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

[Mort]

Ah! It's a common mistake for people to think it is. My bad

Knock IS one of those spells that you'd just assume WOULD be a ritual - because it's such a natural fit as one.

But (IMO rightly) the designers clearly thought it would be problematic as a ritual. Even with the "dinner bell" kicker.

I hated this spell in 3e because it was one of those that allowed the caster to stomp on the rogue's toes (better even because a caster could open any wizard lock with this spell, while even a 20th level rogue would be foiled by a wizard lock from a 3rd level wizard!) . And with proper scroll /wand management, the caster could do it with minimal resource cost. I was quite glad that the 5e designers were into this and took steps to minimize it.

 

[tetrasodium]

Knock IS one of those spells that you'd just assume WOULD be a ritual - because it's such a natural fit as one.

But (IMO rightly) the designers clearly thought it would be problematic as a ritual. Even with the "dinner bell" kicker.

I hated this spell in 3e because it was one of those that allowed the caster to stomp on the rogue's toes (better even because a caster could open any wizard lock with this spell, while even a 20th level rogue would be foiled by a wizard lock from a 3rd level wizard!) . And with proper scroll /wand management, the caster could do it with minimal resource cost. I was quite glad that the 5e designers were into this and took steps to minimize it.

It's not sarcasm when I say that niche protection is all well and good in ways deserving of consideration but there's a problem when taken too far. You've argued that combat should be the martial's niche that exploration tools like lock picking should be martial niche and likely others in this thread. That raises the question of what the caster niche is where other classes start stomping on caster toes.


Knock is an especially poor example of treading on niche protection too because backgrounds already do that. Anyone can take it jinx and get thieves tools proficient. Swapping land vehicles or some other useless tool proficient option for them might also be allowed. At a certain point being a distant unneeded second third or fifth at something stops being a niche when everything it can do is held back out of fear that it might step on someone else's niche.

 

[Mind of tempest]

It's not sarcasm when I say that niche protection is all well and good in ways deserving of consideration but there's a problem when taken too far. You've argued that combat should be the martial's niche that exploration tools like lock picking should be martial niche and likely others in this thread. That raises the question of what the caster niche is where other classes start stomping on caster toes.


Knock is an especially poor example of treading on niche protection too because backgrounds already do that. Anyone can take it jinx and get thieves tools proficient. Swapping land vehicles or some other useless tool proficient option for them might also be allowed. At a certain point being a distant unneeded second third or fifth at something stops being a niche when everything it can do is held back out of fear that it might step on someone else's niche.

caster like magic so they should be good at it but what limits of magic are there other than resists spells or anti-magic?
some times the mundane option should just work better.
it would help if we had fewer types of caster.

 

[Mort]

It's not sarcasm when I say that niche protection is all well and good in ways deserving of consideration but there's a problem when taken too far. You've argued that combat should be the martial's niche that exploration tools like lock picking should be martial niche and likely others in this thread. That raises the question of what the caster niche is where other classes start stomping on caster toes.


Knock is an especially poor example of treading on niche protection too because backgrounds already do that. Anyone can take it jinx and get thieves tools proficient. Swapping land vehicles or some other useless tool proficient option for them might also be allowed. At a certain point being a distant unneeded second third or fifth at something stops being a niche when everything it can do is held back out of fear that it might step on someone else's niche.

Sure, just about anyone can take proficiency in thieves tools BUT rogues (and bards) have the option of being much better at it (expertise).

Knock takes away from that because it completely bypasses the skill mechanic and makes opening automatic. But at the tradeoff of resource cost (a second level slot).

Making the spell a ritual completely bypasses the skill mechanic AND eliminates any resource cost (other than time) which IMO is a step too far.

Now, adding the loud ringing to the spell was ALSO a 5e nerf and I'm not sure what to think about that - might also be too far (kinda of like the designers adding the automatically "makes target hostile" kicker to nearly every enchantment spell.)

 

[Quartz]

One big problem is that the martial classes aren’t any better at hitting with weapons than the caster classes. Both use d20 + PB + stat mod. All classes can use Simple weapons. I’m not sure how to solve that.

