D&D 5E Let's Talk about Scaling 5th Edition Spells

[ren1999]

I don't like the idea of 1st level spells being worthless when the caster reaches higher levels. Spells should increase in power. Here are just a few of many ideas I have for doing that.

Spell casters sacrifice hit points when leveling up so they must have a rewarding trade-off in the form of doing greater base damage.

Fire Spells do 2d4 + ongoing damage.
Lighting Spells do 2d6 damage + stun condition.
Cold Spells do 2d8 damage.

The damage does not increase but if the spell caster were to get an additional standard action every 5 level-ups, he or she could cast 5 fire balls at the same target or at different targets.

Only one target can be charmed per caster's turn.

Only one burst spell may be cast per the spell caster's turn. The radius of the burst increases by 5 feet every 5 level-ups.

Fire Ball
evocation/class lvl 1/ranged 20/int vs dex/You shoot a fire ball doing int mod+2d4 fire damage+ongoing 4 damage./target's con vs your int ends/2 targets at 5th, 3 targets 10th lvl

Burning Hand
evocation/class lvl 2/at-will/int vs ac/You strike with your fire aura staff, dagger or wand doing 1[w]+int mod+1d4 fire damage+ongoing 4 damage./target's con vs your int ends

Explosive Rune
evocation/class lvl 3/ranged 20 burst 1/int vs dex/You send a steel ball with a fire rune scroll on it that explodes and does int mod+2d4 fire damage+ongoing 4 damage./target's con vs your int ends

Combust Foe
evocation/class lvl 4/ranged 20/int vs int/You cause 1 foe int mod+2d4 fire damage+ongoing 4 damage./target's con vs your int ends

 

[Szatany]

I don't like the idea of 1st level spells being worthless when the caster reaches higher levels.

Neither do I. Thankfully, 5e will have bounded accuracy which means spells will get obsolete much much slower. Saving throws don't go up with levels, etc.

Spells should increase in power.

They do. It's called getting access to higher level spells.

Spell casters sacrifice hit points when leveling up so they must have a rewarding trade-off in the form of doing greater base damage.

They do. They can nova with their powerful spells.

The damage does not increase but if the spell caster were to get an additional standard action every 5 level-ups, he or she could cast 5 fire balls at the same target or at different targets.

Please, no action per round extravaganza.

 

[the Jester]

I'm not a big fan of forcing all fire spells to do ongoing damage or all lightning to stun; I much prefer having the option of individual spells being more diverse.

In other words, some fire spells might add ongoing damage, others might just be fire damage, others might give temporary blindness or weakness, etc. This also has the advantage of allowing a broader range of effects for (f'rinstance) a pyromancer specialist, instead of him becoming a one-trick-pony.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'm not a big fan of forcing all fire spells to do ongoing damage or all lightning to stun; I much prefer having the option of individual spells being more diverse.

In other words, some fire spells might add ongoing damage, others might just be fire damage, others might give temporary blindness or weakness, etc. This also has the advantage of allowing a broader range of effects for (f'rinstance) a pyromancer specialist, instead of him becoming a one-trick-pony.

I both agree and disagree. I agree in that I want diversity in spells, but I disagree in that elemental effects should work in a logical and consistent manner. Fire is a good example. If a fire spell does damage, it should also set things on fire and possibly do ongoing damage. But, if it's a quick flash intended to cause blindness, then it shouldn't do damage at all, and so wouldn't get these additional effects.

I'm sure there are exceptions. Perhaps a fire whip only ever singes things, but has enough physicality to still do damage. So long as the rules follow the story, I'm cool.

 

[Sadrik]

Spells are a good thing to bring up. But I do not agree with your supposition that low level spells become weak and inconsequential at higher levels.

Lets look at what happened with spells in 3e, generally low level combat spells became weak as you went up, sleep no longer worked due to HD limits etc. So, you used your high level slots for combat spells and you used your low level slots for defense and utility spells. I see no reason why that should not also be true in 5e.

Spells that do not deliver damage but instead an affliction would still also be viable as a low level spell because the saves do not scale. A low level spell has the same save as a high level spell. (Granted the effect of a high level spell will be more dramatic, rather than a nuisance)

Also it should be pointed out that if you memorize a low level spell at a higher level it will increase the damage (probably +2d6/spell level). So if you are particularly enamored with an attack spell you can utilize it throughout your career. I personally really like that. If burning hands or thunder wave is your signature spell, you can memorize it as a 5th level spell and get +8d6 damage on it. Blam, still effective.

Last point, catching on fire from any source should work the same, whether getting shoved in a bonfire or blasted by some spell, something should be written in the combat section and not in the spell section. This would be like looking up poison rules in the spell section. Afflictions should happen in the spell section, and reference the combat section, where a standardized rule for catching on fire resides. I dont want 3 different spells that catch things on fire in a different way. Three different spells that say "can catch people on fire" then goes on to reference the standard catch on fire rule. This goes for all similarly standardized effects, disease, poison, fatigue, suffocation, and the list could go on and on.

 

[Gorgoroth]

.

