D&D (2024) What Should D&D 2024 Have Been +

then it cannot be limited to the player side only, I am ok with buffing both sides a bit
I think damage output across the board needs a buff. And damage spells need less of a buff than weapon attacks.

But right now we've got bullet sponge enemies (which are even worse when you use the DMG guidance) who unlike 4e often don't do their own things.

log in or register to remove this ad


Where is that Singe?
At a certain point, isn't it simpler to just reduce HP across the board?
Yes. Remove creature bonus HP for CON. That does most of the work.

I don't suggest just using half HP since there are many creatures that gain little or no benefit from CON, so nerfing their HP further doesn't work as well IME.


Ok, to make it clear.

take all spells that fall under, by whoever makes those marks, blue and sky blue current mechanics.

then make sure all other spells are as equally useful, maybe some circumstantial spells might fall down a grade, but the should not be 4 grades lower.

I.E. take fireball as gold standard for damage spells and rebalance all others with fireball as guidance.
Casters definitely don't need the massive upgrade which is to improve every spell rated average or less.

Spells should not all be blue or sky blue. (Per definition, having every point in a data set be above average is even mathematically impossible, but I digress)

This is starting to turn into a tangent, so I think I'll steer back to my original statement:
Every spell that the various guides out there rates red should be significantly improved, or redone entirely. (Yes I know there is value of having subpar spells you can give to high level caster monsters, but a spell every guide agrees is red is simply a waste of PHB space)

Every spell (including Fireball!) that's rated sky blue or gold should be nerfed slightly. WIth many more spell options roughly comparable, we will see more varied builds, approaches and strategies. This is a good thing.


So now your Wizard is better at fighting than the Fighter and better outside of combat by a mile, why even have the Fighter class then, so they can carry your extra spellbooks?

Yes and the game is better for it. Most players playing Fighters like it more, find it more immersive and more fun and most players playing Wizards like it more, find it more immersive and more fun. Players of all types are more attracted and by more product.

It works for everyone.

You have the Fighter class because people want to play a Fighter, if you don't want to play a Fighter because you can't be as powerful as others at the tame then don't play it, but don't bash us that do enjoy playing the class.

D&D is a team game and if the best thing for the team to win is to have my Fighter carry the Wizard's spell books then that is what I will do. I never had that happen in game yet. I have carried loot and gear for other players (Wizards and non-Wizards). The closest thing is probably when I carried an extra suit of half-Plate that the Wizard would put on after she ran out of Bladesong for the day.

which mechanics are those, because I am not sure I saw them… the in-step subclass progression? That says nothing about relative power, and yes, I would have preferred getting that

Changing the Warlock to a long rest mechanic, making the Druid Wild more restrictive, Sneak attack once a round, Divine Smite once a round, not rolling all dice on a crit, nerfing twin spell, making Hex and Eldritch Blast Warlock abilities instead of spells, getting rid of Cantrip formulas for the Wizard, making Find Familiar stat blocks instead of real creature stats.

I am sure this is not everything, but it is everything I can think of right now. All of those things were playtested and were unpopular and I believe all of them except the nerf to Twin Spell were reversed in later playtests.

Also there were several spells that were improved, most notably healing and some Cantrips and there were changes that made casters even more powerful than they are now. Those changes further imbalance the game and the response to them was generally positive.
Last edited:


Casters definitely don't need the massive upgrade which is to improve every spell rated average or less.

I think the weak spells should be improved. I only think there are a couple spells that should be nerfed - Simulacrum is the only one I can think of offhand that really needs to be weakened.

Improving the bad spells to give casters more good option is a good thing IMO

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads