High level spells aren't really that much better then low level?

[Regulas]

Well that threat about hating 5e does bring up something about 5e that does bother me... at least for warlocks, albeit ironically it's fantastic for every other spellcaster:

Is it just me or is most of the advantages of higher level spells don't seem to exist anymore compared to older editions?, so being able to cast a lot of high level spells isn't that big of a deal, at least compared to 3.x/pathfinder rendering Warlocks relatively a lot weaker then they first seemed.



Damage and "Coverage" (area or number of targets) are the main things that scale up with level (so blasting is good I guess, limited as it is). There are unique effects you can only get later on of course, but generally speaking a lot of level 1 and 2 spells are equally effective cast as level 1 spells when you're level 20 as when you cast them back at level 1. So even though as a wizard I get less highest level spells I tend to feel a lot more powerful then the Warlock, because my low level casts are just as impactful and I generally have more slots total per day (unless we rest a ton per day, since DMG intends only 2 short rests) and even partial casters like Rangers and paladins can have nearly as impressive spellcasting simply because those fog clouds and bless' and the like are still really solid.

More then DC the critical element is that spells now mostly just place status effects. In old version spells tended to have more specific effects, and higher level spells would have larger numbers on penalties, additional effects etc. but now non-damage spells mostly just do the same things, not to mention the higher DC's. A 5e warlock in 3.x would be pretty sweet spellcaster compared to the more restrictive 5e one.

Doubly so is the irony that Warlocks are ironically barred from using most of the higher level spells that really make higher level slots good.

[Tanarii]

I tend to feel a lot more powerful then the Warlock, because my low level casts are just as impactful and I generally have more slots total per day (unless we rest a ton per day, since DMG intends only 2 short rests)
Warlocks get approximately the same number of spell slots of level 5 and below, except for the sweet spot zone for long rest full caster at levels 7-10.

Edit: also your premise is flawed. There's a significant different between casting a 1st level spell and a 5th level spell, or casting out of a 1st level spell slot and a 5th level spell slot. That's what makes warlocks approximately equal. They get full power spell slots, just a bit fewer of them.

[JNAProductions]

Have you actually played a Warlock?

[Regulas]

Warlocks get approximately the same number of spell slots of level 5 and below, except for the sweet spot zone for long rest full caster at levels 7-10.

Edit: also your premise is flawed. There's a significant different between casting a 1st level spell and a 5th level spell, or casting out of a 1st level spell slot and a 5th level spell slot. That's what makes warlocks approximately equal. They get full power spell slots, just a bit fewer of them.

Warlocks get approximately 6 spells per day unless your group does a lot of rests, later on 9 per day. Other spellcasters get 6 by 3rd level and continue increasing.

Also have you ever used Grease? Fog Cloud? Tasha's.... sorry so I don't make a massive list, have you ever used non-damage spells at all? Pretty much any of the good 1st level spells are just as effective against that level 20 BBEG as against a lvl 1 goblin, except for a few special cases like sleep. What matters is there save in that type so as long as they have any vulnerability to a saving throw type then you can debuff and in some cases entirely disable enemies with level 1 spells, and because it's all just status' the debuffs are just as good at level 1. Let alone getting into 2-3 level spells... if an enemy fails its save to fear...

The premise that there isn't a significant difference between casting a 1st and 5th level spell is based on the fact that in many cases I can attain a nearly identical effect with a level 1 or 2 spell. Unless there are a very large number of enemies, or I am trying to blast.

[Tanarii]

Warlocks get approximately 6 spells per day unless your group does a lot of rests, later on 9 per day. Other spellcasters get 6 by 3rd level and continue increasing.But by level 5, you're casting 6 3rd levels per day, to a wizards 1 3rd, 3 2nd, and 4 1st. Less slots, a lot more power. This breaks down a bit at levels 7-10, where long rest full casters come out significantly ahead (approx 2 spells per encounter to a warlocks 1), but the warlock makes up for most of that at level 11.


The premise that there isn't a significant difference between casting a 1st and 5th level spell is based on the fact that in many cases I can attain a nearly identical effect with a level 1 or 2 spell. Unless there are a very large number of enemies, or I am trying to blast.
Not really. Better spells come online at higher levels. And upcast 1st level spells are more powerful than lower level ones. Grease is obsoleted by Web, and Tasha's doesn't scale up at all and is best traded out. Fog Cloud is not a bad escape spell though at any level.

But yes, a 1st or 2nd level non-damage spell is still better than no non-damage spell at all. That's undeniable. But 6 3rd level spells beats 1 3rd + 3 2nd, and 9 5th beats 2 5th, 3 4th, and 3 3rd. Warlocks have different 'strong points' compared to a long rest full caster, that's all.

