D&D 5E Xanathar's Guide errata coming

[Shiroiken]

maybe they will finally accept responsibility & issue errata for spells like heat metal & tiny hut in an updated phb errata too

Probably not. Healing Spirit was pretty much universally considered WAY beyond it's proposed intent (in combat healing), since out of combat it could be used to heal 10d6 HP to ALL allies as a level 2 spell (compared to 2d8+5 to six allies). Heat Metal and Tiny Hut may have some issues, but they're not nearly as universal in agreement. The same could be said of Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter; many feel they're OP but not an overwhelming majority.

 

[Essafah]

You're right, I don't look at a spell in a vacuum. I look at spells in comparison to other spells because spells are ranked by spell level and class has nothing to do with it. I would point out that an argument in a vacuum white room trumps the lack of any evidence to the contrary that occurs in gameplay that you provided. Claiming it's a vacuum does not prove any point you might be trying to convince me of.

This is a fact: Out of combat in it's current version allows healing spirit to give 10d6 hp in healing to every member of the party. In a party of 3 that's 105 hp. In a party of 4 that's 140 hp. In a party of 5 that's 175 hp. That's in a 2nd level spell slot. Aura of healing, in a higher level slot, gives 70 hp to the party out of combat per casting. A 2nd level spell should never be better than a 3rd level spell when they both have the same function. That's unbalanced. Please prove otherwise.

Further, healing spirit costs a bonus action to cast and no further actions to maintain. Aura of healing costs an action to cast, and therefore an attack, and a bonus action to maintain. On top of that, aura of healing is restricted to one PC per round instead of on each turn in combat when it matters, and healing spring using the same slot heals the same 2d6 on top of all the other benefits it has over the higher level spell.

Healing word and cure wounds are not efficient healing at all.

Prayer of healing used to be the good out of combat healing spell. By your reasoning adding healing spirit was a buff to druids and rangers, and therefore a nerf to clerics and paladins. Fixing healing spirit cannot be a nerf when it's correcting a nerf.

Prayer of healing is the same spell level as healing spirit. Healing spirit takes a bonus action to cast, no action to maintain, can be used in combat, and heals more hit point damage out of combat. Out of combat healing spirit has healed more hit points than prayer of healing can 9 minutes before prayer of healing goes off. There's nothing but disadvantage for prayer of healing in comparison.

Mass cure wounds, a 5th level spell, requires an action to cast and heals 6 creatures 18.5 hp on average. That's 111 hp total, which is more than prayer of healing or aura of vitality (which makes sense), but less than the same number of creatures using a second level slot for healing spirit does. In combat, healing spirit in the same slot is 14 per target in the first round and doubled to 28 per target in the second round. For a bonus action spell. Second level spells should also not be out performing 5th level spells in the same slot.

That's not a vacuum. That's how the spells work in play and based on how spells are ranked. In combat there is at least a movement requirement but out of combat the spell was clearly ridiculous. A cap on the number of uses has nothing to do with nerfing or buffing any class. It's fixing something in the spell that needed fixing.

You start off on a faulty premise when you state spells are ranked by spell level and class had nothing to do with it. Spells are ranked by spell AND class access. There is a separate spell list for clerics and druids etcetera in the PHB it isn't just all X level spells. Thus class access absolutely matters.

Yes. HS helped balance things for classes like rangers and druids and out of combat much like spells like catnap allowed the party to keep going and keep the story and action moving without doing "well resources are low I guess we should go back to the Grove and rest" misadventure. Out of combat healing that keeps the PCs moving to the next plot point encounter etc is a good thing.

In combat HS was absolutely not efficient healing. My long term group both players and DMs are tactics minded power gamers. The number not times HS has been cast actually in combat over other healing spells I can count on two hands. A ranger in combat is going to have Hunters Mark not HS running. A druid MIGHT have HS running but not likely and if the druid did have HS running I as a DM would be happy that the player chose to have a concentration spell that heals a target (for 1d6 hp LMAO) vs. having an actual battlefield control spell like spike growth running or casting a buff spell like protection energy etc running and then shifting into beast form to stomp stuff. Likewise if a ranger is concentrating on HS be HM to me that is better scenario as a DM and something I would not do as a player as it is not optimal, but I am sure the change maybe real because I saw how in the DnD Next open test phase the designers caved in to the vocal OSR contingent to the chagrin of everyone else .

