D&D 5E Desired Spell Changes

[Squidmaster]

Moving spells up in level in general makes a lot of sense to me. To take my own example, invisibility is a spell that is fairly iconic to the idea of wizardry. I don't feel like it has to be removed or completely declawed, but I do think that it is unreasonable to assume that it has to be available to hedge wizards and low level adventurers.

By moving invisibility up a few levels, the odds are greatly improved that the spell will be used in more epic situations, possibly against villains who have more creative means of dealing with the problem.

If the current spell progression chart holds up, increasing spells in level also greatly reduces the amount of times they can be used per day.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Invisibility is one of those effects that has always bugged me. It's so obviously high-powered that the basic version of it dissipates when you attack, which screams of being a metagame limitation. I'd much prefer there simply be one invisibility spell that was placed appropriately.

 

[Squidmaster]

That makes a lot of sense to me, Jeff. What if invisibility required and opposed check of some kind, or even a saving throw?

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

That makes a lot of sense to me, Jeff. What if invisibility required and opposed check of some kind, or even a saving throw?

I'm not sure what you mean. Being invisible doesn't mean a perception check can't detect you, though it does make it much harder. It only means they can't see you. Hearing, smell, and any movement you might cause can still give you away.

 

[Lackhand]

iI've often thought that a hedge magician's invisibility is already reasonably well placed at second level, it's just been inexplicably named Blur.

It's a short term, one encounter buff that grants concealment by making it hard to concentrate on you. hold still, stick to shadows, and you've got a decent invisibility effect to tide you over until you can afford Improved Invisibility.

It doesn't have the advantage of being true unseeability, just very-hard-to-seeability, but I prefer that as a DM anyway.

 

[Nymrohd]

Invisibility is really strong against proper circumstances, useless against others. A simple door can make that spell pointless.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Power Word Kill: This spell is pitifully weak for a 9th level spell. The HP threshold mechanic is terrible and needs to go. The problem is, if the target has the right number of hp, it dies with no save, and I hate things that kill instantly without a save. On the other hand, if the target has too many HP (which is very likely at that level), the spell does absolutely nothing. They should just make the spell do a lot of necrotic damage.
.

The point of that mechanic is that the designers want this (and some other spells) to be dramatic 'finish him' spells, rather than potent opening spells.

Personally, I'm OK with that.

 

[Falling Icicle]

The point of that mechanic is that the designers want this (and some other spells) to be dramatic 'finish him' spells, rather than potent opening spells.

Personally, I'm OK with that.

Even as a "finish him" effect, this mechanic is still problematic. How are players supposed to know when someone is at a certain number of HP? Either they have to guess (and risk wasting the spell, to no effect), or they have to resort to metagame knowledge, such as looking in the bestiary to see how many HP a creature has and keeping track of the damage it has taken. I don't think either of those are good things. IMO, there are other, much better ways to design "finish him" type spells. For example, a spell could give the creature disadvantage on its save if it's below half hp.

The other problem with PWK is that other spells are capable of doing more damage, and they don't have to worry about how many hp a creature has. So they are just as good as a "finish him" type spell, but they are also capable of weakening the monster if the damage isn't enough to outright kill it. Disintegrate, for example, does 60 damage on average, and that's a 6th level spell, not 9th! I would use that any day over PWK, unless I happened to know the creature's true name.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Even as a "finish him" effect, this mechanic is still problematic. How are players supposed to know when someone is at a certain number of HP? Either they have to guess (and risk wasting the spell, to no effect), or they have to resort to metagame knowledge, such as looking in the bestiary to see how many HP a creature has and keeping track of the damage it has taken. I don't think either of those are good things. IMO, there are other, much better ways to design "finish him" type spells. For example, a spell could give the creature disadvantage on its save if it's below half hp.

The other problem with PWK is that other spells are capable of doing more damage, and they don't have to worry about how many hp a creature has. So they are just as good as a "finish him" type spell, but they are also capable of weakening the monster if the damage isn't enough to outright kill it. Disintegrate, for example, does 60 damage on average, and that's a 6th level spell, not 9th! I would use that any day over PWK, unless I happened to know the creature's true name.

I don't entirely agree or disagree with you. These are valid points.

In general, I like the idea of a finishing move spell. A hit point threshold seems appropriate for this, but it should always be rolled, just like damage. Some spells already do this. There should be uncertainty if the effect is going to work, even if you know the target's HP value.

In every game I've played in, it's acceptable to ask, "how is he looking?" in regard to an enemy. Depending on the DM's answer, you can consider if it's worth trying a finishing spell.

All of that said, I like the idea you presented that the target gains disadvantage on a saving throw if they're below a threshold. I could see that applied to all kinds of spells.

 

[Rhenny]

Even as a "finish him" effect, this mechanic is still problematic. How are players supposed to know when someone is at a certain number of HP? Either they have to guess (and risk wasting the spell, to no effect), or they have to resort to metagame knowledge, such as looking in the bestiary to see how many HP a creature has and keeping track of the damage it has taken. I don't think either of those are good things. IMO, there are other, much better ways to design "finish him" type spells. For example, a spell could give the creature disadvantage on its save if it's below half hp.

The other problem with PWK is that other spells are capable of doing more damage, and they don't have to worry about how many hp a creature has. So they are just as good as a "finish him" type spell, but they are also capable of weakening the monster if the damage isn't enough to outright kill it. Disintegrate, for example, does 60 damage on average, and that's a 6th level spell, not 9th! I would use that any day over PWK, unless I happened to know the creature's true name.

I agree with you. I'd much rather have instant kill spells like power word kill, death spell, etc. have a two tiered saving throw mechanic. The target should make two saving throws. If both save, the spell does nothing. If one saves, the spell does 1d6 per spell level of damage. If both saves are failed, instant death. I like the "wow" of powerful spells, but I also want to keep some balance in the game.

Either that, or they could use the "bloodied" condition in 5e, and make spells that only work if a foe is "bloodied". Then at least, the caster could see if the foe is ripe for a killing blow.