D&D 5E Why does 5E SUCK?

[The Crimson Binome]

Now the wizard could just cast a level 1 or 2 spell (jump, spider climb, misty step, levitate, or tensers disk can bypass most STR based hazards just fine) and have no chance of death. So in this scenario, it is better for the wizard to use one of his low level slots. Especially given that at levels 5+, a cantrip will tend to do about as much damage as a level 1 spell. By level 5+, the wizard should easily be capable of preparing at least 2 exploration utility spells.

There's always a chance of death. You might try to spider climb up a wall, only to find that there's an anti-magic field up there. Or the wizard could lose concentration somehow. Or. Or. Or.

There's also a substantial period of time where level 2 is the highest spell level you can cast. And the more powerful you get, as level 2 spells become a trivial resource, the more likely you are to encounter magical counter-measures. If a difficult obstacle can be bypassed easily with a low-level spell, then there's a good chance that the opposing force has already taken that into consideration.

 

[Ashkelon]

There's always a chance of death. You might try to spider climb up a wall, only to find that there's an anti-magic field up there. Or the wizard could lose concentration somehow. Or. Or. Or.

There's also a substantial period of time where level 2 is the highest spell level you can cast. And the more powerful you get, as level 2 spells become a trivial resource, the more likely you are to encounter magical counter-measures. If a difficult obstacle can be bypassed easily with a low-level spell, then there's a good chance that the opposing force has already taken that into consideration.

Here is the thing, at low levels, when you really need your level 1 and 2 spells for combat, there is very little difference between the fighter and other classes at exploration tasks. If you had a war cleric with 14 Strength, he is only 1 or 2 worse than the fighter at Str based checks, but has guidance for +d4 to every check he makes. The circle of the moon druid can turn into an 18 Strength bear and be better than the fighter at those tasks. The bard with 12 Str and expertise is significnatly better than the fighter at such tasks. This means that at low levels, you are better off having one of those other classes than a fighter for getting by physical challenges.

At higher levels, if the enemies know physical challenges can by bypassed through low level spells, why would they leave the physical challenges there at all. Wouldn't it be better to make 35 foot chasms that no mundane warrior could ever jump. Or why not us unclimbable walls of force. Or. Or. Or.

Basically, why is the DM fiat saying no to low level spells solving the problem, but still allowing for the +10 athletics check fighter (who is still worse than the 14 str war cleric with guidance) to succeed. That seems like you are artificially making situations for the fighter to get to use his athletics skills.

Also, not all exploration is into defensible enemy positions. Sometimes it is actual exploration.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

There's always a chance of death. You might try to spider climb up a wall, only to find that there's an anti-magic field up there. Or the wizard could lose concentration somehow. Or. Or. Or.

Note to self: put a Symbol of Death at the top end of a vertical 250' tunnel.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Basically, why is the DM fiat saying no to low level spells solving the problem, but still allowing for the +10 athletics check fighter (who is still worse than the 14 str war cleric with guidance) to succeed. That seems like you are artificially making situations for the fighter to get to use his athletics skills.

It's not DM fiat. It's the DM playing the NPCs appropriately. Powerful NPCs are likely to know about common, low-level spells, but might underestimate the abilities of a non-magical character. That's a pretty common character trait of powerful magicians.

 

[Ashkelon]

It's not DM fiat. It's the DM playing the NPCs appropriately. Powerful NPCs are likely to know about common, low-level spells, but might underestimate the abilities of a non-magical character. That's a pretty common character trait of powerful magicians.

Yes, but why are such NPCs leaving their lair open to common athletics checks that even a low level PC could pass (a level 5 valor bars with a 14 strength has +8 athletics). Seems like these NPCs aren't being played all that smart after all.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Yes, but why are such NPCs leaving their lair open to common athletics checks that even a low level PC could pass (a level 5 valor bars with a 14 strength has +8 athletics). Seems like these NPCs aren't being played all that smart after all.

In the proposed scenario, where death or injury is the penalty for failure (as is typical for any case where you'd consider casting a spell), that risk should usually be enough to prevent someone from trying. If everyone who might try to overcome this obstacle has a bonus between -1 and +10, then a DC 20 check should be more than enough to deter anyone from trying. Even a DC 15 check would give them pause for consideration.

