D&D 5E (2024) NPCs, and the poverty of the core books

[Cadence]

I don't remember anyone ever preparing absorb elements even after playing with many different groups. So I'm with you, in my experience it's a niche spell that is rarely used.

A druid/barbarian in a game I'm on usually has it ready at least once a day ..

...but it might be an item.

 

[AlViking]

Like I said IME every Ranger, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer and Artificer have it prepared. It is not often cast and its use is situational, but they always have it IME.

And IME I may or may not have seen it once. Between multiple home games, game days, conventions I've likely played with significantly more than 50 people over the years.

So either it's not as wide spread as you claim, it's just coincidence that the people you play with have it, or you have confirmation bias.

 

[ECMO3]

And IME I may or may not have seen it once. Between multiple home games, game days, conventions I've likely played with significantly more than 50 people over the years.

So either it's not as wide spread as you claim, it's just coincidence that the people you play with have it, or you have confirmation bias.

Or it is coincidence that those you play with don't? I've played with around 50 different players in the last 6 months alone. I am playing in 4 weekly campaigns right now, with 2 more campaigns I play less frequently. I guess our experiences just differ.

I still think fire resistance is pretty common in PCs, even if Absorb Elements is not ubiquitous, and I am also confident that the average party in tier 2+ can easily heal to stay ahead of AOEs for most fights that fall within the design norms.

 

[Maxperson]

Or it is coincidence that those you play with don't? I've played with around 50 different players in the last 6 months alone. I am playing in 4 weekly campaigns right now, with 2 more campaigns I play less frequently. I guess our experiences just differ.

I still think fire resistance is pretty common in PCs, even if Absorb Elements is not ubiquitous, and I am also confident that the average party in tier 2+ can easily heal to stay ahead of AOEs for most fights that fall within the design norms.

There aren't any design norms for deadly encounters. It's X+, where X is the number you see listed as deadly on the chart. Anything and everything above X is still just deadly.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Then we can never agree because I think your approach is terrible and has little to no benefit

To me the purpose of rules is to represent fiction. If any rule can represent any fiction, then there is really no reason to have different rules. That is to say that if warlock rules can represent artificer and vice versa, then there is no need to have different rules for artificers and warlocks in the first place.

 

[AlViking]

Or it is coincidence that those you play with don't? I've played with around 50 different players in the last 6 months alone. I am playing in 4 weekly campaigns right now, with 2 more campaigns I play less frequently. I guess our experiences just differ.

I still think fire resistance is pretty common in PCs, even if Absorb Elements is not ubiquitous, and I am also confident that the average party in tier 2+ can easily heal to stay ahead of AOEs for most fights that fall within the design norms.

You asserted that every caster who can have the spell does. They obviously do not. From my experience I'd be surprised if even a significant percentage do because it's a niche spell and while it's nice to have most of the time it's use would be far rarer than other spells that could be prepared instead.

I've been surprised before but without survey data we'll never know.

 

[Maxperson]

Then we can never agree because I think your approach is terrible and has little to no benefit

YOUR approach is terrible and has little to no benefit!!!! Well, no, not really. It's just different. Both approaches have pros and cons and you view yours as having awesome pros and cons that are minimal. I have a different view.

This is a situation where neither of us can be right or wrong, because it's purely a preference thing. But hey, if you want to denigrate other folks preferences instead of just acknowledging that we have different priorities and preferences, go for it I guess.

 

[TwoSix]

Like I said IME every Ranger, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer and Artificer have it prepared. It is not often cast and its use is situational, but they always have it IME.

Yep. If a class has Absorb Elements, then the character has it learned/prepped, assuming they're past level 5 and aren't dependent on 1st level slots for offense. Same thing with Shield, and for the players who are plugged into the 5e ecosystem, Silvery Barbs.

 

[GobHag]

To me the purpose of rules is to represent fiction. If any rule can represent any fiction, then there is really no reason to have different rules. That is to say that if warlock rules can represent artificer and vice versa, then there is no need to have different rules for artificers and warlocks in the first place.

Rules to me are, fundamentally, mental toys--the reason for each existing is that both create a different gameplay experience on the table and in char-building. They're there to also inspire players to create an in-fiction construct of themes and aesthetic they're into, but that's a secondary concern. I'm very much not a fiction first kinda guy, and certainly not someone that finds verisimilitude anything but a nice bonus AT BEST.

And the rules for Pact Magic and Invocation doesn't have enough ties to the fiction itself for me to even say that there'd be a conflict--Treating invocations as just the player upgrading their Arcane-Engine Ensemble doesn't seem at all conflicting with the mechanics, with only the CHA keystat focus being the only 'big' hurdle.

But then again, INT is a weaker stat so balance-wise if they're fine making changing the keystat to CHA it's still a-okay in my table.

YOUR approach is terrible and has little to no benefit!!!! Well, no, not really. It's just different. Both approaches have pros and cons and you view yours as having awesome pros and cons that are minimal. I have a different view.

This is a situation where neither of us can be right or wrong, because it's purely a preference thing. But hey, if you want to denigrate other folks preferences instead of just acknowledging that we have different priorities and preferences, go for it I guess.

Thank you for accepting my denigration of something you held dearly and clearly care for. I am not being sarcastic despite your clear sarcam and I am not being apologetic for my rudeness earlier, it was deliberate.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Rules to me are, fundamentally, mental toys--the reason for each existing is that both create a different gameplay experience on the table and in char-building. They're there to also inspire players to create an in-fiction construct of themes and aesthetic they're into, but that's a secondary concern. I'm very much not a fiction first kinda guy, and certainly not someone that finds verisimilitude anything but a nice bonus AT BEST.

And the rules for Pact Magic and Invocation doesn't have enough ties to the fiction itself for me to even say that there'd be a conflict--Treating invocations as just the player upgrading their Arcane-Engine Ensemble doesn't seem at all conflicting with the mechanics, with only the CHA keystat focus being the only 'big' hurdle.

But then again, INT is a weaker stat so balance-wise if they're fine making changing the keystat to CHA it's still a-okay in my table.


Thank you for accepting my denigration of something you held dearly and clearly care for. I am not being sarcastic despite your clear sarcam and I am not being apologetic for my rudeness earlier, it was deliberate.

Deliberate rudeness is generally frowned upon on this board.