Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What would you say is the biggest problem with Wizards, Clerics, Druids, and other "Tier 1" Spellcasters?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6074310" data-attributes="member: 6681948"><p>Just out of curiosity, is all this Animal Companion nerfing intended to mess with the Tier 1 Druid, or the Ranger, acknowledged as being less powerful?</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>OK, first off, not every threat will have the wherewithal to do this, unquestionably. But, if Rope Trick is used by every PC group to facilitate that 5 minute work day, because after all, that’s what ANY reasonable group would do, then it seems unlikely they are the only ones ever to have thought of this. Rope Trick must be pretty well known, given any wizard or sorcerer can select it as a 4[SUP]th[/SUP] level spell, so awareness of the spell seems pretty likely.</p><p> </p><p>Assuming someone can track (not guaranteed, but I seem to recall a Survival skill, humanoids with pets that have Scent, etc. – not every scenario, but common enough), then what precautions is the party taking? They can certainly hide their trail (and move at half speed – better chance of being stumbled across while doing so). They could lay some false trails (but, again, this is time they aren’t hiding). Terrain matters a lot, as a DC over 10 means someone needs the feat to track, lowering the likelihood a lot. But any shaman can use Detect Magic. How far do you plan on travelling before using that Rope Trick? The further you go, the less obvious it is to look for you there.</p><p> </p><p>The usual reaction to a good tactic is to determine ways of preventing, mitigating or nerfing it. Is it unrealistic that infantry came up with setting pole arms to deal with charging cavalry? In a world where magic is common enough to be commoditized (you can just buy any item you want), it’s common enough to be well known, and for non-magic practitioners to work out tactics for dealing with it. Do the party archers not target the unarmored guy in the back because “he clearly casts arcane spells”? Then I expect the enemy archers can come to the same conclusion.</p><p> </p><p>And I ask again – where are your Handy Haversacks and Bags of Holding? They can’t safely go into the Rope Trick’s extradimensional space. Maybe we find somewhere to hide them, but weren’t the wizard’s spell books in those containers? Good luck carrying them while climbing up a rope. Guess we have to hope nothing bad happens while the Fighter is carrying them, since the Wizard likely dumped STR, and probably doesn’t have a nonmagical container to haul them along in anyway.</p><p> </p><p>And, if they don’t know where you went, building up defences for a future raid is the far more likely tactic.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Again, depends strongly on where someone chooses to rest. There’s not always a convenient secret chamber, and you just might need to get past more than one encounter to open it. Are you REALLY going to open the secret door right now? You’re down some spells from beating the inhabitants of the lair before you found it. Less an issue for a group that’s not operating on the basis that one encounter means “time for bed”.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, very scenario-specific. But if there are routine concerns about raiding parties from the neighbours, I’d also expect more guards, better prepared defences, and much greater likelihood of wandering encounters as the residents likely have patrols in case of such raids. There may, of course, be signs that these weren’t the neighbours (if the neighbours are ogres, and many of our dead are burned, with scorch marks on the walls, it seems unlikely it was the neighbours). Again, scenario-specific.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Logical restrictions in, and reactions to, the existence of spells is part of the overall backdrop that impacts whether these issues really exist. </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>It’s interesting that we discuss all the changes that boost casters. Maybe we’ve all forgotten that, in 1e, most spells had no caps. Magic Missile added one missile per two levels, so a 19[SUP]th[/SUP] level wizard fired off 10 of them. Fireballs and Lightning Bolts just kept adding d6’s, so now we’re at 19d6. Then along came 2e, and said 1[SUP]st[/SUP] level spells cap out at 5d4 +5, and 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] level spells at 10d6, etc. Suddenly, those damaging wizard spells weren’t so effective. </p><p> </p><p>Sleep affected 2-8 1 HD creatures, and they got no save. Now it affects 4 HD (1 less than the average of 2 – 8) and they get a Will save to avoid the effects entirely. Seems like that spell didn’t get better as editions moved forward either.