# Make SPELLS Balanced



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

*Make SPELLS Balanced*

This thread doublechecks the official spells in 5e. The hope is the 2024 edition will calibrate the spells, so every spell in a same slot will be about equal in value.

5e does an excellent job at nerfing the spells from earlier editions that were historically broken. This effort is part of why 5e is a remarkably robust gaming engine that can handle character optimization. At the same time, 5e made less effort to upgrade spells that were subpar from earlier editions. There are trap options that are disruptively inferior to other options in the same slot.



To avoid confusion between "class level" and "spell level", I will refer to spell levels as "slots". For example, a "5th-level spell" is the same thing as a "5th-slot spell", a "5 slot spell", and a "spell that requires 5 slots".



*DAMAGE SPELLS*

The classic damage spells, like _Fireball_, deal instantaneous save-for-half damage. A multi-target spell should deal 7 damage per slot. A single-target spell should deal 9 damage per slot.

The 2014 Dungeon Masters Guide (page 284) advises how much damage a spell should do per slot. However, similar to how the Monster Manual ignores the DMG advice for monsters, the Players Handbook ignores the DMG advice for spells. For example, the DMG says a 3rd-slot spell should deal 21 damage (6d6), but no spell like this exists in 5e. 5e spells deal amounts of damage that are wildly inconsistent. Even so, it is possible to identify certain spells as bench marks that other spells can measure against. Whence: multi-target should deal about 7 damage per slot and single-target should deal about 9 damage per slot.

The following spells deal an appropriate amount of damage for their slot.


*SLOT**MULTI-TARGET**SINGLE-TARGET**1st-slot **2d6 damage (7)*
Arms of Hadar (7)
Burning Hands (10.5)*2d8 damage (9)*
Ray of Sickness (9)
Dissonant Whispers (10.5)
Hellish Rebuke (11)
Chromatic Orb (13.5)
Inflict Wounds (16.5)*2nd-slot**4d6 damage (14)*
Shatter (13.5)*4d8 damage (18)*
Scorching Ray (21)*3rd-slot**6d6 damage (21)*
−*6d8 damage (27)*
−*4th-slot**8d6 damage (28)*
−*8d8 damage (36)*
Blight (36)*5th-slot**10d6 damage (35)*
Destructive Wave (35)
Cone of Cold (36)
Conjure Volley (36)*10d8 damage (45)*
Harm (49)*6th-slot**12d6 damage (42)*
Chain Lighting (45)*12d8 damage (54)*
−*7th-slot**14d6 damage (49)*
−*14d8 damage (63)*
Finger of Death (61.5)

Notes.

To get a sense of the 5e gaming engine, these spells should be 4th-slot spells: _Fireball_, _Flame Strike_, _Lightning Bolt_, and _Circle of Death_.

The 7th- and 8th-slot damage spells are remarkably subpar. Even 7th-slot _Finger of Death_ is slightly subpar. Yet, the 9th-slot has extremely high damage dealing spells. Instead of the scaling multi-target 63 damage, _Meteor Swarm_ deals 140 damage. Instead of the scaling single-target 81 damage, _Power Word Kill_ deals 100 damage.

Several damage spells might need to relocate to a lower slot where they can become competitive with the other spells at that lower slot. Otherwise to remain in their current slot, they require a damage boost or possibly additional effects. Examples of subpar damage spells include: _Melfs Acid Arrow_, _Conjure Barrage_, _Ice Storm_, _Flame Strike_, _Circle of Death_, _Fire Storm_, and _Sunburst_.


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> *Make SPELLS Balanced*
> 
> This thread doublechecks the official spells in 5e. The hope is the 2024 edition will calibrate the spells, so every spell in a same slot will be about equal in value.
> 
> ...



I very much agree on correcting the "intentionally overtuned"* spell problem since it really creates a mess both for casters & GMs alike.  While they are at doing that 5.5 needs to correct problems caused  by the overuse of concentration to hamstring


Spoiler: a Self Correcting 'Problem'




[*edit: *I link to this rather than a guide describing how to because it nicely explains the what & why in ways a guide would obfuscate with excess data]


buff debuff & control type spells are a thing that serve to make the rest of the party shine a bit brighter & give them wiggle room when its needed but between so much of the system being constructed with an effort to "embrace the imbalance"* there isn't much room or need for it.

*I wish those were not direct quotes


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

I like 8d6 fireball.
There are more problems with casters than removing HP from targets.
Control, battlefield manipulations are far more effective than removing HPs.
Most monsters are huge bags of HPs anyway.

All spells should be around fireballs damage at 3rd spell level.

also damage spells need better scaling.

banishment goes from 1 target to 2 targets at spell levels 4 and 5.
+100% efficiency.
fireball goes from 9d6 to 10d6 from 4th to 5th level.
+11% efficiency. What a joke.

depending on side effects, damage types, AoE size, most, if not all damaging spells should be based on d6 and d8 only.

upcasting of damaging spells should be 3 dice for single target, and 2 dice for AoE.

I.E. 
fireball should deal +2d6 extra per spell level. with +5ft radius increase.

Scorching ray should be 2 rays for 3d6 at 2nd level and gain one 3d6 ray per spell level.


----------



## Lojaan (Oct 4, 2022)

Oh boy the _spells... _<rolls up sleeves> LET ME AT THEM!


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> I like 8d6 fireball.



I appreciate the Wizard casting a _Fireball_ is an iconic D&D tradition. The designers want to give this icon "plot protection".

Even so, in the context of 5e, the design goal works better as a special Wizard feature to boost the _Fireball_ spell, rather than creating an overpowered spell that disrupts the balance of other spells. Compare how the Warlock boosts the _Eldritch Blast_ cantrip and the _Detect Magic_ spell, and how the UA Ranger modifies _Conjure Barrage_.

The _Fireball_ spell is thematically appropriate for an elemental Druid. It helps for the Druid to have it on the spell list even if without a special Wizard boost.



Horwath said:


> There are more problems with casters than removing HP from targets.
> Control, battlefield manipulations are far more effective than removing HPs.
> Most monsters are huge bags of HPs anyway.



This thread can discuss any kind of spell. The first post address the damage spells as a starting point. Comparing the numbers shows clearly the 5e spells need calibration generally, for the sake of balance.



Horwath said:


> also damage spells need better scaling.



Looking at what a spells damage should be for each slot, helps clarify how much damage spells should scale.

Generally, +2d6 for multi-target and +2d8 for single-target.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The _Fireball_ spell is thematically appropriate for an elemental Druid. It helps for the Druid to have it on its spell list even if without a special Wizard boost.



Wildfire druid should get it as a bonus spell instead of Plantgrowth or Revivify.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> I appreciate the Wizard casting a _Fireball_ is an iconic D&D tradition. The designers want to give this icon "plot protection".
> 
> Even so, in the context of 5e, the design goal works better as a special Wizard feature to boost the _Fireball_ spell, rather than creating an overpowered spell that disrupts the balance of other spells. Compare how the Warlock boosts the _Eldritch Blast_ cantrip and the _Detect Magic_ spell, and how the UA Ranger modifies _Conjure Barrage_.



Special wizard boost could be +1 damage per die rolled.
Fireball, 8d6+8


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> I very much agree on correcting the "intentionally overtuned"* spell problem since it really creates a mess both for casters & GMs alike.



Yeah. The imbalance of spells causes all kind of problems, including ranging from trap options, to hampering class access to thematically appropriate spells, to imbalance between casters and noncasters. And more.



tetrasodium said:


> While they are at doing that 5.5 needs to correct problems caused  by the overuse of concentration to hamstring



I dont have as strong a feel for the Concentration mechanic. The spells that I go for tend to deserve it. But there are spells that clearly dont deserve it, and others that should probably have it.



tetrasodium said:


> buff debuff & control type spells are a thing that serve to make the rest of the party shine a bit brighter & give them wiggle room when its needed but between so much of the system being constructed with an effort to "embrace the imbalance"* there isn't much room or need for it.



Yeah. Yet an other problem that spell imbalance causes. Spells that are good for party participation end up not happening, because they are less good than other spells at the same slot.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Wildfire druid should get it as a bonus spell instead of Plantgrowth or Revivify.



The Wildfire Druid should probably have both _Fireball_ (and _Lightning Bolt_ since lightning normally causes natural wildfires) as well as _Plantgrowth_ (since the forest burnings fertilize the soil).

The Wildfire Druid also needs access to _Revivify_ if serving as the party healer.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Special wizard boost could be +1 damage per die rolled.
> Fireball, 8d6+8



Brainstorming.

The Wizard can have a feature that can increase the die size of the Fireball spell and any other Fire spell.

For balance generally, a 3rd-slot spell deals about 6d6 damage.

But the Wizard feature would convert d6→d8 to deal 6d8 damage.

It would work for other Fire spells too, including cantrips and Burning Hands.


----------



## Staffan (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The 2014 Dungeon Masters Guide (page 284) advises how much damage a spell should do per slot. However, similar to how the Monster Manual ignores the DMG advice for monsters, the Players Handbook ignores the DMG advice for spells. For example, the DMG says a 3rd-slot spell should deal 21 damage (6d6), but no spell like this exists in 5e. 5e spells deal amounts of damage that are wildly inconsistent. Even so, it is possible to identify certain spells as bench marks that other spells can measure against. Whence: multi-target should deal about 7 damage per slot and single-target should deal about 9 damage per slot.



Damage, however, is not the only concern. One thing that's clearly taken into account is AOE. You mention Circle of Death and its low damage (same damage as 3rd level fireball but using a 6th level slot) – but Circle of Death has an absolutely *massive* area, 9 times that of a Fireball.


Yaarel said:


> Instead of the scaling single-target 81 damage, _Power Word Kill_ deals 100 damage.



Power Word Kill deals no damage. It kills a target with 100 hp or fewer, but if the target has e.g. 101 hp it has no effect.

It is essentially the same as Sleep, only a higher-level version.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The Wildfire Druid should probably have both _Fireball_ (and _Lightning Bolt_ since lightning normally causes natural wildfires) as well as _Plantgrowth_ (since the forest burnings fertilize the soil).
> 
> The Wildfire Druid also needs access to _Revivify_ if serving as the party healer.



as Revivify is not Druid spell, it should be 3rd level bonus with Fireball.
Druid can access Plant growth normally with preparation.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Brainstorming.
> 
> The Wizard can have a feature that can increase the die size of the Fireball spell and any other Fire spell.
> 
> ...



d6+1 is more reliable than d8 with same average damage.

that is better for some "trained" or "specialized" bonus.


----------



## aco175 (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> d6+1 is more reliable than d8 with same average damage.
> 
> that is better for some "trained" or "specialized" bonus.



I might like having specialized wizards re-roll 1s on the damage and then have a level ability where they re-roll 2s as well.  Instead of just adding more damage that is static.  Players like to roll dice and not be disappointed when the dice suck.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

aco175 said:


> I might like having specialized wizards re-roll 1s on the damage and then have a level ability where they re-roll 2s as well.  Instead of just adding more damage that is static.  Players like to roll dice and not be disappointed when the dice suck.



Yeah. The reroll looks solid, and can work with other spells that use different dice.

Fireball 6d6 reroll 1s and 2s (27 damage) ≈ 8d6 (28 damage)

And the Wizard class can boost it incrementally, starting with reroll 1s and elsewhere upgrade to reroll 2s.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

Staffan said:


> Damage, however, is not the only concern. One thing that's clearly taken into account is AOE. You mention Circle of Death and its low damage (same damage as 3rd level fireball but using a 6th level slot) – but Circle of Death has an absolutely *massive* area, 9 times that of a Fireball.



Unless the caster can "sculpt" the area effect to avoid hitting allies, the larger the area effect means the less useful the spell is − thus the lower the level it is.

But generally, the Players Handbook doesnt take area effect into consideration in any consistent way.

When it comes to spells that were subpar in earlier editions, 5e tends to import them as-is without too much thought. For example, in 5e, it makes less sense for Telepathy to be an 8th-slot spell (it could easily be a 3rd-slot spell), or Legend Lore to be 5th-slot spell (when the 5e History skill obsoletes it). Several spells are examples of a rough cut-and-paste from earlier editions. Only the spells that were brokenly powerful and caused huge problems in earlier edition got the proper attention of the 5e designers.



Staffan said:


> Power Word Kill deals no damage. It kills a target with 100 hp or fewer, but if the target has e.g. 101 hp it has no effect.



True. But it is normally easy to know if the hostile has less than 100 hit points.

In case of doubt, soften the hostile up first before casting Power Word Kill.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 4, 2022)

I disagree that fireball should be downgraded to 6d6.

8d6 actually does the right amount of damage at that level. Enough to actually be worth taking over a debuff.

6d6... not so much.

Probably they should update the table instead of downgrading.

I think 7d6 would also be ok.

3d6 at level 1 + 2d6 per spell level.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Several damage spells might need to relocate to a lower slot where they can become competitive with the other spells at that lower slot. Otherwise to remain in their current slot, they require a damage boost or possibly additional effects. Examples of subpar damage spells include: _Melfs Acid Arrow_, _Conjure Barrage_, _Ice Storm_, _Flame Strike_, _Circle of Death_, _Fire Storm_, and _Sunburst_.




Please. Update damage and effect, don't relocate. And mutlitarket should absolutely start with 3d6 (burning hands) , if there is no additional effect. Single target can be 3d10 (inflict wounds) and not be unbalanced.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

aco175 said:


> I might like having specialized wizards re-roll 1s on the damage and then have a level ability where they re-roll 2s as well.  Instead of just adding more damage that is static.  Players like to roll dice and not be disappointed when the dice suck.



