Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8236389" data-attributes="member: 93670">I updated the list of cruddy spells with &quot;utility&quot; spells<a href="https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/flame-blade" target="_blank">fame blade</a> is listed as type:damage&nbsp; (right <a href="https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-class=0&amp;filter-search=&amp;filter-tags=5&amp;page=4" target="_blank">here</a>) and I haven't gotten to those yet.&nbsp; Damage spells is an area that very much deserves scorn but I've had some family visiting since getting done with spells listed as buffs and will probably do ones listed as&nbsp; debuffs or control spells next.&nbsp; The problem with damage spells is that the math of 5e is so incredibly bonkers that it's hard to do the equivalent of saying the sky is blue &amp; not sound like a crazy person.&nbsp; For example, did you know that a fighter with a shield &amp; starting dagger will outdamage the d12 cantrip toll the dead with moderate investment into strength or dex?[spoiler=&quot;yes it will&quot;][ATTACH=full]134943[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]134944[/ATTACH][/spoiler]It gets even worse if you look at dps powerhouse builds like longsword &amp; shield[spoiler=&quot;no really&quot;][ATTACH=full]134950[/ATTACH][/spoiler]So as to damage spells, I'm not even sure how to judge them yet when something like a greataxe &amp; gwm with moderate investment in strength will provide an at will damage that will meet or drastically exceed the output of leveled spells while so many nondamage spells are written as if 5e has hardcore&nbsp; extreme linear fighter quadratic wizard damage scaling they need to resist.[spoiler=&quot;starting greataxe &amp; GWM&quot;][ATTACH=full]134951[/ATTACH][/spoiler]My guess is that a big part of the problem stems from this assumption from dmg249 being always applied as an absurd multiplier for any aoe/multitarget spell&nbsp; without enough consideration to the fact that it's A: a lot more monsters than many encounters will have &amp; B: even if you could credibly claim that every single encounter was&nbsp; wall to wall baddies like some kind of TWD zombie hoard it still runs into the problem that the baddies are not usually going to politely line up in the properly arranged clusters needed for those multipliers to work[spoiler=&quot;adjudicating areas of effect&quot;][ATTACH=full]134956[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]134958[/ATTACH]The sheet for this can be copied <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jA9CbzXDJ2WNS7HdBHw_SA_eMegFSlLfm2KCGM1GUtM/edit?usp=sharing" target="_blank">here</a>[/spoiler]If you want to see me get to damage spells sooner it might help for folks to keep discussing how awful some of the lemons are&nbsp; like has been happening over the last couple pages as right now I'm still undecided how to judge them</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 8236389, member: 93670"] [CENTER][B][SIZE=7]I updated the list of cruddy spells with "utility" spells[/SIZE][/B][/CENTER] [URL='https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/flame-blade'][B]fame blade[/B][/URL][B] is listed as type:damage [/B][I][SIZE=1](right [URL='https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-class=0&filter-search=&filter-tags=5&page=4']here[/URL])[/SIZE][/I] and I haven't gotten to those yet. Damage spells is an area that very much deserves scorn but I've had some family visiting since getting done with spells listed as buffs and will probably do ones listed as debuffs or control spells next. The problem with damage spells is that the math of 5e is so incredibly bonkers that it's hard to do the equivalent of saying the sky is blue & not sound like a crazy person. For example, did you know that a fighter with a shield & [B][U][I]starting dagger[/I][/U][/B] will outdamage the d12 cantrip toll the dead with moderate investment into strength or dex? [spoiler="yes it will"] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1617213189049.png"]134943[/ATTACH] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1617213207922.png"]134944[/ATTACH] [/spoiler] It gets even worse if you look at dps powerhouse builds like longsword & shield [spoiler="no really"] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1617214014516.png"]134950[/ATTACH] [/spoiler] So as to damage spells, I'm not even sure how to judge them yet when something like a greataxe & gwm with moderate investment in strength will provide an at will damage that will meet or drastically exceed the output of leveled spells while so many nondamage spells are written as if 5e has hardcore extreme linear fighter quadratic wizard damage scaling they need to resist. [spoiler="starting greataxe & GWM"] [ATTACH type="full" alt="1617214058928.png"]134951[/ATTACH] [/spoiler] My guess is that a big part of the problem stems from this assumption from dmg249 being [I]always[/I] applied as an absurd multiplier for any aoe/multitarget spell without enough consideration to the fact that it's A: a lot more monsters than many encounters will have & B: even if you could credibly claim that every single encounter was wall to wall baddies like some kind of TWD zombie hoard it still runs into the problem that the baddies are not usually going to politely line up in the properly arranged clusters needed for those multipliers to work [spoiler="adjudicating areas of effect"] [ATTACH type="full"]134956[/ATTACH] [ATTACH type="full"]134958[/ATTACH] The sheet for this can be copied [URL='https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jA9CbzXDJ2WNS7HdBHw_SA_eMegFSlLfm2KCGM1GUtM/edit?usp=sharing']here[/URL] [/spoiler] If you want to see me get to damage spells sooner it might help for folks to keep discussing how awful some of the lemons are like has been happening over the last couple pages as right now I'm still undecided how to judge them [/QUOTE]

Verification