</p><p> </p><p>The tradeoff? You’re getting more spells to cast, so don’t expect them to be easy encounter-enders any more. Of course, the impact has been “blasting is not optimal, so use debuffs, buffs, battlefield control and/or save or lose spells”. </p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>The cost (including spellbook cost and encumbrance) are a definite factor, at least in my experience. Do I need 30 L1 spells when I can carry, at most, 4 + bonus spells (3 at 30 INT – seems pretty high to me) +1 (specialization)? Having some utility spells for high levels (when my L1 spells aren’t effective offense or defense), sure. A spell for every occasion? Not so much.</p><p> </p><p>I disagree that Spellcraft is hugely limiting, but if one does not allow Take 10 on spellcraft to learn spells, there may be a delay (plus, doesn’t that destroy the scroll anyway?).</p><p> </p><p>Clerics/Druids? I find many of their spells are situational. Probably the most versatile Cleric I’ve run had Fire and War domains, and Domain Spontaneity for each. He could memorize situational spells like Remove Curse or Lesser Restoration knowing they could be traded out for a curative spell, or at least one decent offensive spell, as the need arose, but could also be available if their limited utility situation arose.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>That’s my experience. At lower levels, we may have to memorize Knock tomorrow because the rogue has been unable to get through that one lock. At higher levels, it might actually be carried, but if the rogue can open the door, why use it now? There may be more locked doors. Do you want to spend 1,500 gold on a Knock wand every few levels because the opposition keeps locking doors, chests, etc.? The Rogue is a free wand of Knock. But we have the option – so no one absolutely has to play a Rogue, and could play a Rogue that selects other skills instead of Open Locks.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>If the Fighter is so useless, why is it so often his primary role to defend the Wizard? The first 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Ed fighter I ran had two main purposes in life – destroy anyone who gets CLOSE to the sorcerer (that was a party mainline – anyone threatening the Sorcerer is target #1 – drop everything else); set the Rogue up to flank. Who cares if I do any damage? Mobility + Spring Attack + 1 attack at -5 to trigger Combat Expertise so I can get behind the Big Bad and the Rogue can Sneak Attack is a WAY better use of my round than a full attack action. And next round, I can Full Attack with +2 to hit.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Sure. Similarly, most civilized areas probably don’t like people wandering around armed to the teeth, or people just casting spells out in the street.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I don’t see this as an essential change. In most cases, I don’t see scrolls used to replace offensive power, but to transfer spells and/or have a specific ability on hand when needed. Such as a recent L2 situation where we had to spend some cash on scrolls of Magic Weapon as we were expecting incorporeal opposition.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>So remove a restriction on spells the Wizard can cast, rather than adding restrictions? Can the Cleric carry scrolls of Magic Missile “just in case”? Can they use wands in the same manner?</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Commoditization of magic. The availability of scrolls suggests a universality to the use of magic, which bolsters my belief many enemies would be well aware of spells such as Rope Trick.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, this also means it’s not that tough for the warriors to get enchanted weapons and armor, rather than having to rely on whatever they find.</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>In practice, I haven’t found any character’s abilities meaningless. The Sorcerer being able to Slow opponents was never viewed by our group as rendering the rest of the team meaningless. It was viewed as reducing the capabilities of a group of four-armed gorillas to the point the warriors weren’t chopped to hamburger before they could take down the opposition. If one gets close to the Sorcerer, break off and defend him – what’s one attack of opportunity compared to the extra 4 attacks per round they’ll all get without that Slow?