Change to the Shield spell to account for Bounded Accuracy...Is it still usable?

[Man_Over_Game]

Change Shield to halving all damage against an attack that hit you, or having immunity against all damage from a Magic Missile spell.

That's it. It does not last until your next turn. It does not increase AC. It blocks a single attack with your Reaction and halves it.


My question is not "would you use this", but rather, "is this balanced against spells like Misty Step or Absorb Elements"?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Change Shield to halving all damage against an attack that hit you, or having immunity against all damage from a Magic Missile spell.

That's it. It does not last until your next turn. It does not increase AC. It blocks a single attack with your Reaction and halves it.


My question is not "would you use this", but rather, "is this balanced against spells like Misty Step or Absorb Elements"?

No. That's garbage tier for a spell slot. Against multiattacking monsters (which is most of them), resistance to one attack's damage is nothing. And Magic Missile doesn't come up much.

Not to mention, shield doesn't violate bounded accuracy because it's not level scaling. And that's all bounded accuracy cares about. You can go off the d20, but you have to spend resources to do so., Instead of just leveling up.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I'm gonna say "Bad" bordering on "Very Bad" especially at early levels.

Keep in mind who is using the Shield spell out of necessity - Wizards and Sorcerers. Their d6 hit die means the best protection they have against damage (barring exceptions like the Abjurer) isn't mitigation, but prevention.

Using a first level spell for nothing but half damage is just not going to cut it. I think the only reason that Absorb Elements is touted as highly as it is would be because of its extremely specific use being pretty good. When you're getting hit by an elemental attack you're usually expecting above average numbers and its usually attached to a saving throw instead of an attack roll.

This version of Shield is worse than Absorb elements, even though it's likely going to be able to mitigate damage more often. Seconding the issues PhoenixPhyre presented with extra emphasis on how bad it is against multi-attacking creatures.

Shield is something that, as it is now, can actually save the Wizards life against a small group of Goblins. If you changed it to this version, not only would it not be at all useful to saving the Wizards life but it's going to be a worse use of their 1st level spell slot than Witch Bolt. At least Witch Bolt would kill goblin, preventing any damage.

[Man_Over_Game]

No. That's garbage tier for a spell slot. Against multiattacking monsters (which is most of them), resistance to one attack's damage is nothing. And Magic Missile doesn't come up much.

Not to mention, shield doesn't violate bounded accuracy because it's not level scaling. And that's all bounded accuracy cares about. You can go off the d20, but you have to spend resources to do so., Instead of just leveling up.

Rather, Shield works around Bounded Accuracy by using the universal currency of AC.

A player's AC might gain about 4 points over the course of his DnD career, 1-20. However, players gain about 6 HP per level, and deal about 2 more damage per level.

For example, Chromatic Orb (available at level 1) deals an average of 6.75 damage, assuming a 50% hit chance.
When Acid Arrow (available at level 3) deals an average of 10 damage, assuming a 50% hit chance.
A standard warrior deals 10 damage on a hit, or roughly 5 damage per round with a 50% hit chance.

Casting a level 1 spell is roughly the equivalent of dealing damage as a level 2 Martial character. Spending a level 1 spell slot is akin to, temporarily, being as effective as a level 2 character in terms of burst contribution.

The default Shield spell jumps to a +5 bonus. It's useable nearly every combat, hell, almost every turn. It does not interfere with nearly any character's playstyle because of the easy resource it uses (Reaction). And it's very accessible (available through 3 subclasses and two classes). But mostly, it grants you such a dramatic jump in AC that can only be compared by comparing a level 1 character to a level 20.

For a split second, the cheapest leveled spell in the game grants you the same AC as your level 20 version. When your level 20 version uses it, it's such a dramatic spike that most creatures are incapable of hitting you. Compare this to the longevity and power of every other level 1-2 spell in the game. Even something like Invisibility loses its value when you need to take actions or when enemies have Truesight.

[MaxWilson]

Change Shield to halving all damage against an attack that hit you, or having immunity against all damage from a Magic Missile spell.

That's it. It does not last until your next turn. It does not increase AC. It blocks a single attack with your Reaction and halves it.

My question is not "would you use this", but rather, "is this balanced against spells like Misty Step or Absorb Elements"?

Nope. Absorb Elements at least gives you resistance for a full round; Misty Step pulls you out of the fight, again letting you escape multiple attacks. This is basically Uncanny Dodge at the cost of a spell slot, and Uncanny Dodge is a bit weak already.

This spell is clearly worse than either of those two spells.


Rather, Shield works around Bounded Accuracy by using the universal currency of AC.

Bounded Accuracy doesn't mean what you think it means. Nothing a PC does can break Bounded Accuracy. Bounded Accuracy means the world does not increase in difficulty, not that PCs don't get better at tasks within the world. To quote Rodney Thompson (http://bluishcertainty.blogspot.com/2016/06/bounded-accuracy.html), who invented the term "bounded accuracy" (though arguably not the concept, since bounded accuracy was there in AD&D already),


Conventional D&D wisdom tells us that the maxim "the numbers go up" is an inherent part of the class and level progression in D&D. While that might be true, in the next iteration of the game we're experimenting with something we call the bounded accuracy system.

The basic premise behind the bounded accuracy system is simple: we make no assumptions on the DM's side of the game that the player's attack and spell accuracy, or their defenses, increase as a result of gaining levels. Instead, we represent the difference in characters of various levels primarily through their hit points, the amount of damage they deal, and the various new abilities they have gained. Characters can fight tougher monsters not because they can finally hit them, but because their damage is sufficient to take a significant chunk out of the monster's hit points; likewise, the character can now stand up to a few hits from that monster without being killed easily, thanks to the character's increased hit points. Furthermore, gaining levels grants the characters new capabilities, which go much farther toward making your character feel different than simple numerical increases.

Now, note that I said that we make no assumptions on the DM's side of the game about increased accuracy and defenses. This does not mean that the players do not gain bonuses to accuracy and defenses. It does mean, however, that we do not need to make sure that characters advance on a set schedule, and we can let each class advance at its own appropriate pace. Thus, wizards don't have to gain a +10 bonus to weapon attack rolls just for reaching a higher level in order to keep participating; if wizards never gain an accuracy bonus, they can still contribute just fine to the ongoing play experience.

Emphasis mine.

Shield does not break Bounded Accuracy, but if you start restricting yourself to monsters with +10 to hit because wizards have shield, you the DM are violating Bounded Accuracy.

[sophontteks]

Spells are not designed to be balanced at all. Not interested in how shield compares to other level 1 spells, I'm interested in how this effects balance elsewhere.

This game doesn't have any ways to draw agro away from casters. Casters will be targetted sometimes. Shield gave them the chance to get out of this situation. Casters are already very squishy because of their hp. You are removing their primary method of defense, and forcing them to find it elsewhere via. multiclassing or other AC-granting abilities.

Its a big nerf to the EK as well. Gaining shield was what made them competitive.

Its a big buff to bards. Their lack of access to shield was previously the biggest weakpoint of their spell list. Now its bards who can take hits better then wizards.

The revised shield is really bad. Its a wasted spell slot. resistance vs. one attack is nothing close to what shield once did.

[Man_Over_Game]

This is basically Uncanny Dodge at the cost of a spell slot, and Uncanny Dodge is a bit weak already.

That actually was kind of the intent. Uncanny Dodge seemed to be something that a lot of people value in the Rogue. In essence, the goal was to make it so that Shield became "Spend a level 1 spell slot, temporarily gain a level 5 feature". For example, if there was a level 1 spell that said "Make an extra attack this turn", people would be all over it.

But maybe that's the big mistake I made. Uncanny Dodge doesn't have the same value as Extra Attack.


Bounded Accuracy doesn't mean what you think it means. Nothing a PC does can break Bounded Accuracy.
Maybe you're right on that. I pictured it as more of "The Strong are always susceptible to the Weak", and Shield is effective for both the Weak (effectively making them have the same AC as a level 20 version of themselves) AND the Strong (effectively making them no longer susceptible to the Weak).

Or, put another way, swarming a target will work, unless the boss you're fighting has Shield. Very few spells scale the same way as Shield does, as efficiently as Shield does, because AC barely changes compared to every other variable in the game. Even vision goes through more dramatic changes every 5 levels to cause certain spells to no longer have the "oomph" they once did (like Invisibility).

I'll probably go back to the drawing board. My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15.

[Tharkun]

This is very similar to blade turning, a cantrip widely regarded as too weak to learn.

[MaxWilson]

For example, if there was a level 1 spell that said "Make an extra attack this turn", people would be all over it.

That would be irrational unless they were Rogues or (maybe) Sharpshooter/GWMs against a low-AC target. Gaining d8+7 HP of damage at the cost of a spell slot and your reaction (presumably) is pretty bad.

If you implement this change you might see more Defensive Duelists Fighters in play though, since Defensive Duelist would go from "cheaper but objectively worse than Shield" to "objectively better than Shield except against ranged attacks".

[ProsecutorGodot]

I'll probably go back to the drawing board. My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15.
You wouldn't be gaining more 1st level spell slots on casters if you weren't intended to be casting those spells. I don't agree with this line of thinking, there should be spells that can remain a staple throughout your career.

Could you explain why you think it's an issue that a 1st level spell remains viable throughout an adventuring career? What makes Shield stand out as a large enough issue when Hex is something Fighters salivate over to pick up with Magic Initiate? Why is it worse than Bless, which is so highly regarded that a Paladin is willing to give up a smite slot to cast it?

[PhoenixPhyre]

You've got 4 1st level slots, max. Anything more costs your big guns. That's 4 rounds/day, max. That's hardly all day. And the ones who get the biggest boost (potentially being unhittable except on a crit), namely EKs, get even fewer. So shield is not a problem unless you're running lots of single fight days. So don't do that.

And you should, ideally, be able to use the same spell from level 1 to level 20. You don't age out of low level spells in 5e.

[MaxWilson]

You wouldn't be gaining more 1st level spell slots on casters if you weren't intended to be casting those spells. I don't agree with this line of thinking, there should be spells that can remain a staple throughout your career.

"Fuego!"

:)


You've got 4 1st level slots, max. Anything more costs your big guns. That's 4 rounds/day, max. That's hardly all day.

With Arcane Recovery you can get another 4 1st level slots by 8th level, after a short rest. And Shield impacts even the rounds when it isn't needed, by letting you take more risks. A Forge Cleric 1/Enchanter 6 can wade into melee to use his Hypnotic Gaze with nigh-impunity, not because he's constantly casting Shield, but because he's able to cast Shield whenever he needs it.

If you wanted to nerf Shield down to be more in line with spells like Expeditious Retreat and Tasha's Hideous Laughter--if you wanted to nerf it to the point where players wouldn't be excited to see it on a bonus spell list like the Hexblade or the UA Forge Cleric--you could make it work against one attack instead all attacks that round. It would be about on par with Defensive Duelist then, but you'd be spending spell slots in play instead of spending a feat before play, in order to get it.

Or, just ban multiclassing. Shield isn't exciting on an AC 11-12 Wizard the same way it is on an AC 20ish Cleric 1/Wizard X.

[Frozenstep]

My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15.

Wow, there's a lot to unpack here.

1: So first level spell slots should be made to be less useful as time goes on? Should we also nerf things like featherfall and bless and tasha's hideous laughter (still a potentially devastating spell)? I feel like we're breaking bounded accuracy in a different way by doing that.

2: I think we're allowed to break the perceived bounds of the game when it comes to limited resources. Guiding strike is a +10 to hit, that's insane, right? But it's once per short rest, and it's okay because it's bounded by being limited use. Shield can be used "every round in combat", but generally the spellcasters using shield get most of them back on a long rest. Wizards might get some back on a short rest, but it's usually just 1, maybe sometimes 2, because most of the time there's higher level spell slots to worry about recovering. They can start burning higher level spell slots on it, but that has its own costs.

