Talk:Railgun (5e Spell)

Do I see Toaru Majutsu no Index reference here? (Never read that myself, but it's too popular to not know if you happen to be myself, a we- a weirdo.) It's not a bad idea, in fact, I kinda like the idea of implementing it in D&D! However:

• Ranged Spell Attack? If you are taking reference from a certain light novel, you may also notice that this particular feat is way more devastative than a single-target attack. It blows away everything in its trajectory. Which is why I thought it would be more appropriate to have it as a line-area spell, not unlike lightning bolt.

• Fire Damage? Isn't the principle of railgun is to use electromagnetic wumbo-jumbo to propel a small piece of metal as an ammunition? If then, wouldn't it be more appropriate to have this spell deal lightning damage, instead of fire damage?

• Force Damage? This is purely balancing issue, but force damage is the broken damage type in D&D. Notice how magi missile deals such a tiny amount of damage for a 1st-level spell, and there is a spell specifically designed to counter that one spell, the shield spell. I suggest either change the damage type into bludgeoning damage, or reduce the damage.

• Damage Scale. The spell already deals 4d6 damage total in 1st level, and it deals an additional 2d6 damage per each spell slot level above the first. This means this spell deals as much damage as the fireball when both cast at 5th level, and pretty much stronger than any other 1st-level spells, especially considering that half of the damage is force damage. I suggest the damage scaling would be better as just 1d6 per slot level, and only at fire damage, because there are like one or two ways in the entire game to gain resistance and/or immunity to force damage.

That's it for now. In short: Love the concept, but the current version might be a bit too strong for a 1st-level spell. I think this can be easily fixed, so I wish you good luck on your wonderful spell! --WeirdoWhoever (talk) 02:17, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

To me, bludgeoning damage (for an object larger than an inch) or piercing damage (for an object narrower than an inch) would make the most sense. This spell just shoots the metal at high speed, right? It's the equivalent of firing a bullet from a gun, whether you use electromagnetism or combustion or magic. Regardless, I agree the damage scaling to me seems a bit high. I don't think there's any official spell that scales by a full 7 (2d6) per slot level. Is there even one that scales by 6.5 (1d12)?

This is somewhat off-topic, but while force damage is arguably the best damage type, magic missile does so little damage mostly because it always does its full damage roll against a target unless a special rule like shield applies. There's no attack roll or saving throw to mitigate the damage. - Guy (talk) 02:31, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

The damage scaling is okay (in my opinion) if the level of the spell is higher. Imagine this as a 5th level spell, that limits the additional damage to 8d6 (9th spell slot) instead of 16d6. There's too many 1st level spells anyway. Marasmusine (talk) 04:47, 23 July 2017 (MDT)

16d6 is less than half of the damage of 5e SRD:Meteor Swarm, the primary damaging 9th-level spell. --AngelsAndAarakocra (talk) 09:59, 24 July 2017 (MDT)

I'm referring to the additional damage from using higher spell slots, on top of the base damage. Marasmusine (talk) 11:03, 24 July 2017 (MDT)

So 20d6 total? You probrably know better than I do about this.

--AngelsAndAarakocra (talk) 11:14, 24 July 2017 (MDT)