• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D General GM : Spellcaster Arms Race

This has been a ongoing conversation for decades. GMs talk about how mid/high level (and certainly beyond) Spellcasters (lets say level 9+) are not relatively overpowered (compared with their martial counterparts and the obstacles the PCs face) because a GM is capable of either proactively or reactively deploy countermeasures to bring their power in check (and that this approach is (a) not adversarial and (b) appropriate GMing). However, this conversation always struck me in that it was the inverse of the white room theorizing where we converse about how spellcasters dominate the trajectory of play and the bulk of the gamestate. There is always the response that the "caster supremacy" argument never has to "show their work"; eg spells known, spell loadout, etc etc. But I never see the alternative where GM's "show their work." Its always just assumed that because a GM has unilateral access to unestablished backstory, unilateral access to the offscreen, and the ability to fudge rolls if their game isn't player-facing and they choose to do so. Effectively, they have unbridled resources to deploy countermeasures at their discretion.

However, we've never discussed how often or at what rate are GMs deploying these blocks/countermeasures?

So, then. GMs out there who feel that it is appropriate and responsible GMing to focus this kind of overhead to passively and actively counter spellcaster PCs. How often per session or how often per spell deployment are you countering spellcaster PCs via any of the below:

1) Preemptively using unestablished backstory or unilateral access to the offscreen (NPC x has Antimagic wards on their lair/redoubt, Divination and Teleportation exclusion zones mandated by territorial governing bodies, spellcasting is outlawed or aggressively stigmatized, NPC x has a mage with an anti-spellcaster loadout, NPC x IS a mage with an anti-spellcaster loadout, NPC x has Magic Resistance, etc, etc).

2) Reactively (and secretly) changing loadouts or defenses to counter a spellcaster PC after you've discovered they've got an obstacle/encounter trivializing or obviating spell gambit they're about to deploy.

3) Aggressively using the endless resources at your disposal to actively harangue spellcaster PCs in ways that you don't harangue martial PCs (eg creatures that can steal spells or spellcasters that steal spells but none that steal armor/swords, Rakshashas and the like but limited Rust Monsters, spellbook and component pouch stealing Imps/Pixies).

4) Fudge a Saving Throw Roll or a To-Hit Roll against the Spellcaster.




So then.

Is it 1 x per session? Is it 2 x per session?

Is it 1/4 spellcaster deployments (that would otherwise trivialize or outright obviate an encounter)? Is it 2/4? Is it 3/4?

Which of the above 4 countermeasures do you use, why, and how much?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
In the two 5E campaigns I'm running, I don't believe I've done any of the things you've listed. All I can think of is use a spell after seeing the PCs use it effectively (because they think of things I do not). I mean, I had a city council building that had protections against divination spells, but it wasn't to keep the PCs from trivializing anything--it was because it made sense to me that the building would be so protected.

Then again, I think it's clear to both of us that I haven't seen the problem be as bad in 5E as you have--which doesn't of course, mean you haven't seen what you've seen.
 

In the two 5E campaigns I'm running, I don't believe I've done any of the things you've listed. All I can think of is use a spell after seeing the PCs use it effectively (because they think of things I do not). I mean, I had a city council building that had protections against divination spells, but it wasn't to keep the PCs from trivializing anything--it was because it made sense to me that the building would be so protected.

Then again, I think it's clear to both of us that I haven't seen the problem be as bad in 5E as you have--which doesn't of course, mean you haven't seen what you've seen.

This is broadly in D&D (so 1e, Expert/Champions, 2e, RC, 3.x, 5e) so any of those editions apply. There is no doubt that spellcaster supremacy has been comparatively reigned in in 5e. But its absolutely still present (and, excluding 3.x, I'd say a level 14-20 Diviner is the most powerful Spellcaster in D&D I've ever GMed against).

But I don't want to turn this into a "which spellcasters are the most powerful" thread. I'm curious about GMs who feel that this sort of Arms Race and these sorts of blocks are appropriate moves to be made against mid/high (and above) level Spellcasters in D&D and what that looks like in actual play at their tables.
 

steeldragons

Steeliest of the dragons
Epic
There is, I think, another solution to the "spellcaster supremacy" issue...other spellcasters.

