D&D 5E Lightning Bolt should be better.

[jgsugden]

Okay, if you are saying that a common DM style is to actively every encounter prevent lines from happening, then I have to agree with you. Just provide evidence that this is a common DM style to occur in the majority of battles and I will apologize and agree.

Dude. Don't change history. You said you can ALWAYS (you even bolded it) get at least two creatures. There are dozens of situations where you either can't, or won't (due to the collateral damage). They come up all the time.

Or, we can be serious for a bit. Yes, it's easy to picture specifics it doesn't work.

And thus saying ALWAYS, with bolded text, was not the right play.

That said, the cases where fireball can't be used without hitting an ally are much greater than the cases for lightning bolt.

I've been played for 40 years. The core issues around lightning bolt and fireball have been tweaked between editions, but their general shape and placing them has been a pretty consistent underlying issue. And I have to tell you that DM encounter design, DM play style, and party cooperation are the three largest factors in how effective those spells are. It can open the door to make them massive killers, or they can both be hard to use. When the wizard can't get to the front ranks, and can only lightning bolt enemies if they are willing to include the front ranks.... well, that can be tough.

 

[tetrasodium]

Okay, if you are saying that a common DM style is to actively every encounter prevent lines from happening, then I have to agree with you. Just provide evidence that this is a common DM style to occur in the majority of battles and I will apologize and agree.

Or, we can be serious for a bit. Yes, it's easy to picture specifics it doesn't work. That said, the cases where fireball can't be used without hitting an ally are much greater than the cases for lightning bolt.

I offered an example earlier in post 70 where a line is actually present and numerous problems prevent the caster from taking advantage of it. Sadly enough I just drew a big room with the first wall tile I found & plonked down some monsters+PCs without even trying to create problems for lightning bolt & created quite a few. My goal was create a line & point out the problem with getting stuck in melee & I created quite a few by sheer coincidence without even trying.

There are two problems with your claim :

1. It only addresses damage dealt. In combat, damage isn't really the true strength of the Wizard. The true strength of the Wizard is control - hampering enemies to give time for others to eliminate them. From early on spells like sleep, continuing to web, to the wall spells, to spells like force cage and maze. That's the Wizard's true strength.

2. There are two other pillars of play, exploration and social interaction. The wizard's spells allow serious interaction with both these pillars to a degree the fighter simply cannot match. And it gets much worse as the levels increase, thus preserving a big aspect of LFQW.

Since you want to talk about control... I agree that it should bea major component of a skilled arcane caster like a wizard... it's not as simple as yo make it out though. The damage disparity is extremely relevant to things like buffing debuffing & control spells in that it shows the gap those spells need to make up for. Due to excessive application of concentration that gap is simply not something existing (de)buff & control spells are capable of bridging. This still does not get into the monster design assuming no magic weapons despite wotc doing everything they can to ensure that is something avoided unless deliberate. You can also add how phb197 oh so clearly making sure that players know damage beyond zero is nullified &the ease of returning an ally to their feet with any amount of healing further reducing the needfor the rest of the group

Yes exploration & social interaction are very important aspects of the game, however again concentration overuse piles atop things like petty almost good spells the wizard can help you with tomorrow if it's not important to do now because there are so few ritual spells relevant to those pillars & that still isn't getting into the fact that the spell is only useful in any way if the spell is in their spellbook at a gp cost in an edition where wotc has so far refused to provide even a spitball tweet or UA wealth by level type thing a wizard feeling shorted could hold upin support of their need while asking for more. While on that topic there's the totally bonkers fact that wotc seems to think scrolls shouldn't even come into play until level 17-20 as the alpg spells out (above) & their hardcover adventures largely hold the line on when not simply updating old adventures from past editions like TyP did.

