D&D (2024) How to balance the shield spell?

[Valetudo]

Actually I think 5e casters get less spells than earlier editions. Now how they cast rituals for basically nothing might be a problem. The truth is high level casters need some low level spells to burn up their lower level slots. I think the devs know this and will be reluctant in nerfing it. I guess my view is different than most because I'm fine with some spells being better than others.

 

[OB1]

I have no problem with shield as is, but wouldn't be opposed to making the bonus equal to your spellcasting ability modifier for the spell. Keeps the big bonus very MAD for multi-classers. Also think @CleverNickName 's idea about making it only work when not wearing any armor is a solid option.

 

[mellored]

Actually I think 5e casters get less spells than earlier editions.

they do.
And their spells don't scale with level like they used to.

So it is much better than before. But the original idea was to have casters be weak at low level and powerful at high ones. And run shortish campaigns from 1-20.

And that legacy is still with us in the core design.

The truth is high level casters need some low level spells to burn up their lower level slots. I think the devs know this and will be reluctant in nerfing it. I guess my view is different than most because I'm fine with some spells being better than others.

Well...
if spells scaled slower than monsters, then having more spells would work.

At low levels each spell is a huge chunk, but your very limited.
At high levels each spell is a smaller chunk, but you have more.

Like if burning hands did 3d12. And meteor swarm did 20d4.

Not sure if that would fly though.

 

[Clint_L]

I have no problem with shield as is, but wouldn't be opposed to making the bonus equal to your spellcasting ability modifier for the spell. Keeps the big bonus very MAD for multi-classers. Also think @CleverNickName 's idea about making it only work when not wearing any armor is a solid option.

Yes to the first part, but the problem with the second is that you would nerf subclasses like Eldritch Knight who kind of need it (I mean, the first part would too, but this would be a double whammy).

Like, how much do we really want to worry about paladins abusing shield? Is that really a thing worth nerfing other classes for?

 

[OB1]

Yes to the first part, but the problem with the second is that you would nerf subclasses like Eldritch Knight who kind of need it (I mean, the first part would too, but this would be a double whammy).

Like, how much do we really want to worry about paladins abusing shield? Is that really a thing worth nerfing other classes for?

I was saying either or with the two suggestions, but I agree, I don't worry about shield abuse from anyone and think it should be left alone. I'm not sure the Eldritch Knight really 'needs' shield though. Shield is a resource Wizards and Sorcerers use to mitigate their generally low AC and HP, Eldritch Knights don't have that problem.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'd be fine with casters capping out at 3 spells total (1 highest, 2 next highest level), with partial recovery 1-2 times a day. As is, it's simply too much. The game has completely devolved into all casters, all the time.

Casters power needs to be dropped dramatically, as it has been made abundantly clear they aren't making non-casters relevant.

Non-casters are relevant. I’ve played them and run for them quite a lot over the last 8 years. They’re plenty relevant.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Non-casters are relevant. I’ve played them and run for them quite a lot over the last 8 years. They’re plenty relevant.

Countered by my experience. They have squat for narrative plot coupons, spells handle everything that skills can do, and casters get skills as well. Keeping low level slots relevant with utility means even more slots to spam to make sure they continue to be the ones in the spotlight.

Non-casters are simply inferior in terms of what they can do based on their character abilities (rather than player abilities and Mother May I). Their increasingly marginal dps advantage means nothing in games other than hack and slash fests. And D&D is now frankly dull as a hack and slash game, thanks to them sucking all the risk and tactics out of combat. Non-casters are a tiny bit better at the crappy part of the game and way worse at the interesting part.

 

[mellored]

Like, how much do we really want to worry about paladins abusing shield? Is that really a thing worth nerfing other classes for?

That's why I like the flat AC instead.

Until the start of your next turn, you have a 20 AC, including against the triggering attack, and you take no damage from magic missile.
At higher level, increase the AC by 1.

Could be better than +5 for many wizards, but not something paladins are going to rush for.
Eldrich knights can feel safer going 2-hander or dual wielder. Letting shield replace a shield.

It also keeps the changes to a minimum.

That said. I still want this spell...

..as some kind of THP barrier that can block AoEs.

Mass Shield or something.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Countered by my experience. They have squat for narrative plot coupons, spells handle everything that skills can do, and casters get skills as well. Keeping low level slots relevant with utility means even more slots to spam to make sure they continue to be the ones in the spotlight.

Non-casters are simply inferior in terms of what they can do based on their character abilities (rather than player abilities and Mother May I). Their increasingly marginal dps advantage means nothing in games other than hack and slash fests. And D&D is now frankly dull as a hack and slash game, thanks to them sucking all the risk and tactics out of combat. Non-casters are a tiny bit better at the crappy part of the game and way worse at the interesting part.

Okay

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Countered by my experience. They have squat for narrative plot coupons, spells handle everything that skills can do, and casters get skills as well. Keeping low level slots relevant with utility means even more slots to spam to make sure they continue to be the ones in the spotlight.

Non-casters are simply inferior in terms of what they can do based on their character abilities (rather than player abilities and Mother May I). Their increasingly marginal dps advantage means nothing in games other than hack and slash fests. And D&D is now frankly dull as a hack and slash game, thanks to them sucking all the risk and tactics out of combat. Non-casters are a tiny bit better at the crappy part of the game and way worse at the interesting part.

I don’t think 5e dndis ever going to turn into what you’re looking for, tbh.