D&D 5E Reducing High Magic (6th-9th levels) Spell Slots Option

[DND_Reborn]

Just how good an AC are your spellcasters rocking?

We have one with absolutely NO DEX mod, sitting at 19 IIRC, the next is at 21 I think, and I have a 24. All three of use can buff our ACs via Shield, which is used often against foes we think will hit us. For our games we have a house-rule in place that does bump our AC, BUT to counter-balance that we play opponents get the following modifiers for every full 5 points of CR:

+1 to AC
+1 to attack rolls
+1 to all saves
+1 to all skills
+1 to all save DCs for spells and effects.

So, the earlier aforementioned Storm Giant (CR 13) would get a +2 to all those. Basically, if a d20 is rolled for something, they get the bonus to it as well as their AC. The Nightwalker we battled last session "rocked" +4 to all of them.

Casters are already weak as they are.

Correct me if I am wrong, but in the thread about the most powerful level 20 class, weren't you arguing (alongside myself and others) that wizards were the strongest class???

Nothing from the OP indicates to me that he isn't already familiar with "mix up your encounters" and "use counterspells".

Thanks. Yes, I am very familiar with those things. In fact, we've found counterspells to be too powerful since we do have three casters in the group and rarely does the game world also have three casters in an encounter who can attempt to counterspell our counterspell.

I should point out, we play in a world were the tiers are honored by NPC and PC alike. In that I mean you are not going to find a group of archmages all working together typically. High level PCs and NPCs alike a 1 in tens if not hundreds of thousands. For example, we could find clerics to cast raise dead during our adventures, but never encountered one who could cast true resurrection.

 

[Helldritch]

There are better ways to control the flow of the fame than to nerf casters to the ground but they requore a bit more work.

Changing the playstyle a bit to be more in line with the premisses of the game will always be better than the nerf bat.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The first question the OP implied, do I think the addition of more lower level spellslots will compensate for the loss of the higher level ones? That answer to that is no. In my experience (I have run one campaign that ended at 20th level in 5e), casters have enough of the lower level magics, especially when rituals are factored in, and those magics are not the equal of the higher level powers. So this houserule is a nerf to high level casters. Whether your group believes casters need a nerf at high level is completely up to your group, but I would say this is one.

What do you think of the idea of the extra slots translating into a spell slot "pool" they could draw on for any spell of level 1-5? At 20th level this would be a pool of 28 spell levels, which could be quite a few extra mid-level spells.

Also, do you see my point about how powerful these high magic spells are? They can easily shift the course of an encounter, and while I think being able to do them once or twice is fine, having 4-6 of them is just too much. It means for most random encounter "adventuring days" they can use them very freely. I mean, we change things up so what starts as a random encounter turns into a full blown adventure with several encounter before a long rest, but as a DM I don't like to resort to this too often.

Then the question comes down to...is the problem your trying to solve preventing the "nova" or the "everyday nova". For example, one houserule I've been tinkering with is the notion that high level magic slots are per adventure instead of per day. But they would keep their slots as is...or maybe even have more slots. So this means that a caster could throw down on a given day when they need to....but once that high magic is blown, its blown for a long time. Part of my desire for this is just to change the world issue of "why don't high level casters just run everything". If high level magics are literally moments of story, powers that a wizard may not recover for years (at least for npcs that don't adventure)....then it makes them a lot "cooler" and less spammable.

A single encounter NOVA I am fine with, which for many encounters I consider a single high magic spell. What I don't like is multiple novas between rests.

I think restricting them to per adventure might be too harsh, but I know you mentioned giving them more slots, so it might balance out. However, then nothing would stop them from using 2 or more high magic spells in an encounter!

From this idea and some of the earlier posts, I am sort of leaning towards the idea that you can only recover one high magic slot per long rest. So, after resting in town for several days, you are full up. But, once you use a slot, you will only get that one back. Use another, and suddenly you are down one likely until the current adventure is over. Use another, and now you are down two, etc.

For me, this represents the idea that the caster with ample time to prepare is as ready as possible, but once danger is lurking it becomes harder and harder to replenish those powerful spells. What do you think of that idea? I might be able to go with that one...

' Part of my desire for this is just to change the world issue of "why don't high level casters just run everything" '

Yeah, they would IMO.

I know in our final endgame for our main campaign we are facing a CR 23 Wizard while multiple high magic. As a DM, I don't see us winning this fight... I know a wizard, especially since we have to face him on his home turf, is going to be nearly impossible to defeat. I haven't seen his info, but I know our DM and our first encounter with him he was so cocky he used a wish spell to return on of our dead comrades to life, just for the fun of it.

 

[Helldritch]

Correct me if I am wrong, but in the thread about the most powerful level 20 class, weren't you arguing (alongside myself and others) that wizards were the strongest class???

I should point out, we play in a world were the tiers are honored by NPC and PC alike. In that I mean you are not going to find a group of archmages all working together typically. High level PCs and NPCs alike a 1 in tens if not hundreds of thousands. For example, we could find clerics to cast raise dead during our adventures, but never encountered one who could cast true resurrection.

Yes, especially in 1ed... In 5ed they are the strongest at AoE and other casters are strong in their niche too. But at single target, they all suck. So they need their spell slot ro remain strong. Thus removing their high level slots nerfs them with a two tons nerf bat.