</p><p> </p><p>But then, our group has always seemed to focus on making the team more powerful as a whole. That means looking for synergies, not trying to determine who “really” won the battle. The Sorcerer and the Cleric alone would be chopped meat. So would the Fighter and the Rogue. Together, we came out OK.</p><p> </p><p>Mind you, our group doesn’t push for maximum optimization either. Having every Fighter work exactly the same, or every wizard have the same spell selection, etc. is, to me, the ultimate in unfun. Variety is the spice. Different groups find different synergies.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6074310, member: 6681948"] Just out of curiosity, is all this Animal Companion nerfing intended to mess with the Tier 1 Druid, or the Ranger, acknowledged as being less powerful? OK, first off, not every threat will have the wherewithal to do this, unquestionably. But, if Rope Trick is used by every PC group to facilitate that 5 minute work day, because after all, that’s what ANY reasonable group would do, then it seems unlikely they are the only ones ever to have thought of this. Rope Trick must be pretty well known, given any wizard or sorcerer can select it as a 4[SUP]th[/SUP] level spell, so awareness of the spell seems pretty likely. Assuming someone can track (not guaranteed, but I seem to recall a Survival skill, humanoids with pets that have Scent, etc. – not every scenario, but common enough), then what precautions is the party taking? They can certainly hide their trail (and move at half speed – better chance of being stumbled across while doing so). They could lay some false trails (but, again, this is time they aren’t hiding). Terrain matters a lot, as a DC over 10 means someone needs the feat to track, lowering the likelihood a lot. But any shaman can use Detect Magic. How far do you plan on travelling before using that Rope Trick? The further you go, the less obvious it is to look for you there. The usual reaction to a good tactic is to determine ways of preventing, mitigating or nerfing it. Is it unrealistic that infantry came up with setting pole arms to deal with charging cavalry? In a world where magic is common enough to be commoditized (you can just buy any item you want), it’s common enough to be well known, and for non-magic practitioners to work out tactics for dealing with it. Do the party archers not target the unarmored guy in the back because “he clearly casts arcane spells”? Then I expect the enemy archers can come to the same conclusion. And I ask again – where are your Handy Haversacks and Bags of Holding? They can’t safely go into the Rope Trick’s extradimensional space. Maybe we find somewhere to hide them, but weren’t the wizard’s spell books in those containers? Good luck carrying them while climbing up a rope. Guess we have to hope nothing bad happens while the Fighter is carrying them, since the Wizard likely dumped STR, and probably doesn’t have a nonmagical container to haul them along in anyway. And, if they don’t know where you went, building up defences for a future raid is the far more likely tactic. Again, depends strongly on where someone chooses to rest. There’s not always a convenient secret chamber, and you just might need to get past more than one encounter to open it. Are you REALLY going to open the secret door right now? You’re down some spells from beating the inhabitants of the lair before you found it. Less an issue for a group that’s not operating on the basis that one encounter means “time for bed”. Again, very scenario-specific. But if there are routine concerns about raiding parties from the neighbours, I’d also expect more guards, better prepared defences, and much greater likelihood of wandering encounters as the residents likely have patrols in case of such raids. There may, of course, be signs that these weren’t the neighbours (if the neighbours are ogres, and many of our dead are burned, with scorch marks on the walls, it seems unlikely it was the neighbours). Again, scenario-specific. Logical restrictions in, and reactions to, the existence of spells is part of the overall backdrop that impacts whether these issues really exist. It’s interesting that we discuss all the changes that boost casters. Maybe we’ve all forgotten that, in 1e, most spells had no caps. Magic Missile added one missile per two levels, so a 19[SUP]th[/SUP] level wizard fired off 10 of them. Fireballs and Lightning Bolts just kept adding d6’s, so now we’re at 19d6. Then along came 2e, and said 1[SUP]st[/SUP] level spells cap out at 5d4 +5, and 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] level spells at 10d6, etc. Suddenly, those damaging wizard spells weren’t so effective. Sleep affected 2-8 1 HD creatures, and they got no save. Now it affects 4 HD (1 less than the average of 2 – 8) and they get a Will save to avoid the effects entirely. Seems