3: It already becomes less effective as time goes on. Monsters get more accurate (and as you said...players usually don't gain too much more AC), they attack more times (higher chances of a crit), and can have special abilities (forcing a save rather then an attack roll. Not that low CR enemies can't also force saving throws, but once you get to higher levels, you can have swarms of saving throw enemies). Stuns and other status effects pop up and prevent you from shielding. Dangerous spellcasters appear and demand your reactions for counterspells (or maybe they counterspell your shield). +5 AC on a reaction is a great thing, but in the grand scheme of things, you can't rely on it at all, not at level 15.

3b: You want swarms of enemies to still be effective? Have them shove and grapple, with multiple attacks at advantage it won't take long for crits to start rolling in.

4: Multi-classing can be a problem, but you have to remember it's not just the 20 AC cleric1/wizardx that's using shield, it's also the 12 AC wizard.

5: Your proposed change means the player might need to make a concentration saving throw. That's a massive shift in balance that needs more thought.

[Tanarii]

What if it gave you +5 AC or AC 20 for a round, whichever is lower?

Edit: Note based on some other posters objections, your version, blocking a single attack outright, might be more powerful than a normal Shield, depending on how the DM runs the spell and dice. With a normal Shield, if the only information the player is given is that they're Hit and the value of the d20 roll RAW, they may not know if +5 will block the initial hit. Same if the DM rolls behind a screen and determines the Hit from writing down the PCs' ACs in advance, without telling the player the roll results at all. In either of those cases, your version is a garunteed block vs an uncertain one.

Personally I assume Shield is at least one garunteed block, since the players will be told the final hit result including bonuses, then the player will tell the DM them the PC were hit by comparing to the PC's AC. But not all DMs run the game that way.

[ProsecutorGodot]

What if it gave you +5 AC or AC 20 for a round, whichever is lower?

So if you're an EK who's using Plate/Shield and Defense fighting style you're going to lose AC with one of your best spell choices from your limited spell list?

[MaxWilson]

Edit: Note based on some other posters objections, your version, blocking a single attack outright, might be more powerful than a normal Shield, depending on how the DM runs the spell and dice.

But it's not outright! It just halves the damage. It's garbage tier as written.

[Tanarii]

But it's not outright! It just halves the damage. It's garbage tier as written.
Ah. I misread it. I thought it was prevent all damage vs an attack, or half magic missile.

[Greywander]

I'd be curious to know why you think Shield needs to be rebalanced, as that might inform the direction we could take in rebalancing it.

Personally, I think Shield is a strong spell for 1st level, likely one you'd want to keep in your list of prepared spells for most of your career, but not gamebreaking.

It only lasts one round
At lower levels, there's going to be a distinct lack of hit points on both sides of the aisle, so fights should be over fairly quickly. As you level up, though, you'll be facing stronger and stronger monsters who will take longer to bring down. While it's true you'll have more spell slots, you'll always have other things you'd like to do with them, and you don't get them back until you finish a long rest. Wizards and sorcerers in particular become a waste of space without any spell slots left.

It only affects AC
Intelligent monsters will switch to using saving throws instead of attack rolls after you use Shield. Weaker monsters like goblins might not have any save options, but stronger monsters, and especially intelligent monsters, are very likely to have alternate methods of dealing with troublesome characters.

It only affects you
They can just attack someone else. You might have prevented one attack from hitting you, but it's kind of a waste of a spell slot if you don't get attacked anymore for the rest of the round. A few rounds later and you'll be running low on spell slots with a party that is worse for wear. Enemies could even deliberately bait you into using Shield to get you to burn through your spell slots faster.

It doesn't actually break Bounded Accuracy
I've been working off and on on a guide to maximizing your defenses. Here's a bit of a spoiler: the absolute highest you can get your AC is 61, and that basically requires an alignment of the stars to get all the circumstantial bonuses. A more reasonably achievable AC is 39, which still requires a specific 20th level build, several legendary magic items, two of your attunement slots, and concentration. 39 sounds high, doesn't it? But it's only exactly high enough that a tarrasque needs a 20 to hit you. So it's high, yes, but even doing our best to attain a reliably high AC we just barely manage to get there.

On a less optimized character, you're more likely to see plate and a shield giving 20 AC, boosted to 25 with the Shield spell. To put this in perspective, goblins get a +4 to their attack rolls, so an AC of 24 is enough that they can only hit on a 20. On the other hand, the tarrasque gets a +19 to attack rolls, so if your AC is 20 or lower, it hits on everything except a 1. Yes, that's right, plate and a shield do nothing against a tarrasque. So really, the Shield spell only guaranties a miss (except for nat 20s) against extremely weak enemies like goblins, while extremely strong enemies like dragons or the tarrasque hardly notice a difference. This sounds like it's just right for Bounded Accuracy.

[Tanarii]

AC comparisons to a tarrasque are effectively meaningless.

What matters is likely AC in Tier 2 vs typical monsters you might fight in Tier 2, i.e. CR 2 to CR 7. Then Tier 1 vs CR 1/8 to CR 2. And finally some low Tier 3 might be worth looking at. That's where the game is played.

[Yunru]

Set the bonus to either your proficiency or spellcasting modifier?

[Daphne]

Why not disadvantages on attack rolls against you until the start of your next turn?

[Keravath]

I'll probably go back to the drawing board. My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15.

Just a quick comment but by level 15 there are a lot more things for characters to spend a reaction on.

- martials will have op attacks as well as feats providing additional op attacks - polearm master, sentinel etc that will also use the reaction
- casters have counterspell (or in the case of some bards their special uses of bardic inspiration)

Shield is always useful which is good for a level 1 spell but the opportunity cost of using it increases substantially as you level.

In addition, I've seen opponents use counterspell to stop the use of shield. When a character "counts" on shield, this can be a very useful tactic. In a fight against a demi-lich, the paladin scored a hit and planned to smite, the demi-lich cast a spell (likely shield) as a reaction and the bard counter-spelled. The paladin hit and did substantial damage with a smite.

If you take shield in isolation and just look at weapons and to hit and consider a character that optimizes their build for maximum AC then it can look pretty effective. However, with the range of threats including spells, other magic, various kinds of attacks ... AC isn't the only thing you need to focus on and if your character focuses on AC it likely has weaknesses elsewhere.

Anyway, in my experience, playing Tier 1->3, shield remains useful but not unbalanced over the range of levels (At the lowest levels, shield can have the biggest effect in terms of relative AC vs to hit of the opponents, however, it also uses a far larger fraction of the available spell resources so the character can't cast it as often ... and there will likely be other spells they want to cast).

P.S. I'd agree with the other posters that your suggested replacement is weak to very weak ... most might consider it pointless. Uncanny dodge is a useful boost on a rogue since they try very hard to not be on the front lines so hopefully it will 1/2 the damage of the 1 -> 2 hits they might take if they make a mistake and get too close to the fight ... but it is not a strong ability. Compare uncanny dodge to evasion which is a very useful ability.

[Bloodcloud]

I think your trying to fix something that needs no fixing.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'd be curious to know why you think Shield needs to be rebalanced, as that might inform the direction we could take in rebalancing it.

Personally, I think Shield is a strong spell for 1st level, likely one you'd want to keep in your list of prepared spells for most of your career, but not gamebreaking.

My problem isn't necessarily that it's strong as a level 1 spell - it might be worthwhile not to cast it in order to cast something like Chromatic Orb at low levels, for instance - but that later levels, most other level 1 spells dramatically lose their value. You'll stop using Sleep or Chromatic Orb or other high-class level 1 spells. Concentration increases in value, and even spells like Disguise Self lose their value when you're at risk of running into a single creature with Truesight or a high intelligence.
Shield is unbalanced because:

It's cheap.
It scales beyond that of other level 1 spells.
It doesn't interfere with your high level playstyles (when many spells do).



That's why I feel that Shield needs rebalanced. It is valid at level 1, level 10, and even level 20. Maybe not every turn, but almost every combat. What other level 1 spell can do that? My goal was to make Shield fall into the same category. Not necessarily "bad", but not "always good".

My original strategy was focusing on the whole "multiattack" concept. Damage scales slightly per level when it comes to attacks, but not as much as shear quantity. Damage resistance always scales (50% damage is as effective at level 1 as it is at level 20), which is why I felt the revision was fine, but the majority have spoken, and it's far too bad as a level 1 spell.

Then, as new revisions:


Revision 2a: Immunity to one attack. - vulnerable to Multiattack, meaning that it'd start losing value around character level 5, similar to other level 1 spells. A niche solution, but useful for maintaining Concentration when someone catches you by surprise.




Revision 2b: Resistance to all attack damage until the start of your next turn. - means that Concentration saving throws are less protected, but it does have more longevity than the original revision. This also covers the concern of making sure that the caster is an unlikable target until he is able to change his threatened position.


Which is better?

[Hail Tempus]

I'll probably go back to the drawing board. My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15. Why do you consider it to be a bad thing that level 1 spells remain useful at 15th level and higher?

Off the top of my head, Absorb Elements, Shield, Magic Missile, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Healing Word, Hex, Hunter's Mark, and Goodberry are all 1st level spells that remain useful from levels 1-20.

And Shield becomes less useful at higher levels, given that the monster's to-hit bonuses increase as their CRs go up. It's great against a group of goblins, but not so great against something like a Fire Giant that's rolling a +11 to hit twice per turn.

[JNAProductions]

I think your trying to fix something that needs no fixing.

I gotta agree with this. The only time shield potentially becomes problematic is at level 18+ when a Wizard gets it at-will, but EVEN THEN it's hard to cause problems, since Wizards get 5 ASIs. Assuming they start with a 16 in Dex and int, at level 19 they can have 20s in both (at the cost of having a mere 14 at most in Con) along with Warcaster or Resilient (Con) giving them an AC of 23 (with Mage Armor). Brutal against Goblins and Guards, not so much against demons and devils.

[Man_Over_Game]

Why do you consider it to be a bad thing that level 1 spells remain useful at 15th level and higher?

Off the top of my head, Absorb Elements, Shield, Magic Missile, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Healing Word, Hex, Hunter's Mark, and Goodberry are all 1st level spells that remain useful from levels 1-20.

And Shield becomes less useful at higher levels, given that the monster's to-hit bonuses increase as their CRs go up. It's great against a group of goblins, but not so great against something like a Fire Giant that's rolling a +11 to hit twice per turn.

Many of the spells listed do have some value at later levels, but they lose a lot of the staying power they once had. Magic Missile is good at finishing people off, but so is any other AoE. Tasha's Hideous Laughter is easily replaced with Hold Person, Hypnotic Pattern, or literally any Concentration Control spell that you'd rather be casting. Healing Word no longer is a real "healing spell", but more of a better version of "Spare the Dying", and Goodberry can help you not need food, when such a thing is rarely a concern for high level players.

And while high CR creatures do become more abundant as you level up, you are not JUST fighting high CR creatures. You're supposed to be fighting the same things you always have, in larger quantities. You don't stop fighting Kobolds just because you're level 15. You just happen to be fighting MORE kobolds, AND their Dragon.

If Shield is fine...does that mean that most other low level spells are just bad at high levels? If Shield SHOULD be useable to level 15, should we be finding ways to make all of the other level 1 spells just as viable, including damage specific spells like Chromatic Orb?

