D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

[Ahnehnois]

Perhaps this is true of home games, but in organized play, and in many play-by-post environments, all books are allowed by default, and so they don't have the luxury of DM fiat to keep things under control.

So you're saying that organized play and PbP are the problems. If they enforce the rules in such a way and have problems, blame the format, not the game. Also, even Mearls made it very clear in the initial 5e announcement that home games are the core of D&D and would be the focus going forward. Organized play and online venues are secondary concerns.

But, again, this argument has been had many times by many people. You don't have the issue described. Fair enough. Some do. Can you at least see that much?

Yes. I can also see that some people have problems with overpowered fighting classes and need them to be toned down. Others have various other issues with the game.

Ahnehnois - if you truly believe that there are no issues with casters, then how do you explain that both WOTC AND Paizo have gone to great lengths in their respective games to fix the issue? Are the designers at both companies really that clueless as to how the game is played?

Yes! Yes yes yes yes yes. If there's one thing that WotC's trajectory as a company has taught us it's that neither their "market research" nor their "insider knowledge" is worth much of anything. The reason they did whatever they did was because they listened to a small subset of people, because they went out of their way to differentiate new products from old so customers would buy them, and because they simply aren't all that good at what they do.

Are you seriously stating that 4 powers, spread across three classes, all of which are optional, all of which last exactly 1 action long, are on the same level of game changing power as Scry/Buff/Teleport or Polymorphing/Shapechanging? Really? If you're going to talk about using the same standards, I would assume that you would want to apply things equally.

There are some people who are talking about a similarly trivial number of abilities in both cases. For me, I have problems with both editions that go much deeper than that.

Peruse the 3.5 list of 4th level spells for a moment (the level where Polymorph comes in) and see if anyone can find a spell other than Polynmorph that could be considered overpowered.

4th-Level Sorcerer/Wizard Spells
Abjur
Dimensional Anchor: Bars extradimensional movement.
Fire Trap M: Opened object deals 1d4 damage +1/level.
Globe of Invulnerability, Lesser: Stops 1st- through 3rd-level spell effects.
Remove Curse: Frees object or person from curse.
Stoneskin M: Ignore 10 points of damage per attack.
Conj
Black Tentacles: Tentacles grapple all within 20 ft. spread.
Dimension Door: Teleports you short distance.
Minor Creation: Creates one cloth or wood object.
Secure Shelter: Creates sturdy cottage.
Solid Fog: Blocks vision and slows movement.
Summon Monster IV: Calls extraplanar creature to fight for you.
Div
Arcane Eye: Invisible floating eye moves 30 ft./round.
Detect Scrying: Alerts you of magical eavesdropping.
Locate Creature: Indicates direction to familiar creature.
Scrying F: Spies on subject from a distance.
Ench
Charm Monster: Makes monster believe it is your ally.
Confusion: Subjects behave oddly for 1 round/level.
Crushing Despair: Subjects take -2 on attack rolls, damage rolls, saves, and checks.
Geas, Lesser: Commands subject of 7 HD or less.
Evoc
Fire Shield: Creatures attacking you take fire damage; you’re protected from heat or cold.
Ice Storm: Hail deals 5d6 damage in cylinder 40 ft. across.
Resilient Sphere: Force globe protects but traps one subject.
Shout: Deafens all within cone and deals 5d6 sonic damage.
Wall of Fire: Deals 2d4 fire damage out to 10 ft. and 1d4 out to 20 ft. Passing through wall deals 2d6 damage +1/level.
Wall of Ice: Ice plane creates wall with 15 hp +1/level, or hemisphere can trap creatures inside.
Illus
Hallucinatory Terrain: Makes one type of terrain appear like another (field into forest, or the like).
Illusory Wall: Wall, floor, or ceiling looks real, but anything can pass through.
Invisibility, Greater: As invisibility, but subject can attack and stay invisible.
Phantasmal Killer: Fearsome illusion kills subject or deals 3d6 damage.
Rainbow Pattern: Lights fascinate 24 HD of creatures.
Shadow Conjuration: Mimics conjuration below 4th level, but only 20% real.
Necro
Animate Dead M: Creates undead skeletons and zombies.
Bestow Curse: -6 to an ability score; -4 on attack rolls, saves, and checks; or 50% chance of losing each action.
Contagion: Infects subject with chosen disease.
Enervation: Subject gains 1d4 negative levels.
Fear: Subjects within cone flee for 1 round/level.
Trans
Enlarge Person, Mass: Enlarges several creatures.
Mnemonic Enhancer F: Wizard only. Prepares extra spells or retains one just cast.
Polymorph: Gives one willing subject a new form.
Reduce Person, Mass: Reduces several creatures.
Stone Shape: Sculpts stone into any shape.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Just as a point. This is probably the single biggest reason I played 3e over 2e. I mean, I was very, very heavily invested in 2e and knew the system inside and out. I'd played the HELL out of 2e and had no real interest in changing.

Until I actually got to play 3e and realized that it works. It works pretty darn well out of the box. Yeah, the casters get out of hand, but, OTOH, the groups I played with didn't really go for full casters, so, it rarely caused any personal problems at my table. I can totally see why it needs to be handed at the mechanical level, because D&D is more than just my table, but, for myself, it was rarely a serious issue.

