D&D 5E Casters should go back to being interruptable like they used to be.

ezo

Adventurer
Let's look by spell level. My books have disintegrated but this is from a Google search:

.....1e.5e
6th 4 2
7th 3 2
8th 3 1
9th 2 1

Yeah, that looks like multiples. 2-3x as many spells at those levels.
So, you're cherry-picking one area (tier 4ish, which I acknowledge is when AD&D does get more slots) when I showed you that OVERALL what you claimed is factually untrue??

Ok, I'll play your game (not even including Arcane Recovery this time...which it would be worse for you if I did):

Level 1E 5E
1st 1 vs. 2 --- 5E has twice as many
2nd 2 vs. 3 --- 5E has 1.5x as many
3rd 2,1 vs. 4,2 -- 5E has twice as many
...
9th 4,3,3,2,1 vs. 4,3,3,3,1 -- 5E still has more slots

You claimed:
1e and 2e also had several times more spell slots.
I showed you this is untrue over the levels 5E has. You want to address it on a level-by-level basis and focus on a level of play very few people ever experience, yet claim it as a general statement?

Your claim is wrong. I've not even added the optional spell slots in 5E gained through various feats.

Now, this is a M-U vs. Wizard comparison, and if you want to examine Clerics and Druids you'll find AD&D has more of an edge, but overall it is not "several times more spell slots" by any stretch of the imagination if you are looking at ALL the levels and want to make a general, and true, statement.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


ezo

Adventurer
The post you quoted was a comparison of 20th level casters.

My initial comparison post covered how 5e has only 1 spell slot at 7-9.
Fair enough.

(and it seems like neither of your links work for some reason?)

I have always been discussing "losing your one bbeg killer" spell. My position has been consistent.
But you have "bbeg killer" spells at lower levels as well, not just in tiers 3 and 4. And those levels and spells have 5E is many more slots than AD&D had.

I mean, consider the ever popular fireball. When you reached 5th level in AD&D and were lucky enough to learn it, it was a game-changer many times. In 5E, you don't have to try to learn it, you have two slots to cast it, and with Arcane Recovery can do it a 3rd time!
 

The links work for me on android/chrome so...shrug.

You mention fireball. It's a prime example of how you can't look at each rule in a vacuum, you have to look in context. 1e had different ranges indoor/outdoor, saves were completely different and fireball was a volume of like 33x 10ft cubes not a radius. ("Backblast" was a horrifying term many tables learned)

Less specifically concentration spells didn't exist, spell durations were different, ASIs didn't exist but fighter's had the 18/xx chart so a 19 str gauntlet was massive, and classes had different xp tables per class so you didn't have a 12th level rogue and a 12th level wizard who had earned the same XP.

Arcane Recovery applies for the day but not for a specific encounter, which means it comes down to the table's encounters/day and availability of rest time.

I like that earlier editions meant you didn't need a "countercaster" character specifically to deal with enemy casters. I don't think that you can have that with loss of spell slot in combination with 5e only giving 1-2 slots at 6-9.
 
Last edited:


ezo

Adventurer
You mention fireball. It's a prime example of how you can't look at each rule in a vacuum, you have to look in context. 1e had different ranges indoor/outdoor, saves were completely different and fireball was a volume of like 33x 10ft cubes not a radius. ("Backblast" was a horrifying term many tables learned)
Regardless of the rule differences, the fact is in 5E you can cast fireball 3 times given a short rest (which is extremely frequent if you've already expended both your 3rd level spell slots at 5th level), while in AD&D at 5th level you have just 1 fireball...

Less specifically concentration spells didn't exist, spell durations were different, ASIs didn't exist but fighter's had the 18/xx chart so a 19 str gauntlet was massive, and classes had different xp tables per class so you didn't have a 12th level rogue and a 12th level wizard who had earned the same XP.
While pretty much true (Gauntlets of Ogre Power in AD&D gave you an 18/00 Strength, not a 19 ;) ), your point was AD&D had several times the spell slots of 5E, so none of this is really relevant to that point.

Arcane Recovery applies for the day but not for a specific encounter, which means it comes down to the table's encounters/day and availability of rest time.
Again, true, but that is why my last comparison at tiers 1 and 2 didn't include it. Besides, as I also mentioned above, if the Wizard has exhausted their two 3rd level slots, a short rest will 90% of the time be taken (and they will find a way to take it), especially when you consider features other classes will regain on that short rest.

I like that earlier editions meant you didn't need a "countercaster" character specifically to deal with enemy casters. I don't think that you can have that with loss of spell slot in combination with 5e only giving 1-2 slots at 6-9.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I like it too! I much prefer AD&D in a lot of ways to 5E, and this is one of them. :) In AD&D, disrupting a spell was pretty easy and so casters resorted to magical items such as rods, staves, and wands, which could not be disrupted in the same manner.

Given how 5E works in general, the loss of the spell slot would be overkill.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
Most of the time I cast them in play I am in punching range and with a minute duration for most of them, there is not a lot of opportunity to cast ahead of time.
If your combats are lasting ten rounds, that is a DM issue. If you are scampering into melee to cast haste, that's a you issue.

I think it will be hard finding players for such a game as I don't think most players will like this.
I don't think you'll find a lot of players charging their wizard directly into melee to cast pre-combat buff spells.

Penalties for casting in melee has been a thing from 1E to 3.5E and I don't think it was generally liked, which is why they got rid of it I think.
They got rid of them because people complained about combat time and 'simplicity' without ever thinking of the consequences.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Personally, I prefer that spells not be so powerful that the only useful way to prevent them being broken is to nix them.

Just seems like it would be better for everyone involved if both DM and player had a suite of tools such that they were encouraged to exploit those tools to the fullest, rather than each side trying to force the other to fight with one hand tied behind their back.
 

Wolfram stout

Adventurer
Supporter
I miss our 2nd edition style. We converted the casting time from adding it to inititive roll and turned it into a segment countdown. Combat rounds were 10 segments (D10 no modifiers). If you had multiple attacks you either +/- 5 (or 3 if you had 3 attacks). For spellcasters, you started your casting on the segment your rolled. So if you got hit before your roll no problem, then your spell went off on the segment countdown (so if you wizard rolled an 8 inititive he would start casting on 8 and the Web spell would go off on at the end of segment 7/start of 6). Those 2 rounds were the danger spot. So first level spells were normally safe (unless you went on the same segment as the enemies) but at 3rd and higher the timing became very tense.

Looking back, it didn't seem to slow down combat, and everyone stayed engaged,
 


Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top