Please no,

we have more than enough of rerolling mechanics.
i suggested simple +1 per die, as is it simple and does not slow down the game.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 4, 2022)

all spells need to be redone, and fireball should NOT be better then other damage spells. Now the argument can be made to bring other spells up to that level, or bring it down. Same with Meteor Strike.

I also want hold and tasha laugh NERFed to heck... there is NO amount of damage is equal to "take a turn or more away from target" let alone "Take a turn away AND debuff target" 

a 20th level wizard running into a non legendary 20th level threat can use a 1st level Tasha laugh spell to more effect then any damage spell.  Heck since saves don't go up with level if facing a target with low save it may just knock them right out of the fight... compare that to any damage causing spell. 

no 1st or 2nd level spell should be powerful enough to negate a threat like that


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> all spells need to be redone, and fireball should NOT be better then other damage spells. Now the argument can be made to bring other spells up to that level, or bring it down. Same with Meteor Strike.
> 
> I also want hold and tasha laugh NERFed to heck... there is NO amount of damage is equal to "take a turn or more away from target" let alone "Take a turn away AND debuff target"
> 
> ...



yes.

1st and 2nd level spell should have levels of debuffs in range of:

halve speed of target,
inflict disadvantage on attack and/or saves,
prevent spellcasting except cantrips for one round,
"weaken" condition: all damage you deal is halved,
have attacks gain advantage vs target,
targets provokes AoO,


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> I disagree that fireball should be downgraded to 6d6.
> 
> I think 7d6 would also be ok.



A 7d6 Fireball would be fine.

7d6 is powerful but between 6d6 and 8d6 is still within the parameters of a 3rd-slot spell.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> Wildfire druid should get it as a bonus spell instead of Plantgrowth or Revivify.



Our last campaign had a wildfire druid, and he was teased all the time for not having fireball lol.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> A 7d6 Fireball would be fine.
> 
> 7d6 is powerful but between 6d6 and 8d6 is still within the parameters of a 3rd-slot spell.



hmm, might work.

1st level fireball, 3d6, 10ft radius
2nd lvl, 5d6, 15ft radius
3rd lvl, 7d6, 20ft radius
4th level, 9d6, 25ft radius
...
9th level, 19d6, 50ft radius

Fireball is now 1st level spell. This is now canon.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> all spells need to be redone, and fireball should NOT be better then other damage spells. Now the argument can be made to bring other spells up to that level, or bring it down. Same with Meteor Strike.



Yeah, it is important every spell in a slot is comparable.



GMforPowergamers said:


> I also want hold and tasha laugh NERFed to heck... there is NO amount of damage is equal to "take a turn or more away from target" let alone "Take a turn away AND debuff target"



1st-slot _Entangle_ and _Tashas Hiddeous Laughter_ and 6th-slot _Ottos Irresistable Dance_ are roughly comparable to each other. Entangle restrains as an area effect, Laughter incapacitates, and Dance denies an initial save so requires an action to try stop granting advantage.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> 1st-slot _Entangle_ and _Tashas Hiddeous Laughter_ and 6th-slot _Ottos Irresistable Dance_ are roughly comparable to each other. Entangle restrains as an area effect, Laughter incapacitates, and Dance denies an initial save so requires an action to try stop granting advantage.



way back when in 1e spells were not balanced with level... over the years as they tried to, the 'legacy' spells have been proud nails standing up and need to be hammered down hard


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 4, 2022)

The base fireball spell in the hands of a generalist or a caster specced towards some other niche should be 6d6 or less. The reason for that it because that gives evoker & similar archetypes more room to carry meaningful class features that bring it up to wow-worthy levels.  By extension non-evoker type archetypes that focus in some other niche have room for their niche to carry meaningful contributions to their making niche wow worthy as well. Spells themselves have more room to scale better too & it doesn't matter as much if an evoker type upcasts an already wowworthy fireball because said evoker has less power elsewhere that some other caster carries on their class/archetype.



Horwath said:


> I like 8d6 fireball.
> There are more problems with casters than removing HP from targets.
> *Control, battlefield manipulations are far more effective than removing HPs.*
> Most monsters are huge bags of HPs anyway.
> ...



That bold bit is why nuke type spells need a portion of their power shifted to archetypes & buff/debuff/control type spells dialing back their excessive limits is so that an evoker can't also be a master of buff/debuff/control.  With god wizard types carrying class features that make them masters of wow-worthy buff/debuff/control spells  they don't _need_ 8d6 fireballs either.  Casters who are masters of a given niche likewise should be leaning into their niche of helping their party shine however their niche does that;  In the case of casters other than blasters  that is usually done by  letting the party do the damage at lower cost than by throwing out an unimpressive fireball just because they could.


----------



## Stalker0 (Oct 4, 2022)

While I could see the case for fireball being toned back down its not even close to the biggest spell abuse in the game. Something like hypnotic pattern is far more disruptive.

On the flip side, there are a number of garbage spells that could certainly use love, Mordenkainen's Sword being near the top...there's actually a lot of 6th+ level spells that just aren't worth the pay grade.


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 4, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The Wildfire Druid should probably have both _Fireball_ (and _Lightning Bolt_ since lightning normally causes natural wildfires) as well as _Plantgrowth_ (since the forest burnings fertilize the soil).
> 
> The Wildfire Druid also needs access to _Revivify_ if serving as the party healer.



Wildfire druids have access to both Revivify and Plant Growth.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 4, 2022)

Kobold Stew said:


> Wildfire druids have access to both Revivify and Plant Growth.



I was responding to what seemed a suggestion to swap the Circle Spells out to get Fireball. I was saying, all of these spells, including Fireball (and Lightning Bolt) are appropriate for the concept of the Wildfire Druid.


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 4, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> While I could see the case for fireball being toned back down its not even close to the biggest spell abuse in the game. Something like hypnotic pattern is far more disruptive.
> 
> On the flip side, there are a number of garbage spells that could certainly use love, Mordenkainen's Sword being near the top...there's actually a lot of 6th+ level spells that just aren't worth the pay grade.



Lots of spells were dramatically buffed in 5e's streamlining & simplification with nonsensical results for the spell level. hypnotic pattern is a good example when you compare the 5e version to older versions of that spell.  Even going back to check the 2e version has the 5e one more powerful than either edition  back when magic was super powered


Spoiler: 2e



Hypnotic Pattern
(Illusion/Phantasm)

Range: 30 yds. Components: S, M
Duration: Special Casting Time: 2
Area of Effect: 30-ft. cube Saving Throw: Neg.

 When this spell is cast, the wizard creates a weaving, twisting pat-
tern of subtle colors in the air. This pattern causes any creature look-
ing at it to become fascinated and stand gazing at it as long as the 
spellcaster maintains the display, plus two rounds thereafter. The 
spell can captivate a maximum of 24 levels, or Hit Dice, of creatures 
(for example, 24 creatures with 1 Hit Die each, 12 with 2 Hit Dice, 
etc.). All creatures affected must be within the area of effect, and 
each is entitled to a saving throw vs. spell. A damage-inflicting attack 
on an affected creature frees it from the spell immediately.
 The wizard need not utter a sound, but he must gesture appropri-
ately while holding a glowing stick of incense or a crystal rod filled 
with phosphorescent material.





Spoiler: 3.5



Hypnotic Pattern​Illusion (Pattern) [Mind-Affecting]​
Level:Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2Components:V (Brd only), S, M; see textCasting Time:1 standard actionRange:Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)Effect:Colorful lights in a 10-ft.-radius spreadDuration:Concentration + 2 roundsSaving Throw:Will negatesSpell Resistance:Yes
A twisting pattern of subtle, shifting colors weaves through the air, fascinating creatures within it. Roll 2d4 and add your caster level (maximum 10) to determine the total number of Hit Dice of creatures affected. Creatures with the fewest HD are affected first; and, among creatures with equal HD, those who are closest to the spell’s point of origin are affected first. Hit Dice that are not sufficient to affect a creature are wasted. Affected creatures become fascinated by the pattern of colors. Sightless creatures are not affected.

A wizard or sorcerer need not utter a sound to cast this spell, but a bard must sing, play music, or recite a rhyme as a verbal component.

Material Component​





Spoiler: 5e



LEVEL
3rd
CASTING TIME
1 Action
RANGE/AREA
120 ft (30 ft )
COMPONENTS
S, M *
DURATION
_Concentration_ 1 Minute
SCHOOL
Illusion
ATTACK/SAVE
WIS Save
DAMAGE/EFFECT
Charmed

You create a twisting pattern of colors that weaves through the air inside a 30-foot cube within range. The pattern appears for a moment and vanishes. Each creature in the area who sees the pattern must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the creature becomes charmed for the duration. While charmed by this spell, the creature is incapacitated and has a speed of 0.
The spell ends for an affected creature if it takes any damage or if someone else uses an action to shake the creature out of its stupor.



Bizarrely the 5e version dramatically bumps the AoE size over 3.5 & bumps both aoe as well as range over 2e yet removes the hit dice limit from both all while removing the hurdle of being SR:yes from 3.5.


----------



## Gadget (Oct 4, 2022)

I definitely agree that spells need to be rebalanced.  However, like some others, I disagree that Fireball is anywhere near the top of the list.  I'm not sure that the 'suggested guidelines" for spells in the DMG are gospel in any case.  Sure fix Mordenkainen's Sword, along with possibly Witch Bolt, Acid Splash, and some others.  But what about things like Find Traps, True Strike, Friends, Crown of Madness, and many others that could use a boost?

And Hypnotic Pattern, Tiny Hut, Forbiddance, Forcecage, Simulacrum and a few others could use some toning down.

Edit: Grammer & punctuation.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 4, 2022)

Gadget said:


> I definitely agree that spells need to be rebalanced.  However, like some others, I disagree that Fireball is anywhere near the top of the list.  I'm not sure that the 'suggested guidelines" for spells in the DMG are gospel in any case.  Sure Mordenkainen's Sword, along with possibly Witch Bolt, Acid Splash, and some others.  But what about things like Find Traps, True Strike, Friends, Crown of Madness, and many others could use a boost.
> 
> And Hypnotic Pattern, Tiny Hut, Forbiddance, Forcecage, Simulacrum and a few others could use some toning down.



I want less powerful mages... and even I want Bladeward, Friends and True strike to be made more useful. 

I will raise stone skin... it's a sucky spell either make it resist all bludge pierce slash or make it lower level and EITHER way remove the concentration on it


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 4, 2022)

The proposed changes they made to Barkskin and Guidance make me hopeful that they really are trying to listen to concerns raised by the fanbase, and produce something that's workable going forward. Both are solid fixes.

(Barkskin was always terrible, and this is now clear and useful. I myself had no problems with Guidance, but I understand that in some groups it can become annoying. this fixes that.)


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 4, 2022)

Kobold Stew said:


> The proposed changes they made to Barkskin and Guidance make me hopeful that they really are trying to listen to concerns raised by the fanbase, and produce something that's workable going forward. Both are solid fixes.



I like that they tried, but I am not happy with barkskin being a renamed heroism and I don't know how I feel about guidence


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 4, 2022)

Horwath said:


> hmm, might work.
> 
> 1st level fireball, 3d6, 10ft radius
> 2nd lvl, 5d6, 15ft radius
> ...



No, it is a 3rd level spell you can downcast. It is a big difference.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 4, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> No, it is a 3rd level spell you can downcast. It is a big difference.



that means you have to be a 5th level wizard to be able to prep it in a 3rd level prep zone/slot/level that you can use that 1st or 2nd level slot for...


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 4, 2022)

GMforPowergamers said:


> that means you have to be a 5th level wizard to be able to prep it in a 3rd level prep zone/slot/level that you can use that 1st or 2nd level slot for...



Exactly. Or be a sorcerer level 5. Allows the sorcerer to fully upgrade burning hands to fireball because they don´t have to fear not having a fire spell in a low level slot.

In the light of the multiclass rules (which I really like), this would be even more of an incentive to not stra away too far from your main class, as you can get some bigger guns for your otherwise quite useless low level slots. This would allow toning down fireball a bit, as you don´t need the load the burden completely on the highest level slot.


----------



## Laurefindel (Oct 5, 2022)

I find that I don’t have much problems with spell damage as they are; my issue is more with the concentration mechanics. Spells like flame blade and mordenkanen sword are mostly handicapped by the fact that losing concentration makes them too risky for the situations they are made for, that is, encounters where you need to endure with as little spell slots as possible. But in a paradigm where casters cast a new spell every round in every combat, these spells underperform regardless of concentration.

But still, I like the multiple niches that these spells fall in, I just don’t like the fact that the situations for these niches to exist almost never occur at all.


----------



## Sir Brennen (Oct 5, 2022)

One factor I didn’t see taken into consideration for damage spells, is whether a To Hit roll is required. To me that’s always been the justification for spells like Chromatic Orb and Scorching Ray to have higher than average damage.

For true average damages, you’d need to take into account those instances where the spell fails to hit its target, doing zero damage. Same with spells that deal half damage on a save.

And of course, what if there’s additional effects of the spell beyond damage? Like ice storm? Is a round of difficult terrain worth a damage adjustment of some kind?


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 5, 2022)

Sir Brennen said:


> And of course, what if there’s additional effects of the spell beyond damage? Like ice storm? Is a round of difficult terrain worth a damage adjustment of some kind?




Yes, but the penalties are sometimes too harsh.
Ice storm for example covers a huge area and one round of difficult terrain can mean one round of extra hurt before the enemies can approach.


----------



## Staffan (Oct 5, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Unless the caster can "sculpt" the area effect to avoid hitting allies, the larger the area effect means the less useful the spell is − thus the lower the level it is.



