D&D 5E (2024) Mearls has some Interesting Ideals about how to fix high level wizards.

[Flying Toaster]

I recently (this week!) made a list of spells organized by theme to use for PCs and NPC creation. I couldn't find anything on the DM's Guild, so it's posted there as PWYW. I didn't put counts in, but here's a quick look at stuff you could build a character around.

Acid: 6
Antimagic: 9
Beast/Vermin: 20+
Blades & projectiles: 14
Celestial: 12
Cold: 14
Darkness: 7
Draconic: 4
Earth: 23 (this surprised me; not all are damaging, but you could do something with it)
Far Realms: 8
Fear: 6
Fiendish: 10
Fire: 29
Force: 14
Lightning: 7 (sad trombone)
Multi/choose your element: 13, +1 in 5.24. This is what has to do all the hard work for acid and lightning builds.
Necrotic: 17
Plant: 15, although about half of them aren't damaging.
Poison+disease: 10
Psychic: 16
Radiant: 19, +4 in 5.24 because WOTC wants radiant to be the most popular element?
Storm:Weather: 14, +1 in 5.24
Thunder: 8, +1 in 5.24
Undeath: 9
Water: 14, yes Water is better supported than lightning or acid or thunder.
Wind: 15 ( included Wall of Sand in this as well as earth).

Depending upon the theme, lightning casters could also get thunder, weather, and/or storm spells to help bolster their list.

 

[Flying Toaster]

The PF2 discussion in this thread is honestly baffling to me given my experience is completely different. But that's not what the thread is about, so let's move on...

I think if you want to make the Wizard less complicated, it will take an entire class rework. Honestly, an entire magic rework, which isn't a bad idea in general if you really want to modify 5E. Right now trying to imitate the magic of the past is basically the problem. Taking a cue, but not the full structure, of the Warlock is probably a good idea.

For example, instead of just piling on Spell slots forever, you max out at 9, which basically equate to "low", "medium", and "high" level spells. So if you are a 5th level wizard, you get four 1st level spells, three 2nd level spells, and two 3rdlevel spells. Just like normal, still manageable, right? But as you level up, you lose ones at the bottom to give you more at the top: when you go to 6th level, you lose one 1st level slot to gain a 3rd level slot. And when you get 4th level spells, you lose your 1st level slots. If you want to quibble about the number of slots and how they go up, feel free, but the idea would be that it's more about travelling up the chain and not just creating a massive stockpile of spells.

So what offsets losing the lower level ones? Well, I would give Wizards an "Master" ability. It's like a little currency that, once per short rest (to start, but it'll go up) you can cast any level that is lower than your current lowest level. It'll be cast one level below that. So if you lose your first level spells, you can still bust out one every now and then if you need. But instead of it being an empty slot, it becomes more of a "utility" slot: I can bust out anything, and maybe you get an extra one from whatever specialist college you are a part of. But it gives you the versatility of "I always have a spell" without having to track a dozen extra spell slots you won't use, nor having to memorize a bunch of low-level spells. You concentrate on what you have and if you need some weird thing to bypass some problem, go look it up. But until then, don't worry about it.

Same with cantrips: start replacing them at upper levels with new ones that are better adapted to "epic" play. Trying to keep cantrips the same throughout the game is probably too much of an ask and ends up limiting them in weird ways because you have to balance them both at the low and upper ends of the spectrum. Just fit stuff so that it has a natural replacement. Firebolt gives way to Fireblast, which has a small AoE and can be used in a small cone for lesser damage, Frostbite moves over for Flashfreeze, which can temporarily immobilize along with its damage or be spread out to hit more people at the cost of merely slowing people down. Much like the spell slots, you slowly replace what you have with stuff better adapted to your level and better represent it. You can do the same with utility cantrips, too, but I'm just not going to think of anything right now because I'm not interested in actually completely rewriting things.

That's my view. Over time, you take away the slots that just take up space, while still giving players the ability to jump back into the old stuff if there is some puzzle or a pressing need to. But I could be wrong.

If this revised high level wizard is so focused on casting powerful high level spells that they no longer bother with a complete roster of low level spells, then they would have an additional incentive to take on apprentices and minions. They could handle routine low level spellcasting duties so the Archmage himself does not need to sweat the small stuff. It’s a bit like modern grad students grading papers, teaching undergrads, and running experiments so the hotshot prof can focus on research and publishing.

 

[tetrasodium]

If this revised high level wizard is so focused on casting powerful high level spells that they no longer bother with a complete roster of low level spells, then they would have an additional incentive to take on apprentices and minions. They could handle routine low level spellcasting duties so the Archmage himself does not need to sweat the small stuff. It’s a bit like modern grad students grading papers, teaching undergrads, and running experiments so the hotshot prof can focus on research and publishing.