 

[fearsomepirate]

But it is more of an OSR style thinking. The whole "power creep" notion....players like having options that adds power sets to their characters. I and many people enjoy playing heroes that are not just average Joe's that decided to go adventuring but are heroes above the average person who maybe born lowly as a urchin or whatever but whose dreams coupled with their above average abilities makes them destined for greatness. OSR games was a constant struggle where PCs died in droves during 1st sessions, spellcasters had to run out of spells and use xbows. Some people like that and some people don't.. I personally would like to see the cinematic action abilities of PCa in 5E increase not decrease and as a sometimes GM I have no problem with this.

"Power creep" doesn't mean you character is heroic. "Power creep" means the stuff in new books is flat-out better than the stuff in the older books. Healing Spirit is a 2nd-level healing spell that is far more powerful than any other 2nd-level healing spell. College of Swords Bard is far more powerful than College of Valor Bard. Toll the Dead is simply the most powerful cantrip in the game. Etc.

Nobody said spells that heal out of combat are bad. 10d6 per person for a 2nd level slot (20d6 for a 3rd-level) is overpowered...and apparently, Mr Crawford agrees.

 

[Essafah]

"Power creep" doesn't mean you character is heroic. "Power creep" means the stuff in new books is flat-out better than the stuff in the older books. Healing Spirit is a 2nd-level healing spell that is far more powerful than any other 2nd-level healing spell. College of Swords Bard is far more powerful than College of Valor Bard. Toll the Dead is simply the most powerful cantrip in the game. Etc.

For the most part the PHB options remain the strongest in the game. Xanathar's did upset the balance. The college of more bard I would argue by far remains the strongest and most utilitarian bard type. HS is broken if you look at it in a vacuum and look at spell level and not spell and class level which is how spells are broken down. I suspect (I could be wrong but I suspect) toll the dead and most subclasses including hexblade will not be nerfed because they are fine overall. Ex. I still consider the fiend pacr warlock from the phb stronger than the hexblade although it is a close race. The moon druid and land druid from the are still the strongest druid. I think battle master remains overall the strongest fighter. The only class that I think got a boost in XG was the ranger but that is because the ranger was underwhelming to begin with

 

[fearsomepirate]

The college of more bard I would argue by far remains the strongest and most utilitarian bard type.

That's not a fighting bard option. The fighting bards are Valor, Swords, and Whispers, and of the three, Swords is easily the most powerful. "Nobody should play a fighting bard; they should be a casting-only bard instead " hardly proves that Swords isn't a massive improvement over Valor, though.

HS is broken if you look at it in a vacuum and look at spell level and not spell and class level

Druids get 2nd-level spells at the same time clerics do.

 

[Ashrym]

My tables are often in a position to know when damage might happen. There are many times when you are walking into a potentially dangerous situation and might benefit from the tactic, especially in a dungeon. And again, it doesn't waste any slots.

It wastes the slot every time casting is started and damage doesn't need healed by the end of the spell.

 

[Essafah]

That's not a fighting bard option. The fighting bards are Valor, Swords, and Whispers, and of the three, Swords is easily the most powerful. "Nobody should play a fighting bard; they should be a casting-only bard instead " hardly proves that Swords isn't a massive improvement over Valor, though.



Druids get 2nd-level spells at the same time clerics do.

Well first the bard was not balanced in the PHB. The lore bard was stronger than the valor bard. The fact that XG corrected the issue and gave a more competitive options to frontline bards is a good thing not a flaw. I'd anything the flaw was in the original design (the phb). To hold XG to a higher standard than the PHB and then penalize it for shoring up a flaw in the PHB is does not make sense

Yes druids get second level spells at the same time as clerics but they don't get the same level quality of healing spells overall as clerics and clerics and paladins don't have access to HS. It balances.

 

[Olrox17]

Well first the bard was not balanced in the PHB. The lore bard was stronger than the valor bard. The fact that XG corrected the issue and gave a more competitive options to frontline bards is a good thing not a flaw. I'd anything the flaw was in the original design (the phb). To hold XG to a higher standard than the PHB and then penalize it for shoring up a flaw in the PHB is does not make sense

Yes druids get second level spells at the same time as clerics but they don't get the same level quality of healing spells overall as clerics and clerics and paladins don't have access to HS. It balances.

Subclasses like the sword bard, the zealot barbarian and the gloom stalker were introduced almost as a substitute for underwhelming PHB options like the valor bard, the berserker and both phb ranger options.
I’m happy we got them. It’s not a bad type of power creep in my view,

On the other hand, I don’t like that the game is now littered with sub-par trap options completely superseded by new material. But Wotc apparently can’t rebalance trap options (or OP options) because people would get upset that their books are now obsolete. In the digital era, I find this quite sad.

