• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D (2024) Playtest 8 Spell Discussion

Gadget

Adventurer
For some reason, there is no verbiage about moving the elemental in the Conjure Elemental spell. That seems like a serious oversight. On the other hand, Conjure Minor Elementals seems to scale extremely well, at 2d8 per level.

I like the changes to Cure Wounds (and Mass Cure Wounds), as that spell has the opportunity cost of requiring an action and touch and was overshadowed by Healing Word. Not sure about the Healing Word buff though. I don't want a return to the old days where having a heal bot in the party is required for optimal play.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


"You cant move the spirit."

Not sure what you are referring to.

The caster can relocate the conjured spirit. For example, Conjure Fey: "As a Bonus Action on your later turns, you can teleport the spirit to an unoccupied space you can see within 30 feet of the space it left ..."
But with Conjure elemental there is no indication on how to move or relocate the spirit.
 

Yaarel

He-Mage
But with Conjure elemental there is no indication on how to move or relocate the spirit.
Yeah. The Conjure Elemental spell needs a way to locomote. Elementals should move around. As a slot 5 spell, it doesnt need worry too much about propelling (Push, Pull) a Restrained target.
 
Last edited:


Vaalingrade

Legend
But in the 2024 Players Handbook, I prefer clean and meaningful, and elegant.
I feel like we all knew that was never going to happen and it was just going to be natural language'd. I'm just happy to have some useful tagging on the spells so you know at the glace what class gets them t base.
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I notice,

All of the Playtest8 spells lack a Material component.

In 2014, the Material component including any gp component is visual pollution. I hope it is gone from every 2024 spell.
Do I get to get rid of everything that I don't like as "visual pollution?"
Wizards dont use material components. Wizards use wands, or other implement.
That really hasn't been true in any incarnation of D&D, except maybe 4e. I don't know that edition. It's also not true in other media. Sometimes wizards do in fact use components in books or other media.
Clerics dont use material components. Clerics use holy symbols.
This is also not entirely true. The exorcism spell involves the holy water component during the prayer according to many movies and TV shows that I've seen.
Bards dont use material components. Bards use a musical instrument, or pure voice, or pure somatic dance.
Says who? There's no real world analogue, so WotC determines what bards use and they use components and/or an instrument.
Indeed it is always the class that determines how to cast a spell. Not the spell description.
Not in D&D.
The removal of the pollution of the Material component is excellent!
I say we remove the monk pollution and bard pollution. Those have been visual pollutions since 1e. It's time for them to go.
 

Yaarel

He-Mage
Do I get to get rid of everything that I don't like as "visual pollution?"

That really hasn't been true in any incarnation of D&D, except maybe 4e. I don't know that edition. It's also not true in other media. Sometimes wizards do in fact use components in books or other media.

This is also not entirely true. The exorcism spell involves the holy water component during the prayer according to many movies and TV shows that I've seen.

Says who? There's no real world analogue, so WotC determines what bards use and they use components and/or an instrument.

Not in D&D.

I say we remove the monk pollution and bard pollution. Those have been visual pollutions since 1e. It's time for them to go.
In English class, my teacher taught me the concept of "dead wood".

If there is a text, and one can remove some of that text, and the text still works fine, then that removable text is "dead wood". For the sake of modern communication, it is important to prune away any dead wood.


Same thing for a movie. If the editor can remove a scene, and the story feels the same, it is better to remove the unnecessary scene, rather than have a movie drag on or confuse.
 
Last edited:

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
In English class, my teacher taught me the concept of "dead wood".

If there is a text, and one can remove some that text, and the text still works fine, then that removable text is "dead wood". For the sake of modern communication, it is important to prune away any dead wood.
That doesn't apply to games where there exists different functionality. RPGs are not just an exercise in writing. Given the fact(and it is a fact) that the inclusion of classes in the spell descriptions and components in spell descriptions adds ease of use and functionality that is enjoyable, they are not "dead wood."

It doesn't matter if you personally find the classes and component inclusion to be confusing or unenjoyable, because you aren't everyone and don't get to decide things for other people.

A lot of people enjoy spell components for spells. A lot don't. WotC came to a great compromise in 5e with the spell component pouch that allowed those who don't like it to not use it except for really costly components. The solution here is for YOU to ignore spell components if you don't like them, not take them away from those who do.

A lot of people really like to see which classes can use a given spell included in the spell. It really helps and doesn't seem to confuse or mislead anyone but you. At least I haven't seen or heard of anyone else being confused or mislead by it. The solution here is for you to just ignore it and look at the master list every time, not take it away(or prevent the inclusion of) from those who do.

Also, we can completely remove bards and monks from the game and the text(RPG) still works fine. Those are dead wood according to you, as are every other class, every race, every weapon, every spell and more.
 

Remove ads

Top