[JNAProductions]

Many of the spells listed do have some value at later levels, but they lose a lot of the staying power they once had. Magic Missile is good at finishing people off, but so is any other AoE. Tasha's Hideous Laughter is easily replaced with Hold Person, Hypnotic Pattern, or literally any Concentration Control spell that you'd rather be casting. Healing Word no longer is a real "healing spell", but more of a better version of "Spare the Dying", and Goodberry can help you not need food, when such a thing is rarely a concern for high level players.

And while high CR creatures do become more abundant as you level up, you are not JUST fighting high CR creatures. You're supposed to be fighting the same things you always have, in larger quantities. You don't stop fighting Kobolds just because you're level 15. You just happen to be fighting MORE kobolds, AND their Dragon.

If Shield is fine...does that mean that most other low level spells are just bad at high levels? If Shield SHOULD be useable to level 15, should we be finding ways to make all of the other level 1 spells just as viable?

Direct damage? No. If direct damage spells scaled with upcasting just as well as their higher level variants, it'd make the higher level ones pointless, by and large.

Utility/buffing/defense? Sure, why not? Bless works great from a level 1 or 2 slot (just enough to cover the whole party), Absorb Elements stays useful and probably GROWS in use as more enemies get elemental attacks, and so on.

Moreover, even with a 20 in Dex, Mage Armor, and Shield, you're rocking an AC of 23. Your average Goblin still hits 10% of the time with their +4 to-hit. It's an uphill fight for them, but it's not unwinnable (until the Wizard drops a Fireball, that is :P). And besides the numbers, lower-level enemies SHOULD feel weaker. They're not unusable, but they're not as effective as they once were.

As for more numbers... The earliest a Wizard gets AC 23 is level 8, assuming they didn't bother pumping Int. They spend one 1st level slot on Mage Armor, leaving them with 3 1sts, 3 2nds, 3 3rds, and 2 4ths. That is a maximum of 11 rounds of Shield, assuming they blow EVERY SINGLE SLOT on it.

[DrLoveMonkey]

I find it’s much more an issue with the Eldritch Knight actually. The one time I’ve seen shield overused and went “okay that’s a bit much.” Is when the heavy armoured, shield wielding, defence Knight was using half his spell slots to ensure he had well over 20 AC pretty well constantly. Certainly whenever attacks were directed at him.

As Wizards go I’d say the spell starts out pretty useful, and is almost required, but as the spell slot progression happens level 1-2 spell slots become totally trivial. Between the two you’ve got seven uses and unless your wizard is being attacked every single round of combat that’s enough to cover a whole day. Make it six uses and throw on mage armor and you’ve got a pretty consistent 20+ AC, which is probably more than anyone else besides the fighter. Then again it’s also super cool and fun, and I’m not sure that it’s broken in balance. Absorb Elements is the same way, and as noted perhaps even better. Nothing like saving against a red dragon’s fire breath and taking a pathetic 15 from the rolled 60.

[Frozenstep]

My problem isn't necessarily that it's strong as a level 1 spell - it might be worthwhile not to cast it in order to cast something like Chromatic Orb at low levels, for instance - but that later levels, most other level 1 spells dramatically lose their value. You'll stop using Sleep or Chromatic Orb or other high-class level 1 spells. Concentration increases in value, and even spells like Disguise Self lose their value when you're at risk of running into a single creature with Truesight or a high intelligence.


I really think this isn't a huge problem. Casters (as well as everyone else) are supposed to feel stronger at higher levels. Being able to use shield more freely is part of that. You can also more freely use other spells that still hold value like protection from good and evil, command, and tasha's hideous laughter (guess what? It's still useful because it still works on things immune to charm. Guess what immunity shows up a lot at higher level?). What's the problem?



Shield is unbalanced because:

It scales beyond that of other level 1 spells.



Look, it holds value, but it doesn't become more insane as time goes on. Are you really still going to be fighting stuff that has +3 to hit at level 15? Even mobs and swarms should be rocking serious hit bonuses once you get to that point, and you'll need to invest a lot into AC to even give big monsters a sizable chance at missing you. It's not going to make you nearly untouchable like it did at level 1. And again, it only helps with one aspect of defending yourself, and the higher level you get the more you'll find enemies that target other forms of defense.



That's why I feel that Shield needs rebalanced. It is valid at level 1, level 10, and even level 20. Maybe not every turn, but almost every combat. What other level 1 spell can do that? My goal was to make Shield fall into the same category. Not necessarily "bad", but not "always good".


I think it's better to look at the spell in context with how its used and impacts the game balance. Are you seeing casters feeling invincible because of a shield spell? Are they going up to enemies, confident in their shield spell to protect them? Is their AC really that high (and if so, is it because of the magic items you've given out, or some multiclass mess?).


And while high CR creatures do become more abundant as you level up, you are not JUST fighting high CR creatures. You're supposed to be fighting the same things you always have, in larger quantities. You don't stop fighting Kobolds just because you're level 15. You just happen to be fighting MORE kobolds, AND their Dragon.

The kobolds grapple you and knock you down (with enough of them, you're bound to fail). The dragon walks over and crits you because of the advantage. Or the kobolds force you to shield, and the dragon takes the hint and turns around with hits you with a breath while you can't absorb elements. Or if there's enough of them, the kobolds just make use of pack tactics and ranged attacks to land dozens of crits.

Look, I get you really like the idea behind bounded accuracy, but there's a limit to what it can and should do. At some point players become powerful, to the point where it's better for the swarm-type enemies to be composed of tougher enemies, or else a circle of death is just going to wipe them out.

[Hail Tempus]

Many of the spells listed do have some value at later levels, but they lose a lot of the staying power they once had. Magic Missile is good at finishing people off, but so is any other AoE. Tasha's Hideous Laughter is easily replaced with Hold Person, Hypnotic Pattern, or literally any Concentration Control spell that you'd rather be casting. Healing Word no longer is a real "healing spell", but more of a better version of "Spare the Dying", and Goodberry can help you not need food, when such a thing is rarely a concern for high level players. So, they're the same as Shield in that regard. They're still useful at level 15, but they're not as useful as they were at level 1.


And while high CR creatures do become more abundant as you level up, you are not JUST fighting high CR creatures. You're supposed to be fighting the same things you always have, in larger quantities. You don't stop fighting Kobolds just because you're level 15. You just happen to be fighting MORE kobolds, AND their Dragon. I suppose in theory, a DM could throw a horde of kobolds at 15th level characters as part of an encounter, but that's pretty dull. At 15th level, even 20 kobolds barely make a dent in a fight against your average 4 player party (even in a fight where they're just minions).

How many DMs really keep using the same monsters at level 15 that they do at level 1?


If Shield is fine...does that mean that most other low level spells are just bad at high levels? If Shield SHOULD be useable to level 15, should we be finding ways to make all of the other level 1 spells just as viable, including damage specific spells like Chromatic Orb? All level 1 spells keep doing the same thing at level 20 that they were doing at level 1. Sure, higher level spells are more effective, but they have fewer uses per day. Chromatic Orb remains useful at higher levels because monsters are more commonly resistant to certain types of damage at that point, and Chromatic Orb gives you flexibility when it comes to damage type.

[Man_Over_Game]

So, they're the same as Shield in that regard. They're still useful at level 15, but they're not as useful as they were at level 1.

I suppose in theory, a DM could throw a horde of kobolds at 15th level characters as part of an encounter, but that's pretty dull. At 15th level, even 20 kobolds barely make a dent in a fight against your average 4 player party (even in a fight where they're just minions).

How many DMs really keep using the same monsters at level 15 that they do at level 1?

All level 1 spells keep doing the same thing at level 20 that they were doing at level 1. Sure, higher level spells are more effective, but they have fewer uses per day. Chromatic Orb remains useful at higher levels because monsters are more commonly resistant to certain types of damage at that point, and Chromatic Orb gives you flexibility when it comes to damage type.

Kobolds are more of a level 10 example. But most CR 1 creatures have roughly the same hit chance as a CR 1/4 or CR 1/2.

I suppose there's the hypothetical that Chromatic Orb is useful at later levels, because of its versatility, but....who has actually seen that in play? 3d8 damage isn't bad, but most people would just still opt to cast something else. Even resisted, Chain Lightning would deal 5d8 to the resistant target, and deal 10d8 to 3 other creatures. A single action, dealing almost 10x the damage per round as a Chromatic Orb, and that's assuming the creature is resistant to Lightning damage.

Higher level illusion spells, damage spells, healing spells, buff spells, all trump the spells that you'd used to use at lower levels. But...what makes Shield redundant? The only thing I can think of that comes close is Counterspell.

[Hail Tempus]

Higher level illusion spells, damage spells, healing spells, buff spells, all trump the spells that you'd used to use at lower levels. But...what makes Shield redundant? The only thing I can think of that comes close is Counterspell. Even if some level 1 spells become redundant at higher levels, while Shield doesn't, why is your instinct to weaken Shield? Wouldn't the better option be to buff the underperforming level 1 spells?

[Man_Over_Game]

Even if some level 1 spells become redundant at higher levels, while Shield doesn't, why is your instinct to weaken Shield? Wouldn't the better option be to buff the underperforming level 1 spells?

The more mutations you add, the more you risk of really messing something up.

Ideally, modifying the 30 or so spells that need it to be perfect would be the best solution.

But realistically, modifying a single spell that everyone uses would be enough to diversify the spell selections.


Shield, in a way, is a lot like the Eldritch Bolt of level 1 spells. The difference is, only one build gets Eldritch Bolt.

[Haldir]

You've got 4 1st level slots, max. Anything more costs your big guns. That's 4 rounds/day, max. That's hardly all day. And the ones who get the biggest boost (potentially being unhittable except on a crit), namely EKs, get even fewer. So shield is not a problem unless you're running lots of single fight days. So don't do that.

And you should, ideally, be able to use the same spell from level 1 to level 20. You don't age out of low level spells in 5e.

Adding a hearty second to this. Shield is strong and a solid pick, but it's not exactly spammable and any spellslot is a high opportunity cost. You want spells that DO something, and this one definitely does.

[DrLoveMonkey]

Kobolds are more of a level 10 example. But most CR 1 creatures have roughly the same hit chance as a CR 1/4 or CR 1/2.

I suppose there's the hypothetical that Chromatic Orb is useful at later levels, because of its versatility, but....who has actually seen that in play? 3d8 damage isn't bad, but most people would just still opt to cast something else. Even resisted, Chain Lightning would deal 5d8 to the resistant target, and deal 10d8 to 3 other creatures. A single action, dealing almost 10x the damage per round as a Chromatic Orb, and that's assuming the creature is resistant to Lightning damage.

Higher level illusion spells, damage spells, healing spells, buff spells, all trump the spells that you'd used to use at lower levels. But...what makes Shield redundant? The only thing I can think of that comes close is Counterspell.

For what it’s worth I had my level 19 party fight an entire dungeon that was full of, mostly, zombies and skeletons. Admittedly raised by a powerful necromancer so they were buffed, but with 20-25 in a room they caused some resources to be spent. I think they killed maybe 80 of them in one night?

Shield isn’t really redundant, but some of the other ones aren’t really either. Like detect magic or absorb elements and stuff like that. Higher level wizards probably should not feel overly threatened by low CR monsters in small groups anyway. Fighters barbarians and rangers certainly don’t with their big ol’ hit point pools and AC. There’s just maybe a discrepancy where other classes without big HP or AC totals and no access to shield don’t feel similarly powerful in that they can block most damage from weak monsters.

[DrLoveMonkey]

Adding a hearty second to this. Shield is strong and a solid pick, but it's not exactly spammable and any spellslot is a high opportunity cost. You want spells that DO something, and this one definitely does.

I don’t personally see this at higher level. With the seven slots you get between first and second level spells, I’ve never seen a wizard run out of those, even after a gruelling twelve rooms full of monsters.