Has anyone (other than myself) used -or just "developed" in the setting's story wings- a cabal of the world's [or multiverses] most powerful magic-users (known or unknown as other NPCs or heads of states or what have you) to try to...shall we say "neutralize"...and likely desire to subsume the magics of... a caster that is getting "too big for their metaphysical [or worldly] britches?"

Facilities, or areas within them, that are warded against divinations or telelportation/infiltration, invisibility-dispelling doorways, zones of truth, and the like, are pretty standard fare for any place or persons that are of adequate power or importance -in a high or large magical society. I've used those, all of the time...at all levels of character development.

I don't know if I'd say I "harangue" spellcasters...but a caster in a combat situation is likely to be a primary target by any foe with enough intelligence or understanding of magics of their own...That's just "smart play" as far as I'm concerned. My setting has some cultures wherein arcane magic-use is outlawed and/or highly suspect. Some creatures/cultures are particularly superstitious and will run from someone displaying sorcerous prowess rather than attempt to fight the unknown (or risk being "turned into something... unnatural"). Others will bullrush or throw everything they have at someone in robes with a glowy staff to the ignorance of all others. I don't know if I'd count that sort of thing as part of dealing with spellcaster supremacy, so much as the setting's internal consistency.

Of course, I haven't run a game that got to levels of having to worry about a spellcaster taking over...ya know...everything...in quite a while (though was a player in one last year...well, more than that, now). But those are my initial thoughts.
 


steeldragons

Steeliest of the dragons
Epic
@steeldragons

Everything you’ve mentioned falls under one of the 4 headers above.

About how many times per session do these countermeasures come up?

How many times per significant spell deployment (eg 1/4)?
I'm not really sure what you mean by "per significant spell deployment"...Is a significant spell deployment a combat? Any spell used of 3rd level of higher? 5th? Any spell used by a caster of greater than 9th level?

You mean how often per every spell that gets cast? I couldn't possibly wager a guess to quantify how often one of the above is employed against spells used by a player. I will say 1 per 4 sessions seems...low.

If you're talking about a high level party (which the OP seems to imply, 9+) with multiple high-level casters, then it doesn't seem odd that at least once per session something will come up to thwart known/repeated tactics (in game/by their foes, not just because I, the DM, expect them to do ABC in meta-land) or explicit in-world known defenses (like anti-teleportation fields or divination protections).
 


I'm not really sure what you mean by "per significant spell deployment"...Is a significant spell deployment a combat? Any spell used of 3rd level of higher? 5th? Any spell used by a caster of greater than 9th level?

Level doesn’t matter.

Any spell or gambit (let’s say 2 x low level spells) that dramatically impacts the trajectory of play and changes the gamestate in a significantly positive way for team PC. Examples:

* OMG this low level AoE has crippled this encounter!

* OMG the entire Kings Guard has been Charmed for a coup!

* OMG you upleveled Levitate and Absorb Elements so the entire party just obviates THE MEGA CLIMB (or not) OF MOUNT COLDI-ITUDE!

* OMG you used the Tiny Hut ritual to recharge all spells/HP?

* OMG you Banished the two mega demons and now we just clean up the lackeys?

* OMG you Arcane Eyed the whole dungeon to map the way to/out of x and the dangers from here to there?

Etc
 

jgsugden

Legend
I've played since the (very) late 70s. This type of meta-countering has never been necessary.

That being said, in character, enemies have decided to focus on the spellcasters, at times, to prevent them from doing certain things. When a group of informed assassins attack, they usually focus on the spellcasters first to prevent healing and teleportation.

I've also had NPCs try to take down the wizard and steal their stuff. Because - cool stuff!

These things were all story driven based upon the situation. They were not an attempt to 'balance' melee and spellcasters through punishing spellcasters. In 5E, especially, there is no reason to do such a thing because melee classes are doing amazing things in combat these days. I've seen a fighter deal over 300 damage in a turn. I've seen a fighter 11 / paladin 2 / ranger 3 / sorcerer 3 / cleric 1 just ... get silly. These classes can be even more overpowered than spellcasters at high level because the key enemies can't just choose to save against their attacks - they have to deal with these damaging attacks.
 


Remove ads

Top