 

[Mind of tempest]

One big problem is that the martial classes aren’t any better at hitting with weapons than the caster classes. Both use d20 + PB + stat mod. All classes can use Simple weapons. I’m not sure how to solve that.

martial get to add more dice to damage rolls with weapons faster and they stack up more?

 

[Mort]

One big problem is that the martial classes aren’t any better at hitting with weapons than the caster classes. Both use d20 + PB + stat mod. All classes can use Simple weapons. I’m not sure how to solve that.

Except fighter and Ranger archers, who are a full 10% better thanks to the archery fighting style.

And Battlemaster fighters can do significantly better because they can take precision attack.

An archery focused Battlemaster can do both and miss pretty rarely (by 3rd level, they can pull an average of +6 extra to hit when they need it, which is huge in 5e).

Not to mention, with weapons, martials tends to hit harder when they do hit. Martial classes tend to have significant add on to damage (be it sneak attack, smite, rage, superiority dice or whatever). And then there are the feats, which, if allowed, can add a huge amount of damage for a martial (be it great weapon master, sharp shooter, pole arm master or whatever). The only feat for casters that's comparable (that I can think of) is elemental Adept which eliminates resistance and treats 1s as 2s.

 

[tetrasodium]

caster like magic so they should be good at it but what limits of magic are there other than resists spells or anti-magic?
some times the mundane option should just work better.
it would help if we had fewer types of caster.

Thsts a pretty circular answer to what the niche of casters is to say that it's casting spells. Worse you ensure thst it's a narrow and self nullifying niche by choosing to spotlight the superiority of "mundane" options without pointing out any where non-mundane should be equal or better. Thsn mundane. On top of resists and anti magic there is also legendary resist magic resist energy resist/immune concentration known/prepped slots and spell slot consumption. All of that adds up and you only managed what the caster niche is not yet people have seriously claimed that the niche for martials is the entire combat pillar in this thread.

Sure, just about anyone can take proficiency in thieves tools BUT rogues (and bards) have the option of being much better at it (expertise).

Knock takes away from that because it completely bypasses the skill mechanic and makes opening automatic. But at the tradeoff of resource cost (a second level slot).

Making the spell a ritual completely bypasses the skill mechanic AND eliminates any resource cost (other than time) which IMO is a step too far.

Now, adding the loud ringing to the spell was ALSO a 5e nerf and I'm not sure what to think about that - might also be too far (kinda of like the designers adding the automatically "makes target hostile" kicker to nearly every enchantment spell.)

Rogue is also a martial character with one of the highest at will damage options stealth and significant durability from cunning action/uncanny dodge/evasion. Other than putting an extra highlight around the rogue's special niche casters shouldn't invade to define what the caster niche must not be, I'm not seeing anywhere you even vaguely sketch out what the caster niche is.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Yeah, it's a bit of a conundrum.

To feel awesome, fighter-types need to be awesome at fighting, and, to feel awesome, magic-types need to feel awesome at magic.

BUT magic is a bigger tent than fighting. And, really, the big tent that is magic contains the small tent that is fighting... So you can't really feel awesome at magic if you are heinously suckass at fighting.

AND if everyone is awesome at fighting, but magic-types are awesome at other things, magic-types are just better.

There aren't any great fixes to this that make intuitive sense. You get pushback like "how can a warlord shout somebody's arm back on?" if you give fighter-types the ability to do things too far outside the fighting tent, and you undermine their fighter-type-ness if you give them spells.

Tentatively, I think the best way out of this is for fighter-types to get better magic items than magic-types do, which also allow them to do things that are normally in the magic tent. For example: that +1 greatsword for the barbarian might also detect lies and provide an at will 30' jump--now the barbarian is good at the social and exploration pillars--where, by comparison, the wizard just gets a +1 wand of meh, or a headband of 'doing that thing which wizards do already but now slightly more of it'. Obviously, this is something that needs a conscientious DM to make it work correctly (and/or publications that are written by someone with sense). Maybe magic items could, in general, offer more versatility than power, since magic-types have versatility for days and fighter-types do not.