[OverLordOcelot]

If you don't want people to use the shield spell, I'd advise that you just take it out of the game instead of nerfing it into a trap choice. For a good ability to compare it to, a 6th level nature cleric gets the ability to burn their reaction to half the damage they or a nearby party member takes. And they can do this every round without spending a spell slot or using up a known spell.

[Rukelnikov]

snip

As written your version would have to be a Cantrip for me to take it, since early on I wouldn't spend a precious 1st lvl slot to halve damage from an attack unless danger of TPK is high, might as well bite it, wait for my party to win the encounter and still have slots for the following encounters. And at higher levels I'd rather save my reaction for Counterspell, I guess I'd use it at these levels if there are no enemy casters though.

I struggle to see your issue with the spell though, if your problem is people with already high AC getting it sky high, well... that's what gishes have been about since revised 2e at least.

If you wanna nerf if for those cases, but have it remain viable for poor squishy cloth Wizards, there are a couple things you could do:

Replaces your shield's bonus to AC if you have one, an EK or MC caster with a shield woulg effectively get +3 instead of +5, and less if the shield is magical
Have the bonus be tied to Casting Stat, this nerf would affect EKs almost exclusively, and make it scale for others, so probably not what you want.
Your AC becomes 18+Dex (or X+Dex), clunky and unelegant IMO

[Man_Over_Game]

I don’t personally see this at higher level. With the seven slots you get between first and second level spells, I’ve never seen a wizard run out of those, even after a gruelling twelve rooms full of monsters.

This is my experience, too.

I guess, taking it from another direction. Say you're a level 7 caster Sorcerer or Wizard. Pretty basic scenario.

What level 1 spells do you take, and which ones will you regularly use?

[Hail Tempus]

The more mutations you add, the more you risk of really messing something up.

Ideally, modifying the 30 or so spells that need it to be perfect would be the best solution.

But realistically, modifying a single spell that everyone uses would be enough to diversify the spell selections.


Shield, in a way, is a lot like the Eldritch Bolt of level 1 spells. The difference is, only one build gets Eldritch Bolt. I'm just not following your reasoning. It seems to come down to "this spell works as designed, and everyone likes it, so I'm going to break it."

[Rukelnikov]

This is my experience, too.

I guess, taking it from another direction. Say you're a level 7 caster Sorcerer or Wizard. Pretty basic scenario.

What level 1 spells do you take, and which ones will you regularly use?

Depends on build etc, but Shield will certainly be there, as well as Find Familiar.

I don't see why that's a problem though, as almost every Ranger will get Hunter's Mark, almost every Lock will get EB and Hex, and almost every Bard will get Vicious Mockery and Healing Word.

[Zhorn]

MOG, buddy. I love reading your stuff, and you've a had a few great ideas I've tucked away for later use at my table... but this is not one of them :smallconfused:

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm just not following your reasoning. It seems to come down to "this spell works as designed, and everyone likes it, so I'm going to break it."

I'm a big fan of balance. In this case, Shield compared to most other level 1 spells, after Tier 1, has a pretty big disparity. Shield is effectively an autopick. People like it, because it's good. People don't like other spells, because they're not good when Shield is an option.

Similarly, the Four Elements Monk wouldn't appear so bad if it wasn't compared to the Open Hand or Shadow options. Thief Rogue wouldn't look so bad if there wasn't an Arcane Trickster.

I bet if Paladins never had Divine Smite, you'd see a lot more Paladin Spells being cast to add a lot more diversity.


"Good" doesn't always mean "good for the game". But while I do agree that buffing the other 30 forgettable level 1 spells would be a good solution, I don't think that's feasible.


MOG, buddy. I love reading your stuff, and you've a had a few great ideas I've tucked away for later use at my table... but this is not one of them :smallconfused:

You're probably right. But the specifics of the spell/revision are much less important than the discussion, I think.

I think it's a problem that my level 8 Wizard really only has about 3 level 1 spells that he can really consider.

Some people say "Well, shouldn't we have something to cast at that level?", but I say "is Fog Cloud really that bad of a spell?"

No, it's not. It's bad when compared to Shield.

[Frozenstep]

This is my experience, too.

I guess, taking it from another direction. Say you're a level 7 caster Sorcerer or Wizard. Pretty basic scenario.

What level 1 spells do you take, and which ones will you regularly use?

Protection from good and evil, because if a ghost possess the barbarian we're going to be in trouble, and all the other kinds of protection it provides adds up to be very useful even if it is concentration.

Grease, so that when I'm concentrating on something else, I can still give my teammates advantage.

Mage armor, because I don't have +1 studded leather.

Magic missile, so that I can finish off something that's low hp but high AC.

Featherfall, because too many flying things can grapple me and fly me up.

Absorb elements, because of course.

And of course shield.

Look man, if you really, really want to nerf shield, just have it give 5d8 temp hp or something that goes away after a round. Still protects your concentration, still keeps low level casters alive, scales down even harder because plenty of enemies can still damage you through that amount of hp within a single attack.

I get it, shield is an auto-pick, and in a game with lots of choices, having an auto-pick looks like bad design. But I'd rather have one instance of bad design existing if it makes the overall game more balanced and feel better.

[Hail Tempus]

This is my experience, too.

I guess, taking it from another direction. Say you're a level 7 caster Sorcerer or Wizard. Pretty basic scenario.

What level 1 spells do you take, and which ones will you regularly use? As a Wizard, I'd probably have the following 8 first level spells:

Sleep
*Magic Missile
*Tasha's Hideous Laughter
*Absorb Elements
Detect Magic
Find Familiar
*Mage Armor
*Shield

At 7th level, I'd typically prepare the ones with an asterix next to its name.

[Rukelnikov]

I'm a big fan of balance. In this case, Shield compared to most other level 1 spells, after Tier 1, has a pretty big disparity. Shield is effectively an autopick. People like it, because it's good. People don't like other spells, because they're not good.

Similarly, the Four Elements Monk wouldn't appear so bad if it was compared to the Open Hand or Shadow options. Thief Rogue wouldn't look so bad if there wasn't an Arcane Trickster.

I bet if Paladins never had Divine Smite, you'd see a lot more Paladin Spells being cast to add a lot more diversity.

But that's the thing, those things you listed are the "Its so good, it ceases to be an option", like Hexblade dipping, like EB, like Sharpshooter. Those are things that effectively REDUCE the amount of content by making a lot of the other options see much less play. However, IDT that's the case with Shield, since you will not be spending your action on it, and few of those that get shield have many other reactions. The only stuff Shield can be competing for is Spells Known, but a Wiz doesn't have a limit and 1st lvl spells are very cheap, and in the case of Sorcerers its hard to argue that them having 1 less known spell because they had to pick shield means the spell in quiestion is killing the rest of the 1st lvl spells.

[MaxWilson]

All level 1 spells keep doing the same thing at level 20 that they were doing at level 1. Sure, higher level spells are more effective, but they have fewer uses per day. Chromatic Orb remains useful at higher levels because monsters are more commonly resistant to certain types of damage at that point, and Chromatic Orb gives you flexibility when it comes to damage type.

Agreeing with your basic point but expanding:

There are a few low-level spells which get even better over time due to class features coming online (Disguise Self/Malleable Illusions for example), and others which become more relevant due to the monsters they target becoming more common (Protection From Evil is almost useless until you start fighting Efreeti/Vampires/Baatezu/etc.), and others which are good from the get-go and stay good (Tasha's, Expeditious Retreat, Faerie Fire, Goodberry, Shield, Absorb Elements, Command, Wrathful Smite).

All of that being said, if it turns out that in Man_Over_Game's games, Shield is overpowered for one reason or another (e.g. short adventuring days where concentration, not spell slots, is the limiting resource, so good low-level concentration spells like Wrathful Smite and Faerie Fire never get used), then I suppose there's nothing wrong conceptually with adjusting various spells including Shield to match your campaign style. I expect that you'll probably also want to adjust the other good non-concentration spells like Command, Blindness/Deafness, Longstrider, Goodberry, Dissonant Whispers, Grease, Sanctuary, Mage Armor, Find Familiar, and maybe even Unseen Servant to make them less useful as well, otherwise players may start using their spell slots on those spells instead of Revised Shield.


I guess, taking it from another direction. Say you're a level 7 caster Sorcerer or Wizard. Pretty basic scenario.

What level 1 spells do you take, and which ones will you regularly use?

It's always a tough call because there's so much pressure on spells known/prepared, but if I look back at past characters, Find Familiar, Absorb Elements, Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, and Shield are always high on my wish list, and Longstrider, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, and Disguise Self are only slightly less attractive. In reality I can probably only afford to prepare three or four first-level spells at most, and fortunately Find Familiar is a ritual and so is Unseen Servant, so it would probably work out as Absorb Elements, Expeditious Retreat, Mage Armor, and Shield, possibly dropping Mage Armor if there are no Moon Druids in the party and I already have heavy armor proficiency from somewhere. If I could only pick one first level spell I'd go for Expeditious Retreat over Shield, because (1) staying alive is good, (2) casting Shield is tempting from a RP perspective but often not the most efficient use of spell points anyway. In coldly rational terms, Shielding to prevent 7 or 8 HP of damage is often worse than just eating the damage and healing it afterward with somebody's pre-cast Goodberries or with Healing Spirit/Aura of Vitality/short rest healing. Shielding is more worthwhile as insurance in case things go horribly wrong, and in some cases it could turn hundreds of expected HP of damage from goblin arrows or whatnot into mere dozens of HP of damage, but if I don't have Shield available then I should just avoid getting into those situations in the first place. It's not like fighting a literal horde of hundreds of goblins is common under most DMs, even though it's perfectly kosher by DMG rules and almost kosher even by Xanathar's rules.

[Man_Over_Game]

But that's the thing, those things you listed are the "Its so good, it ceases to be an option", like Hexblade dipping, like EB, like Sharpshooter. Those are things that effectively REDUCE the amount of content by making a lot of the other options see much less play. However, IDT that's the case with Shield, since you will not be spending your action on it, and few of those that get shield have many other reactions. The only stuff Shield can be competing for is Spells Known, but a Wiz doesn't have a limit and 1st lvl spells are very cheap, and in the case of Sorcerers its hard to argue that them having 1 less known spell because they had to pick shield means the spell in quiestion is killing the rest of the 1st lvl spells.

That....is actually something I haven't really thought about.

Shield IS better than most level 1 spells, but that doesn't matter....because it doesn't really make you have to choose between them. You have to choose between casting Tasha's Hideous Laughter and Hold Person, but you don't have to choose between Shield and Hold Person or Shield and Hideous Laughter.

Shield is really only an autopick because of the lack of competition of Reaction-based spells that make one another redundant. If there was a reliable level 4 Reaction spell that solved the same problems as Shield and more, Shield wouldn't be considered.

A part of me still feels pretty bad about it, as I still feel like it's picked much more often than almost every other level 1 spell, but it doesn't necessarily prevent people from casting those spells. Unless you're limited on spells learned.

Hmm....on that last note, it does seem like the only thing that wouldn't have that problem are Wizards (so EKs, ATs, and Sorcerers all have a problem of Shield being too good of a choice), but it's definitely given me a lot more to think about. Thanks, Rukelnikov!

[PhoenixPhyre]

Hmm....on that last note, it does seem like the only thing that wouldn't have that problem are Wizards (so EKs, ATs, and Sorcerers all have a problem of Shield being too good of a choice), but it's definitely given me a lot more to think about. Thanks, Rukelnikov!

EKs are the prime candidates for shield. It's their bread and butter. Almost spec-defining. Don't take it away from them.

AT would have to burn a precious any-school choice. I doubt many do.