That bolded point needs support as you provide no evidence or even a shred of specificity in support of it as if the statement is true because people say it. Here I'll start you with this line someone posted in the cruddy spells thread "I thought that the point of Skill Empowerment being 5th level and requireing Concentration was to balance the Rogue vs the casters by not devaluing the Rogues Expertise." That theme comes up again & again where the very spells you are vaguely yet not specifically pinning your case on fall short of the mark lest they actually be useful when stacked against someone with higher damage & such

edit: @jgsugden back in post 70 I accidentally showed a case where you won't hit two even after lining it up

 

[Mort]

I offered an example earlier in post 70 where a line is actually present and numerous problems prevent the caster from taking advantage of it. Sadly enough I just drew a big room with the first wall tile I found & plonked down some monsters+PCs without even trying to create problems for lightning bolt & created quite a few. My goal was create a line & point out the problem with getting stuck in melee & I created quite a few by sheer coincidence without even trying.



Since you want to talk about control... I agree that it should bea major component of a skilled arcane caster like a wizard... it's not as simple as yo make it out though. The damage disparity is extremely relevant to things like buffing debuffing & control spells in that it shows the gap those spells need to make up for. Due to excessive application of concentration that gap is simply not something existing (de)buff & control spells are capable of bridging. This still does not get into the monster design assuming no magic weapons despite wotc doing everything they can to ensure that is something avoided unless deliberate. You can also add how phb197 oh so clearly making sure that players know damage beyond zero is nullified &the ease of returning an ally to their feet with any amount of healing further reducing the needfor the rest of the group

Yes exploration & social interaction are very important aspects of the game, however again concentration overuse piles atop things like petty almost good spells the wizard can help you with tomorrow if it's not important to do now because there are so few ritual spells relevant to those pillars & that still isn't getting into the fact that the spell is only useful in any way if the spell is in their spellbook at a gp cost in an edition where wotc has so far refused to provide even a spitball tweet or UA wealth by level type thing a wizard feeling shorted could hold upin support of their need while asking for more. While on that topic there's the totally bonkers fact that wotc seems to think scrolls shouldn't even come into play until level 17-20 as the alpg spells out (above) & their hardcover adventures largely hold the line on when not simply updating old adventures from past editions like TyP did.

That bolded point needs support as you provide no evidence or even a shred of specificity in support of it as if the statement is true because people say it. Here I'll start you with this line someone posted in the cruddy spells thread "I thought that the point of Skill Empowerment being 5th level and requireing Concentration was to balance the Rogue vs the casters by not devaluing the Rogues Expertise." That theme comes up again & again where the very spells you are vaguely yet not specifically pinning your case on fall short of the mark lest they actually be useful when stacked against someone with higher damage & such

edit: @jgsugden back in post 70 I accidentally showed a case where you won't hit two even after lining it up

The bolded point that in the exploration and social interaction tier the LFQW problem exists and worsens with level?

Well OK :

Exploration : as the Wizard/caster levels he gets progressively more reality altering spells that put many gaps between him and a fighter. Starting with stuff like find familiar and moving on to clairvoyance, Arcane eye, scrying, teleport etc. Mundane challenges can be overcome with anything from levitate to fly to dimension door to teleport. There's a reason that as adventures get higher in level they either have to hamstring the wizards spell use (teleport doesn't work because reasons, scry doesn't work because reasons, arbitrary time restrictions etc. ) or figure out fun ways to roll with it.

Social interaction: from the various disguise spells, to charm spells (nerfed quite a bit in 5e but still definitely a thing). To spells like glibness which take a rogue's hard earned reliable talent and tromp on it (floor is higher and it defeats lie detection magic). The wizard makes a big mark here too.

So yes LFQW still exists in 5e.

 

[tetrasodium]

The bolded point that in the exploration and social interaction tier the LFQW problem exists and worsens with level?

Well OK :

Exploration : as the Wizard/caster levels he gets progressively more reality altering spells that put many gaps between him and a fighter. Starting with stuff like find familiar and moving on to clairvoyance, Arcane eye, scrying, teleport etc. Mundane challenges can be overcome with anything from levitate to fly to dimension door to teleport. There's a reason that as adventures get higher in level they either have to hamstring the wizards spell use (teleport doesn't work because reasons, scry doesn't work because reasons, arbitrary time restrictions etc. ) or figure out fun ways to roll with it.

Social interaction: from the various disguise spells, to charm spells (nerfed quite a bit in 5e but still definitely a thing). To spells like glibness which take a rogue's hard earned reliable talent and tromp on it (floor is higher and it defeats lie detection magic). The wizard makes a big mark here too.

So yes LFQW still exists in 5e.

