D&D 5E The Shield Spell and Spell Points

[Yunru]

Adjust.

Seriously, if an organised party keeps encountering a character "whom weapons cannot touch" (assuming they leave survivors), the that party is going to switch to something other than weapons. Add more spellcasters, more spell scrolls, attack more than just their AC.

 

[CapnZapp]

My thoughts: casting Shield is often a trap from a tactical perspective. Unless you have perfect information about the enemy's to-hit bonus and are fighting a super-tough enemy, it rarely saves you enough damage (40+ HP) to be more efficient than just healing up after combat via Extended Aura of Vitality. Consider that a mere three Shield spells costs 6 spell points, which is exactly as much as you need to pay for one Extended Aura of Vitality healing 140 HP, and doesn't cost any in-combat (re)action economy or require you to take Warcaster.

But the Paladin (technically Paladin/Sorcerer from a class perspective--but he acts like a classic paladin so that's how I think of him) casts Shield anyway, because from a roleplaying perspective, who likes getting injured?

Those are my thoughts; I hope that's useful to you.

You just compared in-combat damage avoidment with after-combat healing. That's not equivalent.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[CapnZapp]

Hi everyone!

I got to start a new game up again, and I'm not running a module this time (my last game was converting "Red Hand of Doom" to 5E, but that stalled when a player fell out). We're trying out some Unearthed Arcana things (Hex Blade and Artificer '17), and the Warlock is trying out my spell-point system (until 11th level, her spell points will be Levelx2 per short rest).

One spell has jumped out as potentially problematic under spell points: Shield. The Mystic has similar effects, but they're all more restricted or are something like +1 AC per Power Point. Shield, being +5 AC for the entire round for only 2 spell points, quickly became the Warlock's go to spell. On top of her already 16 AC, it's a bit intense.

Shield is balanced in core because it's not a scaling spell. Once you're out of your 4 1st level spell slots, it becomes more expensive to cast. But that doesn't exist in a spell point system. A core Warlock with shield (from the Hex Blade spell list, or multiclassing) has 2 shields per short rest at level 5. A spell-point warlock, or really any spellpoint spellcaster, has far more.

Would this be a spell you'd think I should switch up? Changing it to +1 AC per spell point would be doable. It would be equal to core Shield as a 3rd level spell and be even better as a 4th or 5th, but as a 1st and 2nd level it would be weaker.

Thoughts?

A core Warlock only has 2 spell slots, total. Shield is definitely not a spell the Warlock can afford to cast (past the first few levels)

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Satyrn]

A core Warlock only has 2 spell slots, total. Shield is definitely not a spell the Warlock can afford to cast (past the first few levels)

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

I think you missed the fundamental point to the OP's issue.

 

[CapnZapp]

The wizard in my campaign started with LMoP and has the Glass Staff. She never has to use spell slots and uses Shield nearly every time something attacks her. She is level 12 and has had it since very early. To be perfectly honest it hasn't often been a big deal. She has gotten pretty dependent upon so that whenever it isn't enough to protect her it ratchets up the tension.

A Wizard is likely to have a bad AC, so there's no issue there.

The real issue with Shield comes with a high level Eldritch Knight that can bring an already impressive AC (over 20) into the stratosphere...



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[hejtmane]

A Wizard is likely to have a bad AC, so there's no issue there.

The real issue with Shield comes with a high level Eldritch Knight that can bring an already impressive AC (over 20) into the stratosphere...



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

High level they should be able to do it by moderate level with plate and a shield then add +5 to get 25 or at 19 if they are two handed and took protection over GWF +5 to 24

 

[raleel]

I would switch it up and not hit his AC so much. Pretty straight forward. Combined arms

 

[Blue]

No, that's an observation from actual play, where Shield is frequently used (by the AC 21 Paladin/Sorcerer) despite being tactically suboptimal, because of roleplaying reasons as I mentioned (injury hurts[1]). And that is despite the fact that I, as a DM, favor large complicated conflicts over dungeon-crawling Medium-bite-sized encounters. In a 5E-style dungeon crawl scenario where attrition is the primary threat mechanism, Shield would be even "worse" (but would still be used anyway).

Only in a highly contrived scenario would Shield x35 [70 spell points] be superior to, say, Shield x3, Expeditious Retreat x2, Find Steed x1, Hypnotic Pattern x3, Extended Aura of Vitality x3, and Quickened Blur x2 [55 spell points]. Maybe against a huge horde of a thousand goblins doing continuous hit-and-run attacks on you in huge Underdark caverns, although even there it would be highly terrain-dependent.

I'm pretty sure that between the two of us, I'm not the one thinking in white-room terms.

Move the goalposts much? I was responding to 3 shield during a battle vs. an extended aura of vitality after that taking that much damage would probably drop the warlock. Everything you posted above has nothing to do with your point I was responding to, it really seems like you picked a vaguely related point in order to "be correct".

As a matter of fact, I even called out a *judicious* use fo shield, using it where needed, not using every spell point for it. So not only are you moving the goalposts, but you're practicing reductio ad absurdum, picking an extreme edge case and trying to use that against a general point.

If you're resorting to not one but two logical fallacies and not addressing my point at all, I'll take that as my original point is still standing.

If you'd like to address it, it is the simple: "preventing <140 HPs of damage in a combat with shield spells so you don't drop can be worth more then healing 140 HPs post-combat with an extended aura of vitality".

 

[Blue]

A core Warlock only has 2 spell slots, total. Shield is definitely not a spell the Warlock can afford to cast (past the first few levels)

The OP's issue was that moving to the spell point system gave the warlock access to MANY shield spells.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Move the goalposts much? I was responding to 3 shield during a battle vs. an extended aura of vitality after that taking that much damage would probably drop the warlock. Everything you posted above has nothing to do with your point I was responding to, it really seems like you picked a vaguely related point in order to "be correct".

Since all I did was repeat my original point in more specific detail, it seems you may have misunderstood my original post.