December 1st UA Spell changes

[Maxperson]

Well, unless they're an Arcana Cleric. Or a High Elf.

I don't see how either of those make a difference to which books can be used for comparisons. If he's excluding optional rules, then since all splat books are optional they have to be excluded. Booming blade is not included in the PHB, so can't be used in any way.

High elves have to pick from PHB cantrips and arcana clerics can't be used at all.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't see how either of those make a difference to which books can be used for comparisons. If he's excluding optional rules, then since all splat books are optional they have to be excluded. Booming blade is not included in the PHB, so can't be used in any way.

High elves have to pick from PHB cantrips and arcana clerics can't be used at all.

Ok, it's just you said we had to assume Feats, and there are ways other than Feats to get those abilities. I haven't been fully engaged in the debate, so I missed the part where optional and non-core rules were being excluded from it.

I never made any secret about the fact that I hate the current healing paradigm and wish healing spells had more oomph, and never understood why offense =/= defense. Pathfinder 1e had this same disparity baked into the game, as they claimed that if defense was better than offense, combats would drag on and become (more) boring.

This however, never seems to prevent monsters from having a plethora of defensive abilities in order to prevent players from killing them quickly, of course.

As much as it would be nice to reexamine the entire paradigm, I highly doubt that anything like that will come from WotC. And, to my dismay, I must admit there is probably a good reason why it works the way it does now.

If casting big heals was optimal, characters who could cast them would feel pressure to do so, and we'd be right back to AD&D, where all your first level spells had to be "cure light wounds" and you'd never be able to cast anything more interesting.

Which was a miserable experience, so if the current state of the game is a necessary evil in order to let people play Clerics, Bards, and Druids and have more options than be walking band-aid dispensers, then so be it, I guess.

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, it's just you said we had to assume Feats, and there are ways other than Feats to get those abilities. I haven't been fully engaged in the debate, so I missed the part where optional and non-core rules were being excluded from it.

You didn't understand, probably because no one in their right mind would follow his and my conversation closely the way it's broken up. He said that fighters could not use feats when he started comparing how much damage the two classes could put out. Presumably because feats are optional and can't be assumed to be in play. That lead to me saying...

"You also can't use Booming Blade unless fighters can use feats. All books outside of core are also optional and can't be assumed to be in play."

...because booming blade is just as optional as fighter feats are.

I never made any secret about the fact that I hate the current healing paradigm and wish healing spells had more oomph, and never understood why offense =/= defense. Pathfinder 1e had this same disparity baked into the game, as they claimed that if defense was better than offense, combats would drag on and become (more) boring.

Healing was sacrificed on the altar of balance around the adventuring day and resource attrition. If it had the oomph of yesteryear, it would unbalance things.

I also wish it had more oomph, but that goes hand in hand with my intense dislike of balance around the adventuring day. I wish they had never used that metric to balance the game around.

This however, never seems to prevent monsters from having a plethora of defensive abilities in order to prevent players from killing them quickly, of course.

As much as it would be nice to reexamine the entire paradigm, I highly doubt that anything like that will come from WotC. And, to my dismay, I must admit there is probably a good reason why it works the way it does now.

Yep.

If casting big heals was optimal, characters who could cast them would feel pressure to do so, and we'd be right back to AD&D, where all your first level spells had to be "cure light wounds" and you'd never be able to cast anything more interesting.

I hated that. I actually rebelled against it when 2e came out. I told the other players straight up that my cleric was going to be a Cleric of War or Magic or whatever and would not have much healing as I would be focused on his calling when it came to spell selection. Then I let them know that if they wanted a dedicated healer, someone else would need to make one. We had like 6 or 7 of us, so 2 clerics was easily doable.

Which was a miserable experience, so if the current state of the game is a necessary evil in order to let people play Clerics, Bards, and Druids and have more options than be walking band-aid dispensers, then so be it, I guess.

I don't think it is. I think there are ways to design the game such that spells, including healing, have more oomph without 1) sending us back to the caster dominance of yore, and 2) setting clerics up to be heal bots.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It adds up and healing spirit scales very well with spell level. Use it as a 3rd level spell and you heal 2d6 per turn (like aura of vitality), which is quite good if you can use it over 3 turns or more (after 3 turns you have negated a whole fireball of damage with a single cast of a 3rd level spell).
Seems about right for me. And again, powerful bursts of healing (a little bit buffed cure wounds) should also be viable (3d8+4) is lousy...

It does scale very well. I'd have to get to using it to determine whether or not the static area and clumping is as bad as I fear I guess.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They have the numbers. You don't. You just have feelings that something is off, and feelings aren't a reason to change things.

I don't have numbers? Where did all my numbers come from then? I mean, sure, I felt something was off. Then I looked at the numbers. Then I checked with other people and sought other opinions, then I looked at the numbers AGAIN... I mean, I'm no paid researcher, but I really think declaring I'm basing everything off feelings when I'm showing my work is pretty lazy for a counter-argument. Especially for someone who hasn't done more than just shout I'm wrong without backing it up.