Sorcerers don't have enough spells-known to bother, unless they plan to be in melee heavily.

So it's a non-issue.

[Man_Over_Game]

Sorcerers don't have enough spells-known to bother, unless they plan to be in melee heavily.

On the contrary, I don't see many other options for their level 1 slots. Converting them into points probably isn't very efficient, and casting most other spells will get in the way of the Sorcerer's damage synergies (like with Draconic/Storm) or their enhancements (Divine Sorcerer/Wild Magic).
For example, you could Twin Tasha's for good value, but shouldn't you just Twin Hold Person?

[Frozenstep]

On the contrary, I don't see many other options for their level 1 slots. Converting them into points probably isn't very efficient, and casting most other spells will get in the way of the Sorcerer's damage synergies (like with Draconic/Storm) or their enhancements (Divine Sorcerer/Wild Magic).
For example, you could Twin Tasha's for good value, but shouldn't you just Twin Hold Person?

But hold person only works on humanoids, and there is stuff that's immune or paralyze on top of that.

Plus the roleplaying! See someone proposing to someone else?

"Will you marry me?" -person a

>subtle tasha's hideous laughter<

"AHAHAHAHAHA" -person b, silently screaming inside because they wanted to say yes.

[PhoenixPhyre]

On the contrary, I don't see many other options for their level 1 slots. Converting them into points probably isn't very efficient, and casting most other spells will get in the way of the Sorcerer's damage synergies (like with Draconic/Storm) or their enhancements (Divine Sorcerer/Wild Magic).
For example, you could Twin Tasha's for good value, but shouldn't you just Twin Hold Person?

Depends on the sorcerer. Converting them (especially between fights) for points is probably more efficient than taking one of your precious 15 for something you rarely use.

Honestly, I see shield used very little except by EK. For most people, it either isn't needed (the enemy missed) or won't help (they were hit by more than 5).

[Man_Over_Game]

But hold person only works on humanoids, and there is stuff that's immune or paralyze on top of that.

Hideous Laughter: " A creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less isn't affected. "

There's a lot of overlap between not being "humanoid" and "creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less". Not always, but you're not going to be afflicting something like a Bulette with Hideous Laughter. Most enemies you face are either Humanoid or dumb.

[Great Dragon]

While I can understand why you're unhappy with Shield, remember that Spellcasters getting high AC at 1st level isn't easy.

With Standard Array (elite stats) and even Point Buy, it's impossible. Even getting a +2 Dex Race only gives 17.

Rolling stats, gives a very low chance of getting an 18. Most rolls end Averaging around 12-14.

As for Multiclassing, I don't allow a shield and the Shield spell bonuses to "stack". (+7 to +10 to AC was just ridiculous to me) Which means that Shield only gives a +3 bonus to AC over a base shield. And is never more than equal to a +3 shield.


Why not disadvantages on attack rolls against you until the start of your next turn?
This might be a solution. It's balanced in that while it makes the caster harder to hit, it's not so drastic that intelligent foes won't still target the caster. It does really cut down on the chance for a Critical as well.


Revision 2b I see this as a better option for what you had in mind for your change. True, pure AC makes it less likely to be hit in the first place, but being able to be surrounded and still be standing the next round might be ok.
Especially for the EK.

But for Sorcerers/Wizards, that's not really much help. Either from multiple foes, or Multi-attacking Creatures, the odds of survival from reduced damage might be very low.

@Frozenstep:
I really liked the Kobolds plus Dragon scene.

[Haldir]

I don’t personally see this at higher level. With the seven slots you get between first and second level spells, I’ve never seen a wizard run out of those, even after a gruelling twelve rooms full of monsters.

So, that's 7 attacks in a whole adventuring day that we can possibly negate. 7 among potentially hundreds that you might experience coming at you. And you get no other 1st or 2nd level spells? As a level 20 Wizard?

That is not at all too powerful or gamebreaking. Maybe your 20th level party was not appropriately challenged?

[Man_Over_Game]

I think it's better to look at the spell in context with how its used and impacts the game balance. Are you seeing casters feeling invincible because of a shield spell? Are they going up to enemies, confident in their shield spell to protect them? Is their AC really that high (and if so, is it because of the magic items you've given out, or some multiclass mess?).

I must have missed this when the new page rolled in. It's a good point, because I don't really consider mages using Shield to really be too terribly strong. It's good for those that already have AC (EKs), but it's not that gamebreaking.

But "balance" has more than one definition. I want to focus on Shield compared to comparable spells of equal level, because that's the problem I'm trying to fix.

And the answer is likely that there's no way of "fixing" the problem without making things worse, but it's still something that needs more attention.


So, that's 7 attacks in a whole adventuring day that we can possibly negate. 7 among potentially hundreds that you might experience coming at you. And you get no other 1st or 2nd level spells? As a level 20 Wizard?

Erm...hundreds?

I'm not sure about anyone else, but....uh...I've never seen attacks be calculated in the hundreds. Or hundred. Or dozens. From my experiences, a Wizard gets attacked like maybe 3-4x per fight.

[Dork_Forge]

This... isn't really an issue, Shield is a spell primarily used by Sorcerer's and Wizards. Both are classes with no default armor proficiency and a d6 hit die, arguably the d6 is to balance the amount of magical defenses available to them (there's no other reasons for a HP nerf compared to other caster's that I can see). Otherwise Shield isn't breaking the game and it costs a limited resource in order to use, as for other 1st level spells that remain useful at high level: absorb elements, detect magic, feather fall, find familiar, identify, Tasha's hideous laughter, mage armor and that's just from the Wizard list. The spell doesn't really need any tweaking and there's plenty of competitive 1st level spells for higher tier use, but I've always seen it as this: When you're low level you mostly use cantrips and save spells for when they count because of limited resources. As you level up you save higher level slots for bosses and more clutch moments and burn through lower slots more readily for defenses (mage armor, mirror image, blink) and attacks for less threatening encounters.

[Frozenstep]

Hideous Laughter: " A creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less isn't affected. "

There's a lot of overlap between not being "humanoid" and "creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less". Not always, but you're not going to be afflicting something like a Bulette with Hideous Laughter. Most enemies you face are either Humanoid or dumb.

Dragons, ogres, hags, mummies, yetis, lots of devils and demons, giants (even hill giants are 5 int), trolls, mind flayers, elementals, vampires, liches, a lot of celestials, a lot of constructs...

[Man_Over_Game]

Dragons, ogres, hags, mummies, yetis, lots of devils and demons, giants (even hill giants are 5 int), trolls, mind flayers, elementals, vampires, liches, a lot of celestials, a lot of constructs...
That's true, but that's why I said "most". I generally fight a lot more humans than I do giants or demons.

A lot of those creatures have their own weaknesses to other magic (Demons, celestial, fey, undead), so even if you can't cast Hold Person, someone might have something that's even better.

Shatter, Hold Person, and someone with Turn Undead/radiant damage would have a lot of "niche" abilities that would cover almost all of the bases. Coincidentally, Shatter and Radiant damage/Turn undead are very common abilities in a party.

[Great Dragon]

@MoG: would giving the Shield spell a lower AC (say +2) for a 1st level slot, and have it scale for higher spell slots (+1/level) be better?

[Frozenstep]

I must have missed this when the new page rolled in. It's a good point, because I don't really consider mages using Shield to really be too terribly strong. It's good for those that already have AC (EKs), but it's not that gamebreaking.

But "balance" has more than one definition. I want to focus on Shield compared to comparable spells of equal level, because that's the problem I'm trying to fix.

And the answer is likely that there's no way of "fixing" the problem without making things worse, but it's still something that needs more attention.

I feel like shield is one of those things that isn't super elegant, but it's probably a small symptom of the system that it came from. Yes, you're not going to see chromatic bolt at high levels, because at that point the cost isn't the spell slot, the cost is your action which could have been used for something better. What are we going for here?

Should A: 1st level spells all be useful at high level?
Or B: should they be weak so you aren't using any of them at a high level?

The system didn't commit to either one, so you have things like shield and absorb element that stick around when other options don't. I think the thing is your solutions lean closer to B, but a lot of people want A because it's always disappointing to see options taken away as you progress rather then being added to or made stronger.

The attention should be on how the overall system could be better. Make it more like warlock casting, with fewer slots, but those slots grow stronger as time goes on. Have most things upcast really well. That way shield competes with other things instead of it being possible to devote all of your 1st and 2nd level spell slots to it.

[Man_Over_Game]

@MoG: would giving the Shield spell a lower AC (say +2) for a 1st level slot, and have it scale for higher spell slots (+1/level) be better?

Probably not.

+2 bonus isn't enough for anyone to consider.

At low levels, you're already making tough choices trying to determine which spells to prepare vs. which ones to cast, and +2 to AC just wouldn't make the cut compared to something like Burning Hands (likely the only AoE effect in your party).

When levels are gained, all the level 1 spells you prepared originally (Burning Hands, Sleep) start to get replaced, because either:

The utility is no longer worth its value (Fog Cloud vs. Concentration control spells)
The numbers it provides are no longer competitive (Burning Hands vs. Fireball)


Spending a high level slot for a high powered Shield does mean that a high leveled character might pack Shield just to block an attack that barely hit him, but....then Shield isn't really considered a level 1 spell at that point. Now it's being weighed against other level 4 spells you could cast instead, in order to block a pretty powerful attack. Rarely will that +2 make a difference.


I guess it does kind of do what I was looking to do, by causing people to take more of an interest in other level 1 spells in the later levels, but I'm not sure if making Shield more expensive is a solid solution.

I want it to still be good at low levels, because ALL level 1 spells should be good at low levels. My problem is that Shield stays competitive, when many others do not.

[Man_Over_Game]

I feel like shield is one of those things that isn't super elegant, but it's probably a small symptom of the system that it came from. Yes, you're not going to see chromatic bolt at high levels, because at that point the cost isn't the spell slot, the cost is your action which could have been used for something better. What are we going for here?

Should A: 1st level spells all be useful at high level?
Or B: should they be weak so you aren't using any of them at a high level?

The system didn't commit to either one, so you have things like shield and absorb element that stick around when other options don't. I think the thing is your solutions lean closer to B, but a lot of people want A because it's always disappointing to see options taken away as you progress rather then being added to or made stronger.

The attention should be on how the overall system could be better. Make it more like warlock casting, with fewer slots, but those slots grow stronger as time goes on. Have most things upcast really well. That way shield competes with other things instead of it being possible to devote all of your 1st and 2nd level spell slots to it.

That's an elegant way of putting it. I think that the system already caters to B in most scenarios (What's Misty Step compared to Dimension Door, Far Step or Thunder Step, other than "cheaper"?), it's just that spells like Shield and Absorb Elements break that consistency. Absorb Elements less so, because elemental damage is less consistent, it forces the caster to still make a Concentration Check, and the damage does not scale well (especially for ranged casters).

+5 to AC is always a big deal. So much so that +3 armor is considered legendary endgame equipment.

[MaxWilson]

I want it to still be good at low levels, because ALL level 1 spells should be good at low levels. My problem is that Shield stays competitive, when many others do not.

Use bigger encounters and longer adventuring days. From what you've said, the main reason you don't see spells like Tasha's in play is that concentration is your PCs' limiting factor, not spell slots. There are some really cheap and effective first level spells available (Command: Flee! can take a melee enemy out of play for two whole rounds), and if PCs aren't using them it's because they are too busy casting even better and more expensive spells.

If you want first-level spells to matter, make high-level spells more scarce, relative to the adventure length. Turn up the difficulty.


(What's Misty Step compared to Dimension Door, Far Step or Thunder Step, other than "cheaper"?)