Ok, you respect the tiers. Great. It means that the mob tactics of surrounding the PCs with enough mobs tonrestraon their mobility followed by a silence spell should work just fine. But consider this: if your PCs do not encounter multiple high level casters while they are themselves high level casters, shouldn't a few of their potential foes get worried? Shouldn’t they form an alliance to get rid of the problem that the PCs are causing? Evil does not always stand alone waiting for the PCs. Hiring high level assassins can be a way for them to get rid of the problematic PCs.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yes, especially in 1ed... In 5ed they are the strongest at AoE and other casters are strong in their niche too. But at single target, they all suck. So they need their spell slot ro remain strong. Thus removing their high level slots nerfs them with a two tons nerf bat.

More like two pounds... maybe two kilograms... of nerfing.

Ok, you respect the tiers. Great. It means that the mob tactics of surrounding the PCs with enough mobs tonrestraon their mobility followed by a silence spell should work just fine. But consider this: if your PCs do not encounter multiple high level casters while they are themselves high level casters, shouldn't a few of their potential foes get worried? Shouldn’t they form an alliance to get rid of the problem that the PCs are causing? Evil does not always stand alone waiting for the PCs. Hiring high level assassins can be a way for them to get rid of the problematic PCs.

I wonder from your responses just how familiar you are with tier 4 play and what those spells can accomplish? My PC would not be very concerned, TBH, because there aren't that many NPCs or creatures out there she is likely to encounter that would defeat her. Worst case scenario, she has to flee to fight another day.

At any rate, if you feel this is not a problem in your games, great. I see it as an issue in ours as we have recently played through tiers 3 and 4. I've seen the stuff our DM has thrown at us to try to make it challenging and it is ridiculous. The only time at this point a PC dies, I can honestly say it was because of player error--just making a dumb choice--not even an unlucky roll or something.

So, I put your vote down as a nerf, thanks for participating.

 

[Coroc]

Actually, using wish to copy 8th or lower level spells doesn't bug me much, but there are a lot of 9th level spells that are just crazy IMO.

So, what were you thinking???

at these levels you are supposed to be powerful. If some spells hurt your campaign context, then rather make them unavailable

 

[Helldritch]

What do you think of the idea of the extra slots translating into a spell slot "pool" they could draw on for any spell of level 1-5? At 20th level this would be a pool of 28 spell levels, which could be quite a few extra mid-level spells.

Also, do you see my point about how powerful these high magic spells are? They can easily shift the course of an encounter, and while I think being able to do them once or twice is fine, having 4-6 of them is just too much. It means for most random encounter "adventuring days" they can use them very freely. I mean, we change things up so what starts as a random encounter turns into a full blown adventure with several encounter before a long rest, but as a DM I don't like to resort to this too often.


A single encounter NOVA I am fine with, which for many encounters I consider a single high magic spell. What I don't like is multiple novas between rests.

I think restricting them to per adventure might be too harsh, but I know you mentioned giving them more slots, so it might balance out. However, then nothing would stop them from using 2 or more high magic spells in an encounter!

From this idea and some of the earlier posts, I am sort of leaning towards the idea that you can only recover one high magic slot per long rest. So, after resting in town for several days, you are full up. But, once you use a slot, you will only get that one back. Use another, and suddenly you are down one likely until the current adventure is over. Use another, and now you are down two, etc.

For me, this represents the idea that the caster with ample time to prepare is as ready as possible, but once danger is lurking it becomes harder and harder to replenish those powerful spells. What do you think of that idea? I might be able to go with that one...

' Part of my desire for this is just to change the world issue of "why don't high level casters just run everything" '

Yeah, they would IMO.

I know in our final endgame for our main campaign we are facing a CR 23 Wizard while multiple high magic. As a DM, I don't see us winning this fight... I know a wizard, especially since we have to face him on his home turf, is going to be nearly impossible to defeat. I haven't seen his info, but I know our DM and our first encounter with him he was so cocky he used a wish spell to return on of our dead comrades to life, just for the fun of it.

Here is the answer. You should win. Fill yourselves with counter spells, make sure one of you is within counter spell range. If that mage is truly alone, he is toast. But that is an easy answer for I am not in your game.

But why aren't high level casters do not run everything? That is a good question. The truth is that it is simply not what they want. High level casters have no interest in temporal powers. They're aiming for immortality, assencion into godhood, lichdom and other esotheric pursuits. It was easier to see the answer in older editions as casters of these levels were rare and even rarer in player case. Now, it us not that easy but the old tropes are still valid enough to ne satisfactory answers.

 

[Helldritch]

More like two pounds... maybe two kilograms... of nerfing.



I wonder from your responses just how familiar you are with tier 4 play and what those spells can accomplish? My PC would not be very concerned, TBH, because there aren't that many NPCs or creatures out there she is likely to encounter that would defeat her. Worst case scenario, she has to flee to fight another day.

At any rate, if you feel this is not a problem in your games, great. I see it as an issue in ours as we have recently played through tiers 3 and 4. I've seen the stuff our DM has thrown at us to try to make it challenging and it is ridiculous. The only time at this point a PC dies, I can honestly say it was because of player error--just making a dumb choice--not even an unlucky roll or something.

So, I put your vote down as a nerf, thanks for participating.

To answer your question. All too familiar.

 

[DND_Reborn]

@Helldritch , I am done responding to you for this topic. Thank you for your insight, and have a nice day.

 

[DND_Reborn]

at these levels you are supposed to be powerful. If some spells hurt your campaign context, then rather make them unavailable

This is also an option which will be discussed today.