Right. One(mine) actually deals with balance. The other(yours) is a white room isolated comparison that does not. Your minor healing spell is not intended to counteract what you are comparing it to. If it was, it would.

So, would your claim be that Wizards has NEVER overvalued something and NEVER made a mistake? I certainly would never make that claim, there is after all a trivially easy thing to point to that shows that they DO overestimate, and reams and reams of things to point towards that show that they make mistakes.

And yours doesn't deal with actual balance, yours deals with the feeling that WoTC totally got it right the first time, despite any evidence to the contrary.

Data when used incorrectly isn't anything at all. Basically you have a poll and are spinning the numbers to suit your desires, but WotC has the actual play balance to consider, not your feelings on the matter.

And you still aren't doing anything to disprove me, just shouting that I'm using my feelings, despite all the facts I keep using. Getting kind of sad.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence that there is anything wrong with balance. You've taken two isolated things and compared them in a white room and declared that something is ubalanced based on a white room situation that doesn't deal with entire party vs. adventuring day balance.

And you keep asserting that I need to consider the entire party... but refuse to acknowledge that you can't predict an entire party. You are demanding the impossible, then asserting that Wizards must have done it right the first time, because... reasons! White Rooms! Feelings!

You want to prove yourself correct? Then you need to show your work, not just insist my work is bad because I'm only looking at healing abilities vs damage.

Um, no. That was entirely you. I never, ever made that claim. If you wanted to actually get my claim correct(and you don't), you would have compared all of the abilities available to one 11th level group to another, and not deliberately twisted what I said compared a 1st level ability to a 6th level ability in a white room again and declared it to be what I am saying.

I think your deliberate Strawman is ridiculous, too. We are in agreement!

I am comparing the majority of the abilities together. Damage, spells, hp, AC, class abilities. Sure, I haven't listed every single thing in a 20 page report, but I certainly have done more than compare a scaling healing to a 6th level spell. Which I did because you claimed that the damage mitigation abilities of ANY two parties would be the same. Fighters get heavy armor, so do clerics, fighter damage, cleric damage, fighter ability to restore hp, cleric ability to restore hp. What more should I list for you to demonstrate that the fighter has less damage mitigation?

Clerics don't have all of their spells for combat. A group of 4 clerics will need use a good percentage of them for utility during the adventuring day, cratering their ability to dish out damage in combat. Again, you are white rooming things by incorrectly declaring that clerics will have all of their spells to use in battle.

Why would they need to use them during the adventuring day? Is the DM forcing them to use spells against their will? After all, it isn't like clerics have a massive amount of utility that they are required to use.

And if the Clerics absolutely MUST use their spells to overcome the utility challenges of the adventuring day... aren't the fighter's just stuck and unable to progress? I mean, they get zero spells for utility. And if they are facing the same challenges... then the clerics don't need their spells for utility.

And if they do so, they're gimping themselves in utility outside of combat and will suffer for it. AND they have zeroed out their 3rd and 4th level slots in 3 out of 6-8 encounters for that adventuring day. Now they have 4 1st level spells, 3 2nd, 2 5th and 1 6th to divide up over 3-5 more encounters AND all utility for the day.

Yes, you have accurately noted the usage of resources. Good job. Now tell me why I should care about this theoretical utility that you are making up? Especially since they still have many spell slots.

You also can't use Booming Blade unless fighters can use feats. All books outside of core are also optional and can't be assumed to be in play.

Why not? I told you that was exactly what I was going to do. Didn't you read my post? I literally stated this "Because if you take the correct combination of abilities, the clerics can deal 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis every round for a fight, while still having the Heal spells, so is that really balanced against 4 fighters with no feats? "

And your response was the following.

Yes, because "for a fight" doesn't equal "for every fight" like fighters maintain.

I asked "Is that really balanced" and you said "Yes". You said it was balanced. Now suddenly, after I demonstrate the reality of that, you claim that it is unfair to not give the fighter's feats, and I can't use non-PHB materials and and and.... funny how quickly "Yes!" turned into "Wait, no, you can't do that." Maybe you should have either read a bit more closely, or considered your answer more.

They're going to get 3-5 more, so...

So you ARE white rooming this into a situation that will never occur in actual game play and assuming that clerics only ever cast spells in combat.

Now try down 1/3 to half your spells AND having to heal yourselves with at least some of those slots instead of using all your slots for offense. You know, like actually happens in real world game play and not fake white room situations where spellcasters have 100% of their slots for utility and 100% of their slots for combat in order to show how they are better than squares both in and out of combat.

You said Fighter's cannot fall behind in damage. I'm demonstrating that is false. You also keep harping on about this utility that I am required to spend spells on, but again, what utility am I required to use spells on? Demonstrate how I am required to spend half of Team Cleric's spells on utility spells, while Team Fighter can solve these same challenges without spells. You can't just assert yourself to be correct, you have to provide evidence.