 

[Ashrym]

You start off on a faulty premise when you state spells are ranked by spell level and class had nothing to do with it. Spells are ranked by spell AND class access. There is a separate spell list for clerics and druids etcetera in the PHB it isn't just all X level spells. Thus class access absolutely matters.

Yes. HS helped balance things for classes like rangers and druids and out of combat much like spells like catnap allowed the party to keep going and keep the story and action moving without doing "well resources are low I guess we should go back to the Grove and rest" misadventure. Out of combat healing that keeps the PCs moving to the next plot point encounter etc is a good thing.

In combat HS was absolutely not efficient healing. My long term group both players and DMs are tactics minded power gamers. The number not times HS has been cast actually in combat over other healing spells I can count on two hands. A ranger in combat is going to have Hunters Mark not HS running. A druid MIGHT have HS running but not likely and if the druid did have HS running I as a DM would be happy that the player chose to have a concentration spell that heals a target (for 1d6 hp LMAO) vs. having an actual battlefield control spell like spike growth running or casting a buff spell like protection energy etc running and then shifting into beast form to stomp stuff. Likewise if a ranger is concentrating on HS be HM to me that is better scenario as a DM and something I would not do as a player as it is not optimal, but I am sure the change maybe real because I saw how in the DnD Next open test phase the designers caved in to the vocal OSR contingent to the chagrin of everyone else .

Something isn't a faulty premise just because you say so. Just like your comment about a vacuum not proving your point you actually need to give evidence backing up how I made a faulty premise.

Every spell has a level from 0 to 9. A spell’s level is a general indicator of how powerful it is, with the lowly (but still impressive) magic missile at 1st level and the earth-shaking wish at 9th. Cantrips—simple but powerful spells that characters can cast almost by rote— are level 0. The higher a spell’s level, the higher level a spellcaster must be to use that spell.

Spell level and character level don’t correspond directly. Typically, a character has to be at least 17th level, not 9th level, to cast a 9th-level spell.

The PHB flat out states spells are ranked in power by spell level. 5e never took class or character level into consideration in that ranking. The faulty premise is yours.

Also, you need to prove characters cannot move on every turn to take healing spirit healing for healing spirit to not be efficient healing because it's available every round to every character as already stated. It's a clear mechanic of the spell.

"Nuh uh we don't use it" illustrates you either aren't the tactically minded players you claim. Healing word is pretty useless outside of some emergency healing because of how little it actually heals and cure wounds costs an action instead of a bonus action. Both affect a single target. If you have something to demonstrate the advantage they have over healing spirit please demonstrate it. The same for prayer of healing or aura of vitality.

I easily gave examples of how healing spring was advantageous. Why are all your arguments that I'm wrong because you claim theory over practice (in a vacuum argument) and appeal to authority (we're tactical players) and similar arguments but no actual demonstrations of the advantages these other spells have?

"Power creep" doesn't mean you character is heroic. "Power creep" means the stuff in new books is flat-out better than the stuff in the older books. Healing Spirit is a 2nd-level healing spell that is far more powerful than any other 2nd-level healing spell. College of Swords Bard is far more powerful than College of Valor Bard. Toll the Dead is simply the most powerful cantrip in the game. Etc.

Nobody said spells that heal out of combat are bad. 10d6 per person for a 2nd level slot (20d6 for a 3rd-level) is overpowered...and apparently, Mr Crawford agrees.

Valor bard is better. Swords cannot use flourishes and also cast spells. The bard is better off with the shield for a resource free AC bonus and spending bardic inspiration on others with better capability is more effective than spending inspiration on oneself for those flourishes. It's a different analysis that I'd be happy to discuss in a different thread when I get more time.

A little bit of power creep happens but I disagree on the bard. Healing spirit is more than power creep. It's very superior to other healing spells. I suspect WotC over-estimated the movement cost at the time.

 

[GlassJaw]

"Power creep" doesn't mean you character is heroic. "Power creep" means the stuff in new books is flat-out better than the stuff in the older books. Healing Spirit is a 2nd-level healing spell that is far more powerful than any other 2nd-level healing spell. College of Swords Bard is far more powerful than College of Valor Bard. Toll the Dead is simply the most powerful cantrip in the game. Etc.

Allowing Healing Spirit more than once per round (which was clearly the design intent) makes it broken beyond belief. So don't do that. The "fix" is overkill and a gross overreaction. It's a redesign instead of actual errata.

But as far as subclasses go, most of the ones in XGtE are weaker than the PHB: Bear totem is still the best, College of Lore and Valor easily hold up, if not better. Cleric domains are good but balanced, same for new Druid circles. Fighter paths are ok, Arcane Archer is weak though, etc, etc.

If anything, WotC erred on the side of caution with regards to power creep.