D&D 5E How would YOU nerf the wizard? +

[Voadam]

Agreed. Simple verbal declaration should be good enough.

Either waste the spell or resolve it on a different target within reach (obviously, "self" is always an option).

Adding in a second point to ponder new options and declare a new action will slow things down further.

Then again, if the Rogue knows you're casting a spell on her then surely she'd hold position until the spell resolves, and then move away...right?

1 if they know. If things are written down and they don't then they might not. Fog of war.

Also if you are targetting an enemy wizard who goes invisible and can't be single person targetted by your dominate before your spell goes off it is still an issue. There are plenty of situations that can change between initiative declaration and action execution.

2 If they don't know who goes first the rogue might have two different things they plan to do based on different round initiative rolls. Again there is the extra time of the more stuff going on based on changing situations in a round between initiative/declaration and action execution.

 

[Lanefan]

Adding in a second point to ponder new options and declare a new action will slow things down further.

1 if they know. If things are written down and they don't then they might not. Fog of war.

Also if you are targetting an enemy wizard who goes invisible and can't be single person targetted by your dominate before your spell goes off it is still an issue. There are plenty of situations that can change between initiative declaration and action execution.

Oh, I know, and sometimes actions don't make sense by the time they resolve. That's fine.

But if a spell's target has disappeared (or more commonly IME, died) in the meantime, I'll allow an instant retargetting; but if there's any hesitancy on the part of the player I take that to reflect hesitancy in the character, and poof goes the spell.

2 If they don't know who goes first the rogue might have two different things they plan to do based on different round initiative rolls. Again there is the extra time of the more stuff going on based on changing situations in a round between initiative/declaration and action execution.

Ah. I'd have them declare after init. gets rolled, not before.

The only time wasted or redundant actions really become an issue in our games is when a bunch of initiatives are tied, meaning a bunch of things are all trying to happen at once. The most common "wasted action" is when multiple melee warriors are all swinging at the same opponent; they all hit it, and the damage from any one of those hits would have been enough to finish it off. C'est la vie, says I.

 

[Voadam]

Oh, I know, and sometimes actions don't make sense by the time they resolve. That's fine.

But if a spell's target has disappeared (or more commonly IME, died) in the meantime, I'll allow an instant retargetting; but if there's any hesitancy on the part of the player I take that to reflect hesitancy in the character, and poof goes the spell.
Ah. I'd have them declare after init. gets rolled, not before.

The only time wasted or redundant actions really become an issue in our games is when a bunch of initiatives are tied, meaning a bunch of things are all trying to happen at once. The most common "wasted action" is when multiple melee warriors are all swinging at the same opponent; they all hit it, and the damage from any one of those hits would have been enough to finish it off. C'est la vie, says I.

My experiences in B/X and AD&D was that kind of led to fine line drawing by DM on the spot judgment of what can be redirected or changed with some PCs angling for more control about changing their actions and what they would do.

I much preferred the game play of 3e style take turns doing a rounds worth of actions. Clear PC control of a character's action and clear resolution with no narrative retroactive revising other than interrupt type processes.

I did enjoy the 2e optional d10 initiative with weapon speeds and spell casting times and used that in my AD&D games after 2e came out.

 

[Lanefan]

My experiences in B/X and AD&D was that kind of led to fine line drawing by DM on the spot judgment of what can be redirected or changed with some PCs angling for more control about changing their actions and what they would do.

Yep, and over time it eventually gets hammered out as to what can be done and what can't, in general.

I much preferred the game play of 3e style take turns doing a rounds worth of actions. Clear PC control of a character's action and clear resolution with no narrative retroactive revising other than interrupt type processes.

The main issue I had with how 3e did it was movement. You're here up until your initative, and on your action suddenly you're over there as if you'd done a very short-range teleport. I'm not sure 4e or 5e improved on this any; there's a thread going right now about continuous initiative in which a very elegant solution is proposed: you move one square per initiative "pip" e.g. if your init is 18 and you're moving 4 squares, you get there on a 14.

The other big issue with 3e - and this caused a nasty argument in a 3e game I was in - was that because initiatives (and thus, actions) couldn't be simultaneous, two characters couldn't act together e.g. the higher-init character delays to match the lower then they hold hands to run through a smoke barrier and not get separated.

For things like multi-attacks (in any edition) I far prefer they each get their own initiative so as to both randomize their timing and to indicate they're not all happening in a sudden flurry.

I did enjoy the 2e optional d10 initiative with weapon speeds and spell casting times and used that in my AD&D games after 2e came out.

We had to convert all the casting times in 1e from a 10-segment round to fit 6-segment rounds in order to line up with everything else, but it's something we only had to do once.