Wait! You've used up every 2nd, 3rd, and 4th level spell on offense, then said you have 2 5th and a 6th for the last fight. Where are you getting this mythical clerical healing from? They have no slots to use any. You have spare the dying to stabilize the clerics that go unconscious and that's it.


Unless of course you want to take back a considerable amount of damage output so that you can actually heal and a considerable amount more for the utility you need to use out of combat in an adventuring day, in which case fighters action surge past you.

I have the 6th level slots. You know, the four 6th level slots that a team of four clerics would have is they had 6th level slots left? That's where that 70 came from. I compared the cleric's casting Heal, like I said, and having four of them becuase they are a team of clerics, like I said, against the Fighter's getting to use second wind.... like I said.

You are really making me question if you understood the premise.

Since you think that clerics have 100% of their spells for combat, 100% for healing, and 100% for utility, you clearly don't.

I'm also, given how you have twisted my claims and how you've used more than 100% of clerical spell slots, not going to trust your numbers as to how much fighters can dish out per fight.

What are you talking about? Do I need to take back that congratulations I gave before for accurately counting resources?

Team Cleric has each cleric start with 4 first level spells, 3 second level, 3 third level, 3 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level.

If they cast Spiritual Weapon at 4th and Spirit Guardians at 3rd, three times each, then they have 4 first level spells, 3 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level spell.

Then, if they cast Spiritual Weapon three times at 2nd, then they have 4 first level spells, 0 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level spell.

Then, if they cast Heal as a 6th level, each member has 4 first level spells, 0 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 0 sixth level spells.


So... I haven't even used 100% of their spells, let alone 300% of them. And, I used the one spell on healing to demonstrate that the Heal Spell once is more healing than the fighter over the adventuring day, unless you get three short rests. I think your feelings are the ones that are suspect, since you are just ranting about me using 100% of the spells for healing (one spell) and 100% of the spells for utility (still not demonstrated) when that is clearly not what I demonstrated.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Ok, it's just you said we had to assume Feats, and there are ways other than Feats to get those abilities. I haven't been fully engaged in the debate, so I missed the part where optional and non-core rules were being excluded from it.

They weren't. Until Max demanded I exclude them for including them in my point.

This however, never seems to prevent monsters from having a plethora of defensive abilities in order to prevent players from killing them quickly, of course.

Yeah, this was another thing I was considering recently. You never see monsters spending their turns healing other monsters. Or if you do, it is incredibly rare. I was recently thinking about a fight for my players where I would do this, and wondering if they'd call me a cheater for bringing back "dead" monsters who were actually just dying and could be healed.

As much as it would be nice to reexamine the entire paradigm, I highly doubt that anything like that will come from WotC. And, to my dismay, I must admit there is probably a good reason why it works the way it does now.

If casting big heals was optimal, characters who could cast them would feel pressure to do so, and we'd be right back to AD&D, where all your first level spells had to be "cure light wounds" and you'd never be able to cast anything more interesting.

Which was a miserable experience, so if the current state of the game is a necessary evil in order to let people play Clerics, Bards, and Druids and have more options than be walking band-aid dispensers, then so be it, I guess.

Now, I will agree with this. But this is actually where the idea of the party resources DOES come into play. If there are multiple sources of healing, then even if the cleric or druid does amazing healing, this isn't all they have to do.

But right now, I think we've swung too far the other way, where players rarely use healing abilities unless they don't understand the game math. The most I ever saw Cure Wounds used was a cleric and a druid who kept casting it on each other in the middle of a combat. And, as the DM, I wanted to scream at them, because they weren't recovering more than I was dishing out, and they were just wasting spell slots and their turns, forcing the rest of the party to pick up the slack. But they just frankly did not understand the math and assumed that the Cure Wounds spell was a viable choice to use every round after getting hit. And I know they didn't understand it, because they were shocked to realize they were running low on hp after the fight.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't have numbers? Where did all my numbers come from then? I mean, sure, I felt something was off. Then I looked at the numbers. Then I checked with other people and sought other opinions, then I looked at the numbers AGAIN... I mean, I'm no paid researcher, but I really think declaring I'm basing everything off feelings when I'm showing my work is pretty lazy for a counter-argument. Especially for someone who hasn't done more than just shout I'm wrong without backing it up.

Oka then, show us WotC's secret balance numbers that you have access to and are using to base your complaint on.

And you keep asserting that I need to consider the entire party... but refuse to acknowledge that you can't predict an entire party.

There's a reason I say that balance is a range. You'd know that if you listened to understand instead of listening to respond.

I am comparing the majority of the abilities together. Damage, spells, hp, AC, class abilities. Sure, I haven't listed every single thing in a 20 page report, but I certainly have done more than compare a scaling healing to a 6th level spell. Which I did because you claimed that the damage mitigation abilities of ANY two parties would be the same. Fighters get heavy armor, so do clerics, fighter damage, cleric damage, fighter ability to restore hp, cleric ability to restore hp. What more should I list for you to demonstrate that the fighter has less damage mitigation?

