D&D 5E (2024) Circle Casting is gonna break a lot of games

[Jefe Bergenstein]

once again I will say; D&D should be exclusively playtested by powergamers/optimizers/munckins.

I wont say exclusively, but you need some people looking out for broken stuff and poorly worded rules. A white hat munchkin if you will.

This seemed designed with an attitude of "whatever we do doesnt matter, Rule 0 will fix it"

 

[dave2008]

We all know on paper this is true. We also know that RAW drive behavior at the table. It sets the expectation that that's how the game is supposed to be played, and lots of gamers will play it that way even if they don't like how the rule works. And of course all those gamers that say "It's in the rules so I can do it!"

Actually I am pretty ignorant of that behavior. I hear people talk about, but I have never seen it myself. We have not played the game RAW since we first started playing in the 80s. We didn't play RAW in 1e AD&D/BECMI, 4e, or 5e. Not once. So that is neither my assumption or how I have seen the game played.

I understand people play that way, it just doesn't make any sense to me. IMO, RPGs and D&D in particular not to be played RAW - that is the beauty of them!

 

[Sacrosanct]

Actually I am pretty ignorant of that behavior. I hear people talk about, but I have never seen it myself. We have not played the game RAW since we first started playing in the 80s. We didn't play RAW in 1e AD&D/BECMI, 4e, or 5e. Not once. So that is neither my assumption or how I have seen the game played.

I understand people play that way, it just doesn't make any sense to me. IMO, RPGs and D&D in particular not to be played RAW - that is the beauty of them!

Not to overgeneralize, but I've seen that older gamers (like us) are used to houseruling and ignoring rules because AD&D was such a rules mess. But I have seen, quite often, "newer" (3e and on) players rely more on the rules than be willing to just houserule away things they don't like. I don't have evidence, but I'd posit that the clearer rules are for a game, the more people will try to follow them. Not just RPGs, but boadgames and other games as well. And then you've got things like AL where you can't just houserule away rules.

 

[Zardnaar]

still to this day I do not know what is the problem with silvery barbs?
Except the reroll mechanics, that is a time sink that is not needed more in combat. But if you are fine with rest of re rolls in the game...

In effect it also sucks the run out of the game.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think this makes mass combat in a common magic realm absolutely fantastic.
No longer is a land with thousands of mages marching peasants and sending walls of knights on horseback, a silly endeavor for sure.
They're absolutely blasting each other with the Weave.

Looking at the math, you can apparently fit 125,664 5-ft squares in a 1000 foot radius. If each future elephant takes up 9 squares, that's still 13,900 goblins/potential elephants within range. Evil warlock assembles force in a flat plain, stands on a stool, and casts the spell with just one other goblin mook to help.

The spell normally would have 113 5-ft squares in a 30-ft radius. That's 12 elephants. So that 1st level goblin mook shaman just increased the number of elephants from 11 to 13,900.

 

[Zardnaar]

Just like silvery barbs was ignored and forgotten in a month or two?

Single spell vs entire subsystem where you need multiple spell casters.

Not the first time circle magic has been done.

Also opportunity cost. If youre willing to build an entire party around circle magic theres do much worse combos you can do.

For example you could build a short rest based party. Monk, cleric, fighter, warlock, maybe another warlock.

At level 10 the cleric can divine intervention a prayer of healing.

Or build around weapon masteries, spell combos and forced movements for example.

Yeeting the cleric around to maximize spirit guardians.

Etc.

 

[bedir than]

Looking at the math, you can apparently fit 125,664 5-ft squares in a 1000 foot radius. If each future elephant takes up 9 squares, that's still 13,900 goblins/potential elephants within range. Evil warlock assembles force in a flat plain, stands on a stool, and casts the spell with just one other goblin mook to help.

The spell normally would have 113 5-ft squares in a 30-ft radius. That's 12 elephants. So that 1st level goblin mook shaman just increased the number of elephants from 11 to 13,900.

why are 13,000 goblins standing together like that?

 

[Horwath]

In effect it also sucks the run out of the game.

really?
why?

it adds fun actually, if you ignore rerolls (house ruled to reduce d20 roll by 5, yes nat 20 is nat 15 with this spell).
it gives you more chance to land that fun ability you have.

 

[Sacrosanct]

why are 13,000 goblins standing together like that?

Because they are an invading army? This is one of the biggest example, but it doesn't have to be 13,000. 1,000 CR 1/4 creatures turning into CR 4 creatures would make any large scale battle moot.

 

[dave2008]

Because they are an invading army? This is one of the biggest example, but it doesn't have to be 13,000. 1,000 CR 1/4 creatures turning into CR 4 creatures would make any large scale battle moot.

I don't have an issue with the increased power circle casting provides, I just think they got the cost budget wrong. IMO, it needs a few minor tweaks to see access at our table