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

[ECMO3]

NM

 

[Maxperson]

Three things.

1. First off the check is to see if he is noticed. I said earlier if he fails the check he can not get it. He would not be opposing the Rogue. If he catches him doing this then he woudl be opposing and it would fails.

2. If you gave me a bag full of dice and asked me to pull out a 20 sided dice I ABSOLUTELY could do that in 6 seconds with no problem. I could do it in half that with no problem. I might even be able to get out 4 specific dice types in 6 seconds and I don't have exceptional dexterity and have been trained specifically to do this.

The bag has about 3 dozen dice of all types. Many components are very similar, and you don't have 6 seconds to feel around. The 6 seconds includes moving the mage hand to the pouch and moving it back out again as well, so you have only a second or two. AND, you have no tactile feeling, so to be accurate, you'd need to numb your hand before you try so you can't feel the dice. Mage Hands have no sensory ability.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

To start with that is the idea of a true martial, someone focused on more damage and more hps. If they have powers or abilities, or god forbid spells then they are not really martials any more are they?

?
What?
"Martial" doesn't generally mean "concerned only with hit points". In this context it means "uses non-magical means, such as skill and sheer grit".
Encouraging an ally to fight on with camraderie and well-chosen words. Analysing a combat situation and their opponents to predict what they are doing next. Striking a particular area of an opponent to inflict a specific condition.
Any (non-wuxia) martial arts or action movie hero is probably a martial hero for example.

Further the premise is untrue, many fighter subclasses are not focused on damage and hps. Samaurai and most of all Bannerets are not focused on damage with their subclass abilities. Further although the Rune Knight has some damage focused runes, many of the runes are not damage focused, you can build a rune knight without any extra damage abilities over the main class. Ironically I think these are some of the most hated and least played fighters. EKs are also not focused on damage and hps, and Arcane Archer abilities are pretty muted in terms of extra damage, being largely more control, skill and cantrip focused.

Precisely. Almost all of the non-ribbon abilities a fighter gets can pertain directly to combat.
The actual capabilities of fighter subclasses are limited by being attached the the very damage-focused fighter class. Many people would like to see a less-damage-focused, but more tactical martial class - Like a wizard version of the battlemaster compared to the eldritch knight.
Wizards have respectable (but not fighter-level) single-target damage, but their main strengths are battlefield control, AoE, buffing and debuffing, and out of combat utility.
Its why a reasonably common suggestion for getting closer to a warlord from battlemaster is to forgo an attack to generate a superiority die - trading a tactical capability for raw damage.

It is in the rules! I could see disadvantage as a judgement for doing this with a normal mage hand done by a wizard as an action, because you are making a judgement call there. I could even see it for a thief standing next to him in melee trying it using fast hands (although that is a bit harsh IMO). The Arcane Trickster ability however says nothing about disadvantage and it is pretty obvious that it is intended to be used against enemies in combat. Thematically, that is why the AT's hand is invisible when the normal wizards mage hand isn't.

As I mentioned, the disadvantage would be due to the movement involved. In combat, creatures are assumed to be moving around within their space, dodging blows, or just angling for a specific view. If you're trying this before initiative is rolled, or the wizard is paralysed, there will not be disadvantage.
Plus the disadvantage mechanic allows me to designate one dice as "did you get the bag?" and the other as "Did the wizard notice you?" Thus allowing more flexibility in the outcome.

It's very clear that the intent is for it to only take ONE object from a container that's worn, and the pouch is in fact a container that is worn. Nothing is being nerfed. You are increasing the power of the ability, much the same way that a lot of people treat Charm Person like some sort of mind control, rather than the 1st level spell that it is. The ability was never intended to be able to disarm Wizards like that. It's intent is to allow you to steal a single small item.

Yeah, I wouldn't allow that. You can't see inside the pouch, so if you're grabbing a small item, it's going to be a random small item. Unless you've somehow previously gained access to the pouch and memorized where the ruby dust is. The Rogue ability doesn't grant X-ray Vision or omniscience.

I read the intent of the action declaration to be removal of the entire pouch. Since component pouches are generally attached to the belt, or held by a strap looped over the shoulder, the Trickster would probably be trying to saw through the strap with a knife, and then gently easing the bag off the wizard so they don't notice the sudden loss of weight.

 

[ph0rk]

Once upon a time, wizard flexibility and power was balanced by very low health, a great need to have a high int (that is lessened, now, but still somewhat present - you may cast a level 9 spell with a 14 int), and quite importantly, prepared slot casting.

The power of some wizard spells came about under this system, and they will never make sense without it.

Spontaneous casting for some classes is fine (but spell points are better); adjust power with spell lists.

Spontaneous casting with prepared lists for wizards is not restrictive enough. Not at all.

 

[Maxperson]

I read the intent of the action declaration to be removal of the entire pouch. Since component pouches are generally attached to the belt, or held by a strap looped over the shoulder, the Trickster would probably be trying to saw through the strap with a knife, and then gently easing the bag off the wizard so they don't notice the sudden loss of weight.

There is no knife to saw with. It's only a mage hand. It can grab one object out of a container and that's it.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

There is no knife to saw with. It's only a mage hand. It can grab one object out of a container and that's it.

It can use thieves tools. What ECMO3 seemed to be asking for isn't covered in the rules - hence why I was giving how I'd rule it as a DM.

 

[Manbearcat]

What is being discussed in this thread (legerdemain to lift a component pouch off a Wizard to shut down a/some/all spells) is just about the alpha and omega of Spellcaster Arms Race that even the entertainment of only exists in certain forms of D&D.

The same forms of D&D where some people actually have the temerity to say that spellcasters aren't outrageously overpowered (after level 7 and then scaling hideously from there)!

Its funny...this sort of mental overhead doesn't_ever_enter the domain of play of:

Moldvay Basic
Shadows of Yesterday
4e D&D
Lady Blackbird
13th Age
Strike (!)
Dungeon World
Beyond the Wall
Burning Wheel/Torchbearer
Cortex + FHRPG
Blades in the Dark (with Whispers or Leeches)

You know what these Fantasy RPGs have in common (besides sorcery/wizardry sitting alongside swording)?

THEY DON'T HAVE OVERPOWERED SPELLCASTERS!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You know what these Fantasy RPGs have in common (besides sorcery/wizardry sitting alongside swording)?

THEY DON'T HAVE OVERPOWERED SPELLCASTERS!

BuT nOnE oF tHoSe ArE lEaDiNg SuCcEsSfUl GaMeS sO tHeY'Re ObViOuSlY wRoNg!

Because, naturally, there is a perfect 1:1 correspondence between things that are successful and things that are completely and thoroughly well-made. There's no such thing as network effects or trade-offs. Everyone loves everything about every successful product.</sarcasm>

 

[ph0rk]

I think many people see overpowered spellcasters as a feature. They won't admit it, of course, and some of them are the same people that would argue that they aren't overpowered in 5e (I suppose 3e is the reference for this comparison?).

 

[Campbell]

Outside of games like Mage or Ars Magica where the point is for everyone to play an overpowered spellcaster I have only run into game balance issues with spellcasters in D&D analogs (including Shadowrun here).

Not a problem in Conan 2d20.
Not a problem in RuneQuest.
Not a problem Legend of the Five Rings.
Not a problem in Exalted.
Not a problem in Classic Deadlands.

The fundamental issue as I see it is that daily attrition as a basis for balancing limited use abilities on different schedules then any balance that exists is going to be tenuous at best. Having to structure play to account for it is one of the biggest reasons why I enjoy playing, but will not run most version of D&D.