Mitigation is one piece of the puzzle, which is your failure. You don't seem to grasp that these abilities are part of a whole and the whole of not only the PC, but the whole party over the entire adventuring day is what the game is balanced around.

Why would they need to use them during the adventuring day? Is the DM forcing them to use spells against their will? After all, it isn't like clerics have a massive amount of utility that they are required to use.

Maybe you haven't played the game before and don't understand that utility spells get used during the day.

And if the Clerics absolutely MUST use their spells to overcome the utility challenges of the adventuring day... aren't the fighter's just stuck and unable to progress? I mean, they get zero spells for utility. And if they are facing the same challenges... then the clerics don't need their spells for utility.

They're going to use them. As for fighters and utility, perhaps you missed in all your ignoring of what I have been saying that fighters need help in the other two pillars.

Yes, you have accurately noted the usage of resources. Good job. Now tell me why I should care about this theoretical utility that you are making up? Especially since they still have many spell slots.

Many? You have literally used up every 2nd to 5th level slot for your combat damage. They only have four 1st level spells and one 6th level spell for those "many" slots.

I asked "Is that really balanced" and you said "Yes". You said it was balanced. Now suddenly, after I demonstrate the reality of that, you claim that it is unfair to not give the fighter's feats, and I can't use non-PHB materials and and and.... funny how quickly "Yes!" turned into "Wait, no, you can't do that." Maybe you should have either read a bit more closely, or considered your answer more.

You haven't demonstrated any such thing. You incorrectly used more slots than clerics have to attack in every combat, while at the same time using those same slots for healing, and ignoring the fact that clerics will use spells for utility. 1+1 doesn't equal 7. You don't get to use more slots than you have.

Team Cleric has each cleric start with 4 first level spells, 3 second level, 3 third level, 3 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level.

If they cast Spiritual Weapon at 4th and Spirit Guardians at 3rd, three times each, then they have 4 first level spells, 3 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level spell.

Then, if they cast Spiritual Weapon three times at 2nd, then they have 4 first level spells, 0 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 1 sixth level spell.

Then, if they cast Heal as a 6th level, each member has 4 first level spells, 0 second level, 0 third level, 0 fourth level, 2 fifth level, and 0 sixth level spells.

Oh, so now your statement that they used their 5th level spells in the 7th fight is false? And what about an 8th? And the utility that will be used despite your protestations?

Oh, and only having heal available is going to be death for those clerics. The way combats work they will be brought low or knocked out in multiple encounters. More often than 4 heal spells can handle.

 

[Maxperson]

They weren't. Until Max demanded I exclude them for including them in my point.

You excluded feats which are the same as non-core rules. Either optional rules are usable or they aren't. You don't get to use some optional rules and then exclude the other side from also using them.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It does scale very well. I'd have to get to using it to determine whether or not the static area and clumping is as bad as I fear I guess.

Just to clarify, I would allow the caster to move the spirit as a bonus action. Probably I''d tie that heal to the bonus action as well, now that twf as a bonus action is probably gone.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Just to clarify, I would allow the caster to move the spirit as a bonus action. Probably I''d tie that heal to the bonus action as well, now that twf as a bonus action is probably gone.

Good point

 

[Chaosmancer]

Oka then, show us WotC's secret balance numbers that you have access to and are using to base your complaint on.

Why would they have secret balance numbers instead of the numbers out in the open in the books? They've flat told us what they expect for the damage of a monster based on its CR, and we can trivially see the player information. There is nothing hidden here, so you don't need "secret balance numbers" at all. This is just a blatant attempt to pretend like I have nothing but feelings, while ignoring the numbers I've been using.

There's a reason I say that balance is a range. You'd know that if you listened to understand instead of listening to respond.

So, how big of a range? What kind of factors go into this range that you clearly have access to and knowledge of? Can you provide evidence instead of just making assertions as though they were facts.

Mitigation is one piece of the puzzle, which is your failure. You don't seem to grasp that these abilities are part of a whole and the whole of not only the PC, but the whole party over the entire adventuring day is what the game is balanced around.

What abilities? I've talked HP, mitigation, Healing, AC, Damage... again, instead of just saying that I'm only looking at "one piece" why don't you actually tell me what you think I'm missing.

Because right now, I've covered the VAST majority of the things that could possibly be factors, but you keep saying that I'm only looking at one thing and ignoring everything else. And since you aren't giving any example, I'm left wondering if this is just theater because you don't have an actual point to argue against me with.

Maybe you haven't played the game before and don't understand that utility spells get used during the day.

Ad Hominen's won't help you. Especially for such a weak position.

They're going to use them. As for fighters and utility, perhaps you missed in all your ignoring of what I have been saying that fighters need help in the other two pillars.

So, here is an interesting point. The Fighters are going to lag... as in they can't solve the challenges. So, are you imagining that these two teams are facing two different sets of challenges, to force the clerics to use spells while also allowing Fighters to actually progress through the day?