Few obstacles are actually insurmountable - it would take too much time and effort (and money) to block every possible method - so the NPC takes care to block the easy solutions, and trusts that doing things the hard way is actually difficult enough to stop anyone else.

 

[Ashkelon]

In the proposed scenario, where death or injury is the penalty for failure (as is typical for any case where you'd consider casting a spell), that risk should usually be enough to prevent someone from trying. If everyone who might try to overcome this obstacle has a bonus between -1 and +10, then a DC 20 check should be more than enough to deter anyone from trying. Even a DC 15 check would give them pause for consideration.

Few obstacles are actually insurmountable - it would take too much time and effort (and money) to block every possible method - so the NPC takes care to block the easy solutions, and trusts that doing things the hard way is actually difficult enough to stop anyone else.

Doesn't this just prove my point?

So now the only option is to attempt with only a 25-50% chance of success, where failure results in significant injury or death? Why bother trying at that point? All you have done is shown that if the enemies create an anti-magic field (impossible given the rules) they can make a task that can only be accomplished by a suicidal Strength based PC with a significant chance of failure.

On the other hand, a rogue with expertise in athletics and reliable talent, simply can't fail to get bthrough those defenses AT any DC Less than 21.

Also, it seems easier to come up with solutions to prevent mundane PCs from being able to get through than magical ones. For the magical ones you have to invent things that don't actually exist in the rules, whereas a simple 30 ft chasm or admantium gate can stop a mundane PC.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

On the other hand, a rogue with expertise in athletics and reliable talent, simply can't fail to get bthrough those defenses AT any DC Less than 21.

Rogues don't generally have expertise in Athletics, though, since Strength is a dump stat for them. In the off chance that you did have such a character, then you might get past the obstacle without difficulty, but the bad guy can't account for such ridiculously unlikely events.

And I have no idea how the NPC is supposed to create a lasting anti-magic field, but it shows up enough in published modules for it to be one of the go-to solutions for these types of situations. Or if not permanent, then make a contingent Dispel on anyone in that area. Or animate zombie birds to break your concentration. However you do it, though, it has to be cheaper than building an entire gate out of adamantium.

 

[Tony Vargas]

*Edit II* it looks like you're attributing a statement KM said to me in that quote.

Yep, sorry about that, fixed it.

I tried using the option to do a multi-quote earlier in the thread, and now they're showing up every time I try to quote anyone. They won't go away, and it's messing with attribution.

It's not system mastery to base an argument on the position that a caster will always have the right spell available to cast, all the time.

I haven't seen anyone make the claim that the right spell will always be available, just that the more important a given task is, the more sense it would make to expend a sure-thing limited resource instead of risk failure. I think it's obvious that a limited resource is not always available, thus 'limited.'

Now 5e neo-Vancian, combining the flexibility of 3.x Prepped & Spontaneous casting, does make it pretty likely that a given spell will be available, relative to prior editions (though wands & scrolls were trivially available in 3.x). But prepared/known spells are still finite, and slots are still a limited resource, and both must be managed.

Managing such resources well, is, of course, one example of system mastery.

So, sure, the poorer the system mastery/resource management at the table, and the fewer limited resources the party collectively has, the less likely just the right limited resource will be available at the optimal moment. In that sense, merely playing a non-EK fighter makes it more likely the party will fall back on him making some check at an important moment, since playing a fighter instead of a full caster reduces the total spell resources available to the party. In an all-Champion party, for instance, their RA-enhanced checks will never be obviated by the expenditure of a spell resource.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I haven't seen anyone make the claim that the right spell will always be available, just that the more important a given task is, the more sense it would make to expend a sure-thing limited resource instead of risk failure. I think it's obvious that a limited resource is not always available, thus 'limited.' .

When people say that fighters can't do anything out of combat, or that a caster will always do better than a non caster, it relies on the assumption that the caster will always have the right spell ready, all the time. No one actually has to come out and specifically say that; it's inferred by the argument that is being made because otherwise there is no way that argument could work.