D&D 5E What spells are not Scalable and should be?

[dmgorgon]

I think the scaling mechanic should be unique to each spell. Chromatic Orb is a great example of how a spell can scale with level.

 

[KidSnide]

I think the scaling mechanic should be unique to each spell. Chromatic Orb is a great example of how a spell can scale with level.

Man... I loved that spell. Good times. Still, it's a better example of a complicated way to scale a spell than a good way to scale a spell...

-KS

 

[JasonZZ]

I think the scaling mechanic should be unique to each spell. Chromatic Orb is a great example of how a spell can scale with level.

From a d4+trivial side effect to a death effect with a first level spell? No thanks--I liked the idea, but higher-level effects were way overpowered for its level.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I hate seeing spells in my spellbook that I know I'll never use because they've been eclipsed by higher level spells; it seems such a waste. I think all of the spells in your book should be useful no matter what level you are. Scaling is a great way to do this. An archmage might even find Grease to be the best spell to use for his turn if it covers a large enough area to make all of the enemies fall. (not actually sure if that's a good example since I didn't look up if it does scale, oh well, imagine your own example if this one doesn't work ) If lower level spells become more powerful for high level mages, then this might need to be balanced by reducing the number of spell slots per level, but I'm okay with that.

I also really like the idea of metamagicking spells, thereby making them a higher level.

 

[Aloïsius]

There are many better, more flavourful and more interesting options than "classic" D&D when you talk about spells and spell chains.

For example :
1) Low level spells could be pre-requisites for high level one : you can't learn "charm monster" if you don't know "charm person"
2) Low level spells can be base spells for high level one : if you know "charm person", you can scale it up to "charm monster"

Those two options have their appeal, but I think I like the 2) the most. It could even allow to create spell combos : if you know "charm person" and "dream", then you can cast a 9th level spell that allow you to charm a creature through its dream. If you know "fly" and "gaseous form", then you can cast a 7th level spell like "wind walk". If you know "magic missiles" and "fireball", you can cast something that would be like "flaming meteors" and so on. Cure disease + remove blindness + restoration + cure light wound +remove poison => heal. There could even be a module for the DM to adjudicate spontaneous spell combinations at higher level.
Another idea would be to still allow PC to learn the high level spell as a separate, independent spell, while "combined spells" would require a "spellcraft" check to be cast successfully.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I hate seeing spells in my spellbook that I know I'll never use because they've been eclipsed by higher level spells; it seems such a waste. I think all of the spells in your book should be useful no matter what level you are. Scaling is a great way to do this. An archmage might even find Grease to be the best spell to use for his turn if it covers a large enough area to make all of the enemies fall. (not actually sure if that's a good example since I didn't look up if it does scale, oh well, imagine your own example if this one doesn't work ) If lower level spells become more powerful for high level mages, then this might need to be balanced by reducing the number of spell slots per level, but I'm okay with that.

I also really like the idea of metamagicking spells, thereby making them a higher level.

Well, if they haven't changed it, you only get 2 spells per spell level max. So, let's say you are level 11 and have one level 6 spell, 2x lvl 5, 2x lvl 4 and so on, you quite quickly run out of high level spells and the low level spells gets used because they are the best you have got. You might even use them early on to conserver your high level spells.

In other words, I don't think you will run into the situation in 5e where you don't use your low level spells, even if they don't scale. Some might get less use, but I am fine with that.

 

[Philousk]

There are several possibilities to consider. Here is an example of spell that not focused on the damage and that can be scaled as follows:


- Mirror Image: Two new illusory duplicates of you by higher level or...for each level invested beyond, the images require as much of hits or magic effect area causing damage to disappear regardless of their severity. For example, images of Mirror Image Level 5 ask to be affected four times before disappearing.

 

[Luz]

Entangle and monster summoning I.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Well, if they haven't changed it, you only get 2 spells per spell level max. So, let's say you are level 11 and have one level 6 spell, 2x lvl 5, 2x lvl 4 and so on

That's not true. You learn two spells (of any spell level) per class level. Plus any spells you find lying around.

 

[Blackbrrd]

That's not true. You learn two spells (of any spell level) per class level. Plus any spells you find lying around.

I was referring to spell slots, not spells known.