And, what are they going to use? Which Utility spells are these clerics using? "Some of them?" That isn't an answer. It is just yet another vague assertion. I'm not going to recant my assertions just because you make vague unsubstantiated claims.

Many? You have literally used up every 2nd to 5th level slot for your combat damage. They only have four 1st level spells and one 6th level spell for those "many" slots.

Wrong. Four 1st, two 5th and one 6th. Why do you keep having so much trouble keeping track of this? It really shows a lack of care that I have had to constantly correct you on what I've been saying.

You haven't demonstrated any such thing. You incorrectly used more slots than clerics have to attack in every combat, while at the same time using those same slots for healing, and ignoring the fact that clerics will use spells for utility. 1+1 doesn't equal 7. You don't get to use more slots than you have.

In order.

Yes I did.
No I didn't use more slots than clerics have.
No, I've only used a single slot from each character for healing.
No, I haven't been ignoring utility. I've been asking you what utility they are being required to use. You have refused to answer and instead insisted I don't play DnD.
You are correct, 1+1 = 2. And 4+3+3+3+2+1-3-3-3 = 7
Again, I've never used more slots than were had. You just seem to have a hard time counting, which is why I explained it below. You'd think that would have you take back this part of your post where you just demonstrate your inability to follow along.

Oh, so now your statement that they used their 5th level spells in the 7th fight is false?

I never made that assertion. I never followed the damage into the 7th fight, simply noting that by the time they reach the 7th fight they still have two 5th level spell slots, if we wanted to continue,.

And what about an 8th?

I never did the 8th fight, beyond noting that it would take until the 8th fight for the Fighter to have as much healing. I figured demonstrating they were behind on damage for 6 fights out of the day was sufficient.

And the utility that will be used despite your protestations?

Despite my asking for clarification on what utility you think a cleric will be using in this scenario, you have never once stated any. I am not protesting the use of utility spells, I'm asking what scenarios do you think that Team Fighter could solve without spells, that Team Cleric would be forced to use spells to solve.

Since we have reached the end of your post, and you never answered this, allow me to posit something. You claimed that every party was balanced, against every party, by looking at all party resources. You claim this to be true, despite any build differences. Now then, are you aware that some people want to play blasters? That a cleric might load up on damage and healing spells, and not prepare any utility spells? Are you also aware that I have only stated three leveled spells (Spiritual Weapon, Spirit Guardians, Heal) and that the cleric can prepare approximately 14 spells at 11th level, meaning there are 11 other spells they could prepare... which could be ritual spells that do not require a spell slot? Are you also aware that clerics can have more than one cantrip, and since I have only used a cantrip that would not come from the class that there are a potential 5 cantrips that could be referenced that I have not considered yet. Additionally, clerics have skills, and skills could have utility uses, it is sort of their entire thing.

So, beyond not all players wanting to play a utility character, we have ritual utility spells, and cantrips, and skills... all of which can cover any challenge that we can assume fighter's can cover with skills, since this cleric group has FAR more options than the fighters for utility. Which is strange, since that is while playing damage dealers that could potentially out-damage the fighters. And having comparable Hp, and the same AC.

Oh, and only having heal available is going to be death for those clerics. The way combats work they will be brought low or knocked out in multiple encounters. More often than 4 heal spells can handle.

Would they? Can you demonstrate this, or is this just another instance of "trust me, I'm right"? Because it seems to completely ignore those Hit Dice. I didn't mention them, but that's because I was accounting for class resources, and both groups were taking short rests, and therefore getting Hit Dice usage. I didn't think I needed to state them, because they would be obvious. Of course, now that I have been show repeatedly you can't count spell slots, I'm really far less certain.

You excluded feats which are the same as non-core rules. Either optional rules are usable or they aren't. You don't get to use some optional rules and then exclude the other side from also using them.

No. I excluded feats for the Fighters specifically. You claimed, again, that parties were balanced based on resources at the party level. That two disparate parties with completely different abilities and resources and builds are in fact balanced against each other. The Fighter's all took ASI's and have much higher stats, as demonstrated in the numbers. Or, are you going to claim that ASIs are not balanced vs feats? Funny, since again, when I asked the question:

"Because if you take the correct combination of abilities, the clerics can deal 3d8+2d8+wis+4d8+wis every round for a fight, while still having the Heal spells, so is that really balanced against 4 fighters with no feats? "

You said "Yes".

So, were you wrong before, or did you just not understand the question. Again.

 

[Maxperson]

Why would they have secret balance numbers instead of the numbers out in the open in the books?

They design based around their formula, not the DMG guidelines.

So, how big of a range? What kind of factors go into this range that you clearly have access to and knowledge of?

You need to ask WotC and see if they will share it with you. I don't work for them and probably couldn't share due to an NDA if I did.

What abilities? I've talked HP, mitigation, Healing, AC, Damage... again, instead of just saying that I'm only looking at "one piece" why don't you actually tell me what you think I'm missing.

Everything from Action Surge to fast movement to save or suck to portent. It all makes a difference and factors in. A single spell doing less healing than you want it to doesn't mean that it's underpowered.

