D&D (2024) It Is 2025 And Save Or Suck Spells Still Suck (the fun out of the game)

[Reynard]

OP mind me asking how the PCs were killing stuff?

Controls great but imho it's the others who tend to seal the deal.

Just the usual damage methods. The party includes a monk, a battlemaster, a wizard, a cleric and a bard. There were multiple crits on the party side since they had advantage on most attacks due to the combination of PC abilities. The dragon never got its breath recharge, and like I said, my dice were cold and the PCs' were hot (except the poor monk).

Just add 3-5 Kobold sorcerers to your next boss fight to cast suggestion on the PCs/counter the suggestion spells they cast.

Again, one of the worst things a GM can do in my opinion is start an arms race with the players, and punishing them for success is just as bad.

That said, the dragon's lieutenant looking for revenge will definitely acquire something that grants protection from charm/mind control first.

 

[James Gasik]

That said, the dragon's lieutenant looking for revenge will definitely acquire something that grants protection from charm/mind control first.

Just make sure that the item is limited use (like maybe 3/day you can use a reaction to succeed on a save against a charm effect or something) for when the players inevitably loot it for themselves!

I've found that my players react better to NPC's using things that they can theoretically benefit from (even if they inevitably don't, because they are too situational to consume a valuable attunement slot) than just "oh he's just immune because" or "sadly, this item is unusable to you".

Then it gets tossed into the treasure pile and they can try to sell it for a few hundred gold when they reach a major city. Or maybe it leads to future adventures!

I had a fun time with all the "protection from turning" amulets they picked up in one of the Tales from the Yawning Portal adventures- something that is largely useless to most PC's.

 

[Reynard]

Just make sure that the item is limited use (like maybe 3/day you can use a reaction to succeed on a save against a charm effect or something) for when the players inevitably loot it for themselves!

I've found that my players react better to NPC's using things that they can theoretically benefit from (even if they inevitably don't, because they are too situational to consume a valuable attunement slot) than just "oh he's just immune because" or "sadly, this item is unusable to you".

Then it gets tossed into the treasure pile and they can try to sell it for a few hundred gold when they reach a major city. Or maybe it leads to future adventures!

I had a fun time with all the "protection from turning" amulets they picked up in one of the Tales from the Yawning Portal adventures- something that is largely useless to most PC's.

I was thinking something horrid, like a psychic symbiote.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Modern D&D, and 5.5 especially so from what I've read, is a very player-centric game, that seems to prioritize players showing off their PC's cool powers to wreck everything around them at every opportunity so they can display their awesomeness to everyone else at the table. Sometimes I feel the DM's main job according to the game's design philosophy is simply to create opportunities for the players to do this.

I feel you but with some recent games we had player death and did not capture or kill the main target.

I think all things being equal, yes, the game leans into players showing off toys. Because they have too many! And I don’t men variety but rather number of uses. Combine spells and domain powers and it is hard to “run out.”

It takes work to have an encounter draining people or have staying power to withstand the barrage.

I don’t think it’s the game’s intent…it just happened. Likewise I don’t think it must be this way…but extra work is required. (I enjoy 5e fwiw…so not slamming the edition at all).

Focusing more energy on the actual OP…

We have also had PCs get knocked from encounters with save or suck. Not super fun for the one in question…BUT…I think contrast and failure enhances the overall long run enjoyment of the game. Mostly. Adversity matters.

I would also say I like slogs and my buddy likes to curb stomp monsters and win fast. I think more enemies is better than one big one (preaching to people that know more than me, no doubt).

One issue I have is concentration is too hard to disrupt. I think 1e made spells harder to cast and keep and probably was the better way to go.

We get screwed we always talk about the times we dominated and say that is how the dice roll and vice versa. But when I DM I remind myself I have ideas but i am choose to let things emerge. I don’t control what players choose from available options nkor do I choose which encounters have Hollywood endings. I am at peace with this.

 

[James Gasik]

One thing I don't think DM's appreciate is that the difficulty in forcing a loss of concentration is a double-edged sword. I tend to think that a fight against an enemy caster should be a marquee event, but the players just dogpile them and I can't imagine what it would be like if concentration was instantly broken every time they took damage!

