Does DnD 5e Arcane Casting suck vs 3e? (Not a complaint re BG3, more a complaint re DnD 5e)

[Telmorial]

Don't get me wrong, I think I will love BG3 (I played BG1 & 2 and all the expansions) but I was interested in your feedback regarding DnD 5e in general. I generally find it less fun and more dumb down than 3e (let's not talk about 4e!)

My 3 main pet peeves are;
1. The concentration system. I can see what they were trying to accomplish but they (the DnD guys, not BG3 devs) went waaaay OTT.
In my opinion, they should have limited concentration to per spell level or spell range of spell levels (E.G. can can 1 spell from lvl 1 to 4 and 1 spell from level 5 to 8 etc running at the same time).

2. Maybe I'm missing something but it seems the spells in general don't get more powerful as you level. E.G. Cone of Cone is 8D8. It doesn't matter if you're level 9 or level 20, it always does 8D8.

3. This one I'm unsure about but maybe INT now doesn't give a Wizard more spells?
In 3e, the more INT, the more spells I could cast per rest period.

All 3 points essentially removes a lot of the feeling of character progression, in terms of my arcane magic user character.

Again, I'm not moaning about this particular game and yes, it's probably the wrong forum to post this but I don't post in the DnD forums, so I was interested in other players point of view on this subject.

EDIT: I updated the post title, as I realised, my only real complaint against DnD 5e is the arcane/Wizard casting system and really most of that is the Concentration system.

[Auburn2]

Originally posted by id795078477:

3rd edition is the best edition of D&D to ever exist.
(my opinion)

And yes, unlike some folks here, I'm willing to underline the opinionated bit. To each their own.

I consider 5e a TES5 and 3e a TES3 (even their version numbers match). To me 5e is too simplistic and too "streamlined", it's an instance of throwing baby with the water. I like the variety, depth and freedom that 3e has.

To be honest, we need to give it some wait. 3e has stood the test of time. There are games and worlds still running on it to this day, many of them popular - and that's 2 decades later. Will 5e last for so long? Maybe, but that time is yet to pass.

To each his own, but I personally feel I have way more freedom in 5E than I did in 3E, that is the reason why I like it so much better.

I feel like 3E had the illusion of choice because they had many options, but they were not real choices as one decision excluded 10 others. Even the simple things - I want to be a high-level Dwarf Warlock with 4 levels of Wizard or I want to be a pure single class Wizards who can be great in melee, awesome at stealth, and good at picking locks while having a full casters compliment of spells. Both of those examples are simple and easy in 5E but pretty much undoable in 3E.

As far as popularity 5E is 9 years old right now and passed 3E in total liftetime sales 5 years ago. WOTC stated last week they need to stagger future releases because their printers can't print in the volume necessary to release multiple books at a time. 3E will be around for a long time, there are still people playing AD&D 1E, but it is unlikely that 3E will ever be more popular than 5E in the future.

[Auburn2]

Originally posted by Telmorial:

Don't get me wrong, I think I will love BG3 (I played BG1 & 2 and all the expansions) but I was interested in your feedback regarding DnD 5e in general. I generally find it less fun and more dumb down than 3e (let's not talk about 4e!)

My 3 main pet peeves are;
1. The concentration system. I can see what they were trying to accomplish but they (the DnD guys, not BG3 devs) went waaaay OTT.
In my opinion, they should have limited concentration to per spell level or spell range of spell levels (E.G. can can 1 spell from lvl 1 to 4 and 1 spell from level 5 to 8 etc running at the same time).

2. Maybe I'm missing something but it seems the spells in general don't get more powerful as you level. E.G. Cone of Cone is 8D8. It doesn't matter if you're level 9 or level 20, it always does 8D8.

3. This one I'm unsure about but maybe INT now doesn't give a Wizard more spells?
In 3e, the more INT, the more spells I could cast per rest period.

All 3 points essentially removes a lot of the feeling of character progression, in terms of my arcane magic user character.