Not if you can cast it at range and catch more enemies without targeting your allies. It and of itself, a bigger boom is better, but there are situations where you'd prefer a smaller one.


Yaarel said:


> True. But it is normally easy to know if the hostile has less than 100 hit points.
> 
> In case of doubt, soften the hostile up first before casting Power Word Kill.



The point is that you can't use two Power Words Kill to kill an opponent with 200 hp (ignoring for the moment that you rarely have the ability to cast two 9th level spells). With a Fireball, it doesn't matter much when in the fight you cast it. First round, fifth round, whatever. It might be less efficient in the fifth round because there are fewer targets and/or allies are more mushed up with enemies, but other than that it works just as well. But PWK needs softening up first.


----------



## Mistwell (Oct 5, 2022)

I want an end to some bad spells which were such duds almost nobody took them. But I am not that interested in precise damage balance. Spells are too varied, and what some value in add-ons others don't, and that should remain as personal preference. How do you balance fire damage being more commonly resisted? How to you value forced movement, or restrained? Let players and DMs decide this on their own and just continue to offer a wide variety of combinations and options. I don't want it bogged down too much in an extensive formula behind each spell making sure it's balanced against other spells. I just want all the spells to be roughly as useful to someone, at that same level. Even if one spell is highly circumstantial and the other has broader utility.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 6, 2022)

Horwath said:


> hmm, might work.
> 
> 1st level fireball, 3d6, 10ft radius
> 2nd lvl, 5d6, 15ft radius
> ...



I like those damage amounts for spells that focus on damage only.

So for 3rd slot, a damage spell that includes an effect that useful and effective in combat would deal closer to 21 damage (6d6). But a spell whose use is mainly damage would deal 24.5 damage (7d6). Essentially, the spell is swapping out damage for a useful effect.

Because there is a quite range from 6d6 until 8d6. There is flexibility to design each spell on a case by case basis, and even some room for error.

Damage is important, because against a hostile in combat, Dead is the best condition. Hit points are both essential and easy to track. Likewise, focus fire is the most effective combat tactic. Almost any other effect prolongs the battle and increases risk.



Regarding the radius of the spell, because of theater of the mind, I am less enthusiastic about micromanaging distances. Normally in combat, the only distances that are useful are: adjacent, within a 30 foot move, or beyond.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 6, 2022)

The purpose of pacing out amounts of damage across levels is to make the higher levels more playable, with balanced expectations at those levels.

Even at lower levels, spells that are obviously more powerful than other spells at the same slot make the rest of the spells less desirable and less useful in comparison.

The benefits of a sober restraint when assigning damage amounts are many.


----------



## Haplo781 (Oct 6, 2022)

Horwath said:


> d6+1 is more reliable than d8 with same average damage.
> 
> that is better for some "trained" or "specialized" bonus.



Wizards don't need to be any better.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 6, 2022)

Here is a list of all of the official 5e spells at 1st slot.

In this assessment, spells must be worth preparing. Spells that a character is less likely to prepare probably work better for a nonspell feature, such as skill or nonspell ritual. Normally, spells that are useful in combat are highly regarded. Spells that are versatile and invite thinking outside-the-box, like Silent Image, are also highly regarded. A spell listed as "(near)" has a range of 15 feet or less, and is better for melee-competent characters like Paladin and Hexblade but less good for "squishy" characters like most Wizard builds.

The spells list from Problematic to Worst to Best. Generally spells in the same group are tough choices to choose between. The spells should rank from worse to better. If you feel a particular spell is out of order, mention which two spells it should instead go between.

*1st SLOT*


Spoiler



*Obsolete Spells − 5e skills obsolete this spell − NEEDS RETHINK *
Identify → Arcana skill → short rest automatically identifies any magic item
Comprehend Languages → History skill
Jump → Athletics skill
Animal Friendship → Animal Handling skill
Detect Poison and Disease → Medicine skill
Snare → Survival skill
Detect Planar/Good/Evil → Religion/Arcana skill
Detect Magic → Arcana skill (this spell is excellent but works better as skill)

*Unworthy Spells − mostly unworthy of preparation − NEEDS RETHINK*
Color Spray
Purify Food and Drink
Create Food and Water
Ceremony

*Less Useful − ineffective/situational/unlikely to prepare − NEEDS BOOST/RETHINK*
Floating Disk
Witchbolt
Speak with Animals
Unseen Servant
Searing Smite (near)

*Not Bad − forgivable to prepare but other spells better − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK*
Ray of Sickness
Arms of Hadar (near)
Alarm
Beast Bond
Feather Fall
Charm Person
Divine Favor (near)
Compelled Duel (near)
Armor of Agathys
False Life
Hail of Thorns (near)
Longstrider
Bane
Sanctuary

*Good − standard effect for this spell slot*
Heroism
Ice Knife
Locate Object
Earth Tremor (near)
Burning Hands (near)
Inflict Wounds (near)
Chromatic Orb
Catapult
Chaos Bolt
Fog Cloud
Wrathful Smite (near)
Command
Grease
Cause Fear
Shield of Faith
Protection From Planar/Evil/Good
Thunderwave
Expeditious Retreat
Zephyr Strike (near)
Cure Wounds
Goodberry
Mage Armor
Tashas Caustic Brew
Hellish Rebuke
Dissonant Whispers
Ensnaring Strike (near)
Sleep
Disguise Self
Silent Image

*Excellent − may or may not be balanced − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK*
Faerie Fire
Thunderous Smite (near)
Hunters Mark
Hex (near)
Absorb Elements
Guiding Bolt
Magic Missile
Healing Word
Find Familiar
Entangle
Tashas Hideous Laughter
Shield
Bless


----------



## Stalker0 (Oct 6, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> In this assessment, spells must be worth preparing.



However, that's not always a factor when it comes to a wizard (assuming that hasn't changed). Look at floating disk for example, would I prepare that spell, no most likely not. Would as a wizard I want that in my book so I can ritually it out whenever I need, yes absolutely.


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 6, 2022)

These are interesting lists. I'll offer some thoughts.


Yaarel said:


> *Obsolete Spells − 5e skills obsolete this spell − NEEDS RETHINK *
> Identify → Arcana skill → short rest automatically identifies any magic item
> Comprehend Languages → History skill
> Jump → Athletics skill
> ...



I agree with all of these except Comprhend Languages. You can learn the languages, or use magic. History is not a substitute.Comprehend languages is an invaluable first-level spell for some campaigns, and is exactly what a ritual first-level spell should be.


Yaarel said:


> *Unworthy Spells − mostly unworthy of preparation − NEEDS RETHINK*
> Color Spray
> Purify Food and Drink
> Create Food and Water
> Ceremony



Ceremony should never have been introduced. It is terrible. Ceremonies should not have a mechanical effect, and should be what the Acolyte background lets you do. 

I don't understand the hate of Color Spray. 

Purify/create are obstacle-avoiding spells (as is goodberry), and it completely defangs some adventures, where the challenge is in deprivation. They're not unworthy, but when they are relevant, they are antagonistic to the plot of the adventure. They reinforce an us vs the DM mentality, instead of a collaborative one.  


Yaarel said:


> *Less Useful − ineffective/situational/unlikely to prepare − NEEDS BOOST/RETHINK*
> Floating Disk
> Witchbolt
> Speak with Animals
> Unseen Servant



Three of these are rituals (as are four of the spells in the categories above). That, I think, is telling: it suggests that your problem is with rituals spells (which is reinforced with the new ritual rules -- bring back ritual casting from before). I have had characters take Ritual caster in order to have access to Floating Disk and Unseen Servant specifically.

Rituals have a real place in the game, and they don't all need to be cranked up to 11, unless players have to squeeze out more effective options because space is limited (as with the new Rit Caster feat). 


Yaarel said:


> *Not Bad − forgivable to prepare but other spells better − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK*
> Ray of Sickness
> Arms of Hadar (near)
> Alarm
> ...



I have no concerns about any of these -- I think Feather Fall should be yourself-only, but that ship has sailed. "Forgiveable" is a bit loaded. 


Yaarel said:


> *Good − standard effect for this spell slot*
> Heroism
> Ice Knife
> Searing Smite (near)
> ...



Goodberry is not a problem if (a) each berry takes an action to eat, (b) you can't make someone unconscious eat food, and (c) you ignore the sage advice about the intersection with Life Cleric.

Faerie Fire is very strong throughout the game; I'd call it excellent (not overpowered)

I've never liked Disguise self as a spell (I'd put it in your Obsolete category). 


Yaarel said:


> *Excellent − may or may not be balanced − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK*
> Thunderous Smite (near)
> Hunters Mark
> Hex (near)
> ...



I have no problems with any of these; problems occur only with edge case multiclass builds, IME


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 6, 2022)

Damn... my character has made very good use of spells of the first three categories... all. Of the mentioned rituals. And colour spray. A great spell actually. I took it as my arcane trickster illusion and was surprised myself how often it saved us. As a multiclass caster i have even upcasted it to level 3 a few times. 10d10 hp is average 55 hp and a good chance to affect at least 45 hp.
Since it works without a save, it has its uses. I'd love spells that work on hp tesholds to have a chance to have a lesser effect on enemies with higher hp.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 6, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> ... would I prepare that spell, no most likely not. Would as a wizard I want that in my book so I can ritually it out whenever I need, yes absolutely.





Kobold Stew said:


> Three of these are rituals (as are four of the spells in the categories above). That, I think, is telling: it suggests that your *problem is with rituals spells* (which is reinforced with the new ritual rules -- bring back ritual casting from before). I have had characters take Ritual caster in order to have access to Floating Disk and Unseen Servant specifically. ... Rituals have a real place in the game, and they don't all need to be cranked up to 11, unless players have to squeeze out more effective options because space is limited (as with the new Rit Caster feat).



Yeah, rituals feel like a different silo from the slot-spending "action" spells.

Also, a ritual can be for anything, including for an effect that is unrelated to a spell list.

Perhaps, all rituals should instead be skill checks?

Then noncasters can also train in the corresponding skill to perform a ritual.



Kobold Stew said:


> I agree with all of these except Comprhend Languages. You can learn the languages, or use magic. History is not a substitute.Comprehend languages is an invaluable first-level spell for some campaigns, and is exactly what a ritual first-level spell should be.



Maybe merge _Comprehend Languages_ with _Tongues_ to make a 1st-slot spell that is useful for encounters. But even this might work better as a skill check ritual.

Meanwhile using the History skill to "decode" a language or dialect is also ok.



Kobold Stew said:


> Ceremony should never have been introduced. It is terrible. Ceremonies should not have a mechanical effect, and should be what the Acolyte background lets you do.



_Ceremony_ is fine for a "ritual". Maybe the Religion skill check can perform it?



Altho I am suggesting skill checks, I feel it is ok for each ritual to have a character level prerequisite (similar to the way a feat does).


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 6, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Yeah, rituals feel like a different silo from the slot-spending "action" spells.
> 
> Also, a ritual can be for anything, including for an effect that is unrelated to a spell list.
> 
> Perhaps, all rituals should instead be skill checks?



I think we just have a different sense of what ritual magic is for, and why it can be fun in play. That's okay -- but we're not going to agree.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 6, 2022)

Kobold Stew said:


> I think we just have a different sense of what ritual magic is for, and why it can be fun in play. That's okay -- but we're not going to agree.



I am ok with rituals − actually love them.

However, they are trap options in a spell list.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 17, 2022)

"Demotion" means to move a substandard spell to a lower slot where it is more competitive with the spells at that slot. Alternatively, to remain in its current slot it might need a boost.

"Promotion" means to move an extrapowerful spell to a higher slot where it is more balanced with the spells at that slot. Alternatively, to remain in its current slot it might need a nerf.

Note, all mindlink communication spells need a rethink and often a demotion, including _Telepathy_, Monster Manual Telepathy language, _Tongues_, _Detect Thoughts_, _Rarys Telepathic Bond_, even _Message_. Generally, full-on two-way linguistic/sensory Telepathy is appropriate as a single 2nd-Slot spell that merges the other spells. Something like, the spell can link any minds within 30 feet but allows "bonds" with a mind that can reach any distance. Insight skill checks or granting Wisdom saves might probe memories of unwilling targets. But nonmagical Insight skill can discern desire and intention and even coldread to intuit specific details. Telepathy can convey sensorial images as well as speak words, and also understand the intended meaning without knowing the same language.

Note, an unintended exploit makes _Magic Mouth_ weirdly powerful. The trick is its anything-goes trigger. For example, tell a Mouth on an object to "scream if someone tries to steal anything". Or even, "scream if anyone with an Evil alignment approaches within 10 feet". Clever conditions for its trigger can abuse the spell. Even so, its 1 minute casting time makes it useless to prepare it for use with spell slots. Only its ritual is worthwhile.

The game needs two separate silos: one feature for a list of "rituals" versus a different feature for a list of preparable spells. It is confusing to newbies who dont realize that is highly problematic to prepare certain spells that are in the spell list. The amount of system mastery necessary to avoid the trap options is inordinate.



