Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Huntsman57" data-source="post: 7113498" data-attributes="member: 6803721">Back in the days of 2E and 3E, "save or suck" spells were arguably very over-powered. Yet, I rarely used them. Largely this was based on the concern of getting unlucky with the result being that I'd burn through spell slot after spell slot, and waste round after round, without having a useful impact on the combat.In the current 5E iteration, these spells have been significantly nerfed, though arguably this is a good thing. Still, if my concerns about wasting spell slots and having no impact on a fight were of a concern then, they certainly are now.At the end of the day, one could argue that being, say a fighter, isn't much different. You could swing your sword, whiff the roll, and during that round, you didn't have an impact on the fight that round. Not only is the fighter more likely to have multiple attacks however, but more importantly, he isn't limited by a feature like spell slots. He can attack as much as he wants all day long.At the end of the day, while I like 5E spell casting overall, I feel as though spells including, but not limited to Charm Person, Hold Person, Slow, Confusion, and Flesh to Stone should have some small 1 round long impact on their targets even if the saving throw is successful. What kind of impact this is may vary, but many of these spells seem to have an overall common thread that is to wrest control of a target's body or mind. So, a minor 1 round long debilitating effect while the target attempts to shrug the spell off might be reasonable.Potentially, the higher the level of spell, the stronger the effect, but as an example, a 1st or 2nd level spell (or a spell cast at these levels) will always create a -1 to attack rolls, AC, and dex saving throws. This might increase to -2 for spells cast at levels 3-5, and a spell cast at levels 6-9 might cause disadvantage for that single round. Thoughts?</blockquote>

Verification