D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A 11/22/13

[Iosue]

I wonder if silence spell could block the sound from the knock spell

I believe yes. The sound is said to "emanate from the target object" in the Knock spell, while the Silence spell says that no sound can be created within or pass through its zone. However, there are practical considerations. The zone of a silence spell has a 20' radius. Cast it centered on the door, and you're probably going to alert whatever's within 20' on the other side. If you've got 41 to 50 feet of free room, you could cast it at a spot 20' away from the door, and cast the Knock through the 40' diameter zone while standing up to 50' away from the door. (Or much closer if your player is aces at spherical geometry!) I would hazard that dungeon and room configurations would make this difficult much of the time.

 

[Mistwell]

Sounds good, though I still think the loud boom on Knock is overkill. Rogue lockpicking is already far superior to the Knock spell because it's at-will and doesn't cost a spell slot or a 10 minute ritual.

Isn't the point of a ritual to be at-will? I think a spell slot is vastly more flexible than the open locks ability, as you can fill it with dozens of different spells depending on the day (or even hour), you can use it to make other magic items like scrolls, you can use it for a ritual, you can use it to power lower level spells, etc.. I like the loud sound from Knock.

 

[GX.Sigma]

2. While I am fine with the number of armor types they have in the game, I still hate armor scaling with gp cost. Instead of different armor types within the same category having different pros and cons, they just get progressively better and better. There's no reason to wear chain mail if you can afford banded armor, etc.

There was a big thread about this a while ago, and I actually argued the opposite position: Better armor should be better. Even Conan wore plate armor once he could afford it.

3. Sounds good, though I still think the loud boom on Knock is overkill. Rogue lockpicking is already far superior to the Knock spell because it's at-will and doesn't cost a spell slot or a 10 minute ritual.

Hell, just smashing the thing open is superior to the knock spell.

 

[MoonSong]

1. The sorcerer origins sound good, but please tell me this doesn't mean sorcerers will be the only ones that have metamagics.

Actaully I would be extremely pleased if that was the case, the wizards have already eaten the sorcerer's lunch -by being strictly better in all regards, before they announced this all a sorcerer could be was being like a wizard but with very limited spells known and no ritual casting-, having the sorcerers have a class-level primacy on metamagic should indeed help counter that, let the wizards and codzillas have to deal with lousy 1/day metamagiks, allowing sorcerers metamagic primacy creates a niche for them to replace the one that was ripped from them -tactical flexibility-

3. Sounds good, though I still think the loud boom on Knock is overkill. Rogue lockpicking is already far superior to the Knock spell because it's at-will and doesn't cost a spell slot or a 10 minute ritual.

I wonder if silence spell could block the sound from the knock spell

Isn't the point of a ritual to be at-will? I think a spell slot is vastly more flexible than the open locks ability, as you can fill it with dozens of different spells depending on the day (or even hour), you can use it to make other magic items like scrolls, you can use it for a ritual, you can use it to power lower level spells, etc.. I like the loud sound from Knock.

Hell, just smashing the thing open is superior to the knock spell.

The knock thing is specially contentious, I think it is fair to make it specially bad for wizards, after all I do get the main points -He can prepare something different tomorrow and it isn't fair that a wizard can make a fellow party member superflous with just a few hours rest-, but again for sorcerers this isn't as clear cut, for a wizard preparing knock is a matter of adaptation for a given day, for a sorcerer is a life path choice -or at least a long term compromise-, a sorcerer doesn't pick knock to casually replace the rogue, a sorcerer picks it to be a magical thief, probably even hoping to do that in a permanent basis, and being extremely noisy each time goes against that. The only way I think both camps could be satisfied is by keeping knock as is and then provide sorcerers with a non-noisy version that cannot be ritual casted or have knock say that sorcerers don't produce the noise, I don't know.

 

[ccooke]

The knock thing is specially contentious, I think it is fair to make it specially bad for wizards, after all I do get the main points -He can prepare something different tomorrow and it isn't fair that a wizard can make a fellow party member superflous with just a few hours rest-, but again for sorcerers this isn't as clear cut, for a wizard preparing knock is a matter of adaptation for a given day, for a sorcerer is a life path choice -or at least a long term compromise-, a sorcerer doesn't pick knock to casually replace the rogue, a sorcerer picks it to be a magical thief, probably even hoping to do that in a permanent basis, and being extremely noisy each time goes against that. The only way I think both camps could be satisfied is by keeping knock as is and then provide sorcerers with a non-noisy version that cannot be ritual casted or have knock say that sorcerers don't produce the noise, I don't know.

Well, we don't know how it's going to be implemented, but... the description given last was that Sorcerors are getting a pool of Sorcery points that can be used to apply metamagic effects. If there's a silent metamagic effect, then that fits the balance issue nicely: A Sorceror with Knock *can* be as good at opening locks as a rogue... but they need to use two class features to do it, and they have a strict limitation on how often they can do it. They can't, for instance, sneak into a building containing an unknown number of locks. They're no use disarming traps by default, either.