Here is the spell list from problematic to worst to best:

*2nd SLOT*


Spoiler



*Obsolete Spells − NEEDS RETHINK*
Entrall → Persuasion/Intimidation/Bluff skill
Find Traps → Perception skill
Detect Thoughts → Insight skill
Augury → and other DM-gives-hint spells need rethink
Continual Flame → mostly obsolete by Light cantrip
Protection from Poison (Less Useful) → Medicine skill

*Unworthy of Spell Preparation − NEEDS RETHINK*
Animal Messenger
Skywrite
Warding Bond
Darkvision (make into cantrip)
Magic Mouth

*Less Useful − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Gentle Repose
Ray of Enfeeblement
Cordon of Arrows
Snillocs Snowball Swarm
Dust Devil
Barkskin (new 1DD version fixes this: it gets its rethink!)
Magic Weapon
Melfs Acid Arrow
Nystuls Magic Aura
Zone of Truth
Gust of Wind
Knock

*Not Bad − forgivable − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/DEMOTION*
Darkness
Flame Blade
Cloud of Daggers
Beast Sense
Branding Smite
Earthbind
Arcane Lock
Aid
Enlarge/Reduce
Crown of Madness
See Invisibility
Lesser Restoration
Blindness/Deafness
Warding Wind
Aganazzars Scorcher
Shatter
Calm Emotions
Spider Climb

*Good − standard effect for this spell slot*
Pyrotechnics
Rope Trick
Enhance Ability
Silence
Blur
Alter Self
Earthen Grasp
Hold Person
Scorching Ray
Moonbeam
Levitate
Web
Heat Metal

*Excellent − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/PROMOTION*
Find Steed
Prayer of Healing
Pass without Trace
Spike Growth
Mirror Image
Invisibility
Spiritual Weapon
Flaming Sphere
Misty Step
Phantasmal Force
Suggestion


----------



## Kobold Stew (Oct 17, 2022)

A few thoughts: as always your list is stimulating.


Yaarel said:


> *2nd SLOT
> 
> Obsolete Spells − NEEDS RETHINK*
> Continual Flame → mostly obsolete by Light cantrip



Continual flame is a great world-building spell. 50gp is a lot, but gaslight transformed London in the 19th c., and this does the same thing in a fantasy context for a wizard-run city.


Yaarel said:


> *Unworthy of Spell Preparation − NEEDS RETHINK*
> Animal Messenger



It's a fun spell/skill for gnomes and halflings to have. It's a racial-ability spell, though.


Yaarel said:


> Darkvision (make into cantrip)



There's too much darkvision already. Much better to take it away from eveyone except orcs and dwarves, than to change the spell.


Yaarel said:


> *Less Useful − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
> Calm Emotions



Calm Emotions has saved me so many times. I'd rank it "Good" -- on par with Enhance Ability.


Yaarel said:


> *Not Bad − forgivable − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/DEMOTION*
> Aid
> Enlarge/Reduce



Both of these are solid spells.


Yaarel said:


> Lesser Restoration



This is another world-changing spell. Its mere existence gets rid of so many pre-industiral problems.


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 17, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> "Demotion" means to move a substandard spell to a lower slot where it is more competitive with the spells at that slot. Alternatively, to remain in its current slot it might need a boost.
> 
> "Promotion" means to move an extrapowerful spell to a higher slot where it is more balanced with the spells at that slot. Alternatively, to remain in its current slot it might need a nerf.
> 
> ...



Magic mouth used to have a good set of guidelines that kept it in check


Spoiler



Triggers react to what 
appears to be the case. Disguises and illu-
sions can fool them. Normal darkness does 
not defeat a visual trigger, but magical 
darkness or invisibility does. Silent 
movement or magical silence defeats audi-
ble triggers. Audible triggers can be keyed 
to general types of noises (footsteps, metal 
clanking) or to a specific noise or spoken 
word (when a pin drops, or when anyone 
says “Boo”). Actions can serve as triggers if 
they are visible or audible. For example, 
“Speak when any creature touches the 
statue” is an acceptable command if the 
creature is visible. A magic mouth cannot 
distinguish alignment, level, Hit Dice, or 
class except by external garb. 
The range limit of a trigger is 15 feet per 
caster level, so a 6th-level caster can 
command a magic mouth to respond to 
triggers as far as 90 feet away. Regardless of 
range, the mouth can respond only to 
visible or audible triggers and actions in 
line of sight or within hearing distance.



I'm going to agree with @Kobold Stew on continual flame.  I've seen a lot of players continual flame their equipment both for light as well as for the abilioty to be cool/bluff that the weapon is better than it is over the years & used it occasionally in the world.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 17, 2022)

Kobold Stew said:


> A few thoughts: as always your list is stimulating.
> 
> Continual flame is a great world-building spell. 50gp is a lot, but gaslight transformed London in the 19th c., and this does the same thing in a fantasy context for a wizard-run city.



Sure. But world-building "industrial magic" rituals are not what spell slots are for.

_Continual Flame_ works better as a ritual, or a readily available magic item comparable to holy water. The Flame is already costly like a purchasable item would be.

Spell slot preparation is mainly for combat and its purpose is to cast a spell within a second.

By contrast, leisurely magic that takes 10 minutes or so to cast, without spending a slot, is something different.

There needs to be a separate feature with a separate list.

ANYTHING can be a ritual. Most reallife folkbelief magic is some kind of "ritual", with specific unusual requirements and a marvelous − often dangerous − consequences. Regarding danger, a rule of thumb is: One use of magic is good, two uses is better. Three uses proves dangerous. Either it ends in destruction or a fourth uses stabilizes the magic.

If the ritual is a separate design space, and only uses level prereqs and skill checks, then the game can go wild. Any character regardless of class can perform a ritual. There can be all kinds of rituals that are magic items found as treasure, each with its own weird instructions and utility. It wont matter if some rituals are more useful than other rituals, because all of it is treasure to choose between. The flavor potential is enormous.





Kobold Stew said:


> It's a fun spell/skill for gnomes and halflings to have. It's a racial-ability spell, though.



_Animal Messenger_ is a trap option in a spell list.



Kobold Stew said:


> There's too much darkvision already. Much better to take it away from eveyone except orcs and dwarves, than to change the spell.



I agree there is (way) too much Darkvision.

Even so, when _Darkvision_ is a cantrip, an Elf can easily lack Darkvision. If the Elf wants to spend a precious cantrip to get _Darkvision_ instead of carrying a torch, then that is fair.

Meanwhile, I suspect most mages would rather just deal with torches and lanterns and the _Light_ cantrip.



Kobold Stew said:


> Calm Emotions has saved me so many times. I'd rank it "Good" -- on par with Enhance Ability.
> 
> Both of these are solid spells.



You might be right. I will doublecheck the ranking between Worst to Best for _Calm Emotions_.



Kobold Stew said:


> This is another world-changing spell. Its mere existence gets rid of so many pre-industiral problems.



_Lesser Restoration_ is the kind of spell that needs a rethink. As is, it is too situational and passive. Perhaps it would work better as a slot 1 spell, but it would suffer the same problematic there despite being cheaper to cast.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 17, 2022)

In the list above, I moved _Calm Emotions_ towards better.

I cant see it as better than _Rope Trick_. But it is not far behind. It is somewhat comparable to _Lesser Restoration_ except a bit more proactive in utility.

For now, Calm is Not Bad.


----------



## Dausuul (Oct 17, 2022)

One thing I hope they take into account is that AoE makes an enormous difference--not just "area spell or not," but the size and shape of the area have a huge impact on power level.

I mean, compare _fireball_ to _lightning bolt_. They're both AoE damage spells. They deal the same amount of damage and call for the same type of saving throw. Lightning is slightly less resisted than fire. Yet _fireball_ is vastly superior. Why? Because unless your DM is very fond of staging encounters in corridors, you can hit a lot more enemies with a 20-foot-radius sphere than you can with a 100-foot line.

If _fireball_ were scaled down to 6d6 and _lightning bolt_ stayed at 8d6, it might be an interesting choice. As is, it's a no-brainer.


----------



## TaranTheWanderer (Oct 17, 2022)

Wouldn’t it be easier to balance low level spells by giving more powerful enemies a bonus to save against them?  Maybe that’s overly complicated but I remember in older editions, Magic Jar had this included.  

In any case, against more powerful enemies, they have an easier time to save against the spell unless you upcast it.  I’m talking about some of the spells like Tasha’s that people took exception to.  You can base it on HD.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 18, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> One thing I hope they take into account is that AoE makes an enormous difference--not just "area spell or not," but the size and shape of the area have a huge impact on power level.
> 
> I mean, compare _fireball_ to _lightning bolt_. They're both AoE damage spells. They deal the same amount of damage and call for the same type of saving throw. Lightning is slightly less resisted than fire. Yet _fireball_ is vastly superior. Why? Because unless your DM is very fond of staging encounters in corridors, you can hit a lot more enemies with a 20-foot-radius sphere than you can with a 100-foot line.
> 
> If _fireball_ were scaled down to 6d6 and _lightning bolt_ stayed at 8d6, it might be an interesting choice. As is, it's a no-brainer.



The DMs Guide (page 283) distinguishes between one-target damage and multi-target damage. The original post of this thread does too, while noting the official spells are more like a 7 to 9 ratio. Despite inconsistent spells, the ability to choose better spells and avoid less good spells makes multi damage roughly 78% of singular damage.

Regarding the area of _Fireball_ versus the line of _Lightningbolt_, each has their use. The area is best to first-strike a cluster of targets before engaging them. But once combat is in progress, the line is better to hit a target without damaging an ally.

In a separate part of the DMs Guide relating to Creature Size (249), there is a discussion about how many targets one can expect in a spell effect. Of interest here:
• Circle: Targets ≈ radius/5
• Line: Targets ≈ length/30
Thereby, _Fireball_ with a 20-foot radius equates to about 4 targets. But _Lightningbolt_ with a 100-foot line equates to about 3.33 targets. The _Fireball_ assessment feels right. In my experience, maybe _Lightningbolt_ is more like 2.5 targets, but if rounding the number to 3, that sounds good enough to me. The benefit of _Lightningbolt_ is avoiding friendlyfire. So when I use it or see it used, it is mostly to assist a distant ally by taking out a boss, and if one or two mooks get in the way of the Lightning, that helps too.

In the Players Handbook, the spells at a slot level differ wildly in effectiveness. They ignore the advice in the DMs Guide. Humorously, the DMs Guide says: "If a spell is so good that a caster would want to use it all the time, it might be too powerful for its level." But then despite the sound advice, the designers intentionally made _Fireball_ too powerful for its slot level.

By the way, it is more than spell selection and caster-versus-noncaster that needs spells to balance better. Everything in the game engine relies on spells. At low levels, different kinds of features are easier to compare and balance, and there is more familiarity with them to discern their desirability. But high level features are more difficult to assess, being less familiar, more abstract, and often shifting to a different kind of game, such as conditions becoming more threatening relative to hit point loss. When designers try to assess high level features, they comparing them to the spells at that level. So when the spells are wonky, everything gets wonky.



Most damage spells assume a save for half damage. That is what the original post lists for each slot. According to the DMs Guide advice, "if your spell doesnt deal damage on a successful save, increase the damage by 25 percent." So, at slot 5, a spell like _Cone of Cold_ deals damage that corresponds to about 35 damage, and save for half. But if a spell at that slot is all or nothing, it should deal about a fourth more, roughly 44 damage. Spells that are rays like _Disintegrate_ and spells that roll an attack tend to be all or nothing, and should deliver more damage when successful.



There is enough good advice to balance spells reasonably well at each level. Start with the damage spells, because the math is more obvious. But then start comparing other spells to the damage spells by feel. Which spell would one rather have? Eventually, the one gets a strong sense of what the nondamage effects are worth too. For example, one can seriate the mobility spells like _Fly_ and _Teleportation_ from worst to best, lay them across the slot levels, and get a clear sense of what mobility effects are worthwhile at each slot. One knows one is accurate enough when choosing between a mobility spell and a damage spell is a genuinely tough choice.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 18, 2022)

_Animal Messenger_ is a terrible spell. Even if it demoted from a 2nd- to a 1st-slot spell, it would still be a terrible spell at that slot too.

Spells are not the appropriate design space for that kind of magical effect.

It is more like a scroll describing a weird ritual that someone can find as treasure and use it for cute harmless flavor.


----------



## Stalker0 (Oct 18, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Regarding the area of _Fireball_ versus the line of _Lightningbolt_, each has their use. The area is best to first-strike a cluster of targets before engaging them. But once combat is in progress, the line is better to hit a target without damaging an ally.



While in theory that makes sense, in practice, time and time and time again the sphere area has proven itself VASTLY superior to a 5 ft line. When I use spells (or monster effects) that use sphere areas, I consistently hit more targets than with lines. And considering that you can push spheres up against walls and the like to limit their areas and help reduce friendly fire, I find my players are often able to use those spheres without hurting their friends, and still get more targets than with lines.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 18, 2022)

Stalker0 said:


> While in theory that makes sense, in practice, time and time and time again the sphere area has proven itself VASTLY superior to a 5 ft line. When I use spells (or monster effects) that use sphere areas, I consistently hit more targets than with lines. And considering that you can push spheres up against walls and the like to limit their areas and help reduce friendly fire, I find my players are often able to use those spheres without hurting their friends, and still get more targets than with lines.



I agree sphere/circle areas catch more targets than lines.

Catching 4 targets with a 20-foot sphere looks about right, on average.

The line feels less. Maybe the line is more like 2 targets on average, for any line 20 feet or more.

Where _Fireball_ catches about 4 (≈ 20 radius/5)

_Lightingbolt_ catches about 2


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 19, 2022)

Regarding the damage progression. Many players are emotionally attached to the 8d6 _Fireball_. Instead of reducing the _Fireball_ damage, what about calibrating every other spell with _Fireball_ as the standard? It is a power up for many damage spells in the game. But it leaves _Fireball_ alone, and makes the lower slots a bit more worth spending a precious slot on. Meanwhile, it doesnt make too much difference at the higher slots, and actually matches the 9th-slot a bit better. The numbers are for spells that only deal damage: spells that deal damage plus some other effect typically are one die less. For example, in the 2014 Players Handbook, _Burning Hands_ currently deals 3d6 damage. The following table would either improve it to 4d6 damage, or else add some kind of nondamage benefit while leaving it 3d6. Personally, I wouldnt go this direction, but can live with it. Your thoughts?




