D&D 5E Healing spirit has been updated?

[ad_hoc]

That's my point. Healing Spirit is so weird it feels like it was designed differently.

I guess I just see it differently.

Seems to me that they had an idea for a spell - summoning a spirit to heal people - and then used the existing mechanics for spells which have an effect in an area to model it.

The problem is that they didn't catch that those spells work because people don't want to go into the space.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Average damage 5 vs average damage 6.

On Average, both kill the target in a single hit. That seems non-signifigant.

Firebolt has a 40% chance of failing to kill a kobold in one hit, thus rendering your attack effectively wasted, since someone else will have to waste an attack to finish them off anyway. Other cantrips have an even higher failure rate. The crossbow only has a 25% chance of doing so. That's pretty significant.

And since the game has given us fewer opportunities to increase our base stats compared to older editions, I'd say that is a good thing.

We actually have more opportunities to increase our secondary stats, since the cap was put in place. After you reach Int 20, you still have mandatory stat increases that have to go somewhere. It would have been nice if there was something that could compete with Constitution.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Firebolt has a 40% chance of failing to kill a kobold in one hit, thus rendering your attack effectively wasted, since someone else will have to waste an attack to finish them off anyway. Other cantrips have an even higher failure rate. The crossbow only has a 25% chance of doing so. That's pretty significant.

Sure, if you want to look at it that way instead of the averages.

But, then let us look at accuracy, as written.

Crossbow without proficiency is +2, meaning you have a 50% chance of missing the kobold and doing 0 damage.

Cantrip has a +6, which is only a 30% chance of missing.

That is also highly signifigant. And giving proficiency only drops the crossbow to a 40% chance, still more likely to miss and waste your attack.

We actually have more opportunities to increase our secondary stats, since the cap was put in place. After you reach Int 20, you still have mandatory stat increases that have to go somewhere. It would have been nice if there was something that could compete with Constitution.

We use feats, so we actually rarely see anyone reach the cap. And, dex does compete with Con. Dex is initiative, stealth and AC for wizards. All of which is useful.

So again, I don't see your point.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

That is also highly significant. And giving proficiency only drops the crossbow to a 40% chance, still more likely to miss and waste your attack.

Wizards have been proficient with crossbows for twenty years. The likelihood of wasting your turn with a firebolt is (0.3)+(0.4)(0.7) = 58%. The likelihood of wasting your turn with a crossbow is (0.4)+(0.6)(0.25) = 55%.

Beyond that, failing to kill a kobold after you hit it is a feels-bad mechanic. Going through the whole process, and then rolling a 1 for damage, isn't fun. Like I said, some people argue. Using a crossbow isn't a miracle fix for wizards being bad with their at-will attacks, but it's far from a bad idea.

We use feats, so we actually rarely see anyone reach the cap. And, dex does compete with Con. Dex is initiative, stealth and AC for wizards. All of which is useful.

You're playing with feats, so that changes things.

In my experience, without adding any optional rules, most spellcasters will max out their casting stat first, and Constitution is a significantly higher priority than Dexterity after that point.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Wizards have been proficient with crossbows for twenty years. The likelihood of wasting your turn with a firebolt is (0.3)+(0.4)(0.7) = 58%. The likelihood of wasting your turn with a crossbow is (0.4)+(0.6)(0.25) = 55%.

Beyond that, failing to kill a kobold after you hit it is a feels-bad mechanic. Going through the whole process, and then rolling a 1 for damage, isn't fun. Like I said, some people argue. Using a crossbow isn't a miracle fix for wizards being bad with their at-will attacks, but it's far from a bad idea.

Huh, missed that they were proficient. It is such a small list.

And yeah, rolling a 1 for damage sucks. Even if you end up doing 8 damage on a rolled 1, it still sucks. There is no fixing that.

And if they are proficient... then what is the problem? They can use the crossbows, use them. I thought you were asking for them to be given proficiency.

You're playing with feats, so that changes things.

In my experience, without adding any optional rules, most spellcasters will max out their casting stat first, and Constitution is a significantly higher priority than Dexterity after that point.

Ok. That makes sense to me too. They want to focus on health and concentration before focusing on AC and initiative. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[fearsomepirate]

It removes the option of playing a high-Dex wizard or paladin, who makes up for having lower peak efficacy by raising their floor performance. It means that the right way to play a wizard is to maximize their Int, because that's all you ever need, instead of there being any trade-offs involved.

DEX adds to your AC and is one of the most common saving throws. We currently have a wizard who has high DEX and fairly low INT in my campaign. He went Mountain Dwarf and has 17 base AC (half plate). He's a lot harder to take down than the average Wizard.