Yes it does and I had this discussion not too long ago so I'll start by quoting what I wrote there

Spoiler: it covers some of your list

You also should go back to review what you said next time you rush to roll out the snark like when I asked for details on "things". That is significantly more detailed than your original list of "things"


While still not enough to bridge the gap & badly contrived or depending on system differences no longer present in 5e to manufature value in many ways it's at least some level of detail that is capable of being responded to.

• teleport This one is a complex array of issues that range from only being useful if the GM makesit so to depending on edition differences no longer present in 5e
  • First & foremost trying to teleport to an area you are "very familiar with" has a 24% chance of not getting where you want ranging from a mishap to going somewhere else. The odds quickly get worse from there.
    • Even if we assume that one can teleport without error every time it runs into a more significant problem. Specifically that there is no point unless the GM makes it a point. In past editions when you recovered hp slowly while resting in the field & slightly less slow while resting under the right conditions it was a serious benefit to simply teleporting back to town to rest . Firstly that was still a thing generally of dubious value in those older editions though because the person needing the heavy duty recovery was unlikely to be the squishy caster so the caster recovering faster than their crunchier allies is a meaningless hurry up & wait benefit. Secondly even if we assume there was some tangible benefit to doing it the caster still needs to somehow return & doing so is unlikely to be easy or worth the risk unless the gm places a teleport circle where the party is now
• planeshift: This one now has two massive elephants in the room & both of them left a pile on the floor .
  • The first elephant in the room here is that this 7th level spell requires a "forked metal rod worth 250gp, attuned to a particular plane of existence." This spell literally can not even be cast unless the GM gives you something specific to cast it with or something specific to craft the required component needed to cast it.
  • The other is of course Descent into Avernus where the players along with an entire city are dragged into another plane without the use of a player casting such a spell & it eventually ends with players returning from a hardcover adventure where nearly every single creature has some combination of energy resists energy immunities and magic resistance long before anyone is capable of casting it.
• revive the dead: This one is mostly divine specific but I'm not dismissing the possibility of a arcane raise dead type spell existing & caster focused divine class/archetpes exist so it doesn't go away at that. The critical second point is that bringing Bob's body (or some piece of it) back to a town/city & paying a local cleric to bring him back has always been an option to the point of that kind of thing occasionally even getting mentioned in modules & such simply because Bob can't cast raise dead on himself if he's dead if no other reason. Also there are a wide array of ways that a GM could have something else bring bob back, Keith Baker wrote about several here & some of he ravenloft/vanrichten previews seem to imply similar things while talking about dark gifts. I'm not sure why you'd bring up a spell the caster can use to bring an ally back from death but not themselves as such a massive feather in the cap for casters.
• curing curses & diseases.
  Spoiler: xge relaxation

  View attachment 134543
  In 5e bestow curse is a concentration spell with a 1 minute duration , trog stench lasts 1 turn, wight life drain lasts until a long rest... While most of these effects allow regular saves or automatically go away after a long rest there are still rare exceptions like mummy rot & the clay golem thing a group without a caster can hire an NPC to cure it just as they could if bob was the one who needed to cast raise dead but was also the one who was dead. "saved the party from needing to hire an npc to cast a spell" is lightyears away from justifying all of the cards in the deck stacked elusively against casters
• transforming into dragons: The only way that even google seems to think this might be doable is with true
  Spoiler: true polymorph

  View attachment 134545
  As a 9th level spell this is only possible from level 17 on and of such dubious value & even my best effort from google was quick to point out the various downsides of tilting at this windmill that include but aren't limited to "What'd be the reason for them to stick with the party?" "retire the character" and my persona favorite "High level D&D is naughty word BONKERS ... I promise you the other players will be doing bonkers naughty word too, and at that point the campaign will be almost over anyway.".
• conjuring elementals/celestials/etc... Really?... No seriously... This is getting into territory on par with holding up how well sidewalk support using a unicycle or pogostick in a discussion about the state of bike lanes. You think that all of these strings red tape and hurdles were to proactively offset the game crushing powerhouse known as the shepherd circle druid almost nobody has ever seen played since it was released in XGE? You do know that magic resist energy resist/immune legendary resist & so on don't affect conjured creatures right? While casters other than the shepherd can conjure creatures, they are rarely worth conjuring. Tasha's introduced some new spells to summon useful creatures, but again we are talking years into 5e & concentration spells.