*SLOT**MULTI-TARGET**ONE-TARGET**1st-slot **4d6 damage (14)**4d8 damage (18)**2nd-slot**6d6 damage (21)**6d8 damage (27)**3rd-slot**8d6 damage (28)**8d8 damage (36)**4th-slot**10d6 damage (35)**10d8 damage (45)**5th-slot**12d6 damage (42)**12d8 damage (54)**6th-slot**14d6 damage (49)**14d8 damage (63)**7th-slot**16d6 damage (56)**16d8 damage (72)**8th-slot**18d6 damage (63)**18d8 damage (81)**9th-slot**20d6 damage (70)**20d8 damage (90)*


----------



## Composer99 (Oct 19, 2022)

I'd be happier with a 3dX (1st level) -> 5dX (2nd level) -> 8dX (3rd level) scaling in lieu of 4->6->8, myself, but either approach - reducing fireball to 7d6 or bringing other spells up to match fireball - is fine by me.


----------



## tetrasodium (Oct 19, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Regarding the damage progression. Many players are emotionally attached to the 8d6 _Fireball_. Instead of reducing the _Fireball_ damage, what about calibrating every other spell with _Fireball_ as the standard? It is a power up for many damage spells in the game. But it leaves _Fireball_ alone, and makes the lower slots a bit more worth spending a precious slot on. Meanwhile, it doesnt make too much difference at the higher slots, and actually matches the 9th-slot a bit better. The numbers are for spells that only deal damage: spells that deal damage plus some other effect typically are one die less. For example, in the 2014 Players Handbook, _Burning Hands_ currently deals 3d6 damage. The following table would either improve it to 4d6 damage, or else add some kind of nondamage benefit while leaving it 3d6. Personally, I wouldnt go this direction, but can live with it. Your thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



"many players" should play an ecoker or similar (sub)class capable of bringing a properly tuned fireball up to a level they get those warm fuzzies from.  Making the base spell so over the top reduces the room for any other niche to flourish with a different subclass.


----------



## Knight_Marshal (Oct 19, 2022)

The main spell design balance I want to see is the developers realizing that there are more elements that they can use for spells besides fire.

Or

Just bring back the Elemental Substitution feat.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 19, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> "many players" should play an ecoker or similar (sub)class capable of bringing a properly tuned fireball up to a level they get those warm fuzzies from.  Making the base spell so over the top reduces the room for any other niche to flourish with a different subclass.



That is my point of view too.

A 3rd-Slot damage spell should deal 6d6, but if it only does damage and no other effect, 7d6 is appropriate.

Then the Evoker Wizard subclass has a feature to spice up elemental damage spells, including _Fireball_.

That said, if the 3rd-Slots boosts instead to 7d6 or 8d6 depending on other effects, as long as that is the standard that the rest of the game needs to balance around, that is fine.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 19, 2022)

As for the _Lightning Bolt_ spell, it would be "cooler" if it was a bit more like _Chain Lightning_. So it moves in a straight line until it hits a target, but from there can continue to move in a different straight line until hitting an other target, where it can again move in a different straight line, and so on until the length runs out.

Keeping track of the distances is a bit too much for theater of mind style, but I like the flavor. I would like a way to make the spell function without any micromeasurements.

For mindstyle, the ballpark measurements to work with are Melee range (within 10 feet), Close range (within 30 feet), Distant range (within 100 feet), and Bowshot is within 300 feet.

Maybe the Lightning can deal 7d6 lightning damage to a single target, and either stop there or continue on to a different chosen target dealing 5d6 lightning, and stop or continue to a tertiary target for 3d6, and if chosen, a quaternary target for 1d6 damage. All chosen targets must be within 100 feet of the caster, and cannot take additional damage if being struck twice by the same casting. Each additional target reduces the new damage by 2d6.

While _Fireball_ can deal more damage to more targets, the _Lightning Bolt_ arcs around to avoid allies.

Each higher spell slot increases the damage by 2d6, thus also increases the potential number of targets by one.

Anyway just musing to make _Lightning Bolt_ more competitive with _Fireball_.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 19, 2022)

Balancing spells involves spell description format. Because of different jargons, different names sometimes refer to the same distance. For example, Touch, Adjacent, and Reach are all part of Melee Range. It helps when all spells reduce to the following distances.

WITHIN: RANGE TYPE
10 feet: *Melee Range *(or "Engaged") (includes Touch, Adjacent, Reach)
30 feet: *Close Range* (or "Near") (sometimes called Close Quarters Combat, Very Short Range, Move, or Throw)
100 feet: *Short Range* (or "Far") (sometimes called Distant Range)
300 feet: *Mid Range *(or "Bowshot")
1000 feet: *Long Range*
1000+ feet: *Remote *(includes "Line of Sight" for very far sights and "anywhere in the same plane")

For theater of mind style, only Melee and Close (meaning within a Move) matter. Anything else is "Far". Spells that refers to any other distance tend to be unhelpful. Generally, the Short Range (100 feet) represents "Far" targets.



Note there are midway points, but spell descriptions should avoid them. For example, a Dash allows a "double move" of 60 feet. Generally, a double-range can sometimes be meaningful: 20 feet, 60 feet, 200 feet, 600 feet, 2000 feet. But there is no helpful reason for spell descriptions to refer to these extended distances. The double-ranges become micromeasurements that are unsuitable for mind style.

The reason mind style requires simplistic distances is because the DM and each player is visualizing the scene in ones own imagination. Each mind visualizes the scene somewhat differently. But any combat details must be understandable in ways that are compatible with each others visualization.

Moreover, using simpler English terms like "Close" or "Near", rather than math calculations, helps focus on the narrative of the scene and, especially along with active visualization, encourages a distinctive experience referred to as "immersion", where in an apperceptive way one experiences being there, sensorily. It is like reading a novel, and one is seeing the scene rather than the words on the page.

Grid style is for a different purpose, and for it, moving minis to count out spaces and using string to pull circles can make micromeasurements useful. But grids can implement the distances of 10, 30, and 100 feet, just as easily.


----------



## ehren37 (Oct 19, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> *1st SLOT
> 
> Obsolete Spells − 5e skills obsolete this spell − NEEDS RETHINK *
> Identify → Arcana skill → short rest automatically identifies any magic item
> ...




Skills should be better than spells. You don't get to repick your skills each day. At best, the spell should match a trained skill. The swiss army knife should never be the top pick for any single use.

I'd prefer how PF2E does it, where the spell can let you make a check, or enhance the skill of another trained person, to encourage teamwork. Knock, for example, gives a +4 bonus to Thievery. It lets you make the check untrained, but is better cast in coordination with a skill monkey. This way everyone gets to feel good.[/spoiler]


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 19, 2022)

ehren37 said:


> Skills should be better than spells. You don't get to repick your skills each day. At best, the spell should match a trained skill. The swiss army knife should never be the top pick for any single use.
> 
> I'd prefer how PF2E does it, where the spell can let you make a check, or enhance the skill of another trained person, to encourage teamwork. Knock, for example, gives a +4 bonus to Thievery. It lets you make the check untrained, but is better cast in coordination with a skill monkey. This way everyone gets to feel good.[/spoiler]



The _Invisibility_ spell can simply be make a Dexterity (Stealth) check to Hide − despite being in plain sight.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 20, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> That is my point of view too.
> 
> A 3rd-Slot damage spell should deal 6d6, but if it only does damage and no other effect, 7d6 is appropriate.
> 
> ...




The evoker has a way better ability than beefing up the fireball damage right now...
Our evoker does so much damage just with burning hands, which would be impossible if not for sculpt spell.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 20, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The _Invisibility_ spell can simply be make a Dexterity (Stealth) check to Hide − despite being in plain sight.




Which it is right now... more or less. Could a bit more explicitely stated.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 20, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Which it is right now... more or less. Could a bit more explicitely stated.



Making the _Invisibility_ spell more explicitly a Dexterity Stealth check would also help simplify the Hiding rules.

Mechanically, the essential Condition is "Unseen", and it doesnt matter when a Dexterity Stealth check uses Hide while in obscure lighting or Hide while invisible.


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 20, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> The evoker has a way better ability than beefing up the fireball damage right now...
> Our evoker does so much damage just with burning hands, which would be impossible if not for sculpt spell.



I agree. The main motive for the damage boost is nostalgia for the 8d6 _Fireball_, or rather the gentle withdrawal from the addiction to it.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 21, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Balancing spells involves spell description format. Because of different jargons, different names sometimes refer to the same distance. For example, Touch, Adjacent, and Reach are all part of Melee Range. It helps when all spells reduce to the following distances.
> 
> WITHIN: RANGE TYPE
> 10 feet: *Melee Range *(or "Engaged") (includes Touch, Adjacent, Reach)
> ...



I would reduce the range categories a little. it's too much of them

melee: 5 or 10ft, cure/inflict wounds
close: 60ft, Dash move or general darkvision range: healing word, dispel magic, counterspell, silvery barbs, area denial(entangle, slow, grasp of hadar), various crowd controls(hold, charm, banishment)
mid range: 150ft, bow range: firebolt, magic missile, eldritch blast, scorching ray. summon spells
long: 600ft, bow range with SS: fireball, lighting bolt, dimension door,
special: line of sight, anywhere on the plane, different plance: teleport, meteor shower,


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 21, 2022)

Part of the reason for these ranges in particular is, they are the curve of magnitudes.

10^0 = 1
10^1 = 10
10^2 = 100
...

The midpoints in between them are:
10^0.0 = 1
10^0.5 = 3.162
10^1.0 = 10
10^1.5 = 31.62
10^2.0 = 100
10^2.5 = 316.2
...

From this comes the round numbers: 

10, 30, 100, 300, 1000, 3000, 10000, ...

Each magnitude maintains the precise same ratio across the curve as the other magnitudes. Meaning the ratio can accommodate any size from dust to planets, and beyond. The ratios are equally useful at any scale.

Note, on the curve there are further midpoints:
10^0.00 = 1
10^0.25 = 1.778
10^0.50 = 3.162
10^0.75 = 5.623
10^1.00 = 10
10^1.25 = 17.78
10^1.50 = 31.62
10^1.75 = 56.23
10^2.00 = 100
...

From this comes the "double-ranges":
1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 20, 30, 60, 100, 200, 300, 600, 1000, ...

And of course every point on the curve fills out infinitely.

Curiously, the curve of magnitudes resembles the Golden Ratio, but occurring across decimal magnitudes.

And because 10 feet approximates 3 meters, it is easy to convert these ranges back and forth between US and the rest of world.


----------



## thundershot (Oct 23, 2022)

I miss the old 1E/2E over the top spells... Polymorph Other, Glasteel, Crystalbrittle, and Mordenkainen's Disjunction.. there were lots of spells that we lost over the years that were just fun and/or scary.

Edit: I thought of a few more that I miss! Sticks to snakes, Duo Dimension, the original Awaken spell that taxed the caster and creature, and of course the ever-annoying Babble!


----------



## ECMO3 (Oct 25, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> *Make SPELLS Balanced*




I do not want spells to be more balanced.  I think the gmaeplay is better when you have some great spells, some mediocre and some poor.  Only a couple spells need to be changed - off the top of my head True Strike and Witchbolt.

Further if we are really going to balance spells then *all* damaging spells need to do more damage.  A 3rd level Fear is way, way more powerful than a 8d6 fireball and a 3rd level Hypnotic Pattern is as well unless you have a really smart DM.  If you want to balance these you would need Fireball to do about 11d6 on a 3rd level slot to compete.


----------



## Incenjucar (Oct 26, 2022)

I'm no more a fan of Waste of Slot Spells than I am of Waste of Deck Space Cards. It's just a way to bloat the books and make it look like there are a lot more meaningful options than there really are. Whenever balance is possible, it should be sought. There are areas where balance isn't really possible - How much damage is a Charm Person worth? - but where possible, it helps make everything less of a chore.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 27, 2022)

At the end of the day, I find all these spell questions usually end up at this point:

"As a DM, I find players always taking X spell because it is [overpowered, too useful etc.] to be boring. I want it changed so that a wider variety of spells get chosen."

Then I remember the important thing...

- Player happiness supercedes my complaints of "boredom".

Yes, I see these spells more often, because I DM for more players than players play for DMs. So even though I may have seen Shield now at the last 5 tables I've run... this will be the FIRST time that player has played with Shield in years. So who am I to bitch that this player took Shield because it's a good spell?

At some point we DMs need to remember we are not here just for ourselves... we are here to let our players play what they want. So if they want to cast Shield, or Fireball, or take Great Weapon Mastery... who am I to shut that down just because I had players in the last campaign do the same thing? That's not my concern.


----------



## Incenjucar (Oct 27, 2022)

As a player who can never fully shut off knowledge of mathematical superiority, I would like to not have to fight that knowledge to try something different and cool. This was actually a huge problem in 4E, because abilities didn't up-scale, you instead got a different ability entirely if you wanted to keep up with damage, so you'd have to give up a prone effect for a daze effect or whatever even if the prone effect was more interesting, because otherwise you left behind multiple dice of damage.


----------



## Dausuul (Oct 27, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> At the end of the day, I find all these spell questions usually end up at this point:
> 
> "As a DM, I find players always taking X spell because it is [overpowered, too useful etc.] to be boring. I want it changed so that a wider variety of spells get chosen."
> 
> ...



