D&D 5E WHAT IF... Spells didn't do damage?

[Dire Bare]

Like Marvel's WHAT IF comics of old, I sometimes enjoy coming up with a crazy change to the structure of D&D and then thinking through the implications.

So here's one:

There are innumerable threads about martials vs spellcasters. I was thinking about the roles of each in combat, and I came up with a crazy idea.

What if spells didn't do direct damage? What if the only way to actually damage an enemy was to hit it with a weapon (or push it down a staircase, or set it on fire, etc).

I could see a few ways of adapting the 5e Spells to all be non-damaging...

One way would be through conditions. What if spells that deal damage instead created Conditions?

For example, you could have an On Fire Condition.

On Fire: Whenever a creature with the On Fire Condition takes damage, it also takes 1d6 fire damage per level of spell cast upon it. The creature casts bright light in a 15-foot radius, and flammable objects touching the creature catch fire.

So any spell that deals fire damage would instead, on a successful Spell Attack or failed Saving Throw, create the On Fire Condition. Maybe the condition would last for the Duration of the spell?

For cold spells, it could be something like...

Frozen: Whenever a creature with the Frozen Condition takes damage, it also takes 1d4 cold damage per level of spell cast upon it. The creature's speed is reduced to 5 feet.

Or you could even do a "pick your own condition" system. Like for an Acid Spell, you could do:

Corroded: When you cast a spell that successfully deals Acid Damage, choose instead one of the following effects, which lasts as long as the spell duration:

• Corroded Armor: The target's Armor Class is reduced by a number equal to your Proficiency Bonus.
• Blinding Acid: The target suffers disadvantage on Perception Checks, Investigation Checks, and Ranged Attacks.
• Slippery Acid: The target falls prone, and suffers disadvantage on Athletics and Acrobatics checks.

Anyways, those are just some wild ideas. What else could we do if we took the premise spells don't deal direct damage and applied it to 5e D&D?

This is brilliant! Obviously ideas that need workshopping . . . . but as a way to change the way D&D plays for a campaign, and/or for world-building . . . I love this idea!

I'm watching "The Wheel of Time" on Amazon right now and the magic-user types, the Aes Sedai, have magical rules they must follow including not using their power to harm others . . . . except under certain circumstances. However, the Aes Sedai are experts of following the letter of the law rather than the spirit . . . .

 

[BookTenTiger]

This is brilliant! Obviously ideas that need workshopping . . . . but as a way to change the way D&D plays for a campaign, and/or for world-building . . . I love this idea!

I'm watching "The Wheel of Time" on Amazon right now and the magic-user types, the Aes Sedai, have magical rules they must follow including not using their power to harm others . . . . except under certain circumstances. However, the Aes Sedai are experts of following the letter of the law rather than the spirit . . . .

Thanks!

I'm thinking there would be a few approaches to making this happen in a D&D campaign.

The big time consuming way would be to rewrite all the damaging spells so they still have similar effects, but don't deal direct damage.

The easier way would be to just have a menu of effects or conditions that spellcasters can choose based on the damage type. Then when they cast a Fireball or a Ray of Frost or whatever, they choose en effect from the Fire or Cold lists.

 

[Dire Bare]

Thanks!

I'm thinking there would be a few approaches to making this happen in a D&D campaign.

The big time consuming way would be to rewrite all the damaging spells so they still have similar effects, but don't deal direct damage.

The easier way would be to just have a menu of effects or conditions that spellcasters can choose based on the damage type. Then when they cast a Fireball or a Ray of Frost or whatever, they choose en effect from the Fire or Cold lists.

Nice.

When I first read your initial post, I was thinking of removal of all damaging spells altogether. That would certainly change the feel of D&D! Not for everyone's table, of course, but the idea is intriguing! Certainly would make being a magic-user more strategic and calculating!

 

[aco175]

I would rather have more spells that help the other PCs or hurt the bad guys without damage. Something that gives an attack to a PC or takes the attack away from a bad guy. Maybe something that causes the armor to fall off the bad guy making him easier to hit. A shield on the PCs for bonus to AC. I guess everything would become utility and casters would be a backup roll. Great for a NPC type.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Thanks!

I'm thinking there would be a few approaches to making this happen in a D&D campaign.

The big time consuming way would be to rewrite all the damaging spells so they still have similar effects, but don't deal direct damage.

The easier way would be to just have a menu of effects or conditions that spellcasters can choose based on the damage type. Then when they cast a Fireball or a Ray of Frost or whatever, they choose en effect from the Fire or Cold lists.

I think there should be way more Conditions that both martials and casters could lay on the enemies. It would allow spells to do something more interesting than damage and more damage, with maybe an instance of disadvantage here and there.

If you throw a torch on an enemy within a Grease or Web spell, he sould be burning a few round, not take instant fire damage and done.

 

[MattW]

It's a very interesting idea.

It would be a really intriguing campaign if spells that cause damage are unavailable - but are legendary/mythical abilities that can be located and learned. For one thing, you have an obvious quest object. "Find the legendary scroll of Fireballs" (or a wand of fireballs?).