Fighters continue getting extra attacks & even extra action surge, rogues keep getting sneak attack dice & so on, the damage disparity only expands as is detailed quite a bit in that google sheets spreadsheet I keep linking. Even though you list a couple spells not on that reply in the spoiler so it looks like the new straws are

• disguise self, this one is a pretty big stretch but
  Spoiler: disguise self spell doesn't invoke LFQW

  
  Even if that's not allowed at the table, LFQW doesn't mean a caster can do something a martial can't here's a great in depth summary of it. I'm pretty sure that I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen someone cast disguise self in 5e on one hand with a bunch of fingers left over & the only instance I actually remember being notable was immediately followed by a noncaster saying "I'm proficient in disguise kits, can I use that to make the rest of us look more like fine upstanding waiters hired for the party rather than nearly rabid bloodthirsty serial killers?"->"Yes but you'll need to buy some outfits...hmm... costume clothes are 5gp everyone will need a 5gp penguin suit" Even if I went with the 15gp fine clothes it would not be a significant cost. I can't imagine a game of d&d where this spell is a significant impact on the average session or even a mildly infrequent one. Even if it was hypothetically important every session you've gone from defending massive damage disparity with such a fluff spell simply because it's one thing the at will & spike damage leaders can't do. Who knows though, maybe "various disguise spells" is some other spell I'm overlooking.
• Glibness You've selected an 8th level 5e spell not the 3.5 level 3 glibness, from level 15-20 a caster will have one level 8 spell slot per long rest. Before I even get into this, you should think about that right there for a minute and try to decide if a spell that something like five percent of campaigns will reach makes your case. At level 15 a character will have +5 proficiency bonus, tack on expertise & +5 cha you get a flat 15 before the die roll, drop back to just proficiency with +5 cha & well... you see where this is going. Oh yea, glibness in 5e is a bard/warlock spell & you were talking about wizards weren't you?
• fly. You've selected a good spell... and? what exactly is it going to let you do? deal unimpressive damage out of reach? fall out of the sky when you cast nearly any concentration (de)buff or DoT type spell because they are both concentration? I've seen a few attempts at using flight in 5e & they might seem good to them, but it's generally not really a notable difference in my experience... You know what however is a campaign destroying ability? Two players with longbows & sharpshooter saying they want to approach from different sides & attack from max range. That works out to each player being 60 five foot squares from the target without concentration or spell slot/use consumption. If you've got a battlemat you can say "bob the mat's not that big so your off the map"... If you've got a good vtt capable of handling hundreds or even "Millions is probably where you'll start hitting floating point issues" you don't have that excuse but you likely have few if any maps created that are gigantic enough to even pretend to span that range. I also want to go back to the topic of flight, I once ran LMOP start to finish for a group where every single player was playing an aarakokra & really had very little issue with occasionally saying things like "Yeaaaa... the tree canopy is pretty thick" or "yea the ceiling is such and such high" every so often in that extreme case
• arcane eye " A solid barrier blocks the eye's movement" "GM:There is a door"... next spell! did you not look it up before citing this spell?
• scrying "scry & die" wasn't a phrase for nothing, it was phenomenally useful back in the past in that it could let the caster work with the GM to get some details needed to prepare incredible save or suck save or lose & needed utility spells ahead of time back when vancian casting was a thing & you needed to prep each spell slot In 5e?... it's barely useful because A spells are prepped different, B there just aren't that many awesome spells, and C martials don't need to be sure they bring a ghost touch holy cold iron or whatever weapon they didn't know to plan for before because now it just needs to be a "magic" weapon
• find familiar This is great for scouting within 100 feet, of course often so is the rogue ranger or whatever but those don't have the 100ft limit & can do trivial things like open that door
• clairvoyance Your joking... this one's a joke to see if I'm paying attention right? a third level nonritual concentration spell with a ten minute duration that lets you see what's going on at a place you've seen or been before... I'm at a loss for words to even start explaining why this is absolutely not LFQW it's literally just something a caster could do that a noncaster could not however trivial the use it is
• Between my last post & the stuff I added I think I got everything you listed & am going to bed now. If I missed any that you feel make a slam dunk case for 5e still having LFQW the list the specific spells & maybe go into some detail on it because some of these seem to be grasping at the flimsiest straws to an epic degree or you are using a rather unusual meaning for LFQW.