like that spell didn’t get better as editions moved forward either. The tradeoff? You’re getting more spells to cast, so don’t expect them to be easy encounter-enders any more. Of course, the impact has been “blasting is not optimal, so use debuffs, buffs, battlefield control and/or save or lose spells”. The cost (including spellbook cost and encumbrance) are a definite factor, at least in my experience. Do I need 30 L1 spells when I can carry, at most, 4 + bonus spells (3 at 30 INT – seems pretty high to me) +1 (specialization)? Having some utility spells for high levels (when my L1 spells aren’t effective offense or defense), sure. A spell for every occasion? Not so much. I disagree that Spellcraft is hugely limiting, but if one does not allow Take 10 on spellcraft to learn spells, there may be a delay (plus, doesn’t that destroy the scroll anyway?). Clerics/Druids? I find many of their spells are situational. Probably the most versatile Cleric I’ve run had Fire and War domains, and Domain Spontaneity for each. He could memorize situational spells like Remove Curse or Lesser Restoration knowing they could be traded out for a curative spell, or at least one decent offensive spell, as the need arose, but could also be available if their limited utility situation arose. That’s my experience. At lower levels, we may have to memorize Knock tomorrow because the rogue has been unable to get through that one lock. At higher levels, it might actually be carried, but if the rogue can open the door, why use it now? There may be more locked doors. Do you want to spend 1,500 gold on a Knock wand every few levels because the opposition keeps locking doors, chests, etc.? The Rogue is a free wand of Knock. But we have the option – so no one absolutely has to play a Rogue, and could play a Rogue that selects other skills instead of Open Locks. If the Fighter is so useless, why is it so often his primary role to defend the Wizard? The first 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Ed fighter I ran had two main purposes in life – destroy anyone who gets CLOSE to the sorcerer (that was a party mainline – anyone threatening the Sorcerer is target #1 – drop everything else); set the Rogue up to flank. Who cares if I do any damage? Mobility + Spring Attack + 1 attack at -5 to trigger Combat Expertise so I can get behind the Big Bad and the Rogue can Sneak Attack is a WAY better use of my round than a full attack action. And next round, I can Full Attack with +2 to hit. Sure. Similarly, most civilized areas probably don’t like people wandering around armed to the teeth, or people just casting spells out in the street. I don’t see this as an essential change. In most cases, I don’t see scrolls used to replace offensive power, but to transfer spells and/or have a specific ability on hand when needed. Such as a recent L2 situation where we had to spend some cash on scrolls of Magic Weapon as we were expecting incorporeal opposition. So remove a restriction on spells the Wizard can cast, rather than adding restrictions? Can the Cleric carry scrolls of Magic Missile “just in case”? Can they use wands in the same manner? Commoditization of magic. The availability of scrolls suggests a universality to the use of magic, which bolsters my belief many enemies would be well aware of spells such as Rope Trick. Of course, this also means it’s not that tough for the warriors to get enchanted weapons and armor, rather than having to rely on whatever they find. In practice, I haven’t found any character’s abilities meaningless. The Sorcerer being able to Slow opponents was never viewed by our group as rendering the rest of the team meaningless. It was viewed as reducing the capabilities of a group of four-armed gorillas to the point the warriors weren’t chopped to hamburger before they could take down the opposition. If one gets close to the Sorcerer, break off and defend him – what’s one attack of opportunity compared to the extra 4 attacks per round they’ll all get without that Slow? But then, our group has always seemed to focus on making the team more powerful as a whole. That means looking for synergies, not trying to determine who “really” won the battle. The Sorcerer and the Cleric alone would be chopped meat. So would the Fighter and the Rogue. Together, we came out OK. Mind you, our group doesn’t push for maximum optimization either. Having every Fighter work exactly the same, or every wizard have the same spell selection, etc. is, to me, the ultimate in unfun. Variety is the spice. Different groups find different synergies. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What would you say is the biggest problem with Wizards, Clerics, Druids, and other "Tier 1" Spellcasters?
Top