[L&L] Balancing the Wizards in D&D

[Gold Roger]

Spellcasting is dangerous: why should damage interfere with casting magic and not with wielding a sword? I've been doing martial arts for some years (even if I'm not a professional) and I can assure you that after getting kicked hard your ability to fight is reduced until you shake off the pain, and if somebody punches you in the face you'll most likely not complete the maneuver you were supposedly doing.

Fair point.

Sadly, we have no such rl comparison for casting a spell.

But I suspect it's a fair bit harder than getting a hit in during a fight. We have the possibility to not hit (hp and attack rolls do what you describe well enough for my purposes). I think losing your concentration for complicated spells is only fair.

 

[Melkor]

Also, it is a fallacy that a balanced game is somehow a "limiting" game.

Opinions will certainly vary, and this is probably best kept to another topic altogether, but I think the "fallacy" is that true balance is actually obtainable in an RPG. Sure, it can be an aim or a goal, but again, I digress.

 

[grimslade]

Exactly. There is a difference between very low cost and completely at-will.

Who ever needs a knock spell? PEW PEW PEW break that chain or lock. Why not, it costs absolutlely nothing.

Need to build an encampment quickly? PEW PEW PEW down goes a grove of trees.

Need real defensible shelter? PEW PEW PEW I just carved us a cave to camp in.

I can replace PEW PEW PEW with HACK HACK HACK and it is equally ridiculous. I understand and appreciate the desire to not have a pervasive limitless magical damage. But hyperbole of cantrips equaling Disintegrate is not helping your argument.

 

[Fifth Element]

Who ever needs a knock spell? PEW PEW PEW break that chain or lock. Why not, it costs absolutlely nothing.

Need to build an encampment quickly? PEW PEW PEW down goes a grove of trees.

Need real defensible shelter? PEW PEW PEW I just carved us a cave to camp in.

You're making some grandiose assumptions about how these cantrips work. Even if the cantrip works the way you assume it does, how long do you think it would take to PEW PEW a cave from a rockface?

I recall when 4E came out and someone was arguing that giving a dragonborn a dragon breath power was completely overpowered because of all the things you can do with it! When pressed, it turns out that every example he could come up with was something that could be done by someone with a torch or a tinderbox.

Same thing here. Give a fighter an axe and he can level a forest!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Exactly. There is a difference between very low cost and completely at-will.

so25x per day is diffrent really? or hay, Int score + level times per day per cantrip

Who ever needs a knock spell? PEW PEW PEW break that chain or lock. Why not, it costs absolutlely nothing.

or just hit it with yout ace and sword...

Need to build an encampment quickly? PEW PEW PEW down goes a grove of trees.

wait, I wonder if my axe will help.

Need real defensible shelter? PEW PEW PEW I just carved us a cave to camp in.

or use the pick axe...


oh wait the same reason why we don't use the d12 brutal 2 excution axe to break locks, chop trees or break rocks... becuse lets be honnest at will and easy are 2 diffrent things.

I can swing an axe at will, if you want me to chope down trees you will be disapointed.

 

[Ratskinner]

As with several of their articles lately, I agree with the stated goals, but marvel at how they think their proposed mechanics accomplish this. The suggested mechanic about scrolls and wands was the poster boy in this article.

As for all the "pew pew pew" vs "crossbow wizard" stuff....honestly, guys, at this point, I figure they need some way to make either a functional option for a given DM or group to choose. Its legitimate to want to play D&D either way, IMO. Heck, my moods as a DM can vary quite a bit. Sometimes I like gritty, sometimes comedic. I feel the same about "dangerous spells" vs "reliable magic". How they do that....I dunno. Especially dangerous vs reliable, I'd hate to have two versions of the spell list.

Sometimes while reading the discussions in these threads, I think the only way to make this game inclusive enough through modularity is to make the kernel so small as to be almost unplayable.

 

[dkyle]

Opinions will certainly vary, and this is probably best kept to another topic altogether, but I think the "fallacy" is that true balance is actually obtainable in an RPG. Sure, it can be an aim or a goal, but again, I digress.

I think it should have been obvious that when I said "balanced game" in that quote, I did not mean perfect balance.

And when I said "Even in a perfectly balanced RPG", I meant a theoretical perfectly balanced RPG, as a hypothetical. I was not claiming that a perfectly balanced RPG exists. My point was that balance is not limitation, no matter the degree. I was only illustrating using the most extreme hypothetical.

But of course, true balance is actually obtainable. One trivial example: have everyone play characters that are mechanically identical. Obviously, that's not generally desirable. Perfect balance is also theoretically possible with disparate and varied character mechanics, but much more difficult. In practice, balance is a matter of degree.

 

[Ratskinner]

Opinions will certainly vary, and this is probably best kept to another topic altogether, but I think the "fallacy" is that true balance is actually obtainable in an RPG. Sure, it can be an aim or a goal, but again, I digress.

Actually, it is. I'd cite Capes as an example. However, its not very D&D-ish, since it is so narrative-focused. IMO, D&D's simulationist bent is the root of all its "balance" arguments. Not trying to be judgmental, but it is what it is.

 

[Dausuul]

Exactly. There is a difference between very low cost and completely at-will.

Who ever needs a knock spell? PEW PEW PEW break that chain or lock. Why not, it costs absolutlely nothing.

Need to build an encampment quickly? PEW PEW PEW down goes a grove of trees.

Need real defensible shelter? PEW PEW PEW I just carved us a cave to camp in.

Yeah, I'm sure cantrips will be able to cut down trees and carve through solid stone. As for the "problem" of using cantrips to bust open locks, your party fighter would like to introduce you to a totally overpowered and game-wrecking device called a sledgehammer.

 

[Dragonblade]

I don't want "miscast" or "dangerous" magic except for rituals. No other class gets class abilities that can randomly screw them or the party, nor should there be for any class. It should be an option for those who want it, but not default.

If plot breaking magic is confined to rituals then having dangerous rituals is ok.

I also want 4e style implements. Wands and staves that you channel your magic through to help you cast better. Thats how most fantasy fiction works, especially big popular ones like Harry Potter.

Charged spell spamming wands and staves are a weird D&Dism that I have never seen anywhere else. Having both types is fine. But why should there only be one or the other?