes lose concentration as well.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well of course they are. But if you have a specific spell you're 'supposed' to cast that "makes the class," the others are just pointlessly baroque dross.

This begs the question, "What is the spell you're supposed to cast, and who determines that?" I mean, should something be a class feature because optimizers play that way but lots of other people don't? I prefer the less that is mandatory, and the more choices players have to customize their PCs and play them as they envision, the better. Maybe I don't want to cast Bless. Maybe I want to prepare other spells for things I want to do. The minute someone tells me to change something about my PC to make them more optimized because that's how it should be done when it's not how I want to play them, is the minute I find another group.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Not to argue whether that's true or not, but would make it a very, well, inelegant design. If it were meant to be some class-defining thing, it could be a class feature instead of a spell, for instance.

You're right, and the fact that it IS something you can opt out of as a player speaks to a much more diverse character arrangement than some playstyles will freely permit. Or, I suppose, a failure on WotC's part to weed out the chaff.

I play a cleric in a HotDQ game. I don't use Bless. I've had clerics played in my games. I've seen bless used, but it's certainly not over-used. The "necessity" of a given spell depends wildly on the kind of game you run or play in. If I'm not mistaken, from previous posts, [MENTION=5834]Celtavian[/MENTION] 's group runs a pretty hardcore optimization-emphasized game. That style puts pressure on certain options that other styles might not care about.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Making them a spell instead of a class feature seems to be a deliberate choice to open up certain feat and subclass design options. Such as taking Magic Initiate....

Which would seem to defeat the purpose of such an 'OP' spell being intentionally OP in order to be class-defining.

This begs the question, "What is the spell you're supposed to cast, and who determines that?"

The first part's exactly what I don't want to get into. This thread asserts it's Bless. I'm not asserting whether it's right or not, just interested in what it being right would imply. To the second part, obviously, spells and spell lists are a design decision (that, like any design decision in 5e, DMs have unlimited license to second-guess).

You're right, and the fact that it IS something you can opt out of as a player speaks to a much more diverse character arrangement than some playstyles will freely permit. Or, I suppose, a failure on WotC's part to weed out the chaff.

Or, more simply, labeling something as a low-level spell that shouldn't have been. If you want a class to have an exceptional ability at low level, labeling that ability a low-level spell on his list might be convenient, but it makes the classification of 'low level spell' and any mechanics that might depend upon it, less reliable. Less elegant, too, which was my original point.
(Again, not caring if Bless is really OP or not.)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

When our cleric uses bless it makes the pther people hit nearly all of the time. Which usually just makes very bad rolls not bad. Usually they would have hit anyway. The cleric in the first round does nothing at all. She usually casts thubderwave maximized and really leaves an impression on the enemies. Even with a successful save, it is 12 damage. For bless to make the same impact you need a lot of attacks if you catch just a few people in the cone... Shatter in a higher slot is also useful. The possibility of 32 damage now is tempting. And in many cases better than increasing the chances to hit in later rounds.

 

[Rhenny]

When our cleric uses bless it makes the pther people hit nearly all of the time. Which usually just makes very bad rolls not bad. Usually they would have hit anyway. The cleric in the first round does nothing at all. She usually casts thubderwave maximized and really leaves an impression on the enemies. Even with a successful save, it is 12 damage. For bless to make the same impact you need a lot of attacks if you catch just a few people in the cone... Shatter in a higher slot is also useful. The possibility of 32 damage now is tempting. And in many cases better than increasing the chances to hit in later rounds.

I agree completely, especially when I play my Tempest Cleric. I may have used bless once in 5 levels. The power of Thunderwave and Shatter (especially when I can maximize it using the channel divinity power) makes those thunder spells much more impressive and usually pays off much quicker than waiting for others to attack when I cast bless. Bless is handy when we know that the fight will last longer and there are threats that cause us to make saving throws, but so far, haven't really felt the need to cast it instead of the pure damage spells (and an emergency heal once in a while).

 

[Illithidbix]

My experience is somewhat different; I don't recall playing in a game where a cleric has actually ever cast Bless, but then the players I mostly play/run for generally aren't the type that look for the most statistical benefit.

It definitely is a powerful spell, esp. if combined with Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master.

But, it's not one that will rub the rest of the party up the wrong way, because it empowers the party, rather than let one player show off.

And it's obviously not *required* in any way by the standard maths of the game, newbie groups don't TPK regularly because they don't realise they "should" be casting Bless.

Like alot of optimizing in 5E D&D, it will let you punch above your weight, but you're probably doing that already, the Encounter guidelines (and similar) are aimed at casual players.

 

[Mouseferatu]

So, I've been playing 5E since the game came out. I'd say we've probably averaged a little less than a game every two weeks.

Of those games, we only had about five or so where there wasn't a cleric present in the party. In our current campaign, which has so far gone from 3rd to 6th level, the party has two clerics.

In all that time, I've seen bless cast... Maybe three times. (My players are not die-hard optimizers, but they are experienced gamers.)

It's just not that big of a deal, IME and IMO. Useful, but hardly essential, let alone game-breaking.

 

[Shasarak]

Even if the conversation was limited to "1st level cleric combat spells", it's absurd. You need look no further than, 'can bless restore an ally back from 0 hp on the cleric's turn'?

If you have to restore an ally back from 0 hp then you most likely have already made the tactical error of not casting Bless.

 

[Greg Benage]

New and Improved Blees: It Even Cures Male-Pattern Baldness!