I think that's a viable solution for one's own game, but it doesn't really work in the larger sense of the game as designed.

Magic items can be problematic because they aren't typically baked into the class.

If a DM changes magic item distribution away from the norm (running a low magic campaign), it would impact class balance moreso than now. I recall having a conversation with a DM back in the day. He was a 2e DM who had started running 3e. However, he was approaching 3e magic item distribution from a 2e perspective (significantly less magic items) and was explaining that his players were complaining that they felt his game was too hard. I explained to him that 3e presumes a certain amount of magic for each character, as indicated in the WBL table. To which he responded that he didn't want to give out that much magic... IMO, a viable solution should work reasonably well regardless of whether I'm running a no magic campaign, a Monty Haul campaign, or something in between.

Additionally, magic item distribution can be a bit wonky in some groups. In my newbie group, the wizard player is kind of the leader of those guys even outside of game. He's generally a good guy, but he has kind of a forceful personality and can be a bit greedy in game. Several times he's tried to call dibs on powerful magic swords, and I've had to remind everyone at the table "You realize your wizard isn't proficient with that?". I'll grant that isn't going to be the norm, but even so, if the barbarian convinces the fighter to let them take a magic item meant for the fighter, it shouldn't dramatically impact the power disparity between them. If martials are balanced using magic items, I think it would result in a noticable disparity.

That said, you could just bake magic items into the class. That would be a viable solution, though you'd need to have a way for those items to be recovered if they are lost/stolen/destroyed (which is entirely feasible).

Personally, I'd love to see martials grow to be mythologized at higher levels, becoming legends like Beowulf. I'd love to see a high level fighter be able to rip a giant beast's arm off WITHOUT the aid of magic items. Or a barbarian whose blade has soaked in the blood of so many slain enemies that it becomes a dangerously powerful magic weapon. Or a rogue who is such an unparalleled thief that he can steal intangibles, like the love someone holds for another.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I think that's a viable solution for one's own game, but it doesn't really work in the larger sense of the game as designed.

Magic items can be problematic because they aren't typically baked into the class.

If a DM changes magic item distribution away from the norm (running a low magic campaign), it would impact class balance moreso than now. I recall having a conversation with a DM back in the day. He was a 2e DM who had started running 3e. However, he was approaching 3e magic item distribution from a 2e perspective (significantly less magic items) and was explaining that his players were complaining that they felt his game was too hard. I explained to him that 3e presumes a certain amount of magic for each character, as indicated in the WBL table. To which he responded that he didn't want to give out that much magic... IMO, a viable solution should work reasonably well regardless of whether I'm running a no magic campaign, a Monty Haul campaign, or something in between.

Additionally, magic item distribution can be a bit wonky in some groups. In my newbie group, the wizard player is kind of the leader of those guys even outside of game. He's generally a good guy, but he has kind of a forceful personality and can be a bit greedy in game. Several times he's tried to call dibs on powerful magic swords, and I've had to remind everyone at the table "You realize your wizard isn't proficient with that?". I'll grant that isn't going to be the norm, but even so, if the barbarian convinces the fighter to let them take a magic item meant for the fighter, it shouldn't dramatically impact the power disparity between them. If martials are balanced using magic items, I think it would result in a noticable disparity.

That said, you could just bake magic items into the class. That would be a viable solution, though you'd need to have a way for those items to be recovered if they are lost/stolen/destroyed (which is entirely feasible).

Personally, I'd love to see martials grow to be mythologized at higher levels, becoming legends like Beowulf. I'd love to see a high level fighter be able to rip a giant beast's arm off WITHOUT the aid of magic items. Or a barbarian whose blade has soaked in the blood of so many slain enemies that it becomes a dangerously powerful magic weapon. Or a rogue who is such an unparalleled thief that he can steal intangibles, like the love someone holds for another.

latter levels just bing the same but with bigger enemies is a problem If level 10s are very rare and I am level 11 I would be known and matter.
and at 15 what character is not nearing a demi god anyway? lean into it.