So, here is an interesting point. The Fighters are going to lag... as in they can't solve the challenges. So, are you imagining that these two teams are facing two different sets of challenges, to force the clerics to use spells while also allowing Fighters to actually progress through the day?

They will lag outside of the combat pillar, yes.

And, what are they going to use? Which Utility spells are these clerics using? "Some of them?" That isn't an answer. It is just yet another vague assertion. I'm not going to recant my assertions just because you make vague unsubstantiated claims.

Really? You need me to read you the utility spells clerics get? And I already listed 3 or 4 several posts ago. Didn't you read those?

Wrong. Four 1st, two 5th and one 6th. Why do you keep having so much trouble keeping track of this? It really shows a lack of care that I have had to constantly correct you on what I've been saying.

You used your 5th level slots in one of the fights according to your posts. Those are no longer available.

No I didn't use more slots than clerics have.

You did if you didn't factor in utility.

No, I've only used a single slot from each character for healing.

You do know that most combats see combatants go unconscious or very low in hit points, right. Often multiples. If you only have 1 slot for each cleric, they're going to TPK. They aren't as durable as fighters.

I never made that assertion. I never followed the damage into the 7th fight, simply noting that by the time they reach the 7th fight they still have two 5th level spell slots, if we wanted to continue,.

So either they use them, or they die because 4 PCs using only cantrips or maybe 1st level spells aren't going to fare well against an 11th level encounter.

I never did the 8th fight, beyond noting that it would take until the 8th fight for the Fighter to have as much healing. I figured demonstrating they were behind on damage for 6 fights out of the day was sufficient.

So you just arbitrarily announced fighter damage? Which subclass did you use? I'm guessing you went with the Champion, which is the weakest.

Despite my asking for clarification on what utility you think a cleric will be using in this scenario, you have never once stated any. I am not protesting the use of utility spells, I'm asking what scenarios do you think that Team Fighter could solve without spells, that Team Cleric would be forced to use spells to solve.

This is a Red Herring. Fighters don't have to be able to solve them. Clerics WILL use them regardless of what another group might have done or not done.

So, beyond not all players wanting to play a utility character, we have ritual utility spells, and cantrips, and skills... all of which can cover any challenge that we can assume fighter's can cover with skills, since this cleric group has FAR more options than the fighters for utility. Which is strange, since that is while playing damage dealers that could potentially out-damage the fighters. And having comparable Hp, and the same AC.

They don't have comparable HP. They will be behind due to the fighter's larger hit dice and greater average con.

Would they? Can you demonstrate this, or is this just another instance of "trust me, I'm right"? Because it seems to completely ignore those Hit Dice. I didn't mention them, but that's because I was accounting for class resources, and both groups were taking short rests, and therefore getting Hit Dice usage. I didn't think I needed to state them, because they would be obvious. Of course, now that I have been show repeatedly you can't count spell slots, I'm really far less certain.

I have years of game play where monsters dish out lots of damage in every fight. Heal is one use. Since it doesn't carry over and you have 4 clerics who will need healing in most fights, 4 heal spells aren't going to be that good.

No. I excluded feats for the Fighters specifically. You claimed, again, that parties were balanced based on resources at the party level. That two disparate parties with completely different abilities and resources and builds are in fact balanced against each other. The Fighter's all took ASI's and have much higher stats, as demonstrated in the numbers. Or, are you going to claim that ASIs are not balanced vs feats? Funny, since again, when I asked the question:

No. If you can use optional rules from other books, fighters can use optional feats instead of wasting ASIs on stats that they don't need.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Jeremy Crawford just admitted, that the fighters should have abilities that help them deal the damage which are currently available as feats.
So comparing anything to the fighter who does not use feats seems not fair.

 

[James Gasik]

Jeremy Crawford just admitted, that the fighters should have abilities that help them deal the damage which are currently available as feats.
So comparing anything to the fighter who does not use feats seems not fair.

It's kind of strange though- up until the playtest, Feats were optional and not every game used them. So does this mean that not using Feats made the game unbalanced?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It's kind of strange though- up until the playtest, Feats were optional and not every game used them. So does this mean that not using Feats made the game unbalanced?

Probably yes. Not totally but a bit. It always felt that the fighter got shortchanged then.
I hope that Crawford lets deeds follow his words and design powerful abilities for the warrior group.

Edit: Also, feats are still optional mostly.
Only first level feats seem mandatory.

 

[mellored]

It's kind of strange though- up until the playtest, Feats were optional and not every game used them. So does this mean that not using Feats made the game unbalanced?

Getting +2 to your attack stat, and +2 to Con or Dex is just as strong as most feats.

But once you max those, getting +2 to your third favorite stat doesn't match a feat.
And for fighters in particular, they can max faster.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They design based around their formula, not the DMG guidelines.

Where do you think the DMG guidelines for designing things for 5e CAME from? Do you think they designed stuff, had a formula that was balanced, then gave DMs a DIFFERENT formula for designing stuff? That isn't incompetent, that is flat-out malicious.

