D&D 5E Damage Spell Scaling

[Arnwolf666]

Aren't wizards proficient in quarterstaves? Sounds plenty practical and a wizard who didn't skimp on Strength would be outdamaging cantrips. If they picked up one of the weapon cantrips like Green Flame Blade, they'd stay ahead.

How does this compare to the main combat progression of the Rogue?
Does the wizard have to burn a spell slot or similar to do so?

I just reskinned green flame blade and sword to magical blunt damage With the descriptor of being hit by a staff. Doing something similar for daggers.

Rogues advance in damage at the same rate as fighters, adding the equivalent of ~3d6 at each tier. Wizards are roughly 2-3 dice below that, but they also have worse weapons and defenses, which can make it harder for them to attack effectively. (A pure rogue has twice as many HP as a wizard.)

There's no resource expenditure required. This is their at-will attack, which is supposed to replace cantrips.

I often wonder why people that want dpr balance just don’t play 13th age

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I often wonder why people that want dpr balance just don’t play 13th age

There are plenty of reasons to hate 13th Age, and most of them having nothing to do with balance or math.

 

[Arnwolf666]

There are plenty of reasons to hate 13th Age, and most of them having nothing to do with balance or math.

it’s not for everyone. Some of the abilities like polysyllabic verbalization are too vague for me.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I often wonder why people that want dpr balance just don’t play 13th age

It's not D&D.
It's the classic conundrum, really, you notice that D&D is not such a great game, you go looking for a better game, you find 10, you pick one you /particularly/ like, and go looking for other folks who have also realized there's better stuff out there. You find some. They've each also picked a game they particularly like, that's better than D&D. They're all different. They're not even all chosen from the same list of 10.

You end up playing D&D.

;P

 

[Ashrym]

It's not D&D.
It's the classic conundrum, really, you notice that D&D is not such a great game, you go looking for a better game, you find 10, you pick one you /particularly/ like, and go looking for other folks who have also realized there's better stuff out there. You find some. They've each also picked a game they particularly like, that's better than D&D. They're all different. They're not even all chosen from the same list of 10.

You end up playing D&D.

;P

Lol, I didn't say that. The quote is a lie!! , lol?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Lol, I didn't say that. The quote is a lie!! , lol?

But, I got the quote at the same place I got The Cake?

Arnwolf666, Ashrym,
They both start with A?

No, it was an unintentional multi-quote, deleted the wrong attribution. Sorry.

 

[Arnwolf666]

It's not D&D.
It's the classic conundrum, really, you notice that D&D is not such a great game, you go looking for a better game, you find 10, you pick one you /particularly/ like, and go looking for other folks who have also realized there's better stuff out there. You find some. They've each also picked a game they particularly like, that's better than D&D. They're all different. They're not even all chosen from the same list of 10.

You end up playing D&D.

;P

That is so true.

 

[^Dagon^]

A warlock is neither a cleric or bard nor a wizard or druid. They are meant to do damage and there are specific tool directed at that damage. 5e offers room to lean in other directions, for sure. Even the wizard already has evoker for a more damage oriented option.

"Controller" was a bit nebulous when the idea came out and it probably was just something to give for wizards originally, but I bought into the status effects / battlefield control aspects. That's what I see for the majority of the wizard's combat effectiveness now. 5e clearly didn't do a direct translation but the effectiveness of the class is higher following it.

Yet the Evoker doesn't really do that much more damage than other wizards. That's why I have modified that arcane tradition.

 

[^Dagon^]

That is so true.

D&D, especially 5th edition, is highly customizable. I have found out that while the vanilla game is non-challenging and somewhat flat (compared to the previous editions, except 4th that can't be considered D&D), it is easy to fix these issues without that much effort. For the last few years I have been running campaigns (as a DM) using a hybrid of 5th edition and old school D&D (mainly 2nd) with great success. Challenge went way up, variation went way up, fun went way up, customization of characters went way up, in fact the concept was so successful that when the campaigns ended and we started another one with one of the former players as the DM, we kept the homebrewed rules I made.

I have the feeling that the vanilla 5th edition is a basic design ready to be modified by players and DMs that are not new in the scene, that this was an intended feature when they created it. To be easily customizable.

 

[Horwath]

It's not D&D.
It's the classic conundrum, really, you notice that D&D is not such a great game, you go looking for a better game, you find 10, you pick one you /particularly/ like, and go looking for other folks who have also realized there's better stuff out there. You find some. They've each also picked a game they particularly like, that's better than D&D. They're all different. They're not even all chosen from the same list of 10.

You end up playing D&D.

;P

yeah,

other games are just source of inspiration for house rules for D&D.


also, nice necro thread.