Cheaper in spell slots AND action economy, just like Shield, which is why they're both popular. You can Misty Step out of a grapple and still attack.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Use bigger encounters and longer adventuring days. From what you've said, the main reason you don't see spells like Tasha's in play is that concentration is your PCs' limiting factor, not spell slots. There are some really cheap and effective first level spells available (Command: Flee! can take a melee enemy out of play for two whole rounds), and if PCs aren't using them it's because they are too busy casting even better and more expensive spells.


This is key to 90% of all "balance problems" people have. Options were costed based on a full adventuring day (or at least a balanced one) against mass encounters (~1-2 enemies per PC), not single-encounter days against 1 or 2 enemies.

[LudicSavant]

(What's Misty Step compared to Dimension Door, Far Step or Thunder Step, other than "cheaper"?)

A non-Concentration bonus action.

[Vogie]

I don't think it needs to be fixed.

I'd love to buff some other 1st level spells, and upgrade some of the largely unused cantrips, but Shield isn't either of them. It's... fine. Universally. It also doesn't have much competition, as casters have very few things to do with reactions anyway.

Unless you're playing some sort of annoying SorLock Hybrid, you can't keep doing it. All full casters only have 4 1st level spell slots before they start eating into the slots with real power.

If you have a player that's successfully doing that... you need to make better encounters. Either with more styles of attack, or longer battles, antimagic tactics... something to make it more useful.

I'd be okay with buffing Blade Ward to also be cast as a reaction if they expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher starting at level 5 on.

[stoutstien]

@MoG: would giving the Shield spell a lower AC (say +2) for a 1st level slot, and have it scale for higher spell slots (+1/level) be better?

Could just do AC = to Prof bonus. Clunky but close to what MoG is looking for. Maybe add additional effects with upcasting like a mini ward to eat some damage if they do beat AC

[Keravath]

The more mutations you add, the more you risk of really messing something up.

Ideally, modifying the 30 or so spells that need it to be perfect would be the best solution.

But realistically, modifying a single spell that everyone uses would be enough to diversify the spell selections.


Shield, in a way, is a lot like the Eldritch Bolt of level 1 spells. The difference is, only one build gets Eldritch Bolt.

The difference with shield is that it is purely defensive. Almost all of the other spells mentioned as becoming less useful are offensive. Shield lets a character have a better defense for a round at the cost of a spell slot. Given that spell slots are a limited resource, especially if you play with the "standard" adventuring day with several encounters between long rests, and you actually want to cast other spells, shield will always have a significant opportunity cost. It also uses your reaction which is also a significant cost at higher levels.

Eldritch blast on the other hand, scales like all the other attack cantrips. It is strong because it can be split among several targets and an invocation lets you add the casting stat to each bolt and it does a rarely resisted type of damage. That is all.

Basically, at least in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with a character expending a resource to make themselves more difficult to hit for a round. It isn't overpowered, it isn't a problem, its even balanced. It is a defensive tactic and defensive tactics won't win encounters in the long run though they might help keep you alive which is ALL shield does. It helps keep a player alive a little longer. It doesn't make them immune to damage, it isn't a get out of jail free card.

As an example, I was playing a completely different game in which the target in this case was essentially vulnerable only to a critical hit which required rolling 2 on 2d6. Against this target there were 14 opponents, the odds are about 1/3 that a crit would be scored each turn.

Now lets look at D&D, if you are looking at a high CR creature with +10 to +15 to hit, then a creature with a 20AC that casts shield has a 25AC and gets hit anywhere from 25% to 50% of the time ANYWAY. Against a creature with a +6 this is STILL going to be hitting 10% of the time (1/2 will be crits). Against 10 creatures with a +6 to hit, someone is still likely to be hitting and that doesn't include spells and other effects. However, so what, it is defensive and uses a spell slot. They become harder to hit for a turn, opponents turn their attention to the easier to hit opponents or focus on this target with non-AC attacks.

Essentially, it is not an issue that shield remains useful unless you, for some reason, decide that all first level spells should be useless after a certain point ... why pick on shield? The only real criticism you seem to have is that it remains useful while other first level spells do not ... but shield is fully defensive while a lot of other first level spells (even absorb elements) aren't purely defensive.

[DrLoveMonkey]

Erm...hundreds?

I'm not sure about anyone else, but....uh...I've never seen attacks be calculated in the hundreds. Or hundred. Or dozens. From my experiences, a Wizard gets attacked like maybe 3-4x per fight.

With the wizard standing at the back my experience is like, 3-4 times per DAY even. And unless we’re ambushed or the enemies have archers or something very frequently it’s in the 0-1 range. Now, admittedly, some of those attacks might be breath weapons or powerful spells, so it’s not like the wizard is always at max hp, but I can only remember maybe one single day in-game where the wizard had a dozen attacks directed at him over the course, and it was a tier 4 character facing hordes of archers. Even then the fireballs meant that often they got off usually only a single volley before being turned to ash.

[Captain Panda]

Shield is unbalanced because:

It's cheap.
It scales beyond that of other level 1 spells.
It doesn't interfere with your high level playstyles (when many spells do).




That doesn't make it unbalanced, that just means that the function it has stays useful because it isn't competing with high level versions of itself in the same way chromatic orb and sleep are. You get better crowd control and single target damage spells as you level, but shield remains one of the only effective defenses. If you want to see shield get less use, make a new higher level version that is stronger and costs higher level slots.

Shield is not broken as it is now.

[Man_Over_Game]

Could just do AC = to Prof bonus. Clunky but close to what MoG is looking for. Maybe add additional effects with upcasting like a mini ward to eat some damage if they do beat AC

Not quite. If anything, that makes the problem more dramatic, making Shield more viable as a late game spell than it is as an early game spell.

Most level 1 spells are good at low levels, and bad at high levels. I'm trying to find a change that makes Shield follow that pattern.

[Frozenstep]

Not quite. If anything, that makes the problem more dramatic, making Shield more viable as a late game spell than it is as an early game spell.

Most level 1 spells are good at low levels, and bad at high levels. I'm trying to find a change that makes Shield follow that pattern.

If you just want a quick band-aid, I'll offer my solution again. Have it give temp hp that lasts until start/end of your next turn. Could either be a fixed amount or a dice roll amount. Maybe allow it to be upcast for more. Depending on how you rule it, still allows avoiding a concentration saving throw, and it's actually more effective at low levels because it can take the hurt out of a crit, but at high levels any decent enemy could probably tear through it in a single attack (unless you seriously upcast it).

Also leads to cool imagery of the wizard's shield cracking under the strain of a giant's club, only for the second one to shatter it and continue right into the wizard's face.

[Man_Over_Game]

If you just want a quick band-aid, I'll offer my solution again. Have it give temp hp that lasts until start/end of your next turn. Could either be a fixed amount or a dice roll amount. Maybe allow it to be upcast for more. Depending on how you rule it, still allows avoiding a concentration saving throw, and it's actually more effective at low levels because it can take the hurt out of a crit, but at high levels any decent enemy could probably tear through it in a single attack (unless you seriously upcast it).

Also leads to cool imagery of the wizard's shield cracking under the strain of a giant's club, only for the second one to shatter it and continue right into the wizard's face.

I did see it before, I just wasn't sure how I felt about it, considering it didn't do anything to prevent Concentration saving throws. Even Resistance to damage will cause you to have smaller Concentration checks.

Although, that could be the benefit of the Shield spell. Something like this:

When you are hit with an attack or would take Force damage, you can cast this spell to conjure a barrier to take the damage on your behalf. It absorbs up to 2d10 damage and it lasts until the start of your next turn. It only absorbs damage from attacks, but you have Immunity to Force damage while it is active.

The way that's written, it prevents you from having to make a Concentration saving throw if it blocks all of the damage, it provides a niche effect against Magic Missile (and other Force damage effects), and it loses potency at later levels (an average attack is about 9 or so damage, so this would block about 1-2 attacks).

[PhoenixPhyre]

Not quite. If anything, that makes the problem more dramatic, making Shield more viable as a late game spell than it is as an early game spell.

Most level 1 spells are good at low levels, and bad at high levels. I'm trying to find a change that makes Shield follow that pattern.

I don't think that's true. Here are the 1st level SRD Wizard spells. "Ehh means they weren't great then and still aren't".

Alarm -- ehh, ritual
Burning Hands -- hasn't been great since like level 2
Charm Person -- still just as useful
Color Spray -- ehh
Comprehend Languages -- still just as useful
Detect Magic -- still just as useful
Disguise Self -- still just as useful
Expeditious Retreat -- ehh
False Life -- not great at level 1, great when you can upcast it (as a warlock)
Feather Fall -- still just as useful
Find Familiar -- still just as useful
Floating Disk -- still just as useful
Fog Cloud -- still pretty darn good for what it does
Grease -- ehh
Hideous Laughter -- still good
Identify -- ehh
Illusory Script -- ehh
Jump -- ehh
Longstrider -- ehh
Mage Armor -- just as useful
Magic Missile - still good for popping low-health things or hard to hit things
Protection from Evil and Good -- still just as good
Shield -- just as good, diminishes slightly
Silent Image -- still just as good
Sleep -- fades rapidly
Thunderwave -- ok for positioning, but not really
Unseen Servant -- still just as good

Other than a couple that fade really rapidly (sleep), they're basically either very situational from level 1 or they're just as good at higher levels.

[Frozenstep]

I did see it before, I just wasn't sure how I felt about it, considering it didn't do anything to prevent Concentration saving throws. Even Resistance to damage will cause you to have smaller Concentration checks.

Although, that could be the benefit of the Shield spell. Something like this:

When you are hit with an attack or the Magic Missile spell, you can quickly put up a barrier to take the damage on your behalf. It absorbs up to 2d10 damage and it lasts until the start of your next turn. It only absorbs damage from attacks, but you have Immunity to Force damage while it is active.

Right, I forgot temp hp isn't arcane ward. But yes, the intent was to block the need for concentration checks unless the shield shatters and you take the overflow damage.

Biggest problem I can see is bladesinger's song of defense is too similar, then. Probably need to change that, maybe have it increase the amount of damage a shield blocks when bladesong is up.

[dragoeniex]

Most of these posts, to me, sound like shield is working as intended. Having some spells remain viable, easy-access options while others drop off lets casters get continued worth from their lower-level abilities. If all your first levels are worse than your character lv 12+ cantrips (4d8, 4d10, 4d12, etc) in combat, that would be odd. You need some "bread and butter" at lower levels.

Shield, Absorb Elements, Healing Word - like others have pointed out, all solid picks into the late game. Second level has Blindness/Deafness, Heat Metal, Hold Person, and some other nice controllers that are worth tossing between flashier spells. Third level has a big bunch of gifts like Fireball and Dispel Magic that are never going out of style. These might damage or inconvenience high-challenge monsters less, but so will Shield.

I'm playing in a long-term campaign with two full casters, a gish, and two martials. We've gone from lv 5 to 18 as of this past week, and there's been an increasing demand for that reaction slot. Counterspell, Absorb Elements, opportunity attacks and spells, class features, etc.

The group wizard regularly takes a hit instead of using Shield because he's eyeing an enemy caster. I'm the same with my bard. Shield is an important option that has saved characters, but it's still just that: an option.



As a side note. While I think Tasha's is a touch overrated by some, the Int qualifier doesn't have to lock you down to non-humanoids. While you've been mostly fighting humanoids in your game, the vast majority of enemies we've faced in the second half of ours have been other intelligent types. Humanoid fights have been once-in-a-blue-moon for a long time.

Likewise, there's been an increase in the number of creatures that go "That's a wonderful Shield spell, sir. Might I offer you a Gout of Flames to go with it?"

