A different thing I don't think 2024 D&D will accomplish, or even attempt:
Make sure spells don't do the specialist's job better than the specialist.
Yep! Should be goal #1.
Just to give a single example: if a martial character (such as a Rogue) wants to become a master sneaker, the obviously superior approach is to get hold of the Pass without Trace spell. There's NOTHING the heroes can do without magic that comes even close to "everybody gets +10 Stealth, and just to rub it in, you leave no tracks - so the only way to track you is... even more magic!"
Trying to become the best sneaker in the land through skill alone doesn't hold a candle to the old guy who can't even find his own glasses casting a spell. Sure, your Stealth can be ten steps higher than his is without the spell, but the Dumbledore guy grants that to everybody in the party and you don't.
Yep (#2)! A +10 to Stealth, in addition to other benefits (no tracks, virtually, unlimited targets, long duration) is, frankly, insane. When you consider most creatures have a passive Perception of 10, it makes you (and others) virtually undetectable.
Magic users being able to do stuff that's plain physically impossible, sure. Nobody's expecting the Fighter to be able to work out so hard at the gym he can now flap his arms and fly. Or teleport. Or, for that matter, turn into Ernie the Giant Chicken.
But magic being clearly better than what martial characters' supposed to be good at? Get outta here.
Yep (#3)!
If a Rogue (maybe not ANY Rogue, but a specialized one) could reliably fool or circumvent magical defenses (appropriate to her level) the game would be better for everybody. Detecting and then bypassing traps, avoiding being noticed by detection spells, defeating arcane locks, and such.
Same with a Barbarian (or strength-based Fighter). Sheer strength and pure might should be able to shatter magical walls and defenses, even at the expense of tiring or bleeding out the martial champion. And I'm not talking hacking away at a Wall of Stone for minutes to make a hole. A level 20 Fighter should be able to punch a Wall of Force so hard it completely shatters. Instantly.
Need I say it again?
Totally. IMO a martial PC at twice the level a caster needs to be to cast a spells should have a reasonable chance of defeating it. For example,
arcane lock is 2nd level, so a wizard must be 3rd level to cast it; therefore a rogue of 6th level (twice 3rd) should be able to disable the lock.
At 6th level, a rogue with Expertise in thieves' tools and DEX 20 would be +11 to disable a DC 25 (15 + 10 for arcane lock) lock would need a 14 or better, so 35% chance. Not bad, really, but many DMs would rule a failure means no further attempts, so why the PC shouldn't be automatically able to disarm it, the chances should be better IMO.
Now, if
arcane lock imposed disadvantage instead, then magic such as
enchance ability would effectively cancel the penalty. Regardless, the expert lock-picker above would have about a 72% chance of by-passing the magically-enhanced lock (with disadvantage) at DC 15 (not 25). A non-expert, say at +7, would have a 42% chance or so, compared to the 65% they would normally have vs. a DC 15 lock. So, the spell (as disadvantage) would decrease the thief's chances by over 20%.
Not to bad for a 2nd-level spell that lasts indefinitely otherwise...
Spells like
pass without trace and
arcane lock with +10 bumps are too strong IMO.
Likewise with Rangers and Druids. Their ability to f*ck you up in the forest should not be a matter of casting three or four spells, basically because the game easily allows the minmaxing city-slicking warlock or rogue to pick these spells anyway.
Or overcome those spells the Rangers and Druids might use...
Spells enabling the party to compensate for having a weak link? Sure, that just means more fun at the table.
If there were a spell that granted a baseline Stealth score to the clumsy Paladin, then the story where the heroes sneak into the castle can proceed as intended, especially if the DM uses group skill checks. This doesn't steal the Rogue's thunder. In fact, if there are rules for "spectacular success" of some sort, the Rogue can even compensate for one clumsy party member by rolling stratospherically well herself.
Again, a spell like
enhance ability is a great example. Such a spell can remove the Stealth disadvantage for heavy armor, or help others without proficiency or decent Dex scores. It only affects one PC as a 2nd-level spell, but is a bit harsh to require concentration IMO.
As for group checks, a group only need half successes to succeed as a group. This is a way where the expert Rogue or skilled Ranger, Bard, etc.
CAN help the clumsy or inept party member. The theory is the group succeeds because those who excel help those to might faulter.
This would IMHO make the game much more fun for everybody than "we will simply have to stop for the day to let the wizard sleep in order to memorize the win button spell tomorrow".
One final YEP!