At least, I hope that's how it works out
It's certainly plausible from the data we have.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Isn't the point of a ritual to be at-will?

Rituals are "at-will" in that they have no daily usage limit, but they still require 10+ minutes to cast. A rogue, on the other hand, can pick locks as a standard action. That means he can try to pick a lock 100 times in the time it takes a wizard to cast knock as a ritual.

I think a spell slot is vastly more flexible than the open locks ability, as you can fill it with dozens of different spells depending on the day (or even hour), you can use it to make other magic items like scrolls, you can use it for a ritual, you can use it to power lower level spells, etc.. I like the loud sound from Knock.

There's no guarantee that a wizard is even going to know the knock spell. And while it's true that spell slots are more flexible, they also come with a lot of disadvantages to balance that, the biggest one being that they have a daily limit. We both agree that knock should be inferior to a rogue's lockpicking. Where we differ is just on how much inferior it should be. IMO, it should be somewhere in between rogue lockpicking and the crudest option - smashing down the door. The problem with the loud noise on knock is, that's the biggest reason not to just smash down the door - it makes a lot of noise. So why spend 10 minutes casting knock, or spend a daily spell slot, when the fighter can just bash down the door? Either way, the monsters are going to know you're coming.

There was a big thread about this a while ago, and I actually argued the opposite position: Better armor should be better. Even Conan wore plate armor once he could afford it.

Plate armor should be the best armor - at least as far as protection goes. That doesn't mean it should be superior to other heavy armors in every other way as well. IMO, there should be a benefit to wearing lighter and less complex armor, such as lower armor check and speed penalties. Otherwise, every character is just going to obtain the best armor type within the category he can wear as soon as possible, and I don't like the idea of practically every character wearing just one of three types of armor (mithral shirt, mithral scale or mithral plate) after level 5 or so, once characters have 5-6,000 gp to buy the best armor. And some of the armor types are just pointless. Why would anyone wear padded armor when leather is just plain better and is only 5 gp more? The same goes for hide vs studded leather (and why on earth is studded leather medium armor now?).

 

[Mistwell]

Rituals are "at-will" in that they have no daily usage limit, but they still require 10+ minutes to cast. A rogue, on the other hand, can pick locks as a standard action. That means he can try to pick a lock 100 times in the time it takes a wizard to cast knock as a ritual.

Which 99% of the time isn't going to matter. The times when you need to open the door in less than 10 minutes are very rare.

There's no guarantee that a wizard is even going to know the knock spell.

Then it's a moot point. We're discussing a comparison between the two, right?

And while it's true that spell slots are more flexible, they also come with a lot of disadvantages to balance that, the biggest one being that they have a daily limit.

Not as a ritual they don't. We're going in circles here.

We both agree that knock should be inferior to a rogue's lockpicking. Where we differ is just on how much inferior it should be. IMO, it should be somewhere in between rogue lockpicking and the crudest option - smashing down the door. The problem with the loud noise on knock is, that's the biggest reason not to just smash down the door - it makes a lot of noise. So why spend 10 minutes casting knock, or spend a daily spell slot, when the fighter can just bash down the door? Either way, the monsters are going to know you're coming.

It's between the two already, because you're forgetting the other major drawback to breaking down a door - the door no longer works once you break it down.

 

[DEFCON 1]

And some of the armor types are just pointless. Why would anyone wear padded armor when leather is just plain better and is only 5 gp more? The same goes for hide vs studded leather (and why on earth is studded leather medium armor now?).

Yup, this is exactly the case. When the only difference is 5gp, there's no point in having the worse one on the chart. Pointless entries on the armor and weapons charts are still pointless. You're better off just having "light armor", "medium armor" and "heavy armor" and let the player describe what kind of armor it is however they want.

And I'm also not crazy about the "specialty" armors only giving you like one point of better protection. That's ridiculous. You use cows for your leather and get 2 points of armor protection... but then you go up to the hide of a DRAGON and only get one point more?!? Kinda kills the coolness of killing a dragon for its hide and scales doesn't it? Especially considering you can have some wizard wave his wand over that cow leather armor and create a magical set of leather that's cheaper than the dragon leather but just as protective. I guess those dragons aren't such a big a deal after all.

 

[Sunseeker]

I hope the number of Sorcerer power sources are closer to the number that Pathfinder has, rather than comparatively small amount that 4e had.

While I agree, I hope that they are expanded over time, and we don't get a PHB1 with 10 classes, 6 Mage schools, 8 Cleric domains, 10 Sorcerer power sources and 2 variant fighters.

 

[MoonSong]

While I agree, I hope that they are expanded over time, and we don't get a PHB1 with 10 classes, 6 Mage schools, 8 Cleric domains, 10 Sorcerer power sources and 2 variant fighters.

As long as we get about the key five-six at launch (Wild, celestial, draconic, fey, infernal/abssal) I don't care to wait for the more exotic ones, but if core only has two, well that is a no sell really. I would argue that with a good layout ou don't need more than two or three pages to cover about a dozen bloodlines (and the same goes for all subclasses).