[Great Dragon]

Set the bonus to either your proficiency or spellcasting modifier?


Could just do AC = to Prof bonus. Clunky but close to what MoG is looking for. Maybe add additional effects with upcasting like a mini ward to eat some damage if they do beat AC

+Proficiency to AC.
Sure, it's ok at high level, but like MoG said, it's a poor choice at low levels.

I see a lot of complaints about these.
AC depending on a Stat means either a) more players stacking both Dex and Int/Cha or b) more P.B. and low stats Players being angry.


Why not disadvantages on attack rolls against you until the start of your next turn?

I see this as being close to what MoG wants, while still making most Players happy.

[Tanarii]

Erm...hundreds?

I'm not sure about anyone else, but....uh...I've never seen attacks be calculated in the hundreds. Or hundred. Or dozens. From my experiences, a Wizard gets attacked like maybe 3-4x per fight.
I agree, and even 3-4 attacks on a back line caster per day seems like it can high if the party can form a decent line of combat. IMX the typical adventuring day is maybe 25 total combat rounds, say 4 per medium difficulty fight and twice that for a difficult fight. And many people seem to expect a medium difficulty fight will only go 2-3 rounds for them.

I still think hard or soft capping the AC bonus would be your best bet. Hard cap would be something like my suggested AC 20, or equivalent of plate and shield.

This of course makes it far less valuable for Gish characters. But that seems like your intent.

[Rukelnikov]

That....is actually something I haven't really thought about.

Shield IS better than most level 1 spells, but that doesn't matter....because it doesn't really make you have to choose between them. You have to choose between casting Tasha's Hideous Laughter and Hold Person, but you don't have to choose between Shield and Hold Person or Shield and Hideous Laughter.

Shield is really only an autopick because of the lack of competition of Reaction-based spells that make one another redundant. If there was a reliable level 4 Reaction spell that solved the same problems as Shield and more, Shield wouldn't be considered.

A part of me still feels pretty bad about it, as I still feel like it's picked much more often than almost every other level 1 spell, but it doesn't necessarily prevent people from casting those spells. Unless you're limited on spells learned.

Hmm....on that last note, it does seem like the only thing that wouldn't have that problem are Wizards (so EKs, ATs, and Sorcerers all have a problem of Shield being too good of a choice), but it's definitely given me a lot more to think about. Thanks, Rukelnikov!

You're welcome.

And yeah, the scarcity of reaction spells is a big part of Shield's greatness.

[MaxWilson]

You're welcome.

And yeah, the scarcity of reaction spells is a big part of Shield's greatness.

Yes, that's part of it... but I think another part of it is the conceptual coolness of blocking attacks with your spell. (Just like Harry Dresden!)

Evidence in favor of this theory: despite how offense-oriented and DPR-focused the GITP zeitgeist is, nobody cares as much about Infernal Rebuke or whatever it's called as they do about Shield. (I don't dispute that Infernal Rebuke is pretty trashy from an efficiency perspective, but it's slightly better than the Paladin's Divine Smite, which people love for some reason, so logically its inefficiency cannot explain its lack of popularity.)

[Man_Over_Game]

Yes, that's part of it... but I think another part of it is the conceptual coolness of blocking attacks with your spell. (Just like Harry Dresden!)

Evidence in favor of this theory: despite how offense-oriented and DPR-focused the GITP zeitgeist is, nobody cares as much about Infernal Rebuke or whatever it's called as they do about Shield. (I don't dispute that Infernal Rebuke is pretty trashy from an efficiency perspective, but it's slightly better than the Paladin's Divine Smite, which people love for some reason, so logically its inefficiency cannot explain its lack of popularity.)

Hellish Rebuke isn't too terrible. Does 2d10, halves on a miss. Assuming a 50% hit chance, that's 8.25 damage.

Chromatic Orb is 3d8, and deals the most amount of damage for a single target level 1 ranged spell, dealing 6.75 with a 50% hit chance.

Additionally, Hellish Rebuke costs a Reaction, which I'd say is roughly the same value as a Bonus Action. Or the Battle Master's Riposte. So...not bad, really.

[Chaos Jackal]

Eh, Divine Smite is also a proactive move, the usage of which you can control, including it being selected after rolling a 20, while Hellish Rebuke, apart from granting a saving throw, requires you to get hit in the face first, and no d6 HD character wants to get hit in the face.

Shield does exactly what the aforementioned d6 HD character needs - prevent those d6 HDs from being reduced - , does so with a reaction, an otherwise unlikely to use resource unless you need Counterspell, and also provides a use for 1st-level slots in-combat outside of sorcery points fodder, which is only limited to sorcerers anyway.

Is it a good spell? Yes, it is. Does it need to be fixed? I don't think so. When you get a total of 22 spell slots per day at most (before any recovery features), you're not meant to spend every fight busting out the big guns like you did in the past. A 3.5 full caster gets about as many 6th level or higher spells at lv20 as a 5th edition caster's total spells. Even at tier 3 and tier 4 you're gonna use cantrips and 1st or 2nd level spells, because ending every fight through a Forcecage and a Meteor Swarm is impossible. Utility is good, but combat is still a big part of the game, and relying on Forcecage is gonna get you killed. If only the big guns were effective, with the number of spells a caster gets they'd be out of steam within two fights.

That's why some lower level spells being at least somewhat effective (as others have pointed out, that +5 AC isn't gonna mean nearly as much to the +15 giant or dragon as it did to the +4-5 goblin or orc) is in no way unbalanced or weird. Such spells are more like fillers, really. You don't wanna waste the crippling, high level Hold Monster in a fight against a bunch of mooks and a somewhat threatening mini-boss, so you drop a Tasha's, which might not mean his instant death in one turn, but can still be useful if it works and not feel like a total waste if it doesn't. Similarly, if you fight the strongmen protecting the necromancer's ritual chamber Shield might come in handy, but in the fight that actually matters, that against the necromancer himself, Shield is a huge opportunity cost because it means you won't be able to Counterspell, and not being able to Counterspell at higher tiers is a very risky move.

[zinycor]

I think you Could nerf shield if you gave the wizard more defensive options, otherwise you would be nerfing them too much.

[Haldir]

With the wizard standing at the back my experience is like, 3-4 times per DAY even. And unless we’re ambushed or the enemies have archers or something very frequently it’s in the 0-1 range. Now, admittedly, some of those attacks might be breath weapons or powerful spells, so it’s not like the wizard is always at max hp, but I can only remember maybe one single day in-game where the wizard had a dozen attacks directed at him over the course, and it was a tier 4 character facing hordes of archers. Even then the fireballs meant that often they got off usually only a single volley before being turned to ash.

We shouldn't balance based on your experiences of your wizard not being threatened.

We should balance for encounters that challenge everyone in the party and assume the DM uses tactics every once in a while.

[Tanarii]

We shouldn't balance based on your experiences of your wizard not being threatened.

We should balance for encounters that challenge everyone in the party and assume the DM uses tactics every once in a while.
Actually, IMX generally two things that lead to squishes constantly being targeted*, besides DM going out of their way to do it:
- small parties insufficient for the terrain, not allowing basic tactics like forming a blocking line of combat.
- players failing to use tactics.

D&D has become a very small squad combat game for the last several editions, with the assumption seeming to be 4 PCs. That means you need some pretty tight terrain to prevent flanking. Like dungeon corridors.

But even when terrain is there, players are often pretty bad tacticians, unless you let them team conference mid-battle, and sometimes even then. Especially ones that have been trained by DM that don't believe in letting PCs die or TPKs. And that's not helped by side initiative being ditched in favor of individual initiative, even if it's far more intuitive.

*lets be clear here, getting attacked once per round on average is getting attacked a lot when you've got AC 5pts or more lower than a tank, and typically about 3 hps/level lower.

[sophontteks]

Actually, IMX generally two things that lead to squishes constantly being targeted*, besides DM going out of their way to do it:
- small parties insufficient for the terrain, not allowing basic tactics like forming a blocking line of combat.
- players failing to use tactics.

D&D has become a very small squad combat game for the last several editions, with the assumption seeming to be 4 PCs. That means you need some pretty tight terrain to prevent flanking. Like dungeon corridors.

But even when terrain is there, players are often pretty bad tacticians, unless you let them team conference mid-battle, and sometimes even then. Especially ones that have been trained by DM that don't believe in letting PCs die or TPKs. And that's not helped by side initiative being ditched in favor of individual initiative, even if it's far more intuitive.

*lets be clear here, getting attacked once per round on average is getting attacked a lot when you've got AC 5pts or more lower than a tank, and typically about 3 hps/level lower.
I mean no offense, but it could also be bad tactics on the part of the NPCs, who generally are playing with a defensive advantage. If they too employ sound tactics, and actively try to outflank their enemy, the squishies will be under much more heat. I don't really consider this the DM going out of their way, its just sound tactics on their part.

[Tanarii]

I mean no offense, but it could also be bad tactics on the part of the NPCs, who generally are playing with a defensive advantage. If they too employ sound tactics, and actively try to outflank their enemy, the squishies will be under much more heat. I don't really consider this the DM going out of their way, its just sound tactics on their part.
It could be. It probably is, if it's a party with insufficient terrain for their numbers to form a defensive line and the enemy outnumbers or is equal in number to them. But like I said, that's the factor if the party squishes are getting beat on a lot. I guess we're saying the same thing but from opposite sides.

Of course, in that case you've also got either a combat as sport game, or a party that made some poor decisions prior to the fight in a combat as war game. Technically it's a poor decision made at character creation in a combat as sport game ... you can't afford to make squishes if that's the kind of fights you'll be facing often.

Certainly it's a good argument for loading up on defensive spells, and the necessity for them existing in the first place. There will be some tables where wizards and sorcs and warlocks need Mage Armor, Shield, Mirror Image and Blur just to stay alive. :smallamused:

[MaxWilson]

I mean no offense, but it could also be bad tactics on the part of the NPCs, who generally are playing with a defensive advantage. If they too employ sound tactics, and actively try to outflank their enemy, the squishies will be under much more heat. I don't really consider this the DM going out of their way, its just sound tactics on their part.

The problem with using NPCs with "sound tactics" is that the tactically smart thing for them to do in any non-Deadly combat is to withdraw from combat and join up with OTHER monster groups. It's tactically stupid for monsters to let you have multiple Medium encounters instead of one great big uber-deadly encounter. But getting TPK'ed tends to be less fun for the players, so it's the DM's job to think up reasons for the monsters to be stupid, one of the best of which is "the monsters really are stupid brutes, not disciplined tool-using combat veterans".

There's nothing wrong with uber-Deadly encounters of course, but they're not common at most tables.

[Jakinbandw]

One possible way of making it more of a first level spell might be something like (and this is just an idea, I've not tested balance):

As a reaction gain 5 temp hp. You lose any remaining temp hp at the end of the current character or creatures turn.

Very useful at low levels for keeping the wizard alive, not so useful at high levels, but not useless either. It's a free 5 hp every reaction, but there are probably other useful first level spells to cast. Maybe even allow it to be upcast somehow for stronger versions, so players can use it at higher levels but it still actually costs appropriate spell slots to cast.

[ProsecutorGodot]

One possible way of making it more of a first level spell might be something like (and this is just an idea, I've not tested balance):

As a reaction gain 5 temp hp. You lose any remaining temp hp at the end of the current character or creatures turn.

Very useful at low levels for keeping the wizard alive, not so useful at high levels, but not useless either. It's a free 5 hp every reaction, but there are probably other useful first level spells to cast. Maybe even allow it to be upcast somehow for stronger versions, so players can use it at higher levels but it still actually costs appropriate spell slots to cast.
This is worse than the version suggested in the first place. No thanks.