I generally play casters, and I would very much like better balanced spells. There is always a tradeoff between concept and power, but it should be as small as possible. A necromancer who wants to lean into the necromancy theme should be able to pick _vampiric touch_ as their 3rd-level damage spell and have it be effective.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 27, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> I generally play casters, and I would very much like better balanced spells. There is always a tradeoff between concept and power, but it should be as small as possible. A necromancer who wants to lean into the necromancy theme should be able to pick _vampiric touch_ as their 3rd-level damage spell and have it be effective.



Sure, that's fine.  My comment was mainly towards those of us who find it "boring" when the same spells get taken by players all the time because they seem better or more useful than others.  Our "boredom" from this side of the screen doesn't matter if the players are happy with what they have.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 28, 2022)

Incenjucar said:


> As a player who can never fully shut off knowledge of mathematical superiority, I would like to not have to fight that knowledge to try something different and cool. This was actually a huge problem in 4E, because abilities didn't up-scale, you instead got a different ability entirely if you wanted to keep up with damage, so you'd have to give up a prone effect for a daze effect or whatever even if the prone effect was more interesting, because otherwise you left behind multiple dice of damage.



damage scaling of spells is horrible.
it's an non issue if you need to scale up your fireball. You don't!

but control spells scale excellent. 4th level banishment; 1 target. 5th level; 2 targets. Yes, please. +100% effect.
fireball? +11% effect. Suuuuper....


----------



## Yaarel (Oct 31, 2022)

Here is a list of spells from Worst to Best.

*3rd SLOT*


Spoiler



*Unworthy of Spell Preparation − RITUAL NOT SPELL*
Feign Death → Medicine Check
Create Food and Water → Survival Check
Speak With Dead ("DM Gives Hint") → Religion Check
Plant Growth
Meld into Stone
Speak with Plants ("DM Gives Hint")
Glyph of Warding

*Demote to a Cantrip − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Water Breathing

*Demote to 1st SLOT − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Daylight
Phantom Steed
Water Walk

*Demotion to 2nd SLOT − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Sending ("Telepathy")
Tongues ("Telepathy")
Wall of Water
Flame Arrows
Vampiric Touch
Conjure Barrage

*Less Useful − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Elemental Weapon
Remove Curse
Nondetection
Gaseous Form
Wall of Sand
Wind Wall
Hunger of Hadar

*Not Bad − Forgivable − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/DEMOTION*
Bestow Curse
Beacon of Hope
Magic Circle
Blinding Smite
Crusaders Mantle
Stinking Cloud
Tidal Wave
Blink

*Good − Standard Effect For 3rd SLOT*
Protection from Energy
Sleet Storm
Minute Meteors
Slow
Erupting Earth
Clairvoyance
Animate Dead
Call Lightning
Spirit Guardians
Dispel Magic

*Excellent − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/PROMOTION*
Tiny Hut
Haste
Conjure Animals
Mass Healing Word
Hypnotic Pattern
Fear
Lightning Bolt
Lightning Arrow
Major Image
Aura of Vitality
Fly
Counterspell
Revivify
Fireball


----------



## ECMO3 (Nov 1, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Here is a list of spells from Worst to Best.
> 
> *3rd SLOT*
> 
> ...




My corrections to this list:

Phantom Steed: This should be good.  It gives awesome mobility to someone until it is killed and does it without concentration.

Animate Dead:  The long casting time makes this "Forgivable".  If it was an action it would be good

Hypnotic Pattern:  This is "needs rethink" if your DM knows what he is doing.

Lightning Bolt, Fireball, Lightning Arrow should be Forgivable

Fear should be in class all of its own called "overpowered"

Some others not on your list:
Catnap - Demote to 1st level slot
Crusaders Mantle - Demote to 2nd level slot
Enemies Abound - Good
Elemental Weapon - Needs Rethink
Ashardalon's Stride - Forgivable
Fast Friends - Demote to 2nd level slot
Incite Greed - Standard Effect for 3rd level
Summon Fey/Shadowspawn/Undead - excellent
Thunderstep - excellent


----------



## Cruentus (Nov 1, 2022)

I'd prefer that spells in general be keyed to caster level.  Higher level = more effective.  Upcasting spells, I feel, is a work around to that, and a symptom of having too many castable spells over the course of the day.  Its no longer a resource that has to be managed, you can just upcast level spells because you have nothing better in that level slot, which brings me to:

@Yaarel and @ECMO3, I think I'd rather you took the "good and overtuned" categories, and dropped the rest.  Do we really need 60 spells at 3rd level, when really the 24 "most powerful" are the ones likely to be almost always selected?  There are literally hundreds of spells for spellcasters in the game, and only a very small portion get taken or even looked at.  And while you're at it, drop the spells that step on other class abilities, that should cut them down too.  

I get it that people like to have all the things, in the event that it might be useful sometime, but that could be a spells supplement.  Have the core product be better focused and more balanced overall.  But then, I know that's not the direction things are going.


----------



## Dausuul (Nov 1, 2022)

Cruentus said:


> I'd prefer that spells in general be keyed to caster level.  Higher level = more effective.



This was the literal origin of "linear fighter, quadratic wizard." If spells are keyed to caster level, then caster power scales on two axes as they advance: They get more spell slots _and_ the spells in those slots get stronger.

Keeping spell power fixed to the spell slot averts this, while also making it much simpler to balance class features and spells.


----------



## Cruentus (Nov 1, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> This was the literal origin of "linear fighter, quadratic wizard." If spells are keyed to caster level, then caster power scales on two axes as they advance: They get more spell slots _and_ the spells in those slots get stronger.
> 
> Keeping spell power fixed to the spell slot averts this, while also making it much simpler to balance class features and spells.



Was never an issue at our table for 40+ years.  Clerics were always viewed as more powerful than wizards, even at higher levels, and wizards always had drawbacks (low HP being a big one).  

So, that's neither here nor there as it applies to what WOTC _can do_ going forward to better balance spells.  I think less spells would help, and remove a lot of options no one ever takes, which helps better address balance rather than trying to make 300 some odd spells "balanced".   If level linked spell effects can't work, that's cool, but it shouldn't be thrown out offhand because this isn't LF/QW territory anymore.  Its 5e/5.5/One territory.


----------



## ECMO3 (Nov 2, 2022)

Cruentus said:


> I'd prefer that spells in general be keyed to caster level.  Higher level = more effective.  Upcasting spells, I feel, is a work around to that, and a symptom of having too many castable spells over the course of the day.  Its no longer a resource that has to be managed, you can just upcast level spells because you have nothing better in that level slot, which brings me to:
> 
> @Yaarel and @ECMO3, I think I'd rather you took the "good and overtuned" categories, and dropped the rest.  Do we really need 60 spells at 3rd level, when really the 24 "most powerful" are the ones likely to be almost always selected?  There are literally hundreds of spells for spellcasters in the game, and only a very small portion get taken or even looked at.  And while you're at it, drop the spells that step on other class abilities, that should cut them down too.
> 
> I get it that people like to have all the things, in the event that it might be useful sometime, but that could be a spells supplement.  Have the core product be better focused and more balanced overall.  But then, I know that's not the direction things are going.



You can buy 3rd party books with thousands of more spells.

I think it is pretty clear the community wants more spells, not less.


----------



## Zubatcarteira (Nov 2, 2022)

In the first D&D campaign I played, we had access to several homebrew books with a ton of spells, several thousand of them. A lot were very weak, a lot were stupid op, and quite a few were just . . . highly concerning.

There's definitely a market for them, prob since spells are the real system that actually offers options and is easy to make more of. Sometimes it feels like WoTC forgets there's abilities in this game other than spells.


----------



## bert1001 fka bert1000 (Nov 2, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> I do not want spells to be more balanced.  I think the gmaeplay is better when you have some great spells, some mediocre and some poor.




What makes it better this way?   

The only thing I can think of is:

the player skill meta game if you want that -- over time you get to learn which are the better spells as a player and avoid the others
the spells are there for NPC casters who you can flavor as not "finding" or being able to "research" the better spells

I do think there is room for tiers if spellcaster spell lists were more restricted.   X Class gets access to the great AOE damage spells but only the medicore mobility spells, etc.   Y class gets the reverse, etc.


----------



## ECMO3 (Nov 2, 2022)

bert1001 fka bert1000 said:


> What makes it better this way?



More flavor and more variety.  It also lets casters use slots to do physics defying things.

If we balanced spells we would  have to eliminate almost all the control and many of the defensive spells or nerf them so they were useless. 

For example, let's say we want to balance spells - what you do to Invisibility, Hold Person and Suggestion so they are balanced with Flaming Sphere?  What would you do with Fear, Summon Fey and Hypnotic Pattern to bring them down to Fireball's level?

You would have to make most of these spells useless to "balance" them.  Alternatively you would need to boost  the damage on things like Flaming Sphere and Fireball or give them secondary effects (knocks prone, stuns ....).  If you did that casters would outrun non-casters even more than they currently do.

Casters take the great spells and the take the weak spells, there are only a few spells that are almost never used and not worth taking (Witchbolt and True strike being those I can think of).


----------



## Incenjucar (Nov 2, 2022)

You can define a rough metric path for different kinds of spells and balance within that path with similar capabilities granted to other classes.

You can't get a perfect comparison but you can still outline a path of escalation and keep things within the rough line of progression.


----------



## bert1001 fka bert1000 (Nov 2, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> More flavor and more variety.  It also lets casters use slots to do physics defying things.
> 
> If we balanced spells we would  have to eliminate almost all the control and many of the defensive spells or nerf them so they were useless.
> 
> ...




Yeah, I don't think that's what the majority of people are saying.  

The notion is simply if a spell does roughly the same thing as another spell then make the numbers similar or make the trade off one that is difficult to pick between (area for damage, etc) or that has superior uses in some situations (hopfully not rare situations) but not others.

Spells that are not as quantitative are harder to balence but I don't see many people saying get rid of them.  

One test is to look and see if people are picking those spells regularly enough over other spells or all the time or none of the time.     There are lots of levers they could use to rebalance as you started to do with the list above, including sometimes moving a spell's level.   

They should go through a design exercise of picking like 6-10 calibrated spells per level of various types then looking closely to make sure the spells are in good levels relative to other levels.  Once you have that list, any new spell added should be compared to the 6-10 calibrated spells and modified or moved level such that you would think that a chunk of players would pick that spell instead of the calibrated spell sometimes.    People won't 100% agree but I'm pretty sure designers could make things much much more balanced using this method and especially cut some of the "does anyone every take this?".


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 7, 2022)

With regard to skilled players who can optimize mechanically to a reasonable degree:

Different players will have different preferences. But in the aggregate, when averaging all skilled players, each spell is precisely slightly better or worse compared to an other spell in the same Slot.

With accuracy, one can group spells together that are roughly the same amount of power and usefulness.

The simple math of damage is the unit of measurement to compare how much power and usefulness is appropriate at each spell Slot.

These calibrated Slots are the metric for the entire gaming engine of D&D 5e − especially being the ONLY metric for evaluating what features are appropriate at the highest levels.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 7, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> My corrections to this list:
> 
> Phantom Steed: This should be good.  It gives awesome mobility to someone until it is killed and does it without concentration.



Phantom Steed is effective because of its amazing Speed 100.

However, it is arguably less useful than flight, and its 1 minute casting time moves it into the Ritual category, and out of the Slot category.

Maybe it should Demote to the 2nd Slot. Or require a Rethink.



ECMO3 said:


> Animate Dead:  The long casting time makes this "Forgivable".  If it was an action it would be good



Agreed.

A Spell that spends a Slot needs to be no more than one Action (or Bonus or Reaction or Move). Otherwise, it is Ritual.

There is no important reason for Animate Dead to take more than an Action. Either it is a spell that can be cast during combat − or else − like Find Familiar − it is a noncombat Ritual.

Rituals whose effects are also useful in Combat require careful thinking and careful balancing. But generally Slots are for Actions during Combat and Rituals are for Exploration.



ECMO3 said:


> Hypnotic Pattern:  This is "needs rethink" if your DM knows what he is doing.



Hypnotic Pattern and Fear are similar in effectiveness. Hypnotic Pattern is slightly better by making the creatures Incapacitated, but Fear moves the creatures away so one need not deal with them immediately.

Notably both spells can affect teammates, thus greatly reducing the usefulness.

I will probably relocate both to Good − being standard for a 3rd Slot.



ECMO3 said:


> Lightning Bolt, Fireball, Lightning Arrow should be Forgivable



Actually, _Lightning Arrow_ Demotes to a 2nd-Slot spell. Its damage is so weak I somehow assumed it along with its bonus action was in addition to the weapon damage, in which case it would have been an Excellent spell. But I realize it is "instead of" the weapon damage, thus is a subpar compared to other damage spells in the 3rd Slot.

Character optimizers and the 5e designers themselves regard _Fireball_ as an unusually powerful spell.

That said, it occurs to me that _Lightning Bolt_ feels more like a Single-Target spell. Yes, it might also affect one or two other creatures in the line, but that possibility is "situational" thus less useful.

As a Single-Target spell, _Lightning Bolt_ does the appropriate amount of damage for the 3rd Slot. Where a 3rd-Slot damage spells deals 27 damage (6d8) to the single target, the Lightning Bolt deals 28 damage (8d6). If that was all it did, it would simply be a Good spell. But the additional possibility of catching one more mook or so moves Lightning Bolt to an Excellent spell.

By contrast, _Fireball_ can reliably target any cluster of hostiles, and is a Multi-Target spell.

I am comfortable if 8d6 _Lightning Bolt_ remains 3rd-Slot, while 8d6 _Fireball_ Promotes to 4th Slot. Alternatively, both spells might deserve a Rethink.



ECMO3 said:


> Fear should be in class all of its own called "overpowered"



_Fear_ and _Hypnotic Pattern_ are comparable to each other.



ECMO3 said:


> Some others not on your list:
> Catnap - Demote to 1st level slot
> Crusaders Mantle - Demote to 2nd level slot
> Enemies Abound - Good
> ...



The Spell Lists need to include every official spell in 5e. I appreciate you catching these.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 10, 2022)

Here finetunes the spell list for the 3rd Slot.

*3rd SLOT*


Spoiler



*Unworthy of Spell Preparation − RITUAL NOT SPELL*
Feign Death → Medicine Check
Galders Tower
Create Food and Water → Survival Check
Speak With Dead ("DM Gives Hint") → Religion Check
Plant Growth
Meld into Stone
Speak with Plants ("DM Gives Hint")
Glyph of Warding
Catnip (alteration of the setting Resting mechanic)
Phantom Steed (demote to 2nd Slot and Good there but 1 minute casting time less useful)
Tiny Servant (Not Bad but 1 minute casting time less useful)
Magic Circle (Not Bad but 1 minute casting time less useful)
Animate Dead (Good but 1 minute casting time less useful)
Clairvoyance (Good but 10 minute casting time less useful
Tiny Hut of Leomunds (Excellent but 1 minute casting time less useful)

*Demote to a Cantrip − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Water Breathing

*Demote to 1st SLOT − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Wall of Water
Daylight
Water Walk

*Demotion to 2nd SLOT − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Flame Arrows
Crusaders Mantle
Wind Wall
Wall of Sand
Sending ("Telepathy")
Tongues ("Telepathy")
Vampiric Touch
Conjure Barrage

*Less Useful − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Elemental Weapon
Remove Curse
Nondetection
Gaseous Form
Hunger of Hadar

*Not Bad − Forgivable − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/DEMOTION*
Bestow Curse
Ashardalons Stride
Spirit Shroud
Intellect Fortress
Beacon of Hope
Blinding Smite
Stinking Cloud
Tidal Wave
Blink

*Good − Standard Effect For 3rd SLOT*
Protection from Energy
Sleet Storm
Minute Meteors
Slow
Erupting Earth
Pulse Wave
Call Lightning
Hypnotic Pattern
Fear
Thunderstep
Dispel Magic

*Excellent − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/PROMOTION*
Haste
Spirit Guardians
Summon Lesser Demons
Conjure Animals
Summon Undead
Summon Fey
Summon Shadowspawn
Enemies Abound
Fast Friends
Mass Healing Word
Lightning Bolt
Lightning Arrow
Major Image
Aura of Vitality
Fly
Counterspell
Revivify
Fireball


----------



## ECMO3 (Nov 10, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Hypnotic Pattern and Fear are similar in effectiveness. Hypnotic Pattern is slightly better by making the creatures Incapacitated, but Fear moves the creatures away so one need not deal with them immediately.
> 
> Notably both spells can affect teammates, thus greatly reducing the usefulness.
> 
> I will probably relocate both to Good − being standard for a 3rd Slot.




If the DM plays on easy mode they are similar, if the DM plays smart monsters smart Fear is a lot better.  

The problem with hypnotic pattern is one uneffected enemy can end the effect on someone with an action and that enemy does not lose a turn getting out of the effect.  This means as long as one enemy saves it should last no longer than 2 turns.  For example you target 10 guys with HP.  9 of them fail the save and are charmed.  The one that is not charmed uses his action to free one that is, that one uses his action to free another one, that one uses his action to free another one...... in one round all of them are free of it.  That is how it works RAW, if the DM does not play the monsters that way, claims they would not know or try that, or houserules it so enemies can't act on the round they are shaken out then they are comparable.  I will note though that damaging enemies also ends the effect so even in this case I would still give the edge to fear.

Fear by contrast is impossible to get out of as long as the caster is in sight.  If you cast Fear in a room that is a dead end, the fight is over for any that fail the save (unless the caster loses concentration).  They can't leave the room because of frightened, they can't take any actions and they don't get to save again.  Outside in an open area any that fail have to dash away for an entire minute since they can't break line of sight, all you have to do is chase them and keep wailing them with AOOs (or ranged attacks).  Best case for the monsters is it is in an area with a lot of vegetation or underground where they can run around a corner and out of sight and save again.  In those cases it is at least 2 lost turns as they take one turn dashing away.  If they manage to make the first save  at the end of that turn, then they need to dash the next turn to get back to the same place they were when the spell  was cast.

Fear is by far the most effective spell available at 3rd level.




Yaarel said:


> Character optimizers and the 5e designers themselves regard _Fireball_ as an unusually powerful spell.




Yeah but they are wrong it isn't very powerful in play, certainly not compared to control spells.



Yaarel said:


> That said, it occurs to me that _Lightning Bolt_ feels more like a Single-Target spell. Yes, it might also affect one or two other creatures in the line, but that possibility is "situational" thus less useful.




I find fireball more situational because of the large area.  To cast fireball effectively against melee goons a wizard usually needs to win inititative outright, beating both the goons and his own melee allies.  I think your quote kind of gets to the point.  I would say in a multi-target combat, Lighting bolt can almost always target two enemies, but Lightning bolt CAN be used against a single target and it CAN be used in almost any combat at any point in that combat.  

Fireball is a more powerful opener, if the wizard gets a very high initiative, and if there are a lot of enemies but that in itself is situational.

Now if you are playing an evocation wizard that can sculpt spells that is a different story.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 11, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Yeah but they are wrong it isn't very powerful in play, certainly not compared to control spells.
> 
> I find fireball more situational because of the large area.  To cast fireball effectively against melee goons a wizard usually needs to win inititative outright, beating both the goons and his own melee allies.  I think your quote kind of gets to the point.  I would say in a multi-target combat, Lighting bolt can almost always target two enemies, but Lightning bolt CAN be used against a single target and it CAN be used in almost any combat at any point in that combat.
> 
> ...



The character optimizers and designers who focus exactly on how powerful a mechanic is in play identify _Fireball _as "very powerful in play".





ECMO3 said:


> If the DM plays on easy mode they are similar, if the DM plays smart monsters smart Fear is a lot better.
> 
> The problem with hypnotic pattern is one uneffected enemy can end the effect on someone with an action and that enemy does not lose a turn getting out of the effect.  This means as long as one enemy saves it should last no longer than 2 turns.  For example you target 10 guys with HP.  9 of them fail the save and are charmed.  The one that is not charmed uses his action to free one that is, that one uses his action to free another one, that one uses his action to free another one...... in one round all of them are free of it.  That is how it works RAW, if the DM does not play the monsters that way, claims they would not know or try that, or houserules it so enemies can't act on the round they are shaken out then they are comparable.  I will note though that damaging enemies also ends the effect so even in this case I would still give the edge to fear.
> 
> ...



Re _Hypnotic Pattern_, if the creatures are wasting their action that is extremely valuable to the caster. Even two rounds of nonaction is a long time in a combat encounter.

I agree, _Fear _has the edge, but both Fear and _Hypnotic Pattern_ are comparable.

An advantage of Hypnotic is its range. Because the Fear and Hypnotic spells target allies as well as hostiles, casting it in the distance at a cluster of hostiles is valuable.


----------



## ECMO3 (Nov 11, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> [edit.]
> 
> 
> The character optimizers and designers who focus exactly on how powerful a mechanic is in play identify Fireball as "very powerful in play".





Most of the optimizers I've seen rank it middle of the road. 

Here Treantmonk ranks Firreball as 2nd most overated spell in the game, my experience is similar to his:


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 11, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> my experience is similar to his:



That is fair enough.

At the same time, in the spell rankings here, it is the aggregate of all players (that are reasonably skilled at optimizing) that determines a rank.

Even when some optimizers employ nondamage spells more effectively, most optimizers use damage spells more effectively, relating to "focus fire".

@Treantmonk specifically advocates the potency of Wizard mobility spells (that grant or prevent tactical positioning for battlefield control). Meanwhile the Fighter (and others) are supposed to fulfill the necessity of dealing damage.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 24, 2022)

The 4th slot is the most powerful spells that most gamers will ever see. 83% of D&D campaigns will end at level 8 or sooner.

Tier 1-4: 57%
Tier 5-8: 36%
Tier 9-12: 12%
Tier 13-16: 3%
Tier 17-20: 2%

Because slot 4 is a high slot that over a third of campaigns are likely to see, it should include fun and effective spells.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 24, 2022)

Here is the spell list for the 4th slot.

*4th SLOT*


Spoiler



*Unworthy of Spell Preparation − RITUAL NOT SPELL*
Hallucinatory Terrain (not even worth a cantrip)
Leomunds Secret Chest
Widogasts Vault of Amber
Galders Speedy Courier
Divination ("DM gives a hint")
Private Sanctum (Less Useful)
Control Water (Less Useful)
Fabricate (Not Bad but prohibitive casting time)
Conjure Minor Elementals (Not Bad but prohibitive casting time)
Find Greater Steed (Good if after normal horse and before flying mount)

*Demotion to 2nd Slot − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Faithful Hound
Grasping Vine
Guardian of Nature
Locate Creature

*Demotion to 3rd Slot − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Elemental Bane
Stone Shape
Guardian of Faith
Shadow of Moil
Dominate Beast
Ice Storm
Aura of Life
Wall of Fire
Phantasmal Killer

*Less Useful − NEEDS RETHINK/DEMOTION*
Stoneskin

*Not Bad − Forgivable − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/DEMOTION*
Aura of Purity
Storm Sphere
Confusion
Compulsion
Freedom of Movement
Conjure Woodland Beings (DM decides creatures; Excellent if pixies)
Summon Elemental
Summon Greater Demon

*Good − Standard Effect for 4th Slot*
Blight
Dimension Door
Giant Insect
Fire Shield
Staggering Smite
Arcane Eye
Sickening radiance
Vitriolic Sphere
Summon Construct
Raulothims Psychic Lance
Evards Black Tentacles

*Excellent − NEEDS DOUBLECHECK/PROMOTION*
Summon Aberration
Otilukes Resilient Sphere
Death Ward
Water Sphere
Greater Invisibility
Widogasts Web of Fire
Gravity Sinkhole
Banishment
Charm Monster
Polymorph


----------



## mellored (Nov 25, 2022)

I wouldn't mind seeing some spells consolidated.  Just to shrink the list a little bit.

I.e.  hold person / hold monster can be put into a single block.
As well as dominate beast/ person/ monster.
Probably some others too.

Oh, and no conjure 8, or even 4 creatures.  It just boggs down the game.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 25, 2022)

mellored said:


> Oh, and no conjure 8, or even 4 creatures.  It just boggs down the game.



If I understand correctly, the new "Summon" spells will obsolete the earlier 2014 "Conjure" spells.

All of the Summon spells summon only a single creature. (So the designers might be of the same mind as you here.)

Happily, the new Summon spells are worth their official slot. They require one action to cast. But within the slot the spell benefit varies noticeably from Excellent to Good to Not Bad.


----------



## bert1001 fka bert1000 (Nov 25, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> The 4th slot is the most powerful spells that most gamers will ever see. 83% of D&D campaigns will end at level 8 or sooner.
> 
> Tier 1-4: 57%
> Tier 5-8: 36%
> ...




I never like this argument.   It's my suspicion that the reason a lot of campaigns end early is that higher level D&D is not well balanced and breaks down.  Higher levels spells are a big part of this.   It is especially important to balance and rework spells at higher levels.

But perhaps that is a different thread rather than trying to balance spells within their current power levels.


----------



## tetrasodium (Nov 26, 2022)

bert1001 fka bert1000 said:


> I never like this argument.   It's my suspicion that the reason a lot of campaigns end early is that *higher level D&D is not well balanced and breaks down.* Higher levels spells are a big part of this.   It is especially important to balance and rework spells at higher levels.
> 
> But perhaps that is a different thread rather than trying to balance spells within their current power levels.



That bolded bit is a thousand percent accurate but it's not _just_ spells. In the case of 5e you have the first strike where monsters are not balanced for high level PCs because they are aimed at low level parties & hamstrung by bounded accuracy before they even have a chance against higher level PCs.  D&d is math at all levels for 5e to crash into a second strike when the gm finds themselves without the very tools like SR, DR, touchAC, resist #/x, narrow telegraphable saves that allow certain types of spells to be (dis) favored, & so on right when it becomes most important for the gm of a high level party to start employing those tools with finesse to monsters based on their high level party's size & make up.  Finally 5e gets a well deserved third strike that manages to throw the bat at the gm for injury with its by replacing those tools with crude & primative analogs of 50%resist msgic/legendary resist and a pointless excess of saves that monsters rarely even waste ink having anything more than +ability mod to saves when it matters.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 27, 2022)

Spells are the essence of the high-tier gaming engine.

Normally, the designers reallocate the spell design space, when measuring out the impact of new non-spell features for high level classes.

It is vital, the high-tier spells balance well thus merit the value of their assigned spell slot.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 27, 2022)

The "standard" damage spell has an instantaneous duration, deals an amount of damage within a specific range per slot, and saves for half damage. These standard spells are well understood, and easy to evaluate.

Spells that do damage no-save, or else save for zero damage, are variants of the standard damage spell that are also easy to calculate and evaluate.

(By the way. Even spells whose purpose is to purely deal damage should probably include a "ribbon", namely a low-tier or less useful minor feature, for the sake of flavor. For example, even the Fireball spell has a ribbon where it can damage unattended objects along with the intended creatures. Usually, the DM can narratively adjudicate what objects the Fireball destroys, but sometimes the DM will want to roll a save for a specific object. Here the ribbon helps actualize the flavor of extreme heat.)



The standard damage spells that are instantaneous, contrast the nonstandard damage spells that are non-instantaneous. The non-instantaneous deal smaller amounts of ongoing damage, whether across multiple turns or multiple hours, whether dealing auto-damage, using bonus actions, or enhancing actions.

In the context of the gaming engine, these ongoing damage spells are centrally important. Because. The ongoing at-will damage is where the caster classes like Wizard and the noncaster classes like Fighter, intersect. When a Wizard casts an ongoing damage spell, the damage-dealing per turn behaves more like a Fighter wielding at-will high weapon damage.

The standard damage spells are clear to me. These ongoing damage spells are less clear − but so important to get right. How much ongoing damage should a spell deal for each higher slot?

Typically, the Wizard avoids these ongoing damage spells, because the instantaneous higher damage is more effective to eliminate any hostiles and prevent the hostiles from continuing to harm the teammates. Even so, when the Wizard does choose an ongoing spell, the Wizard character resembles the gaming engine of the Fighter class. I need to understand this event better. How much ongoing damage is appropriate at each slot.


----------



## MNblockhead (Nov 27, 2022)

bert1001 fka bert1000 said:


> I never like this argument.   It's my suspicion that the reason a lot of campaigns end early is that higher level D&D is not well balanced and breaks down.  Higher levels spells are a big part of this.   It is especially important to balance and rework spells at higher levels.
> 
> But perhaps that is a different thread rather than trying to balance spells within their current power levels.



A welcome addition to the DMG would be to add a section to help newer DMs understand the effects certain spells can have on the game and over advise on revising the available spells based on genre or play style.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 28, 2022)

MNblockhead said:


> A welcome addition to the DMG would be to add a section to help newer DMs understand the effects certain spells can have on the game and over advise on revising the available spells based on genre or play style.



A simple suggestion for a "low magic" "high fantasy" setting, ban full-casters and only use half-casters. For example, the Paladin is great for a Gandalf archetype. A Trickster Rogue is awesome for a Conan sorcerer. A nature-mage Ranger. Even a Monk fits right in. The magic is vivid but low key. These mages are still effective characters.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 29, 2022)

Looking closer at the "ongoing" damage spells. They are all over the place. The following are my current impressions.

The "standard" ongoing damage spell targets multiple creatures.

Ongoing damage typically targets any "creatures", including harming friends too. "Safe" spells that only target chosen hostiles are uncommon.

"Ongoing" can mean various things. Creatures might incur damage per-turn at start or end. Bonus actions might inflict damage. Extra damage might add to weapon attacks. To inflict the damage might require an Attack Roll, or allow a Save, or be Automatic. A creature might need to make multiple Saves, each time the damage occurs, or the Save might end the ongoing damage. The creatures might need to waste an action to end the ongoing damage. The caster might need to spend future actions to wield a "heavy weapon", like _Call Lightning_. And so on. In some way, new damage continues to occur in future turns after the spell has been cast.

Summon spells that position an additional creature as an ally, come with their own complications. Even so, a summon spell is a kind of ongoing damage spell, and it is important to consider how much ongoing damage the summoning contributes.

It is "Good" when the creature incurs damage at the "start" of its turn. But it is "Less Useful" when the creature incurs it at the "end" of its turn. If at the end, the hostile can continue to harm the team of the caster before elimination.

Ongoing damage from an unmovable area is seriously Less Useful. Compare _Wall of Fire_ or _Mordenkainens Faithful Hound_. The caster can probably catch creatures when the area first appears, but afterward the creatures can simply avoid the area, so that there is no more ongoing damage. If the damage incurs at the end of the turn, so that the creature can walk away without taking any damage, then the spell is almost pointless. An immovable damaging area is moreorless equivalent to a one-time instantaneous Fireball, so the initial damage at the appearance of the spell must be worthwhile, and the possibility of future damage later is more like a "situational" minor ribbon.

By contrast, a movable damaging area, such as _Call Lightning_, is Good, to bring the ongoing damage to the creatures in future rounds.

An area that deals damage if the creature "enters" can be worthwhile, because the team can Push the creatures into the area for respectable extra damage once per turn.

The "standard" ongoing damage spell has duration of 1 minute. This means, the damage remains in effect for one very long combat encounter, or two or three interrelated combat encounters. The duration of 10 minutes is not meaningfully better. It might be useful, it might not. A 1 hour duration is more significant, so at least the spell remains in effect for some session or mission.

Almost always, ongoing damage requires Concentration. The few spells that dont might even seem accidental. Designers view layering many ongoing damage effects as seriously imbalancing to the gaming engine.



In 5e so far, the amounts of ongoing damage that these spells do are all over the place. I have in mind how much damage these should do: at least 4 damage per spell slot. So, a 2nd-slot spell should deal at least 8 damage per round to each creature, and a 4th-slot spell should deal at least 16. I will post more about damage in a later post.


----------



## tetrasodium (Nov 29, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> Looking closer at the "ongoing" damage spells. They are all over the place. The following are my current impressions.
> 
> The "standard" ongoing damage spell targets multiple creatures.
> 
> ...



Ongoing damage spells are _mostly_ carrying over values used in the past (cook & book excluded since it once kinda sucked). Being able to deal a damage type that disables regen etherealness or whatever round after round with a _single_ spell was huge against certain monsters back then.  Cantrips trivialize dealing a damage type each round (_even more so when the most popular high damage cantrips tend to be the go to damage type for this_).  If WotC provided GMs with a good way of removing offensive cantrips or limiting them to the old "_N level zero slots/day with nonscaling 1d3 damage but gain X_" it would go a long way towards creating a situation where it matters for at least some tables.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 29, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> Ongoing damage spells are _mostly_ carrying over values used in the past (cook & book excluded since it once kinda sucked). Being able to deal a damage type that disables regen etherealness or whatever round after round with a _single_ spell was huge against certain monsters back then.  Cantrips trivialize dealing a damage type each round (_even more so when the most popular high damage cantrips tend to be the go to damage type for this_).  If WotC provided GMs with a good way of removing offensive cantrips or limiting them to the old "_N level zero slots/day with nonscaling 1d3 damage buHet gain X_" it would go a long way towards creating a situation where it matters for at least some tables.



I love cantrips. Their at-will magic makes my characters feel magical.

Heh, one of the reasons I can no longer play 3e is its lack of cantrips. I dont want to spend the game shooting mundane crossbolts when I want to play a magical character.



That said. 

Cantrips seem to replace a number of ongoing damage concepts. Even some of the 5e ongoing damage spells feel more like a cantrip. Consider the _Divine Favor_ spell: it makes weapon attacks deal radiant damage. This could be a cantrip, like Shillelagh, that can add the ability to the cantrip damage, while transfiguring the damage type into radiant. The cantrip could use a slot to augment extra damage to each attack.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 29, 2022)

In the context of a Psion discussion, I suggested a new mechanic. I invented it, but suspect "nothing is new under the sun".



Certain spells "occupy" a spell slot, rather than spend it. While the slot is occupied, the spell is in effect. It is always on, for an indefinite period of time. The occupied slot cannot be used for any other spell. But, it remains an option to free up the spell slot thus ending the always-on effect. Then the slot can be used for an other spell. To reuse the occupied slot for an other spell can represent going nova. The purpose of this new Occupant mechanic is to represent a superhero-like magical effects− that is always on.

The description for the spell itself says if it is a Occupant spell. For example, the_ Divine Favor_ spell could be one. This version would occupy a 1st-slot to deal 1d6 damage (or 4) extra radiant damage per weapon attack. At higher levels, it could instead occupy a higher slot indefinitely, such as 3rd-slot for about 3d6 extra damage. (At this level, the Extra Attack feature might come online, making the extra damage toward twice as good.) The radiant damage is always on, like a superhero power.



Designing ongoing damage spells to "occupy" a spell slot for an always-on effect, might be the best way to think about ongoing damage spells, generally.

The Occupant mechanic can also apply to nondamage effects that are always on, such as force armor.


----------



## tetrasodium (Nov 30, 2022)

Yaarel said:


> I love cantrips. Their at-will magic makes my characters feel magical.
> 
> Heh, one of the reasons I can no longer play 3e is its lack of cantrips. I dont want to spend the game shooting mundane crossbolts when I want to play a magical character.
> 
> ...



I kinda like them as well but the implementation of a cradle to grave primary caster attribute at will no resource cost attack that scales by character level with no attached item responsible* is just too good in too many ways.  It squeezes out too many areas of the game from relevance as a result.  The DoT type spells that deal critical damage type round after round is one example, the value of limited use scrolls & wands being nullified if those aren't top shelf or problematically balanced is another.  Having wands recharge rather than deplete just turbo charges the problem cantrips apply to them. 

If casters started with a cantrip wand(s) that let them cast/power the lowest tier of cantrips & needed to get wands rings or whatever  to cast later tiers they would have treasure that was important to them.  If casters only had x cabtrip casts per Y-period that too would provide an important need in the form of equipment to extend that with more casts of something.  If base cantrip damage was trash it would provide room for equipment to improve that.  None of those are true though & cantrips just wind up being a glut of good that overwhelms a lot of stuff

* Yes I know a player _technically_ needs a focus item but that's just a pass/fail boolean thing not a wand or whatever acquired through adventuring or similar.  Barring edge cases like "you wake up in prison" scenarios almost always available with no need to consider it.


----------



## Yaarel (Nov 30, 2022)

tetrasodium said:


> I kinda like them as well but the implementation of a cradle to grave primary caster attribute at will no resource cost attack that scales by character level with no attached item responsible* is just too good in too many ways.



The itemlessness is precisely what makes the cantrip feel innately magical.

To use an item like a mundane crossbolt or even an enhanced crossbolt feels more like buying hardware, and feels less like doing magic.

The always-on capability of cantrips actualizes a talent for magic and helps the character feel personally magical.



I stopped playing 3e for two reasons: convoluted gaming imbalance generally, but also its lack of cantrips specifically.

I like magical characters and require a game whose mechanics express magical flavors well.





tetrasodium said:


> The DoT type spells that deal critical damage type round after round is one example,



The Damage-Over-Time spells are inherently problematic because focus fire is a more effective tactic, by far.

There can still be − and are − spells that grant or swap one kind of damage type for an other.



tetrasodium said:


> the value of limited use scrolls & wands being nullified if those aren't top shelf or problematically balanced is another.



If a "consumable" magic item has charges, such as ten uses of a specific cantrip, that would be valuable enough. As a player, I would appreciate such an item as a treasure.

As a DM, its consumability allows for a less personal more industrial magic, that magic items can purchase. It is an expendable resource.

A one-time scroll use, for a noncombat ritual or even a combat slot spell that any character can cast, can be purchasable as a service. A player character can go to a Sage to prepare such a scroll for a fee. And if the Sage is willing to do the magic, then the item from this Sage will work for the character as a consumable magic item. One would still need to attune to the magic from the Sage to cast such a scroll successfully.

If a character finds such a scroll randomly, one can try attune it, to see if it will work. DM decides. This allows Rogues and Fighters the opportunity to one-off spells.

A caster can first see if it is possible to attune a certain scroll, and if so, attempt to translate its magic style into the ones own personal magic style, in order to acquire it as a known spell for the spellbook or its equivalent. Normally, spellbooks are for noncombat rituals. But the Wizard class specifically can add combat slot spells to their spellbook.

Personally, I would use certain skills to determine if the character can cast certain spell themes successfully, from any ritual instructions or scroll:
• Arcane: force, force constructs, telekinetic flight, metamagic
• Nature: elementalism (earth, water, air, fire)
• Survival: plant
• Animal Handling: beast, shapeshifting, body, athletics
• Medicine: healing
• Insight: mind, enchantment
• Religion: divination, teleportation, planarity



tetrasodium said:


> Having wands recharge rather than deplete just turbo charges the problem cantrips apply to them.



I see two kinds of magic items: permanent and consumable.

A consumable wand can run out of charges − something like a magitech memory stick for several scrolls.

A permanent wand is an inherently valuable magical item − an entity − an event.





tetrasodium said:


> If casters started with a cantrip wand(s) that let them cast/power the lowest tier of cantrips & needed to get wands rings or whatever  to cast later tiers they would have treasure that was important to them.  If casters only had x cabtrip casts per Y-period that too would provide an important need in the form of equipment to extend that with more casts of something.  If base cantrip damage was trash it would provide room for equipment to improve that.  None of those are true though & cantrips just wind up being a glut of good that overwhelms a lot of stuff



Cantrips are valuable. There are many good ones to choose from. Even high level casters only have a few cantrip. Magic items that grant cantrips are useful and valuable.

But the ability to cast cantrips without items is what makes the character oneself feel magical.



tetrasodium said:


> * Yes I know a player _technically_ needs a focus item but that's just a pass/fail boolean thing not a wand or whatever acquired through adventuring or similar.  Barring edge cases like "you wake up in prison" scenarios almost always available with no need to consider it.



Recently but strongly:

I want spell descriptions to delete the spell components. These Verbal-Somatic-Material components are normally ignored, inflexibly precise, convoluted, and obsolete.

Instead.

There should be only the "spell focus". There can many different kinds of focuses.
• Implement (such as magitech wand, mentally imbued item, etcetera)
• Symbol (holy symbol, tattoo, etcetera)
• Familiar
• Ingredient (material components, classical protoscience, plants, rocks, animal products, potions, herbal bags, etcetera)
• Gestures (somatic components, dance, handsigns, nose-wiggle, etcetera)
• Thought (visualization, prayer, trance, etcetera)
• Voice (spontaneous song, artistically crafted poem, traditional verbal formula, etcetera)

Each class or character concept can have signature method to cast spells: a personal spell focus.


----------

