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

[tetrasodium]

The user can be as skilled as you like but if the gun itself is unreliable all that skill ain't gonna help.

Very much agree. The failure to provide a sidebar cutout option that strips at will cantrips and replaces them with something else no longer unlimited at will auto scaling by character level after so many years is incredibly frustrating. I'm tired of the accusations faced from being sandwiched between ignored problems dismissed with "we did this to make it easy do you could homebrew it" and players outraged by blatant nerfs on PC's that are overtuned by design

 

[Lanefan]

So every military professional working with a gun 150 years ago was getting a misfire about once every twelve seconds, causing an outright explosion which injured themselves and their allies every 24 seconds?

Really, Lanefan? Really?

This is absolutely ridiculous. This is not realistic. It is not how learning to use a gun works. You can, in fact, mitigate sources of misfire by learning to use it better. Which is what being Gunslinger 16+ means: you are one of the most skilled gunslingers to ever live.

Were it me, after 16+ levels* of getting blown up on a regular basis I'd probably decide Gunslinger is not the trade for me and pick up a bow instead.

And no, it's not realistic; it's a gamist construct put in to limit the effectiveness and-or appeal of firearms, which - as real-world history clearly shows - otherwise would soon render all other forms of combat moot: the person or side with the (bigger) guns wins.

* - or, more likely, considerably fewer than 16.....

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Were it me, after 16+ levels* of getting blown up on a regular basis I'd probably decide Gunslinger is not the trade for me and pick up a bow instead.

And no, it's not realistic; it's a gamist construct put in to limit the effectiveness and-or appeal of firearms, which - as real-world history clearly shows - otherwise would soon render all other forms of combat moot: the person or side with the (bigger) guns wins.

* - or, more likely, considerably fewer than 16.....

...
The firearms are already designed to not be better, Lanefan.

They are just different from regular weapons. They aren't better. A pistol is 1d8 damage, only 20 ft range, criticals do x3 damage instead of x2 damage. That's it. A regular pistol is identical in stats to a longbow...except it's vastly more expensive and has only 1/5th the range and might explode when you use it.

 

[SkidAce]

So every military professional working with a gun 150 years ago was getting a misfire about once every twelve seconds, causing an outright explosion which injured themselves and their allies every 24 seconds?

Really, Lanefan? Really?

This is absolutely ridiculous. This is not realistic. It is not how learning to use a gun works. You can, in fact, mitigate sources of misfire by learning to use it better. Which is what being Gunslinger 16+ means: you are one of the most skilled gunslingers to ever live.

The more often I fired the M60 in the military the more often it jammed.

My skill and aptitude with the weapon can increase, but the quality of the weapon is static. (aside from proper maintenance of course)

This issue of misfires is really only used for primitive firearms, to create the "inherent risk" of using unstable technology. That why we don't have "misfires" for swords and bows and hammers, etc.

Hence, firearms are mainly goblin inventions in my world, cause they don't care, they like the "Boom!"

 

[Zardnaar]

I absolutely 100% complain about crit fumble tables.

If all nat 1 does is miss, I could not care less.

Misfire breaks the weapon, and a second misfire MAKES IT EXPLODE.

That should not be happening four times as fast when you have become one of the greatest gubslingers alive.

Gunslinger concept fairly stupid in D&D games unless you have revolvers or magical equivalent.

Pathfinder one was also silly. Iirc it was also ranged touch attacks.

Its just easier to not have them.