For reference, Armor of Agathys gives you 5thp and deals the same amount in damage, scales with spell slot level and lasts an hour. False Life is 1d4+4thp scaling with slot as well.

[Great Dragon]

@Jakinbandw:
Personally, I'd rather not be hit, then have a few tHP. When the Giant is doing 2d8 damage per hit, an extra 15 Hp (costing 3rd level slot) isn't much help. Especially for only 6 seconds! Being able to maybe avoid the hit with a 1st level slot reaction, and still drop a good (3rd Level) damage spell is much preferred.


The problem with using NPCs with "sound tactics" is that the tactically smart thing for them to do in any non-Deadly combat is to withdraw from combat and join up with OTHER monster groups. It's tactically stupid for monsters to let you have multiple Medium encounters instead of one great big uber-deadly encounter.(1) But getting TPK'ed tends to be less fun for the players, so it's the DM's job to think up reasons for the monsters to be stupid (2), one of the best of which is "the monsters really are stupid brutes, not disciplined tool-using combat veterans".

There's nothing wrong with uber-Deadly encounters of course, but they're not common at most tables.
1) It's sometimes funny as to why that Monster is even where the PCs find it.
I mean, I can't count how many times I've seen Random Encounter charts used to figure out what the Boss/BBEG is!!!

2) Most Experienced Players know this.😇

IME/O Small-medium Balanced "Tactics" is …. Difficult to portray in a "realistic" or "living world" game, and if being used (especially Deadly Tactics) should be stated in Session Zero.

In the case of Monsters with low Int, playing them dumb is fine.

But, there are a few ways to have small-medium groups encountered.



Orcs are more individual minded and are aggressive, and rarely think of personal survival. Unless dealing with overwhelming Odds.

Hobgoblins have the "Save Face" flaw, which means not only not showing weaknesses to those around them, even returning to the Base from anything but a Deadly fight (to warn of the threat) will cause them Shame.

Now, Goblins are guerrilla-fighters to begin with.
Large groups attract too much attention.
But, Players should watch out for even one Goblin getting away, as it will bring more back.

Kobolds are… the hardest to justify being dumb.
Stupid Kobolds are used as Ambush Bait.
But, terrain can limit how many can directly engage the Party.

Ogres and Hill Giants are not that bright, and are very impressed by their strength.

Encounters with these Monsters in their Lair/s, should be harder, since most are smart enough to take full use of all advantages.
*****
Now, going further up the Tiers,
Monsters that are Encountered should be smarter, as well as tougher.

But, keep in mind that most lower monsters are not willing minions, and might not immediately join (or only one or two per PC will engage) in the Boss Fight. Or they will disengage when at less than half health. (Each individually)

Beholders are paranoid, and only Charmed minions are allowed in the main Lair. A well placed Dispel Magic can turn these minions against the Beholder. It also has to be careful not to include any Charmed Minions in the area of the Anti-magic Ray.

Mind Flayers are rarely encountered near the Elder Brain, and they also Charm and Dominate minions. While these will work with other Illithids, they tend to be a lot more "self interest", and will gladly leave others - Illithid and Minion - to their death/s to survive.

I'll be honest, I refuse to run any Dragon (except maybe Wyrmlings) as being really tactically stupid.
But then, they are half the Name of the Game!!
*****
I'm sure there are more examples, but I'm tired.

[Blood of Gaea]

Kobolds are more of a level 10 example. But most CR 1 creatures have roughly the same hit chance as a CR 1/4 or CR 1/2.

I suppose there's the hypothetical that Chromatic Orb is useful at later levels, because of its versatility, but....who has actually seen that in play? 3d8 damage isn't bad, but most people would just still opt to cast something else. Even resisted, Chain Lightning would deal 5d8 to the resistant target, and deal 10d8 to 3 other creatures. A single action, dealing almost 10x the damage per round as a Chromatic Orb, and that's assuming the creature is resistant to Lightning damage.

Higher level illusion spells, damage spells, healing spells, buff spells, all trump the spells that you'd used to use at lower levels. But...what makes Shield redundant? The only thing I can think of that comes close is Counterspell.
Sure, but that has more to do with how they made blasting spells mostly scale by the level you can get them rather than the level you cast them at.

Shield never becomes redundant, but it gets less useful as you can take more than one attack without dying, and with monsters outpacing your defenses.

[Zalabim]

For example, if there was a level 1 spell that said "Make an extra attack this turn", people would be all over it.
I saw this comment and I just thought, "Well that's Divine Smite's whole deal." So you're not wrong.

Hideous Laughter: " A creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less isn't affected. "

There's a lot of overlap between not being "humanoid" and "creature with an Intelligence score of 4 or less". Not always, but you're not going to be afflicting something like a Bulette with Hideous Laughter. Most enemies you face are either Humanoid or dumb.
Not a lot of call for sorcerers to cast Tasha's Hideous Laughter since it's not on their spell list, unfortunately.

Yes, that's part of it... but I think another part of it is the conceptual coolness of blocking attacks with your spell. (Just like Harry Dresden!)

Evidence in favor of this theory: despite how offense-oriented and DPR-focused the GITP zeitgeist is, nobody cares as much about Infernal Rebuke or whatever it's called as they do about Shield. (I don't dispute that Infernal Rebuke is pretty trashy from an efficiency perspective, but it's slightly better than the Paladin's Divine Smite, which people love for some reason, so logically its inefficiency cannot explain its lack of popularity.)
Hellish Rebuke, and in addition to Chaos Jackal's explanation, it's also a warlock-list-only spell so the competition for spell slots leaves it off of most consideration.

Eh, Divine Smite is also a proactive move, the usage of which you can control, including it being selected after rolling a 20, while Hellish Rebuke, apart from granting a saving throw, requires you to get hit in the face first, and no d6 HD character wants to get hit in the face.
To be precise, the warlock is a d8 HD character and explicitly has a spell for getting hit in the face (armor of agathys) but then you'd have used all your spells on getting hit, and that's not proactive enough for people.

[Witty Username]

Or, put another way, swarming a target will work, unless the boss you're fighting has Shield. Very few spells scale the same way as Shield does, as efficiently as Shield does, because AC barely changes compared to every other variable in the game. Even vision goes through more dramatic changes every 5 levels to cause certain spells to no longer have the "oomph" they once did (like Invisibility).

I'll probably go back to the drawing board. My goal is to find a way to modify Shield so that it's a level 1 spell....and stays that way. Not a level 1 spell that you're reliant on at level 15.
I like using skeletons for my white rooms for this stuff cause its in the PHB, 1/4 cr 50xp. A size for a DMG hard encounter for a level 15 wizard is ... 86!:smalleek:
a 15th level wizard will have gotten 4 ASIs, probably a 20 int and 20 dex with point buy if feats are not allowed(cause warcaster is that good) mage armor is up cause it is armor that a mage can use for AC 18 or AC 23 with shield. skels have a +4 to hit so a 19 or better so 10% chance to hit though the shield or 14 or better without so 35% chance to hit. 86/10 = 8.6 hits per round 4.3 of which are crits for an average damage of ... 56.35 damage a round or this wizard is dead in like two rounds if she doesn't thin this crowd down with higher level spells.
Conclusion 1: swarming still works against shield.
Conclusion 2: shield will keep a wizard alive for a few rounds but is irrelevant for winning the battle, higher level spells are still needed.

But there is a second argument, shield vs other 1 level spells, damage spells are all irrelevant cause either not enough damage to get kills or not enough aoe to get enough kills(and are out scaled by cantrips at this point) so defense or disable is what we will focus on, fog cloud would be able to stop line of sight of the skels effectively blocking fire as would silent image, mage armor is also relevant because of its effective combination with shield. The only reason shield performs as well as it does is the reaction casting allowing the wizard to attack and defend at the same time.
Also, a side argument that first level spells at early levels can decide encounters with their use, thunderwave, grease, tasha's laughter, and sleep all can end encounters at low level, these drop off but if they didn't we would never use higher level spells.

If you want to fix shield so that it doesn't break the game, I think the solution is do nothing

[Armok]

Why change it at all?

Not being snarky here, but genuinely curious. Is there a set of circumstances going on in your game that makes you feel shield is a problem spell? If so, I'd like to share my personal motto: before nerfing or removing something, try adding something instead.

So in this sense, if your monster's attacks are being thwarted by shield regularly, consider adding a +2 or maybe even +3 to hit to their rolls to compensate, or have your monsters make more use of things like the Help action to give advantage. These can mitigate the effectiveness of shield without altering it, which as demonstrated previously in the thread can potentially impact a lot outside of the spell itself in a negative fashion.

[MaxWilson]

I saw this comment and I just thought, "Well that's Divine Smite's whole deal." So you're not wrong.

If Divine Smite required a separate attack roll and cost your reaction, it would be more like this hypothetical spell, and it would also be less popular.



Hellish Rebuke, and in addition to Chaos Jackal's explanation, it's also a warlock-list-only spell so the competition for spell slots leaves it off of most consideration.

And yet Sorlocks, Bardlocks, and Padlocks still don't use it, usually. I can therefore reasonably infer that they would be even less interested in a reaction spell that gives you one melee weapon attack for one spell slot, because that would require an attack roll instead of save-for-half.

[Haldir]

You're welcome.

And yeah, the scarcity of reaction spells is a big part of Shield's greatness.

Some of the greats are reactions- Absorb Elements/Counterspell come to mind. If I'm shielding this attack, I'm not counterspelling that fireball or whatever.

Overall, I think there's some overstating the uniqueness of Shield as "useful at all levels so it's broken." Many first level spells remain as useful in the endgame as they were in the lategame.

I think there's definitely some parties who aren't facing enough casters, sneak attacks, and flankers. And probably not enough encounters per day. A level 20 wizard should be the first target of any monster with an int score higher than 10 and strong enough to be there.

[AdAstra]

Some of the greats are reactions- Absorb Elements/Counterspell come to mind. If I'm shielding this attack, I'm not counterspelling that fireball or whatever.

Overall, I think there's some overstating the uniqueness of Shield as "useful at all levels so it's broken." Many first level spells remain as useful in the endgame as they were in the lategame.

I think there's definitely some parties who aren't facing enough casters, sneak attacks, and flankers. And probably not enough encounters per day. A level 20 wizard should be the first target of any monster with an int score higher than 10 and strong enough to be there.

Hell, even pretty dumb creatures that have strong self-preservation will frequently go for the weakest-looking member of a group. That’s pretty standard predator instinct at the very least, ie wolves and such. From how I see it, the only monsters that would deliberately choose to attack the big dude in plate first are creatures that value challenge or glory over survival odds. If the monsters are able to bypass the frontliners without taking opportunity attacks, I’d definitely have them do so at least half the time. If you want to tank hits for other players, either stick close, find good positioning, or make yourself too big of a nuisance to be ignored (like a cleric with spirit guardians)

of course, this is getting into monster psychology and dm tactics, rather than mechanical problems with shield. Got more thoughts on that, but later because I’m on mobile

EDIT: Okay back. If the goal is to reduce the power of Shield late-game so it's not such an auto-use, why not just have it last for the one attack, maybe giving an even bigger AC bonus to compensate? Since at higher levels you're more likely to take more hits, due to more monsters, many with multiattack, this seems like it would reduce the value by a lot.

Also Hellish Rebuke is probably less valued than Divine Smite because it gives a save, takes up a spell-known, is only on a class whose spell-slots scale up, so only stuff that's good to upcast will likely be kept for long (Hell, even Shield isn't really worth it for a Hexblade to keep past level 5 or so. 4d10 save for half as a reaction probably isn't worth it either), and it does have a small (re)action cost where Divine Smite has none at all, and a lot of people probably just forget about it.