You need to ask WotC and see if they will share it with you. I don't work for them and probably couldn't share due to an NDA if I did.

AKA, I have no idea, yet I am asserting it as an undeniable fact but cannot even give you any guidance on what I am saying means.

Everything from Action Surge to fast movement to save or suck to portent. It all makes a difference and factors in. A single spell doing less healing than you want it to doesn't mean that it's underpowered.

Clerics and fighters don't have fast movement or portent. I'm not considering any save or suck spells either.

Now, Action Surge I did not calculate in. It is possible that could push the damage up before the 6th fight. I'm not sure exactly how one extra round of combat would work out, but it could be half a combat by fight number 6. I hadn't considered short rests when I was at that initial point, and I didn't go back to cover it after I talked about short rests, figuring we could cover it later.

And yet.. I've been struggling even to get you to understand the spell usage, so I never went back to Action Surge.

Also, do you realize that if I can't look at a spell and figure if it is underpowered, no one can look at a spell and determine if it is OVERpowered either, right? Any time you've looked at something and said it is too powerful, you've done exactly what I'm doing here. And I know you have discussed balance before, without taking this stance of it being impossible to determine balance.

They will lag outside of the combat pillar, yes.

Lag how? What is going on outside of the combat pillar that they will lag in doing in this example? If they are able to proceed while lagging, then there is no reason to assume the cleric's can't as well.

Really? You need me to read you the utility spells clerics get? And I already listed 3 or 4 several posts ago. Didn't you read those?

Of course I know what spells they get, but that isn't the point. Sure, They get Water Breathing, do you need water breathing in a dungeon crawl? The answer is "sometimes" but they can also swim for 2 to 3 minutes, meaning that you'd need them to have to cover over 600 ft of distance for that to even be a concern. Augury? Augury is nice, but not nessecary. Not casting Augury is just not asking the DM if you are about to make a bad decision. Or maybe Purify Food and Drink, setting aside that they have the 1st level slots to do so, they are also seemingly in a dungeon crawl, and so that is far less likely to be needed.

What you seem to be doing is conflating the fact that they HAVE utility spells with this idea that they are REQUIRED to use them. Which is false. Just because they have access to those spells, does not mean they are required to utilize them in any given day.

You used your 5th level slots in one of the fights according to your posts. Those are no longer available.

No I did not.

You did if you didn't factor in utility.

No I would not, because you haven't established any need for utility.

You do know that most combats see combatants go unconscious or very low in hit points, right. Often multiples. If you only have 1 slot for each cleric, they're going to TPK. They aren't as durable as fighters.

No, most fights do not see that. If you are dropping people to 0 hp every single fight, you have warped things. If you would like to prove that you aren't, provide evidence, not just empty assertions.

So either they use them, or they die because 4 PCs using only cantrips or maybe 1st level spells aren't going to fare well against an 11th level encounter.

Who says? They might do very well against a level 11 encounter. Or maybe in fight number 7 they do decide to use them, but either way I didn't cover fight number 7, so your accusations are still false.

So you just arbitrarily announced fighter damage? Which subclass did you use? I'm guessing you went with the Champion, which is the weakest.

Really? How do you know the Champion is the weakest? You have to account for all resources of the party, and the range of balance, so how are you determining the champion is underpowered?

And I did not arbitrarily announce the damage, I went sword and board, to mirror the cleric having a shield for matching AC. one-handed martial weapons are 1d8, which is where my numbers came from.

This is a Red Herring. Fighters don't have to be able to solve them. Clerics WILL use them regardless of what another group might have done or not done.

Why? Did they all sign a compact declaring they will use utility spells even if not neccessary so that Maxperson's claims of balance would be true? You keep asserting this opinion like it is a fact, but it is not a fact. The Clerics may choose NOT to use any utility spells. Nothing says they are required to prepare them, and nothing says they are required to cast them, and nothing says they are required to cast them with spell slots instead of as rituals.

They don't have comparable HP. They will be behind due to the fighter's larger hit dice and greater average con.

Behind yes, but that doesn't make them incomparable.

I have years of game play where monsters dish out lots of damage in every fight. Heal is one use. Since it doesn't carry over and you have 4 clerics who will need healing in most fights, 4 heal spells aren't going to be that good.

So, you are saying that Heal isn't sufficient healing for the amount of damage the monsters will be dishing out? Based only on your "years of game play"?

So, you would be saying that ~85 hp, plus the 70 from heal will not be enough to get through two fights and use HD? I'm making sure I understand your claim here, since you are just stating things and not backing it up beyond "I have experience"

No. If you can use optional rules from other books, fighters can use optional feats instead of wasting ASIs on stats that they don't need.

So, you are saying that the two parties are not balanced against each other?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Jeremy Crawford just admitted, that the fighters should have abilities that help them deal the damage which are currently available as feats.
So comparing anything to the fighter who does not use feats seems not fair.