Again, I'm not moaning about this particular game and yes, it's probably the wrong forum to post this but I don't post in the DnD forums, so I was interested in other players point of view on this subject.

EDIT: I updated the post title, as I realised, my only real complaint against DnD 5e is the arcane/Wizard casting system and really most of that is the Concentration system.

To address these three concenrts:

1. Concentration - This is a huge improvement in the game. It keeps people from combining complimentary effects in ways not intended.

2. In 5E you have slots and you can use a slot to cast any spell of that level or lower.
For example an 11th level Wizard has 1 6th level slot per day. He can use that slot to cast any spell of 6th level or below. So for example he could use that 6th level slot to cast True Seeing or Fireball or magic missile. If he casts fireball or magic missile those spells are "upcast" and do more damage than if he cast it with a 3rd and 1st level slot respectively. I also have 4 first level slots and I can use those to cast magic missile as well. If I use a 1st level slot it is less powerful (3d4+3 at 1st level, 8d4+8 at 6th level).

3. Higher Intelligence allows you to prepare more spells. A Wizard can prepare a total number of spells equal to level+int modifier. So at 11th level if I have a 13 Int I can prepare 12 spells total, if I have a 20 Int I can prepare 16 spells. I can cast any of those prepared spells using a slot of its level or higher, but I do not get more slots with a higher intelligence.

All in all the Wizard is far and away the most powerful class in 5E so there is little need to make Arcane casting more powerful than it is already.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

In the new One D&D system, some spells that previously required concentration, no longer do so.

I think they realized that as long as the spell doesn't break either Bounded Accuracy or the Action Economy, it shouldn't require concentration.

Bless should require concentration.
Bane should require concentration (but needs to be buffed in some way).
Haste needs to require concentration.
Moonbeam, Flaming Sphere, Cloud of Daggers, Call Lightning, Hunger of Hadar, and Spiritual Guardians should require concentration.

True Strike, Expeditious Retreat, Guidance, and other spells that do not directly change either the Action Economy or Bounded Accuracy should not be concentration based.

[IgnatiusJ.Reilly]

Overall, casters got a titanic nerf when comparing D&D 3.5 to 5e. This effects 'arcane casters' to the greatest degree, since they depend on 'spell power' the most. This was done in variety of ways, but the most damning thing was the weakening of controlling effects and introduction of the concentration mechanic which allows damage to function as a global dispel.

However, there were three things that add to caster power in 5e. Casters, whether they be prepared or known spell casters, now cast like 3e sorcerers. Casters also have access to cantrips, basically at will attacks that scale with character level. Finally, some of them have access to ritual casting, which can allow one to cast a small number of spells as ritual spells without expending a spell slot. The Wizard is the best at this.

Note that BG3 is not a good representation of 5e spell-casting. A whole host of spells have been nerfed both directly and indirectly from their 5e counterparts, ritual casting doesn't exist, and utility magic is in very short supply. If you'd like a much better implementation of 5e spell-casting in a video game try Solasta.

[Aldain]

Originally posted by IgnatiusJ.Reilly:

Casters also have access to cantrips, basically at will attacks that scale with character level.

Cantrips existed in 3.5e, they were just awful and damage dealing ones were strictly worse than a light crossbow at all times.

They also had a limit on how many level 0 spells you could cast per day, and most of the time nobody was going to waste those slots on something as bad as 1d3 acid damage either.

I know this might be off topic, but if there is one thing I will eternally dunk on 3.5e/PF1e for, it is the absolute JOKE that Cantrips/Orisons were implemented as, complete and utter embarrassment of an implementation.

[IgnatiusJ.Reilly]

Originally posted by Aldain:

Originally posted by IgnatiusJ.Reilly:

Casters also have access to cantrips, basically at will attacks that scale with character level.

Cantrips existed in 3.5e, they were just awful and damage dealing ones were strictly worse than a light crossbow at all times.

They also had a limit on how many level 0 spells you could cast per day, and most of the time nobody was going to waste those slots on something as bad as 1d3 acid damage either.

