D&D 5E Find the Path. What? Why is this a 6th level spell?

[Argyle King]

Does it work across planes?

Dora and Boots are randomly dumped onto a layer of the Abyss
"With this magic spell, I can find my way home!"

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I just want to point out that the reason other than power that 6th level spells are 6th level so they won't show up on bonus spell lists. Why keep this one off bonus spell lists? Who knows, maybe the warlock's patron or whoever the paladin swore an oath to doesn't want them to take the direct path....

 

[see]

This actually makes it much more sensible: it's an escape spell.

Yeah. Now, is the 5e version under-powered for 6th level?

Well, the upgrade Gary Gygax gave it between 1975 (Supplement I) and 1978 (PHB) indicates he thought so even back then. And the decline in megadungeons with subtly sloping corridors, rotating rooms, teleport squares, shifting walls, mazes, duplicate map sections, and similar "get the party lost" tricks since the 1980s is then a secondary decline in utility of the original "find the way out" function. And of course 5e's 5th-level spell teleportation circle can not just find the way out, but get you all the way out (barring various teleport-blocking shenanigans).

So if someone wanted to drop its level from 6th, I'd nod along. The teleportation circle comparison suggests a maximum level of 4th for the spell as written, to me. Similarly, if they wanted to add back the 1st-through-3.5 functionality (and just accepted that their game world never truly has a lost city from the perspective of clerics able to cast 6th-level spells), that works, too.

One can quite understand how the 5e writers wound up where they ended up (effectively the 0th edition function, and the every-previous-edition level), without agreeing that the destination they reached was the right one.

 

[Reynard]

(and just accepted that their game world never truly has a lost city from the perspective of clerics able to cast 6th-level spells)

A couple people have brought this up and I just wanted to address it as an aside:

The spells (or classes, or races, or whatever) in the PHB do NOT necessarily represent what is broadly a part of any particular world. It is just what the heroes/protagonists of the campaign may have access to. Why would a temple priest, even a high level one, ever have Find the Path? they wouldn't. They would have Improve Harvest and Marriage Ceremony and Consecrate Remains as spells. It is called the Player's Handbook for a reason. It seems really strange to me that folks want to model the wider world around the PHB -- that way lies madness.

 

[tetrasodium]

A couple people have brought this up and I just wanted to address it as an aside:

The spells (or classes, or races, or whatever) in the PHB do NOT necessarily represent what is broadly a part of any particular world. It is just what the heroes/protagonists of the campaign may have access to. Why would a temple priest, even a high level one, ever have Find the Path? they wouldn't. They would have Improve Harvest and Marriage Ceremony and Consecrate Remains as spells. It is called the Player's Handbook for a reason. It seems really strange to me that folks want to model the wider world around the PHB -- that way lies madness.

I think part of the reason that happens is that fr doesn't consider things like magewrights and how they cast their own spells or what those spells might look like. The npc/player split is never considered as a result

 

[Reynard]

I think part of the reason that happens is that fr doesn't consider things like magewrights and how they cast their own spells or what those spells might look like. The npc/player split is never considered as a result

Prior to 5E anyway, every edition has tried to codify the world outside the PCs. Remember the cloistered cleric? But generally I agree: D&D settings often try and identify important NPCs in the language of the PC options and I think that is a mistake overall. Either create different options, or don't stat the alchemist that sells tinctures on Brewery Street.

 

[Democratus]

A couple people have brought this up and I just wanted to address it as an aside:

The spells (or classes, or races, or whatever) in the PHB do NOT necessarily represent what is broadly a part of any particular world. It is just what the heroes/protagonists of the campaign may have access to. Why would a temple priest, even a high level one, ever have Find the Path? they wouldn't. They would have Improve Harvest and Marriage Ceremony and Consecrate Remains as spells. It is called the Player's Handbook for a reason. It seems really strange to me that folks want to model the wider world around the PHB -- that way lies madness.

Totally agreed. And I practice this in many of my campaign worlds.

Dugneon Crawl Classics has a great chart that shows how common characters with levels should be.

• 0th Level Characters are 95% of the world population
• 1st Level Characters are "Experts in their Field" (2 in 100)
• 2nd Level Characters are "Leader or master in a craft" (1 in 100)
• 3rd Level Characters are "Rare genius" (1 in 1,000)
• 5th Level Characters are "Once in a Generation" (1 in 10,000)

The tools available to the PCs are not widely available in the world. It is why they are the ones who are doing all the heroic stuff.

 

[Stalker0]

Totally agreed. And I practice this in many of my campaign worlds.

Dugneon Crawl Classics has a great chart that shows how common characters with levels should be.

• 0th Level Characters are 95% of the world population
• 1st Level Characters are "Experts in their Field" (2 in 100)
• 2nd Level Characters are "Leader or master in a craft" (1 in 100)
• 3rd Level Characters are "Rare genius" (1 in 1,000)
• 5th Level Characters are "Once in a Generation" (1 in 10,000)

The tools available to the PCs are not widely available in the world. It is why they are the ones who are doing all the heroic stuff.

nice chart, when was that made? I had taken a stab at level demographics some time ago, and it’s always a tricky business.

 

[Democratus]

nice chart, when was that made? I had taken a stab at level demographics some time ago, and it’s always a tricky business.

DCC is a fairly recent game. It's still in print and I would highly recommend it.

I've always had fun trying to figure out demographics for my game worlds. Is a wizard who can cast fireball as common as a general practicioner or as rare as a brain surgeon? The answer to this will have a huge effect on how the PCs are viewed and the kind of challenges they will face within civilization.

 

[Reynard]

Totally agreed. And I practice this in many of my campaign worlds.

Dugneon Crawl Classics has a great chart that shows how common characters with levels should be.

• 0th Level Characters are 95% of the world population
• 1st Level Characters are "Experts in their Field" (2 in 100)
• 2nd Level Characters are "Leader or master in a craft" (1 in 100)
• 3rd Level Characters are "Rare genius" (1 in 1,000)
• 5th Level Characters are "Once in a Generation" (1 in 10,000)

The tools available to the PCs are not widely available in the world. It is why they are the ones who are doing all the heroic stuff.

That's only half of it, though. There should be lots of fantastical things in the world that the PCs don't have access to -- magic meant for farming, ruling and worshipping.