Yi don't think that I've ever had a game where a player played their Pc in such a way. Even when hirelings were a thing they weren't capable enough to fill the role you are describing. The only game I can think of fitting that sort of thing is houses & humans

Spoiler: boring H&H details

 

[mamba]

Ten years IS the short term.

ok, so when is the long term then, and also who is to say how it does in another 10 or 20 years based on whatever iteration they make in the meantime

Have you not noticed the negative responses to 5.5e? Have you not seen how things are splintering, folks are re-evaluating their commitments, sales aren't being crowed about from the rooftops, etc., etc.?

A new version always has some people not liking it, that is nothing new (and yes, I do nit like 2024 myself).

As to sales, all I have heard is that it was the fastest selling edition and that pretty much right now both starter sets are sold out. Not exactly a sign of low sales.

For someone like me, who credits a lot of the success of 5th Edition to a combination of luck and timing, it's really quite clear the honeymoon is over and folks aren't satisfied anymore. 5.5e will last a while, because a (first) re-release always does that.

I guess you are basing this more on your general dislike of 5e and cherry-picking than anything objective.

The honeymoon phase has been over for years, I have heard people saying it went downhill with Tasha’s, and yet D&D kept growing.

That being said, nothing grows forever, so and end of growth for a while is not the end of evergreen for me. For that it would have ti really tank.

"It succeeded so it will always succeed forever and everything after this should imitate it as closely as possible" is a really bad policy.

it is also contradicted by thousands of years ago f human history. I am not expecting that from literally anything, so if that is your requirement for something to be evergreen, then yeah, nothing ever will be

"5e was a success" isn't an argument that's going to get a lot of traction with me, more or less. Sure, what's past is prologue, but things change. If you think those changes don't matter, you're gonna have to actually bring evidence to the table.

how about you bring yours first for simple being the death of sales in the long run… I am not expecting 5e to last forever, I do not think its ‘simplicity’ will have anything to do with that however

I am very much of the opinion that the buying public has, over time, decided that 5e was simplification taken too far.

care to back that up with anything given your previous ‘you gotta bring evidence’?

Most of the successful / other TTRPGs are actually simpler than 5e, so the market seems to think 5e is at best to complex, but certainly not complex enough

Again in my own personal experience, the thing I hear from tons of people, across a wide gulf of interest, personal history, and rules-preferences, is that D&D 5th Edition does not give them enough personal expression in how they build their characters.

Assuming this were true for the general public, they would need more variety, that is not the same as wanting a more complex game

People are specifically talking about making every class more simple than it already is. That's the essence of "all simple all the time".

yes, I believe the whole game should be slightly simpler. Creating your character is part of that, as is having simple subclasses. That does nit mean that all of them have to be simple, ie your ‘all the time’ part.

I also see no evidence that 5e is losing any sales due to it being too low in complexity. Can it lack complexity for someone who has been playing for 7-10 years, sure, they might have seen it all by then, but again, it is evergreen if it keeps on bringing in new people all the time, not when it hangs on to the same 500k players forever.

People do not play D&D for 10 years, with very few exceptions, so designing a game that tries to do that over being easy for new people to pick up, will fail in a few years. See 3e

 

[tetrasodium]

I ignore internet drivel unless its hitting critical mass.
. No one's really hating on 5.5 that much relative to other cycles. Its more indifference.

Dagger Heart outsold expectations by 2500% and had to print off more books.

Draw Steel seems to be doing similar and already had to do the same. They are working on a dungeon crawler too but that's a ways off still.

Not sure how level up is selling but I got the impression that it did pretty well so might as well mention it too.

Finally you literally posted that in a thread talking about level 11-20 wizards in Mike Mearls's "Moldvey" patreon thing.


Kicking off healthy competitors is probably not on the goals list for 2024

 

[mamba]

Basic line lasted 17 years just saying. Technically 19.

and don’t forget that all the TSR lines shed sales fast, despite lasting for many years

1e and 2e do not look all that different either…

 

[tetrasodium]

Spoiler: super long BackNForth fisking

ok, so when is the long term then, and also who is to say how it does in another 10 or 20 years based on whatever iteration they make in the meantime


A new version always has some people not liking it, that is nothing new (and yes, I do nit like 2024 myself).

As to sales, all I have heard is that it was the fastest selling edition and that pretty much right now both starter sets are sold out. Not exactly a sign of low sales.


I guess you are basing this more on your general dislike of 5e and cherry-picking than anything objective.

The honeymoon phase has been over for years, I have heard people saying it went downhill with Tasha’s, and yet D&D kept growing.

That being said, nothing grows forever, so and end of growth for a while is not the end of evergreen for me. For that it would have ti really tank.



it is also contradicted by thousands of years ago f human history. I am not expecting that from literally anything, so if that is your requirement for something to be evergreen, then yeah, nothing ever will be


how about you bring yours first for simple being the death of sales in the long run… I am not expecting 5e to last forever, I do not think its ‘simplicity’ will have anything to do with that however


care to back that up with anything given your previous ‘you gotta bring evidence’?