 

[Cadence]

Are the Technocracy and paradox a few steps too far?

 

[Reynard]

Are the Technocracy and paradox a few steps too far?

The Horrors from Earthdawn are kind of that, in effect.

 

[Voadam]

Are the Technocracy and paradox a few steps too far?

The way paradigm works the Technocracy would be the odd men out in most D&D worlds and paradox would give the advantage to the mainstream consensus wizards (and druids and clerics and monks).

 

[leozg]

1. Cantrips not scaling.
2. Wizard HD d4.
3. Learning 1.5 spell per level (1 in odd levels, 2 in even levels).
4. No Arcane Recovery.
5. Casting spells with somatic component triggers AoO (except cantrips).
6. Casting a spell requires concentration (except cantrips).
7. Subclasses have 2 prohibited spell schools (can't learn or cast spells from these schools).
8. Create spell level 10 and move some powerfull spells to level 10.
9. Rework game breaking spells (remove save or suck, for example).
10. Spell slot progesssion reworked: only 5 spell slot levels (level 20 wizard have 5 lvl 1 slots, 4 lvl 2 slots,..., 1 lvl 5 slot). Casting a spell 6+ level now requires a combination of slots whose levels sum equals the spell level. Can take levels of exhaustion to add. Same change applied to all spellcasters.
11. Spell slot recovery after long rest: recover slots whose levels sum is equal to character proficiency bonus (player choose the combination).
12. Rituals reworked: no ritual spells, a ritual is now a group of spellcasters contributing spell slots to cast a spell (any spell) the ritual leader has prepared.
13. Spell Mastery reworked: optional ability, you choose only a lvl 1 spell and lose your lvl 5 spell slot permanently.
14. Signature spell reworked: choose only one level 1 spell to change it (remove a component, change damage type, increase range or duration x2, add a harmless effect).
15. Back to 3 saves (Fort, Refl, Will) like 3ed.
16. Death saving throw now a DC 15 Fortitude save (and Concentration now a Will save).

 

[Quartz]

I feel like I need a table showing how this works. My brain is not collating it for me.

See this thread: D&D 5E - How would you balance this modification to spellcasters? and particularly this post

D&D 5E - How would you balance this modification to spellcasters?

Ignore this - was trying to respond to an alternate in a comment and responded to the main thread instead.

www.enworld.org

Unfortunately I never got to try it.

 

[Remathilis]

1. Cantrips not scaling.
2. Wizard HD d4.
3. Learning 1.5 spell per level (1 in odd levels, 2 in even levels).
4. No Arcane Recovery.
5. Casting spells with somatic component triggers AoO (except cantrips).
6. Casting a spell requires concentration (except cantrips).
7. Subclasses have 2 prohibited spell schools (can't learn or cast spells from these schools).
8. Create spell level 10 and move some powerfull spells to level 10.
9. Rework game breaking spells (remove save or suck, for example).
10. Spell slot progesssion reworked: only 5 spell slot levels (level 20 wizard have 5 lvl 1 slots, 4 lvl 2 slots,..., 1 lvl 5 slot). Casting a spell 6+ level now requires a combination of slots whose levels sum equals the spell level. Can take levels of exhaustion to add. Same change applied to all spellcasters.
11. Spell slot recovery after long rest: recover slots whose levels sum is equal to character proficiency bonus (player choose the combination).
12. Rituals reworked: no ritual spells, a ritual is now a group of spellcasters contributing spell slots to cast a spell (any spell) the ritual leader has prepared.
13. Spell Mastery reworked: optional ability, you choose only a lvl 1 spell and lose your lvl 5 spell slot permanently.
14. Signature spell reworked: choose only one level 1 spell to change it (remove a component, change damage type, increase range or duration x2, add a harmless effect).
15. Back to 3 saves (Fort, Refl, Will) like 3ed.
16. Death saving throw now a DC 15 Fortitude save (and Concentration now a Will save).

I wonder how many people would accept the same level of nerfing to other classes:

Fighter
Must choose a single weapon to specialize in.
Only get extra attacks with that weapon.
No self healing
action surge only grants extra attack action
Gain bonus damage equal to prof mod with your specialized weapon

Rogue
Sneak attack starts at 2d6 but only goes up at 5, 11, and 16 levels
Sneak attack doesn't work against creatures with unusual anatomy.
Evasion costs you your reaction and movement on the next turn
Expertise is 1 1/2 proficiency bonus
D6 HD

Cleric
Bludgeoning weapons only
All caster changes mentioned above
Only class with healing spells
No miracles as a class feature
Spells start at 2nd level.