Combat issues: slayer + at-will magic missile.

[CleverNickName]

Defeating minions is overpowered at 1st?

Whoops. Factually incorrect.

My fault; I should have mentioned that do not run 4E rules. Things like auto-damage, minions, and at-will powers do not fit my preferred style of play.

 

[CM]

Damage on a miss is just fine IMO. We already have plenty of spells that damage on a miss (save for half). The slayer's feat just represents the fact that the character's attacks are so brutal that they will eventually wear down the enemy's defenses, leaving it vulnerable to a deadly hit.

People complain the 4e fighter is weak offensively and that being a defender cramps their style, and yet when wizards gives the playtest fighter a theme with some teeth, it's too much.

Wait till we see laser cleric slayers or ranger slayers doing an automatic 3-4 damage at range at first level.

 

[Stormonu]

Y'now, it has come to my attention I really dislike the way damage on a miss is implemented.

Yeah, damage on a miss kills a kobold. You missed - how did you take him out? The sucker had a heart-attack or perhaps the dwarf's ale-laden breath did him in?

Even in 4E, minions had the rule that you couldn't kill them on a miss.

Things like this that bothered me in 4E (tripping oozes, psychically blasting skeletons...) I'd rather not see in 5E. They'd just be reasons for me to avoid buying into the game.

Eh, thinking about it, I guess it's like the 1/2 damage on a fireball save. Of course, for the wizard, he doesn't get to use that same spell again the next round - it's gone for the day (though he could try to blow another in his stock). Still don't like it though.

 

[IronWolf]

Y'now, it has come to my attention I really dislike the way damage on a miss is implemented.

Yeah, damage on a miss kills a kobold. You missed - how did you take him out? The sucker had a heart-attack or perhaps the dwarf's ale-laden breath did him in?

My initial reaction was this as well. Still haven't seen it in actual play, but as I was thinking, in PbP's I frequently describe a miss as a glancing blow off the armor or some such. Given that I describe it as that, it stands to reason there could have been some damage caused. Now enough damage to kill the creature outright is still a bit difficult for me to swallow, but...

We will see how it plays out.

 

[Kaodi]

I do not see why anyone would think the light spell is all you need. It only has a radius of 20' feet, whereas a torch has a radius of 40' feet.

Also, I do not know if it has been mentioned yet anywhere, but a rogue with the magic-user theme could get shocking grasp, which would make them absolutely killer in melee against anything with metal armour. I mean, what it is there for a rogue not to love about a spell that guarantees advantage against a significant subset of enemies?

 

[Stormonu]

Slayer theme has me a bit bothered now...

Fighter could use a mechanic where he's spitting out fairly consistent damage, so that even a streak of bad rolls doesn't make him utterly useless. But giving a platitude of "damage on a miss" seems poor (I think I'd also like to see the end of it for "1/2 on successful save" spells - you miss, you're out of luck). I think I'd rather see a mechanic to allow the fighter to shift his miss into a hit after an attack.

Something perhaps that allows the fighter to shift his damage die down a grade for each +1 to the die - and lose Strength bonus to damage. Of course, this would favor bigger weapons, so some other sort of shift mechanic might be more appropriate. But not one based on level, or we're basically back to the BAB for fighters once again.

Mayhaps the fighter can choose to give his enemy Advantage in return for gaining Advantage on a bad roll?

(Side Thought: an ability with a shield that allows the bearer to grant Disadvantage to one enemy a round, reflecting using the shield to block blows aimed at the character?)

 

[Fifth Element]

Yeah, damage on a miss kills a kobold. You missed - how did you take him out? The sucker had a heart-attack or perhaps the dwarf's ale-laden breath did him in?

One thing to bear in mind is that in D&D, armour absorbs attacks that would otherwise have hit you. If you're wearing armour that increases your AC by 4, and your opponent "misses" you by 2, that means he actually hit you (ie, landed his weapon on your person), but the armor absorbed the blow. So, in some cases at least, it can be a matter of smashing your weapon into the opponent's armour, but with such force that he's going to feel some of the attack regardless.

 

[Lanefan]

You know, I can't help but read the OP as, "the play test has two problems: the wizard is too awesome at using magic and the slayer is too awesome at killing puny monsters." I interpret those as positives. I want my PCs to be awesome. I'm tired of starting at third level so that I don't suck. There's plenty of design space for weaker level one characters, but I honestly think most players don't want there new characters dying constantly like in old school DnD.

Speak for yourself.

It's the "dying constantly" at low level that makes the awesome that comes later that much more special, because you've earned it.

If you want your PCs to be awesome, play them long enough to get there. If you want them to be awesome RIGHT NOW, I'm sorry but you'll find very little sympathy here.

Lan-"already being awesome at 1st level really limits the room for growth later"-efan

 

[eamon]

I really don't understand how you could describe magic missile as "awesome". It's puny.

In any case, I agree that if you're trying to run a world with low-magic and no at-will magic, it's unfortunate. D&D's never (or not in my experience) really been very low-magic, so achieving that's going to take a bit of adaptation.

If the only thing bothering you is the always-hit nature, just house-rule it to something like an attack with d8+Int damage. Preferences vary - I think auto-hit is just fine, but obviously not everyone agrees. Whatever the case, you've got to realize it's not a major balance factor and given the current state of essentials and 3e, it's quite traditional.

So, I hope that those that don't like auto-damaging magic missiles can find satisfaction in that although the rule is unlikely to change, it's also easy to house-rule so that it's not a major issue.

 

[IronWolf]

In any case, I agree that if you're trying to run a world with low-magic and no at-will magic, it's unfortunate. D&D's never (or not in my experience) really been very low-magic, so achieving that's going to take a bit of adaptation.

I think the issue is more the beefed up at-will magic that some folks are struggling with. I know on reading it that I am inclined to think it might be too much. I really need to see it in play though as I might find it plays out better for me than it reads.

Not having at-wills though does not necessarily make a setting low magic though. I think there are several varying degrees between low magic and high magic settings.

If the only thing bothering you is the always-hit nature, just house-rule it to something like an attack with d8+Int damage. Preferences vary - I think auto-hit is just fine, but obviously not everyone agrees. Whatever the case, you've got to realize it's not a major balance factor and given the current state of essentials and 3e, it's quite traditional.

I think the auto-hit nature coupled with at-will is what is most troubling for some. As you said, it could be fixed by requiring an attack roll or it could be fixed by making it not be an at-will spell. Both would likely be suitable house rules.