I know this might be off topic, but if there is one thing I will eternally dunk on 3.5e/PF1e for, it is the absolute JOKE that Cantrips/Orisons were implemented as, complete and utter embarrassment of an implementation.

Yes, they were present, but they weren't really an option. A cross-bow was better, in practice. Their purpose was to give casters something to do when not casting leveled spells, but they failed at that. They didn't become 'at will' until Pathfinder 1e, but they were still a non-option even then.

However, now that I think about it, weren't there some expansion material that allowed one to make some simple 'at will' spell attacks as long as they had a particular spell prepared? Not sure if it was in Complete Arcane or Complete Mage expansion material. My memory of the system is a bit hazy.

Edit: Yes, they're in Complete Mage, and called Reserve feats. For example, if you've an acid spell prepared you can hurl an orb of acid for nd6 damage where n is the level of the acid spell prepared.

[Aldain]

Originally posted by IgnatiusJ.Reilly:

However, now that I think about it, weren't there some expansion material that allowed one to make some simple 'at will' spell attacks as long as they had a particular spell prepared? Not sure if it was in Complete Arcane or Complete Mage expansion material. My memory of the system is a bit hazy.

Wouldn't be able to tell ya, most of my 3.5e experiences was either mostly vanilla/SRD stuff of by proxy through PF1e and Owlcat's games.

[IgnatiusJ.Reilly]

Originally posted by Aldain:

Originally posted by IgnatiusJ.Reilly:

However, now that I think about it, weren't there some expansion material that allowed one to make some simple 'at will' spell attacks as long as they had a particular spell prepared? Not sure if it was in Complete Arcane or Complete Mage expansion material. My memory of the system is a bit hazy.

Wouldn't be able to tell ya, most of my 3.5e experiences was either mostly vanilla/SRD stuff of by proxy through PF1e and Owlcat's games.

Yeah, I had to look it up, so I just edited my post above. They were in Complete Mage and were called Reserve feats. They were on par or even somewhat better than 5e's cantrips depending on the slot's level one held in reserve. All one had to give up was a feat and one of their prepared spells.

[SpaceNvader]

Concentration is not the problem for me. 5e spell systems are okay and feel better balanced. Its the spells themselves that need some refreshing. Many of them feel like filler material and were just carried over to 5e because they existed in previous editions.

Granted, 3.5e has a ridiculous amount of filler material. And you can stack persistent AOEs and buffs until it takes a spreadsheet to keep track of them. But its still what we play at TT nights.

[BW022]

Telmorial,

1. Concentration.
The issue with 3/3.5e was that you ended up with massive spell staking to the point it was awful to track. I remember even at 10th-level, having virtual spreadsheets of +1 bless, +1 prayer, +1 bard song, +4 bull's strength, +1 for magic weapon, etc. and then someone drops, three spells end, and everyone spends the next two minutes re-doing all their pluses, ACs, etc.

5e is fine. Most spells are more impactful, magic missile starts with three magic missiles, cantrips are in the 1d6 to 1d10 range and at will, etc. IMO, this is better unless you cap 3/3.5e at relatively low levels.

2. Spell Power
Different spells do get more powerful and you can up cast spells using higher level slots if you want larger effects.

3. Abilities granting Spell Slots
Those were annoying, especially when combined with items which increased stat bonuses. Your primary stats affect spell saves and attack roles using spells and cantrips, which is typically important enough. Just more math, book keeping, extra tables, etc.

Progression
5e is more linear in progression. Proficiency bonuses only go from +2 to +6, ability scores are bound at +5, and magic is only +1 to +3. 3/3.5e you go from zero to superhero by level 10 and it made the game extremely hard to run, keep balanced, etc. This was true of all classes. Most 3/3.5e campaigns ended at around 8 to 12 because of this. By 12th-level my druid was nearly impossible to challenge without slaughter the rest of the party. In another campaign were we reached 19th, my bard/cleric could DC 58 charm/dominate anything not immune to charms. Dragons, titans, NPCs, etc. only saved on a 20. Was it cool... the first few times. Then it was just a slog for our DM.