D&D General Mike Mearls says control spells are ruining 5th Edition

[Stalker0]

Cough

4e did it. 5e copied.

I don’t believe so. Might have been a few powers that allowed it, but in general you could not move 2 squares, so a power, and then move the rest of your speed.

 

[Minigiant]

I don’t believe so. Might have been a few powers that allowed it, but in general you could not move 2 squares, so a power, and then move the rest of your speed.

Most strikers has attack powers that have movement and minor action movement powers.
And the ones that didn't had pushed and slides so you technically moved away.

Some defenders too.

 

[Zardnaar]

Thought I did

6 saves is better that 3 saves because if you actually design spells targeting all six saves, a spellcaster would have to prepare six spells in order to properly Target a weak save.

If you only have three saving throws then a spellcaster only needs to prepare three spells in order to always Target the weak save.

AKA Preparing

Watery Sphere
Ice Storm
Cone of Cold
Synaptic Static
Charm Monster
Banishment

Vs
Ice Storm
Cone of Cold
Charm Monster

Targeting a monster's worth save would be more costly when you have six saves to worry about.



Nah it's really just that fans want some really strong control or control effects and making them only 1 roll Save or Suck is too much.

Since D&D is not going to go with tiered levels of success. It might have to go with "Fail Twice and Suck".

It's actually easier than it look because you're just rolling against the same DC twice most of the time.

Roll twice vs spell DC.
Succeed twice, no effect.
Faill once, minor effect.
Fail twice, major effect..
Roll 2 1s, Roll a new PC.

3 saves and no weak saves or the difference is 1-4 points vs 11.

Designing more spells isnt the solution when simple fix is eliminate bad saves.

 

[Minigiant]

3 saves and no weak saves or the difference is 1-4 points vs 11.

Designing more spells isnt the solution when simple fix is eliminate bad saves.

My point is you're more likely to get Wizards to design more spells than to design a system where there's no bad saves.

Because many of the problems are self-inflicted via bias and nostalgia.

 

[Zardnaar]

My point is you're more likely to get Wizards to design more spells than to design a system where there's no bad saves.

Because many of the problems are self-inflicted via bias and nostalgia.

Bad saves were only one edition.

Tradition and nostalgia you would have good saves.

 

[Lanefan]

Its also adding complexity for complexity sake.

You would have to add a lot of spells. Theres around 9 that target intelligence iirc.

Easy enough to tweak any spell that targets either Intelligence or Wisdom to instead target both, with the victim having to use the worse of the two saves...

 

[Lanefan]

Hot take: if the issues in Tier 2 5th edition happen in Tier 1, 5e sells less than 4e. 5e is lucky that most of the criticisms arrive with it happen around the time most campaigns end.

That's not luck, that's actual good design: you get the bits right that most of the people are going to use most of the time, then let the other bits (that people don't use nearly as often) fend for themselves.

1e and 3e did much the same thing. They got low-mid level right - which is where the vast majority of play occurs - and didn't worry nearly as much about high level where the wheels fall off.

 

[Lanefan]

Bad saves were only one edition.

Tradition and nostalgia you would have good saves.

Tradition and nostalgia would lead to both - you'd have bad saves at low level progressing to good saves at high level.

 

[tetrasodium]

Thought I did

6 saves is better that 3 saves because if you actually design spells targeting all six saves, a spellcaster would have to prepare six spells in order to properly Target a weak save.

If you only have three saving throws then a spellcaster only needs to prepare three spells in order to always Target the weak save.

AKA Preparing

Watery Sphere
Ice Storm
Cone of Cold
Synaptic Static
Charm Monster
Banishment

Vs
Ice Storm
Cone of Cold
Charm Monster

Targeting a monster's worth save would be more costly when you have six saves to worry about.



Nah it's really just that fans want some really strong control or control effects and making them only 1 roll Save or Suck is too much.

Since D&D is not going to go with tiered levels of success. It might have to go with "Fail Twice and Suck".

It's actually easier than it look because you're just rolling against the same DC twice most of the time.

Roll twice vs spell DC.
Succeed twice, no effect.
Faill once, minor effect.
Fail twice, major effect..
Roll 2 1s, Roll a new PC.

This reads a lot like "6 is better than 3 if d&d d&d 5e had done something hypothetical that it didn't do and that hypothetical did not also create a bunch of new problems instead of being pixie dust" it falls apart immediately because players are still equipped with neovancian prep and could have enough of the S A+ and A tier spells while the missing safeguards assure the most optimal slot distribution. Your still relying on safeguards like vancian prep to make it work but those aren't present in 5e either. All your hypothetical pixie dust would do is create more top tier spells and make it even easier to target weak saves

Instead it had every Warrior attempting to gain out a full attack action against a monster.

Either everybody stayed in one spot and full attack each other. Or everybody chased it one another making only one main attack and one AoO.

This is where the Control Wizards eventually started showing up because it became a lot more tactically sound to paralyze or slow enemies so that your warriors could walk up to them one turn and in the next turn full attack them down to sliced mild cheddar

This is bizarre. 5e combat is far more static than it was in the past and a big part of that is the fact that PCs don't need to consider OAs as meaningful risk on the odd chance they are even subject to them now that AoOs are gone. If the goal is to make combat involve more dynamic fluid movement it needs to provide positive design for that supported by tactical elements like draw steel rather than stripping all of the tactical elements and adding a time suck

 

[Stormonu]

Or decouple saves from ability scores altogether and put them at fixed values, possibly by class and level - more akin to 1E/2E. Just be less arbitrary with the save names (I'd be comfortable with using Fort, Reflex, Will and have spells target one of the three).