D&D 5E Spellcasters and Balance in 5e: A Poll

[Mort]

Gotta disagree from experience. But I am sure by your post that you have that problem. Good luck dealing with it.

So you're saying that in 5e; in your experience, if you only run one (or even a few) encounter(s) between rests, spellcasters do not tend to dominate?

And no, I don't have that problem, because I recognize the issue and know how to deal with it.

 

[Minigiant]

That’s a DM problem not a system problem

It's a system problem if the system doesn't inform DMs how to pace in different ways or assumes an unrealistic pace.

 

[Manbearcat]

The tragic truth of option 2 (where the bulk of respondents are landing) is that, while it’s a legitimate option for a D&D poll, it’s basically a non sequitor as participant skill increases. Fundamentally, skillfully deployed control that lands is effectively “Save or Die” on anything that doesn’t have Legendary Resistance…and skillfully deployed AoE control (particularly by an Enchanter with Portent) just cripples Team Monster. The fact that you then have to melee at-will or Cantrip the HP to 0 doesn’t change the situation from a fait accompli. It’s like saying “you’re such a good marksman…yes you are (!)” after someone has scooped the impossible to shoot fish into a wee barrel!

I mean…Legendary Resistance wouldn’t be designed into the game to “patch” the problem if this weren’t true. The fact that you have to sneak in “Spell Plot Armor” to BBEG in order to protect against said fait accompli is basically the deign smoking gun.

 

[Minigiant]

The tragic truth of option 2 (where the bulk of respondents are landing) is that, while it’s a legitimate option for a D&D poll, it’s basically a non sequitor as participant skill increases. Fundamentally, skillfully deployed control that lands is effectively “Save or Die” on anything that doesn’t have Legendary Resistance…and skillfully deployed AoE control (particularly by an Enchanter with Portent) just cripples Team Monster. The fact that you then have to melee at-will or Cantrip the HP to 0 doesn’t change the situation from a fait accompli. It’s like saying “you’re such a good marksman…yes you are (!)” after someone has scooped the impossible to shoot fish into a wee barrel!

I mean…Legendary Resistance wouldn’t be designed into the game to “patch” the problem if this weren’t true. The fact that you have to sneak in “Spell Plot Armor” to BBEG in order to protect against said fait accompli is basically the deign smoking gun.

Well... only 1 edition ever really managed to do option 2... well.

A big issue D&D always had its fans have conflicting desires.
A lot of conflicting desires.
The same fan wants 12 things in D&D that conflict with each other.

 

[Asisreo]

So you're saying that in 5e; in your experience, if you only run one (or even a few) encounter(s) between rests, spellcasters do not tend to dominate?

And no, I don't have that problem, because I recognize the issue and know how to deal with it.

Depends on the actual encounter(s). Running a single encounter a day can be extremely interesting and can keep casters on their toes as long as the actual encounter isn't stagnate and predictable.

You'd have to go over "Deadly" by a certain magnitude but as long as these encounter's aren't "solo monster no legendary action/resistance" encounters with creatures with more than just an "attack" action, an interesting encounter is bound to happen.

The difference between a single death knight and a death knight with a few ghasts/ghouls/wights makes it so that no single combat option is as effective as it would be with only the death knight.

 

[Mort]

Depends on the actual encounter(s). Running a single encounter a day can be extremely interesting and can keep casters on their toes as long as the actual encounter isn't stagnate and predictable.

You'd have to go over "Deadly" by a certain magnitude but as long as these encounter's aren't "solo monster no legendary action/resistance" encounters with creatures with more than just an "attack" action, an interesting encounter is bound to happen.

The difference between a single death knight and a death knight with a few ghasts/ghouls/wights makes it so that no single combat option is as effective as it would be with only the death knight.

Sure, if you properly design the once per rest encounter it can be extremely interesting / challenging etc. And it can be very cool.

BUT, this works best if you understand that the encounter MUST be designed differently - and that's part of pacing.

 

[tetrasodium]

But a properly utilized spellcaster can exponentially increase the effectiveness of any of those classes. Which is the point as D&D is, generally, a team game.

Maybe in a whiteroom with little resemblance to normal play, but a claim like that requires more details to back it up.

 

[Asisreo]

Sure, if you properly design the once per rest encounter it can be extremely interesting / challenging etc. And it can be very cool.

BUT, this works best if you understand that the encounter MUST be designed differently - and that's part of pacing.

I think it also depends highly on how veteran your players are. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, though.

So, what happens when you have a single-enemy no legendary-anything encounter? Well, with a bunch of veterans and a single spellcaster, you're likely to have them use their insta-win spell to finish it off.

But does the same happen with more novice players? Not very much, imx. Sometimes a player might fumble or luck their way into a perfect spell or they might feel their intuition telling them a certain spell might work, but usually players forget 3/4ths of their spell list anyways, let alone how they work.

And if your single-monster non-legendary monster only has multiattack as its defining trait and its not in any sort of compatible environment for its abilities, I'd often put that less as a struggling DM and more as a lazy DM.

My point: I believe its possible to have an engaging fight with not alot of forethought so long as a DM puts even a modicum of effort into their campaign. Or at least the designers of the adventure (whom often don't actually put forethought into encounters outside of orchestrated boss fights).

 

[Undrave]

I think what doesn't help is how the designers just keep cranking out Spellcasters and Spells and we had to wait until Tasha's for new maneuvers.

 

[Shiroiken]

The notion that martials aren't as viable as casters is nonsense, as my session today proved it. Our last session ended after 3 combats of the current day, and this session we had 6 more for a total of 9. We had no opportunity to short rest at all, as we were in the middle of a giant battle. Today, 4 of the battles occurred within only a few rounds of each other (with potential for overlap), so we didn't even to get much outside of combat healing from potions and the like. All the casters except me (nature cleric) were drained by the end of the 3rd fight today (6th fight overall, and we're 15th level). I wasn't because my character is focused on Spiritual Guardians, which I was able to keep up for all 4 fights. Except for 1 Spiritual Weapon, the only other spells I cast were healing, Shillelagh, and 1 Misty Step.

The point being that the Barbarian was crushing it all day long. She held the front lines, often facing the baddest enemy on the field by herself, every single fight. The paladin and hexblade were helpful for a while, but they fell off the curve after the 2nd fight today (5th overall). She dealt and took ridiculous amounts of damage, and took only the Mass Cure Wounds spells before the final combat (I gave her a level 3 cure wounds to keep her from dropping, which would lose her last rage). In the final 3 fights today, there's no question she was the MVP, seconded by me (because of my healing).