Most of the successful / other TTRPGs are actually simpler than 5e, so the market seems to think 5e is at best to complex, but certainly not complex enough


Assuming this were true for the general public, they would need more variety, that is not the same as wanting a more complex game


yes, I believe the whole game should be slightly simpler. Creating your character is part of that, as is having simple subclasses. That does nit mean that all of them have to be simple, ie your ‘all the time’ part.

I also see no evidence that 5e is losing any sales due to it being too low in complexity. Can it lack complexity for someone who has been playing for 7-10 years, sure, they might have seen it all by then, but again, it is evergreen if it keeps on bringing in new people all the time, not when it hangs on to the same 500k players forever.

People do not play D&D for 10 years, with very few exceptions, so designing a game that tries to do that over being easy for new people to pick up, will fail in a few years. See 3e

[Rant]I hate how fisking makes it hard to respond to a post without making the resulting fisking worse.[/spoiler]

I seem to remember 3.5 ushering in the era of d20 clones making stuff that was largely compatible with 3.5 till 4e came along with the gsl trying to kill it rather than a seemingly healthy ecosystem of 3pp support for new systems that don't even use a d20.

 

[mamba]

Dagger Heart outsold expectations by 2500% and had to print off more books.

that 2500% is a BS number. It were true if you expected the sales of the first two weeks to continue at that rate for the rest of the year.

It is selling great for Darrington Press, no doubt, but I would like some absolute numbers rather than relative ones.

Kicking off healthy competitors is probably not on the goals list for 2024

then maybe they should not have meddled with the OGL in 2022, although it is unclear whether it would have prevented any of the current competitors to be made

 

[mamba]

I seem to remember 3.5 ushering in the era of d20 clones making stuff that was largely compatible with 3.5 till 4e came along

maybe that is what you remember, but the 3.5 sales were lower than the 3e sales (according to Ben Riggs) and both dropped off fast or we would not have gotten 3.5 three years after 3e and 4e five years after 3.5.

3e, 3.5, and 4e all sold decently for their first year, but dropped off fast, and each one had less total (PHB I assume) sales than the edition before it

 

[tetrasodium]

that 2500% is a BS number. It were true if you expected the sales of the first two weeks to continue at that rate for the rest of the year.

It is selling great for Darrington Press, no doubt, but I would like some absolute numbers rather than relative ones.


then maybe they should not have meddled with the OGL in 2022, although it is unclear whether it would have prevented any of the current competitors to be made

maybe that is what you remember, but the 3.5 sales were lower than the 3e sales (according to Ben Riggs) and both dropped off fast or we would not have gotten 3.5 three years after 3e and 4e five years after 3.5.

3e, 3.5, and 4e all sold decently for their first year, but dropped off fast, and each one had less total (PHB I assume) sales than the edition before it

Waiting for a second print run after selling out the first unexpectedly fast tends to limit sales of sold out books. The critical point is that both Dagger Heart and Draw Steel are developing their own ecosystems of 3rd party supplied content.

No analysis of why we got 4e can ignore the weight of hasbro wanting to kill off the d20 ecosystem with the GSL. But since you mentioned brn Riggs so highly ill drop this quote and this whole fisking silliness.

Riggs also spent a lot of time talking about how there was (and still is) a lot of internal politics that goes on with regard to WotC. He cites the company as having no single authority (where D&D is concerned), and that there are factions within the company that are engaged in power struggles to get their respective visions implemented (according to one of his sources, the word "Machiavellian" was used). The pro-OGL and anti-OGL factions are just two of them, and he compared and contrasted the disastrous 4E GSL to what happened this January with the OGL 1.1 fiasco.
...
One final note of interest: Riggs mentioned that he couldn't get anyone to talk to him about what's going on with One D&D, but that it seems emblematic of WotC still having a culture of warring factions. His big example there was how Mike Mearls, who wrote the 5E PHB (which according to Riggs' estimate has sold at least 3 million copies, if not more), is currently working on Magic: the Gathering instead of D&D. John Tynes, who wrote three of the top six best RPGs according to RPG.net, is also currently working on M:tG and not role-playing games. "Something," Riggs noted, "is rotten at Wizards of the Coast."

D&D 4E Thread 'Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023'

Aug 8, 2023

I made sure to attend Ben Riggs' seminar about the rise and fall of D&D 4E while I was at Gen Con. While it's been nearly a week since then (the seminar having happened Thursday afternoon), my memory isn't quite so bad that I can't recall the bulk of the salient points discussed there.

Now, I've mentioned before that I don't care much for Riggs' writing style. While he does good work, and his current book is absolutely worth reading, he unnecessarily damages his own credibility by openly presenting his own biases and opinions with regards to the people he's writing about (in...

• Alzrius
• Replies: 3,542
• Forum: D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants

• 
• 
•