If Max had said at the beginning that a team with feats compared to a team without them was unfair, I would have potentially given feats. He did not. He said that they were balanced, because Fighters could go for longer. It is the classic argument that martials being able to "go all day" is how they are balanced.

Kind of difficult to accept that the premise is unfair over halfway through the discussion, once he realized that the numbers were against him.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Getting +2 to your attack stat, and +2 to Con or Dex is just as strong as most feats.

But once you max those, getting +2 to your third favorite stat doesn't match a feat.
And for fighters in particular, they can max faster.

And for this scenario, Fighters are only level 11. That is only three feats I think (I'd have to check if they got one at 10th)

So, it is possible they are only just reaching the 20 in both strength and con

 

[Maxperson]

Where do you think the DMG guidelines for designing things for 5e CAME from? Do you think they designed stuff, had a formula that was balanced, then gave DMs a DIFFERENT formula for designing stuff? That isn't incompetent, that is flat-out malicious.

Those design things don't include the hidden math. They just all fit. You could not for instance, complete invent a new ability and rate it without having a very good chance of getting it wrong. They would be very unlikely to get it wrong, because they have the hidden stuff.

Clerics and fighters don't have fast movement or portent.

Fine. Since you want to be pedantic about it. Clerics have channel divinity and domain abilities. Fighters have fighting styles, feats(since you insist on optional rules being usable), indomitable, etc.

I'm not considering any save or suck spells either.

Why not? Clerics have those.

Now, Action Surge I did not calculate in. It is possible that could push the damage up before the 6th fight. I'm not sure exactly how one extra round of combat would work out, but it could be half a combat by fight number 6. I hadn't considered short rests when I was at that initial point, and I didn't go back to cover it after I talked about short rests, figuring we could cover it later.

3 action surges, since it's not hard to have at least 2 short rests.

Also, do you realize that if I can't look at a spell and figure if it is underpowered, no one can look at a spell and determine if it is OVERpowered either, right? Any time you've looked at something and said it is too powerful, you've done exactly what I'm doing here. And I know you have discussed balance before, without taking this stance of it being impossible to determine balance.

If I've said something is too powerful, that's purely my opinion about how it works in my game. Not a fact. And people here have said that it works just fine and isn't overpowered in their games.

Having the opinion is fine. Change the healing spell for your game and be done with it, just like I nerf or ban things I think are too powerful or disrupt the campaign.

Lag how? What is going on outside of the combat pillar that they will lag in doing in this example? If they are able to proceed while lagging, then there is no reason to assume the cleric's can't as well.

That's horribly wrong. Just because you can suffer through something, taking lots of damage or having to go around obstacles, doesn't mean that clerics who can avoid issues aren't better at it.

I'll let you look at some of the fighter threads to see exactly how they lag in social and exploration.

Of course I know what spells they get, but that isn't the point. Sure, They get Water Breathing, do you need water breathing in a dungeon crawl? The answer is "sometimes" but they can also swim for 2 to 3 minutes, meaning that you'd need them to have to cover over 600 ft of distance for that to even be a concern. Augury? Augury is nice, but not nessecary. Not casting Augury is just not asking the DM if you are about to make a bad decision. Or maybe Purify Food and Drink, setting aside that they have the 1st level slots to do so, they are also seemingly in a dungeon crawl, and so that is far less likely to be needed.

What you seem to be doing is conflating the fact that they HAVE utility spells with this idea that they are REQUIRED to use them. Which is false. Just because they have access to those spells, does not mean they are required to utilize them in any given day.

No. I'm saying that some will be used, not that they are required. That's how players work. If there's a problem and they have a utility spell that will solve it, it will almost always be cast.

No, most fights do not see that. If you are dropping people to 0 hp every single fight, you have warped things. If you would like to prove that you aren't, provide evidence, not just empty assertions.

I love how you ignores the "or" portion of that statement in order to twist my words into "dropping people to 0 hp every single fight."

Really? How do you know the Champion is the weakest? You have to account for all resources of the party, and the range of balance, so how are you determining the champion is underpowered?

The champion is not underpowered. It is the weakest of the fighter classes. Battle Masters have more battle utility through their maneuvers and also deal more damage. I find it convenient that you went out of your way to say no feats and use the weakest fighter in order to try and show that clerics are better, and you didn't even really manage to do that.

And I did not arbitrarily announce the damage, I went sword and board, to mirror the cleric having a shield for matching AC. one-handed martial weapons are 1d8, which is where my numbers came from.

You don't need matching AC. The fighter is better off with a two handed weapon and great weapon master.

Behind yes, but that doesn't make them incomparable.

Behind by at least 22 hit points is not comparable.

So, you are saying that Heal isn't sufficient healing for the amount of damage the monsters will be dishing out? Based only on your "years of game play"?

It only helps in one fight out of the 6-8 for the adventuring day. Then they die.

So, you are saying that the two parties are not balanced against each other?

I'm saying that if you get to use optional rules for the clerics, the fighters get to as well.