"Haha, I got your Fighter Slowed, now what?"!"

"I shoot an arrow at him. 17!"

"(Swears in High Vancian)!"

 

[Warpiglet-7]

One thing I don't think DM's appreciate is that the difficulty in forcing a loss of concentration is a double-edged sword. I tend to think that a fight against an enemy caster should be a marquee event, but the players just dogpile them and I can't imagine what it would be like if concentration was instantly broken every time they took damage!

"Haha, I got your Fighter Slowed, now what?"!"

"I shoot an arrow at him. 17!"

"(Swears in High Vancian)!"

Yeah. Good for goose, good for gander.

The game is and is always an arms race if you want challenges.

The problem with magic being too powerful is best handled I think with making it dangerous. Clearly that is not how the game has trended and may not be what a majority wants.

Just my opinion. But frankly that is if magic seems to be a problem. I have adapted to 5e and have gotten comfortable with its conceits for the most part.

 

[Sorinth]

Yeah, I dislike how evergreen stuff like Shield is, but the usefulness of such spells at higher levels was probably considered a feature not a bug by designers. Why cast a 2nd level acid arrow when your 11th level can’t rip out damages it?

Obviously you don't, instead you use that 2nd level spell slot on Enhance Ability or Misty Step or See Invisibility.

The idea is that as you level up and get better spells (And your cantrips get better) what you use your low level slots for should change and play a more supporting role, or specialized role.

 

[Quickleaf]

That subject line is a little incendiary, but anway.

Last night the PCs (5 4th level 5E2024 characters) went into a young black dragon's lair to kill it. The dragon also had an allied abomination (using the stats for a half dragon in the MM). This was, per the A5E chart (which has been pretty accurate, even for 2024 rules) a Deadly encounter. And it mighthave been if not a for a few failed saves.

Just a reminder: a young dragon is not a legendary creature, has no legendary actions, and has no lair actions.

As soons as the PCs enter, the wizard casts suggestion on the half dragon and compels it to just up and leave. It fails. it leaves. Suggestion is RIDICULOUS.

The dragon swoops down on the monk, breaths, and drops the monk instantly (dying not dead). So it looks like there might be an actual fight to be had, even with the solo young dragon. Then the bard gets going with Dissonate Whispers (which triggers opportunity attacks). The dragon does not recharge its breath and unloads on the bard. Unfortunately, the dice were not with me at all.

Ultimately, hideous laughter completely did the dragon in.

What an underwhelming experience.

Note: I am not saying that there is anything wrong with the rules, or with luck having so much weight in the fight. I am just complaining that it turned into a comedy of errors rather than anything fun and tense. And I am still aghast at suggestion.

Anyway: how do you feel about save or suck spells in D&D 2024? Anything interesting, fun or frustrating to share?

Oh yes, those spells have always been extremely swingy throughout D&D's history. Less impactful in the old school days, maybe, because combat turns were shorter and the comedy of errors seemed to be embraced in the chaos.

I do think D&D's spell design – not the system, but the specific language and how spells are conceived – leaves a lot to be desired.

Magic is more interesting when there's a give and take, or some kind of complication, catch 22, or a "but look out for this side effect." That's why spells like Teleport can be so much fun, and why the old Fireball and Lightning Bolt were great. IMO. For example, a Hideous Laughter spell... that is contagious if you get too close to a victim of the laughter. Or a Suggestion spell that requires tricking the target into speaking a certain word of agreement or using a material component uniquely connected to the target...without which the target/GM gets a wide range of interpretation over the suggestion given (e.g. "leave" might be interpreted as "leave" their most cherished possession on the ground).

 

[pemerton]

That just exacerbates the faulty D&D design of higher level casters having essentially useless low level slots.

Really casting needs a complete overhaul along with save or suck spells.

If only a version of D&D had been published that did all this!

 

[Zardnaar]

If only a version of D&D had been published that did all this!

If only people liked it! One can still play it even.

Drastically overhauling D&Ds a non starter. Personally I think better defenses are needed and direct damage overhauled.
Most efficient way of dealing with st7ff now is control plus damage. Spellcaster not very good at damage generally.