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

[Distracted DM]

With 5e, though, even a round of inaction can spell quick doom. Two rounds and it's over. 5e has a very different combat balance than AD&D did.

Is this right? I don't remember most 2e combats lasting very long either.
3e I remember being longer.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think the central premise as that it's easier to land control spells in 5e AND it gets easier as you level.

Whereas in AD&D, you chance of landing spells for worse as you leveled, your ability to boost that was severely limited, you had to prepare them to slots, and bosses tended to be higher HD for better saves. So spells vs "bosses" were hail maries if they weren't immune.

Having to prepare spells slot by slot was orders of magnitude better for both the health of gameplay as well as encouraging players to plan to work together then follow through with doing so in service of competence porn teamwork. That applied to both casters and noncasters because both depended on each other to have their back with follow through on a plan and willingly engage in good faith communication rather than the way 5e tends to result in players who don't really care about working together soloing near each other while expecting their fellow party members to figure it out on the go or be just as big of an antisocial spotlight hog as they are.

 

[Maxperson]

Is this right? I don't remember most 2e combats lasting very long either.
3e I remember being longer.

The 2e fights I remember were longer, but not anything like 3e, some of which went more than one 4 hour session.

 

[Distracted DM]

Having to prepare spells slot by slot was orders of magnitude better for both the health of gameplay as well as encouraging players to plan to work together then follow through with doing so in service of competence porn teamwork. That applied to both casters and noncasters because both depended on each other to have their back with follow through on a plan and willingly engage in good faith communication rather than the way 5e tends to result in players who don't really care about working together soloing near each other while expecting their fellow party members to figure it out on the go or be just as big of an antisocial spotlight hog as they are.

I almost want to make vancian for 5e again and incentivize it somehow ... But I feel like any reasonable incentives would never be strong enough to make it worth taking over the existing system.

There must be existing work others have done in that line for 5e homebrew. But again I can't imagine anyone would use it without it being massively overpowered.

 

[ECMO3]

I think the central premise as that it's easier to land control spells in 5e AND it gets easier as you level.

Whereas in AD&D, you chance of landing spells for worse as you leveled, your ability to boost that was severely limited, you had to prepare them to slots, and bosses tended to be higher HD for better saves. So spells vs "bosses" were hail maries if they weren't immune.

I agree to a point, they are easier to land but they were not really hail marys in AD&D.

I think an Ancient Gold Dragon in AD&D saves on a 10 against a spell, an 8 if it is a polymproph spell. So cast it 3 turns in a row and you probably got him and if you do land it the fight is over.

Preparing spells slot by slot had its pluses and minuses. At low level it was a lot worse but at high level you are memorizing like 30 different spells a day.

 

[Distracted DM]

I agree to a point, they are easier to land but they were not really hail marys in AD&D.

I think an Ancient Gold Dragon in AD&D saves on a 10 against a spell, an 8 if it is a polymproph spell. So cast it 3 turns in a row and you probably got him and if you do land it the fight is over.

... If you entirely skip its 70% magic resistance, sure

 

[Zardnaar]

... If you entirely skip its 70% magic resistance, sure

How many HD does a ancient GD have in 2E?

 

[pemerton]

I think an Ancient Gold Dragon in AD&D saves on a 10 against a spell, an 8 if it is a polymproph spell. So cast it 3 turns in a row and you probably got him and if you do land it the fight is over.

... If you entirely skip its 70% magic resistance, sure

In 1st ed AD&D dragons don't have magic resistance.

But they do have special saving throws (MM, p 31):

When a dragon attains 5 or more hit points per die, its saving throw is calculated by dividing its total hit points by 4, thus giving a higher number of hit dice than it actually has. This reflects the magic resistance and general toughness of this creature. Conversely, even a very young dragon gains the benefit of the actual number of its hit dice, even though the hit point/die are but 1 each, for determining scores required. This reflects the same nature of dragonkind, i.e. magic resistance and toughness.​

So an ancient dragon, which has 8 hp per die, has saving throws based on HD equal to twice its actual HD. For a gold dragon, those actual HD are 10 to 12 (depending on size) and so saving throws are at HD 20 to 24.

As per page 79 of the DMG,

Most monsters save as fighters, except:

1. Those with abilities of other character classes gain the benefit of the most favorable saving throw score, i.e. be it cleric or magic-user or thief.​

So an ancient gold dragon has the best saves of a fighter or MU of level 20 to 24 (depending on size). That's 3/4/5/4/6 at level 20, and 3/4/3/4/4 above that.

Hold Monster targeted at a single creature gives a -3 on the saving throw, so that is a 7 to save. The chance of making 3 such saves in a row is a touch over 1 in 3.