Mostly we just ignored it.

And, 4e works on a very similar principle to 3e - write rules that work. You don't really need to houserule 4e all that much to make it work. At the moment, our 4e game has exactly one houserule - long term damage effects to add a bit of grittiness to the game. Next time I DM, I'm adding in Morale rules.

Interesting point, thanks. I' would, however, add one caveat to your description of 3e; the rules work as long as you do not put pressure on them. If you try stressing them they break all over the place. And it doesn't matter what the rules are - I'm likely to stress them. Which means I really like games like Smallville where the harder you push the system (with the exception of two munchkin exploits*) the better the game gets.

* Challenging a relationship with a one-shot temporary extra and always rolling the same value and relationship because you're e.g. tying everything to "Justice" and "My parents are dead".

 

[pemerton]

Peruse the 3.5 list of 4th level spells for a moment (the level where Polymorph comes in) and see if anyone can find a spell other than Polynmorph that could be considered overpowered.

3.5 isn't really my game, but I've heard Evard's Black Tentacles, Stonesking and Greater Invisibility (whatever happened to Improved Invisibility?) mentioned. Charm Monster is also on the strong side in my personal opinion.

 

[TwoSix]

3.5 isn't really my game, but I've heard Evard's Black Tentacles, Stonesking and Greater Invisibility (whatever happened to Improved Invisibility?) mentioned. Charm Monster is also on the strong side in my personal opinion.

Solid Fog and Enervation are also quite strong for their level. Stoneskin was the king buff spell back in 2e, but is much weaker in 3e.

 

[Ahnehnois]

3.5 isn't really my game, but I've heard Evard's Black Tentacles, Stoneskin and Greater Invisibility (whatever happened to Improved Invisibility?) mentioned. Charm Monster is also on the strong side in my personal opinion.

I don't think any of those are really unduly powerful. Certainly not gamebreaking in the way that a worst-case polymorph scenario is. Moreover, if we're talking about the relative balance of characters of different classes, buff spells like Stoneskin and Greater Invisibility are more effective when used on other party members than when used on the caster. I haven't seen many fighter players complaining about Stoneskin.

But then again, that's out of 45 spells. Even if we conservatively include all of those, we're talking about ~10% of spells, at a fairly advanced level. I think that even that is at that point it's clearly about the spells themselves, not the class using them. Most of the 4th level list is marginally effective spells for direct attack and small-niche (if useful) utility spells.

 

[TwoSix]

But then again, that's out of 45 spells. Even if we conservatively include all of those, we're talking about ~10% of spells, at a fairly advanced level. I think that even that is at that point it's clearly about the spells themselves, not the class using them. Most of the 4th level list is marginally effective spells for direct attack and small-niche (if useful) utility spells.

Just so I'm clear, is your thesis that 3e would make a better framework game for a larger percentage of D&D players if all of the problematic spells were removed?

 

[Hussar]

Just so I'm clear, is your thesis that 3e would make a better framework game for a larger percentage of D&D players if all of the problematic spells were removed?

If it is, it would be something I'd agree with.

I think we should go back to about 10 spells per spell level. I also realize that there isn't a chance in heck that that's going to happen.

 

[Umbran]

the rules work as long as you do not put pressure on them.

For you.

The rules work for you so long as you do not put pressure on them.

The rules have worked acceptably for *tens of thousands of people*, for years. Acceptably enough that when they were replaced, a separate company was able to pick it up and make successful business of it. So, how about we drop the implications that somehow the thing is objectively fundamentally flawed, and admit that we all play differently, and what works for someone else may not be the best for you?

 

[TwoSix]

If it is, it would be something I'd agree with.

I think we should go back to about 10 spells per spell level. I also realize that there isn't a chance in heck that that's going to happen.

I would be quite happy with a 3e that used the Healer and the Warmage as the baseline casters, with access to other kinds of magic granted by feats or PrCs.

Use the Trailblazer changes to iterative attacks, allow a full attack as a standard action, and make the Fighter sort of a Warblade lite (gaining some non-supernatural manuevers, of course! ), and I'd buy a revised 3e PHB.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Just so I'm clear, is your thesis that 3e would make a better framework game for a larger percentage of D&D players if all of the problematic spells were removed?

Not removed, but dealt with. Some need to be written better (Evard's tentacles), somme simply have been valued incorrectly and need a change in level or power (Teleport). There's a case for making some spells explicitly optional or under the DM's purview like resurrection and polymorphs.

But yes, that's my thesis.

Conversely, I don't think that's true about 4e (for me anyway). I mean, CaGI is a problem, but my first issue with 4e is the first-level fighter power that lets you deal triple damage (or 3[W]; whatever it's called) once a day. I'd never accept a version of D&D that had a structure anything like the power system. I think that many people however, even those who do have issues with 3e, would be willing to accept a version of D&D in which casters had spells and noncasters had nothing similar (as is currently the case in 5e and has been in every non-4e version of the game).

Edit: sounds like the answer to that is yes.