I'd like to put in that burninating peasants with fireball, anything that can catch fire easily like straw cottages, should completely burn....If DMs don't want stuff that easily could catch fire to catch fire, don't apply fire to it, or don't put it in. What I'm saying is if you are holding a scroll in your hand and you are in the blast of a fireball, sorry, bye bye scroll. whooosh

none of this "we could not implement logical, expected behavior of this game element due to limitations in our game engine". This is videogame speak. I completely agree that D&D should function with at least some verisimilitude. If I have an acid arrow at-will, and use it repeatedly on an iron lock or door handle, it should melt (eventually, depending on the "strength" of the hit). What I'm saying is...don't give PCs fire spells if you don't intend for them to be able to replicate the functionality of a 1cp match, or acid spells if you don't want stuff to be melted. Not saying either thing should instantly vaporize whatever they're applied to (some books survive house fires, at least partially), but loose pieces of paper, or hair, or whatever....buring hands should be like a blast from a flame thrower. There's plenty of evidence about what that does to a human body from WWI...D&D should be at least that lethal. I'm sorry, but real people and experienced that agony. The lucky ones died quickly, or at all. If you think fire burns across your whole body don't do ongoing damage...well / shrug. Let's not molly coddle D&D PCs. It's a game. They are meant to die.

If fire damage is so devastating, take counter measures. i.e. Don't walk into a dungeon covered in lamp grease!! Or walk across hot coals in papyrus sandals. There has to be SOME verisimilitude. Don't give us fire spells that don't set stuff on fire. PLEASE. That is IDIOTIC!!!!!

 

[Bobbum Man]

I say get rid of the traditional D&D spell list, and spell levels altogether.

I want spells that scale all the way up through a character's career, and a reduction of redundancy. We don't need 5 slightly more powerful versions of "Fireball", when one will do. Also, if we do this, then we can simply give higher spell casters like 12 spells per day, rather than the 36+ they get in older editions. This would significantly decrease unnecessary complexity, bookkeeping AND page count.

For spells which the lowest expression is more powerful, simply give them some sort of prerequisite, like you must know Summon Monster and Plane Shift before you can learn Planar Binding, etc.

The traditional 9 spell levels only add clutter to the game, and they need to take one last walk out behind the barn.

 

[ren1999]

I say get rid of the traditional D&D spell list, and spell levels altogether.

I want spells that scale all the way up through a character's career, and a reduction of redundancy. We don't need 5 slightly more powerful versions of "Fireball", when one will do. Also, if we do this, then we can simply give higher spell casters like 12 spells per day, rather than the 36+ they get in older editions. This would significantly decrease unnecessary complexity, bookkeeping AND page count.

For spells which the lowest expression is more powerful, simply give them some sort of prerequisite, like you must know Summon Monster and Plane Shift before you can learn Planar Binding, etc.

The traditional 9 spell levels only add clutter to the game, and they need to take one last walk out behind the barn.

This is what I want too.
Can all of you commenting give me an example of a spell you would design that would be effective at 1st level and at 20th level?

 

[GameDoc]

I say get rid of the traditional D&D spell list, and spell levels altogether.

I want spells that scale all the way up through a character's career, and a reduction of redundancy. We don't need 5 slightly more powerful versions of "Fireball", when one will do. Also, if we do this, then we can simply give higher spell casters like 12 spells per day, rather than the 36+ they get in older editions. This would significantly decrease unnecessary complexity, bookkeeping AND page count.

For spells which the lowest expression is more powerful, simply give them some sort of prerequisite, like you must know Summon Monster and Plane Shift before you can learn Planar Binding, etc.

The traditional 9 spell levels only add clutter to the game, and they need to take one last walk out behind the barn.

This is similar to how spells are addressed in True20. They aren't leveled, but some require you know a conceptually more rudimentary spell first. They actually function more like skills with higher DCs for larger or more comlex applications.

For example, one spell, "fire shaping", covers the production of flame - everything from creating a small light source, to igniting flammable objects, to causing an existing fire to grow. There are similar "shaping"spells for each element. If you know any of the shaping spells, you can then learn the spell "elemental blast" and apply it to any element you can shape. This gives you burning hands, fireball, cone of cold, acid arrow, lightning bolt, etc.

If you want more power, you ratchet up the DC. I'm not sure if that sort of system would be as flexible under bounded accuracy. Also, I think it would induce a level of grognard rage hence unseen because it's such a radical departure from traditional D&D.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

This is what I want too.
Can all of you commenting give me an example of a spell you would design that would be effective at 1st level and at 20th level?

I'll have a go! I sort of combined fireball and kin with melf's minute meteors.

Fireball

You summon fire in the form of explosive projectiles. You can fling one bolt of fire as an action, that can optionally explode upon impact. You have 1 point of fire per level to either distribute over many rounds or spend all at once, as follows:

If your fireball strikes a single target, make a magical attack roll vs. AC to determine if you hit, dealing 1d6 fire damage per point spent +1d6 bludgeoning damage.

If your fireball instead explodes on impact, you may exchange 1 fire point for a 5 foot radius of effect. Each point spent otherwise deals 1d6 fire damage. Creatures struck by the fireball that succeed on a dexterity saving throw take only half damage.

In the round you cast the spell you may also make an attack with it as part of your action. From the round after you cast the spell onwards, if you maintain concentration (a move action), you can summon 1 additional fire point to your reserves.

Example: A 5th level Wizard casts Fireball, and has 5 fire points. He can blow it all immediately on a single bolt for 6d6 total damage (if he hits), or a small explosion (9 squares, 4d6 damage), or large explosion (49 squares, 2d6 damage). He can also fire off one small bolt every round (2d6 damage each) for five rounds, or longer if he concentrates.