[Corran]

Have a look at this old thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?472150-Spells-that-scale-exceedingly-well). It talks about whih spells are good choices to upcast, so it is partly relevant to the conversation.

[Regulas]

Stop for a second, forget the extra side effects and just consider:

Even if you could cast an obstentiously "stronger spell" what difference does it functionally make? If your level 11 and you cast Fear spell, and it makes the BBEG run away for 10 rounds while your party harasses, what point is there to casting a higher level spell? You can already win regardless.

What about a debuff? a level 1 grease spell provides the same advantage/disadvantage effect as a level 5 spell and doesn't even take concentration. So even if a 5th level spell has better overall properties the psychical effect is largely the same.

Edit: and Tasha's incapacitates. it doesn't need to scale. DC auto scales.

[Tanarii]

Even if you could cast an obstentiously "stronger spell" what difference does it functionally make?Each spell level gained is strong enough it (mostly) counts as a class feature all by itself to gain access to it. It makes a large functional difference.

[R.Shackleford]

Have you played a Warlock?

[Regulas]

Have you played a Warlock?

Yes one, and two while more relevant to warlocks, this is about spells in general and not warlocks specifically so that comment isn't super relevant anyway. I focused on locks only because it has more of impact not because it was a problem solely with warlocks.

[MrStabby]

This is true, but a bit DM dependant.

There are a lot of low level spells that scale really well, this should not be denied. However they may be quire limited in other regards.

Take hold person as an example. A level 2 spell that does a great jon of removing someone from the fight. At low levels it is good and also at high levels. What determines how well it scales is the fraction of the enemy power of an encounter it can address. If your DM likes a single very powerful enemy then it is great. If the DM scales up encounters by adding more enemies it is less good. Bear in mind that as the DM adds more powerful enemies they still need to be humanoids so no dragons etc..

This is a pattern across a lot of the incapacitating low level spells. They are good vs things like bandits and scale well to super-high-level bandits but tend to do less well against otherworldly horrors that have more status immunities or need a shared language or are not humanoid.

Some spells, for example grease, become harder to use as your enemies' jumping distance increases. It is a minor loss in power, more mentioned for completeness than anything else.

Finally, you may come up against an enemy with legendary saves. If you do then the low level spells that all allow saves become less effective.

So yes the spells scale beautifully, but their application tends to narrow.

Compare this with something like a wall of force as a high level control spell. No save so legendary resistance wont work, can wall off multiple targets, can shut down enemies larger than humanoids.

[Toadkiller]

Read Treantmonk's wizard guide. It's deliberate that high level casters are (somewhat) less overpowering than earlier editions. That said, I dropped "banishment" last session and permanently ended an encounter the DM was expecting to be hard. Session before polymorph let us breeze through one we probably "should" have had to run from.

So it kind of depends on which spell in what situation.

[SharkForce]

higher level spells give you access to new effects, new saving throws to target (which is a massive swing in many cases being able to target a poor save instead of a good one), more targets, in some cases removes a concentration requirement, and in some cases have effects that don't even allow saves.

web is a great spell at level 3, and it is a great spell at level 20. but it isn't as good as wall of force when it comes to dividing a battle in half. tasha's is a great spell, but it isn't nearly as good as hold person, and it is even less good when compared to hold person in a higher level spell slot. spells like antipathy can be cast once and last for days, keep dozens of enemies from approaching you, and do not require concentration. polymorph is vastly superior to alter self. suggestion is a good spell, but mass suggestion is a much better spell.

sure, low level spells don't inherently lose value. but high level spells are vastly superior to low level spells in many ways.

the warlock in particular may not have the best spell list to leverage getting a ton of level 5 spells at the cost of lower level spell slots, but higher level spells have a lot of power to them.

[R.Shackleford]

Yes one, and two while more relevant to warlocks, this is about spells in general and not warlocks specifically so that comment isn't super relevant anyway. I focused on locks only because it has more of impact not because it was a problem solely with warlocks.

Yes it is.

If you actually play casters at low, mid, and high levels you will see how things work.

It really seems like you are white room speculating on things instead of actually playing the game.

There are tons of spells that quadratically explode the power level of casters. Plane Shift alone is just... Wow. Telekinesis is an absolute messed up spell when used correctly.

Anyone who looks at a mid level to high caster, especially a warlock, and thinks anything close to "high level spells aren't much better"... Well... I just don't think they have played at those levels.

I really suggest that *everyone* plays once per month or every other month to play a long one or two shot at high levels. Get out of the white room and actually see the game in action :)

[Democratus]

I really suggest that *everyone* plays once per month or every other month to play a long one or two shot at high levels. Get out of the white room and actually see the game in action :)

Any discussion that ends with, "hey...play the game!" is okay by me. :smallcool:

I've also found that there's no substitute for walking an imaginary mile in a character's virtual shoes.