The antagonists might be evil/tyrannical wizards and clerics that are feared not because they have access to spells like "Fireball", but rather because they can use "Polymorph", "Charm", "Curse", "Cause Disease", or "Summon X" (not to mention the various divination/clairvoyance and mind reading spells)

But I don't think you have to make major changes. Just limit the PCs to "bards", or maybe "Illusionists". Clerical spell lists would also need a little tweaking

Yes, it definitely has some intriguing possibilities. For example, some minor magic items would become much more valuable. Something like a wand of magic missiles could be of major importance on the battlefield.

 

[see]

Like Marvel's WHAT IF comics of old, I sometimes enjoy coming up with a crazy change to the structure of D&D and then thinking through the implications.

So here's one:

There are innumerable threads about martials vs spellcasters. I was thinking about the roles of each in combat, and I came up with a crazy idea.

What if spells didn't do direct damage? What if the only way to actually damage an enemy was to hit it with a weapon (or push it down a staircase, or set it on fire, etc).

In short, what if every wizard character had to be played as what Treantmonk, back in the 3.5 era, first named a "god wizard"?

 

[rmcoen]

It's a very interesting idea.

It would be a really intriguing campaign if spells that cause damage are unavailable - but are legendary/mythical abilities that can be located and learned. For one thing, you have an obvious quest object. "Find the legendary scroll of Fireballs" (or a wand of fireballs?).

The antagonists might be evil/tyrannical wizards and clerics that are feared not because they have access to spells like "Fireball", but rather because they can use "Polymorph", "Charm", "Curse", "Cause Disease", or "Summon X" (not to mention the various divination/clairvoyance and mind reading spells)

But I don't think you have to make major changes. Just limit the PCs to "bards", or maybe "Illusionists". Clerical spell lists would also need a little tweaking

Yes, it definitely has some intriguing possibilities. For example, some minor magic items would become much more valuable. Something like a wand of magic missiles could be of major importance on the battlefield.

This would be interesting, too. The only damage spells that exist are found on scrolls/tomes/whatever, and you have to actively use/read them. If you have multiples of these after many quests... you can still only have one ready and in your hands. and maybe it takes a full round to use it, giving foes a chance to disrupt it, swipe the object, whatever.

Then you don't have to rewrite all spells in the game, just start with removing all spells that cause damage. Or better: "All damage a spell does is reduced to 0", but then leave the opportunity to boost it from there. For example, a Red Dragon Sorcerer can still cast a 4pt firebolt with his CHA of 18, while the Evoker Wizard is doing 4 damage (from INT 18) with that fireball to one of the targets. But this way you can still keep the "damaging" spells that might have other effects. Spirit Guardians doesn't do damage, but still lights the area and makes it difficult terrain to enemies.

 

[Faolyn]

This would be interesting, too. The only damage spells that exist are found on scrolls/tomes/whatever, and you have to actively use/read them. If you have multiples of these after many quests... you can still only have one ready and in your hands. and maybe it takes a full round to use it, giving foes a chance to disrupt it, swipe the object, whatever.

I'd go with wands/staves/rods as well. Limited charges or uses per day, you can still only use one at a time, and you may have to attune to them. Perhaps your living tissue (or living soul) is damaged when you try to channel elemental damage through it, but the nonliving matter of a wand can safely handle it.

And even then, you can have certain limitations. Perhaps certain materials can only handle channeling certain types of damage, or break more easily if they are used to make a magic item of the "wrong" material type. Like, a wand of fireball may break on a 1-in-20 if made of metal, but 2 or 3-in-20 if made of wood.

Then you don't have to rewrite all spells in the game, just start with removing all spells that cause damage. Or better: "All damage a spell does is reduced to 0", but then leave the opportunity to boost it from there. For example, a Red Dragon Sorcerer can still cast a 4pt firebolt with his CHA of 18, while the Evoker Wizard is doing 4 damage (from INT 18) with that fireball to one of the targets. But this way you can still keep the "damaging" spells that might have other effects. Spirit Guardians doesn't do damage, but still lights the area and makes it difficult terrain to enemies.

If you're going to remove damage from these sorts of spells, you need to have better effects. Like, spirit guardians actively grapples or even restrains a number of enemies as well as producing difficult terrain, and the number of enemies increases as you upcast it. Moonbeam might slow creatures in it or put them to magical sleep, or poison shapechangers.

 

[rmcoen]

Well, I was trying to avoid rewriting all the spells. Me personally, I love changing everything about everything. An unofficial sarcasm motto of mine since college has been "it's not a game until we've changed the rules!" But... in practice, no one wants to have to go double-check "how did we change this fiddly bit? I forget...". Hence the suggestion for a higher-level sweeping change that applies to everything. Maybe spirit guardians is now underpowered and gets used less... So? It still exists, and might still be perfect for slowing things vulnerable to radiant? Versus the other sweeping high level change proposed: "Remove all damage spells from the game." Moonbeam still forces shapechangers to change shape, making it an underpowered niche spell - but the only one of its kind. Fireball, with no other changes... just sets unattended objects on fire in a big area ("Even works around corners!") - but it's still there. Disintegrate still puts large holes in things... just apparently not living things (no damage). And so on.