 

[Lanefan]

Here's a thought, which would strengthen the "bouncing bolt" and also simplify adjudication (no calculating angles of incidence or debating the curve of a cave wall):

When the line hits a solid barrier other than the ground, it ricochets and continues in a new direction of the caster's choice. A creature crossed multiple times by the same bolt only takes damage once.

In close quarters where you could bounce it between walls, hitting enemies and dodging allies, lightning bolt would now be a clear winner over fireball. On the other hand, fireball would remain the superior option in open spaces.

I'd never let anything after the bounce be at the caster's choice like that - that's where the risk part comes in! Even when I first started DMing, the billiards model was never hard to work with; and if the bounce is off an irregular or rough wall a bit of random rolling soon sorts it out.

That said, I certainly would say that someone hit twice takes damage twice (and thus needs two saves).

 

[Lanefan]

I would probably allow it to function a tiny bit more like Chain Lightning, but not much. Something like you choose a line to point the lightning bolt, but it doesn't go straight down that line, it can zig-zag to creatures within 5 feet of it (in any direction) until the end of the line,

This is cool up to here. (though I'd still want to see an aiming roll for whether the line goes exactly where you want it to)

allowing the caster to choose who in the line are affected.

But this wrecks it. The bolt should affect everyone it can reach and not discriminate between friends, foes, or innocent bystanders.

I also might change the saving throw type of CON, as lightning doesn't actually need to hit you to kill you, and trying to dodge lightning in real life is doomed to failure.

Monks dodging lightning for no damage is just plain cool. Anyone else is still going to take half damage anyway.

 

[Lanefan]

So yes LFQW still exists in 5e.

Given how badly so many wizard spells have been nerfed over the years and editions, I find this hard to believe; unless the at-wills they've picked up during the same time are overpowered.

 

[Peter BOSCO'S]

What if metal armor gave disadvantage on saves versus Lightning bolts?
(Precedent - Shocking Grasp is more likely to hit a metal armed target, why shouldn't Lighting Bolt be the same?)
Fireball would still be better, but you would have closed part of the gap.

 

[TheSword]

One of more of these would be my preference

• Disadvantage on saving throw in metal armour
• Choice to make it a 30’ cone
• Choice to have it originate up to 10 ft away from you
• Creature that fails its save can’t take reactions.

Im not a fan of the bouncing off walls. Mainly because we no longer adventure exclusively in stone walled dungeons. I want that lightning bolt to smash through wood not bounce of it.

In outdoor areas placing a fireball is much much easier. As it is in larger rooms. It’s harder placing a fireball in a room thats less than 40-50’ if the PCs are in the middle. However in smaller rooms it’s also harder to get in position for a line. The curved nature of the fireball also means it can pick out enemies that are surrounded on two sides. It’s rare that PCs get behind an enemy. So you can often chip a fireball into a conflict where a straight line would hit friends.

We’ve already seen an excellent diagram explaining why lightning bolt is a terrible spell for a corridor. Unless your wizard is standing at the front. In which case lightning bolt probably is relatively good.... they’re never gonna live to reach level 4 spells.

 

[Salthorae]

One of more of these would be my preference

• Disadvantage on saving throw in metal armour
• Choice to make it a 30’ cone
• Choice to have it originate up to 10 ft away from you
• Creature that fails its save can’t take reactions.

I agree - I think all lightning spells should have the adv on attack or dis to saves for those in metal armor. No reactions would also be nice but would probably be too much.

For me my biggest issue with Lightning Bolt in particular is that it's a "Self" spell and therefore a sorcerer can't use distant spell. Like Fireball is already the better spell... why'd you have to make it so you can't use distant spell with Lightning Bolt to at least maybe get some more functionality from it?

Grids make it more difficult to use. When you're not on a grid you can line up your caster between two ranks of enemies and anyone on either side of the line get hit.