D&D 5E Damage Spell Scaling

[Tony Vargas]

D&D is not a PVP game.

Oh? Since when?

2008

 

[Lanefan]

The difference between 1e and 5e is that in 1e and 2e, when the cantrips were level 1 spells, they had to automatically scale because you couldn't cast spells at a higher level, you had to prepare the same spell multiple times a day if you wanted to cast it more than once, if you prepare a spell you didn't use that day, it was a wasted slot, and if you ran out of spell slots, you were completely defenseless. Also then came the balance issue, where the wizard became so much more powerful than everything else at high levels.

Cantrips gave a wizard viability and survivability over those previous editions without breaking the game. If you're old enough to have played back in those days, then you should have recognized this.

Part of the trade-off for wizards becoming so powerful at higher levels was that they had to get there, and didn't always. Increasing their low-level survivability, all other things being equal, makes the problem worse not better.

Also, if you'll recall 1e had cantrips - they came in in Unearthed Arcana - but none of them did damage greater than 1 hit point.

That said, I don't at all mind 1e-style damage scaling on spells.

 

[FrogReaver]

I understand that ppl want to do more damage and make the most overpowered build possible, but I don't see where it is broken.

Let's start with a hypothetical - suppose I wanted to increase the damage of level 1 and level 2 spells by 1 after level 5.

Would you still be complaining that I'm wanting to make the most overpowered build possible? Or would you recognize that the single damage on those few spells isn't going to significantly power up the caster at all?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Funny - I always thought the purpose of the wizard was to blow the batcrap out of anything within range.

No, it uses the batcrap to blow up anything in range.

 

[Lanefan]

I understand that ppl want to do more damage and make the most overpowered build possible, but I don't see where it is broken.

It's interesting - and I'm not singling you out here for any reason other than your post brought on this thought - but whenever anyone complains about wizard types being overpowered the first thing that gets pointed to is the damage spells.

Yet oftentimes the damage spells are (or should be) the least of one's concerns.

A non-blasting utility-buff-stealth-mindtricks mage - now there's where the problems arise. But what those mages do isn't in-your-face like damage is, so they tend to get overlooked. (I learned this lesson in 3e playing a Wizard with Evokation as her banned school, alongside another Wizard who spec'ed in Evoking - sure the Evoker was flashy, but I was a lot more useful most of the time)

 

[Lanefan]

2008

Get. Off my lawn.

 

[FrogReaver]

Challenge accepted. I'll give you spells that do it directly, spells that do it by adding on, and then show that the spell damage is even more than that.

First, a list of ones with either area of effect or repeating damage that do more.

Burning Hands - your sample. At 5th with two target that's 8d6 damage. Equivalent to 2d6+7 great sword with Extra Attack which is pretty good at 5th. Catch more than two in the 15' cone and you'll do a lot more.
Flaming Sphere (bonus action repeat means a single casting will add up to way more than a single Attack action)
Heat Metal (same as Flaming Sphere)
Magic Missile (3x 2d4+1 with no chance to miss is more than an Attack action once you consider miss chance.)
Scorching Ray (3 x 3d6 works out to be two attacks of a greatsword doing 2d6+8. +8 is nice bonus damage to be doing at 5th. 9d6 blows sneak attack out fo the water).
Shatter (with multiple foes in a 20' diameter)
Spike Growth (debatable. stepping on one square isn't more than an attack action. But cast in a hallway where someone needs to go across 40' of it will add +8d4 (avg 20) at 5th, +16d4 (40) at 11th, and +24d4 (60) at 17th.)

Then there are the ones that stack with other actions by only being a bonus action to cast:

Hellish Rebuke (well, reaction to cast in this case)
Spiritual Weapon (like Heat Metal, but just a bonus action to initiate to it always wills stack)
All 1-2 level paladin smite spells

And don't forget the ranger and the warlock's damage adjusters of Hunter's Mark and Hex - those will start adding a heck of a lot more damage.

(This is just looking at PHB spells quickly, I tossed a lot of "nicer but not nicer enough", nor did I look through XGtE)

Now let's multiply that that many leveled damage spells still do half damage on a successful save. So even if the succcess damage is similar to an Attack action, the expected damage is greater since attacks do nothing on miss.

And finally, let's remember that it's about the damage done, not just the dice. Due to the nature of only two proficient saves, even with good ability scores most foes will have 2-4 good saves total. So having a wider selection of worthwhile damage spells means a wider ability to pick the save (and damage type) that is best against a particular foe. So while hitting remains roughly static with bounded accuracy over levels, an increasing DC vs. a flat save makes that damage spells with saves will get more likely to do their full damage if you have a big enough pool to have the right type of save - and this makes it that you will.

Again, I'm fine with spells doing more than attacks - this is just showing that making low level spells viable damage dealers at higher levels means that more actions per day will be > attacks with fewer level for cantrips doing < attacks, so the average damage for the caster will improve above weapon attacker ranges.

The point isn't about any particular spell, it's about replacing < weapon Actions (cantrips) with > weapon Actions (now-viable low level damage spells) over the course of a day raising the average.

I'm dismissing the multitarget argument because the game simply doesn't value multi target damage significantly more than single target damage - else you'd actually have a major reason to cast things other than fireball for single target damage...

I'm also ignoring your recurring damage citations as they aren't really what I've had in mind this whole thread. If I need to restrict my initial criteria more then that's fine.

I'm ignoring paladin smites because it was never my intention to buff those.

I think the only spell that's left out of your list is magic missile and attack actions obviously do more than it in a level 1 slot starting in tier 2 and more than it in a level 2 slot in tier 3. That's with chance to hit factored in.

So ummm, want to try again?

 

[Tony Vargas]

whenever anyone complains about wizard types being overpowered the first thing that gets pointed to is the damage spells.
Yet oftentimes the damage spells are (or should be) the least of one's concerns.

Damage is easy to compare, and DPR easy to calculate.

 

[FrogReaver]

Damage is easy to compare, and DPR easy to calculate.

That and most actions can be evaluated as their overall impact on DPR, either friendly or foe. So even debuff spells or buff spells can often be evaluated in terms of DPR as well.

 

[neogod22]

I'm dismissing the multitarget argument because the game simply doesn't value multi target damage significantly more than single target damage - else you'd actually have a major reason to cast things other than fireball for single target damage...

I'm also ignoring your recurring damage citations as they aren't really what I've had in mind this whole thread. If I need to restrict my initial criteria more then that's fine.

I'm ignoring paladin smites because it was never my intention to buff those.

I think the only spell that's left out of your list is magic missile and attack actions obviously do more than it in a level 1 slot starting in tier 2 and more than it in a level 2 slot in tier 3. That's with chance to hit factored in.

So ummm, want to try again?

And this is why I feel you should be playing another class like a warlock. You're dismissing the majority of the strengths of a wizard and complaining it's too weak.