High level spells combined with a fertile imagination can be a world changer. We have a warlock/sorcerer duo that love to combine Hex (disadvantage to Str. checks) and Telekinesis (Str. check to escape) to "force choke" powerful enemies.

[R.Shackleford]

Any discussion that ends with, "hey...play the game!" is okay by me. :smallcool:

I've also found that there's no substitute for walking an imaginary mile in a character's virtual shoes.

High level spells combined with a fertile imagination can be a world changer. We have a warlock/sorcerer duo that love to combine Hex (disadvantage to Str. checks) and Telekinesis (Str. check to escape) to "force choke" powerful enemies.

The biggest problem is there are a lot of people who rely solely on white room examples.

Oh, the fighter (champion) can keep going all day!

Well, no, they have to stop when their allies stop. The champion is a short/long* rest class if that is all their allies are.

Edited for clarity.

[Tanarii]

Well, no, they have to stop when their allies stop. The champion is a long rest class if that is all their allies are.And the allies have to keep on pushing on with light crossbows if they can't stop. LR dependent classes don't automatically drive the timing for rests. Hell ... players don't automatically get to choose when to rest.

But yes, champions being able to fight 'all day' is clearly hyperbole. At the very least, they still have hit points & hit dice. :smallwink:

[R.Shackleford]

And the allies have to keep on pushing on with light crossbows if they can't stop. LR dependent classes don't automatically drive the timing for rests. Hell ... players don't automatically get to choose when to rest.

But yes, champions being able to fight 'all day' is clearly hyperbole. At the very least, they still have hit points & hit dice. :smallwink:

The "fighters fight all day" is the loudest white room example I hear way too much.

I've found that white room leads to hyperbole very quickly.

If the combat system wasn't so mundane I could see casters picking up a crossbow and taking some called shots since their damage output will be limited.

It isn't just about damage though. Everyone talks about how great second wind is, it isnt, and how other classes can't keep up with the fighter on survivability... Well, if the other classes are out of resources and HP the fighter will be stopping with them.

Adventuring isn't a race or marathon of pc v pc, but a relay race with all the PCs on one side. Of a majority of the group can't go on then the fighter isn't going on either.

[Tanarii]

Of a majority of the group can't go on then the fighter isn't going on either.Or the fighter might be pulling their bacon out of the fire as they are forced to go on. You seem to have this underlying assumption that the players are getting to choose if they must go on or not. (edit: or stop trying to get out, which IMX is the far more likely situation for when PCs don't have a choice but to continue.)

[Cybren]

The "fighters fight all day" is the loudest white room example I hear way too much.

I've found that white room leads to hyperbole very quickly.

If the combat system wasn't so mundane I could see casters picking up a crossbow and taking some called shots since their damage output will be limited.

It isn't just about damage though. Everyone talks about how great second wind is, it isnt, and how other classes can't keep up with the fighter on survivability... Well, if the other classes are out of resources and HP the fighter will be stopping with them.

Adventuring isn't a race or marathon of pc v pc, but a relay race with all the PCs on one side. Of a majority of the group can't go on then the fighter isn't going on either.

You're missing the point. The longevity of a fighters sustained capabilities is a strength of the class. Because it gives the groups added flexibility and security. Yes, we're down to just cantrips, but Doug is still hitting just as hard as he was since the morning. Arguing that this isn't an advantage is itself a "white room analysis", because in real games PCs don't deplete resources symmetrically. Having someone that is still able to perform at near peak while everyone else is dwindling is important. The only area where it isn't is in a sterile dungeon where the PCs can rest at their leisure with no chance to be interrupted or ambushed and have no reason not to take as much time as they like

[MrStabby]

You're missing the point. The longevity of a fighters sustained capabilities is a strength of the class. Because it gives the groups added flexibility and security. Yes, we're down to just cantrips, but Doug is still hitting just as hard as he was since the morning. Arguing that this isn't an advantage is itself a "white room analysis", because in real games PCs don't deplete resources symmetrically. Having someone that is still able to perform at near peak while everyone else is dwindling is important. The only area where it isn't is in a sterile dungeon where the PCs can rest at their leisure with no chance to be interrupted or ambushed and have no reason not to take as much time as they like

I think when people use "hyperbole" they are being pretty accurate. they are not dismissing the ability as irrelevant or even not that useful. They are just saying that it isn't the greatest ability, no better than say a third attack or an action surge.

For me, this ability has almost always lead to champions taking the first watch. They are awake and active whilst others are beginning to just recover their short rest abilities. If anything happens in that time the champion can spring into action at nearly full power.

[Tanarii]

/facepalm I didn't realize R.Shackleford was talking specifically about the Champion capstone. :smallredface: