Community

Sep 11, 2012 -- 2:38PM, Gnarl wrote:

10 spells per day for a wizard? That's not a lot of spells!

It might tie into my preference that the wizard shouldn't be casting spells every round, but for the purpose of this discussion I'm willing to concede that a basic firebolt or magic missile can be an at-will that's appropriate in most situations.

I don't know what games you've been playing, but the last time I killed Deathwing, I don't recall using more than half a dozen different spells over the course of the entire series of encounters... fireball... fireball... fire blast... pyroblast... fireball ... fireball...

There also a lot of highly situation spells that, in the context of DDN, you would never prepare because you could always cast it as a ritual - teleportation spells, create food, that sort of thing.  Sure, you technically have a bunch of other spell sets (ice bolts, arcane whatever), but you're not expected to use those once you've specialized.

You have your basic fall-back at-will (fireball or fire blast, where - disregarding their contrived game mechanics, the difference is whether you want to move and cast or just stand in place), and a lot of more situational things that you might use (flamestrike, blast wave).

I don't know about the exact number, but in general we've had few problems with any pre-3rd system. In other words, basic attack, and a handful of special abilities or spells, and the rest being up to narrative or roleplaying interpretation. Options were a little narrow for casters at low level, and a little high at high level. Other than that, KISS. We probably wouldn't include many (if any) options like are currently being considered in our games.

Sep 11, 2012 -- 3:30PM, Gnarl wrote:

That sounds like an awful MMO! D&D Online?

I don't mind wizards casting fewer spells if they have something else to do when they're not casting a spell. If all you do as a wizard is cast at most 2 spells and swing your staff the rest of the time, that's not satisfying at all.

The reason the game failed me, from my perspective, was that there was never a question of which spell to cast - you know ahead of time that you want to cast two fireballs, then a fire blast, and when your special proc goes off then you can cast a free pyroblast.  Essentially, there was always a "most correct" move because the only metric for success was how much damage you could deal (well, as long as you stayed alive, but that was mostly about gimmicks and whether you read up on the fight ahead of time so that you would know exactly what they expect you to do in each new, gimicky situation).

I mean, I guess there are some people who have fun with that, because the game is still the biggest fish in the pond, but I want a game I play to be about choices rather than flawless execution down a pre-determined path.

If the only maneuvers a barbarian ever had in combat were basic attack (which should always remain viable), power attack (sacrifice accuracy for increased damage), and cleave (reduced accuracy and/or damage, but hits 2-3 targets), then that feels like enough.  A couple of at-will, always applicable abilities, so there's always a choice, but also a more situational move for when single-target abilities stop being useful.  Maybe even add a whirlwind (hits everyone around you, but it's a full-round action so you can't move), if they could find a way to make that difference meaningful, so you have a choice in a crowd as well.

Likewise, I was really happy with the options available to a warlock, back in 3.5 - even just the eldritch blast was more than enough, once you picked up a shape or two.  Even the dragonfire adept made for interesting gameplay, trying to maneuver into position for either a 15' cone or 30' line where I could hit as many enemies as possible without hitting an ally!

I don't care how few options I have at a time, as long as that choice is always meaningful!

I would want 3-5 options at all times. Then add a few extra situational options.

For casters I think they should have about 3 daily spells per encounter at all levels. So every other round they use their Minor spells, but the other rounds they get to use their big nova spells. So around level 5 to 9 is about right for Wizards anything else is out of range if they continue with the same progression they have now.

The Cleric being a gish (weapon/caster) means they get less spells but have the same power level as the Wizard spells and nearly the same power level as the Fighter using weapons. So their options are attack with weapon, channel divinity, or cast a spell. I think maybe they should restore their spells on a short rest or start with more spells if they get 3 spells that would work fine. Maybe a 2 weapon attacks per 1 spell ratio or about 2 daily spells per encounter. So they need around 8 spells total which means they aren't hitting their sweet spot until a much higher level than we have in the play test. Even going with 1 spell per encounter we need to double the spells they get now.

Fighters are about right they get 5 options at level 5. Maybe at later levels they can swap those options out or get options that have requirements to make them situational.

Rogues have 2 options attack or hide. They kind of have a third situational option with sneak attack. If no one notices them or they manage to get advantage they get to use the sneak attack damage. That's about right, though they might get 2 more options. Maybe if they don't have advantage they could use their sneak attack in other ways...

I have a fighting game which gives approximately 32 options (Note that at any given time you may have anywhere from only have 3 to 16 choices being available and/or viable) ... invariably attempts to create custom choice matrices result in somewhat more moves than that like 8 or 10 more -- so lets call it 42 since thats the meaning of life the universe and everything.