Talk:Spell Design (5e Guideline)

What if you want a 10th level spell?

Short answer, you don't get one. Long answer, there are variant rules for stronger magic, and most are confined to their own pages. --SwankyPants (talk) 05:58, 4 March 2021 (MST)

What about spell components? I know V and M but are there more?

Verbal, Somatic, Material. SirSprinkles (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2022 (MST)

Single-target no-save expected damage values

The single-target no-save expected damage per level segment of the table does not match with expected damage values from Magic Missile, is there a particular reasoning for this? Magic Missile is three counts of 1d4+1, which is equivalent to 3d4+3, not simply 3d4. At maximum level Magic Missile can be expected to deal 38.5 total damage instead of the listed 27.5. Is this due to the multiple manners in which Magic Missile may be negated entirely, and if so should homebrewed spells based on Magic Missile which remain affected by those same countermeasures then adhere to the higher damage curve? --Nuke The Earth (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2024 (MST)

It looks like that column was added in 2022 by someone who registered just to make this edit. [1]

I personally believe that column should not exist. Magic missile to me feels like a deliberately overpowered arcane option, like fireball and meteor storm. Like most of the limit-breaking damage spells from WotC it's iconic to the franchise.

If you throw magic missiles all at one target for ~10.5 damage, it's basically the same as the recommended amount for a save to have damage at ~11. (That's not even considering magic missile's ability to split damage, its absurd range for its level, dealing force damage, etc.) I think it's clear magic missile should not be used as a basis for this column.

Outside of that spell there are very few cases of automatic damage on which to reliably base values, and unlike the other columns there isn't specific guidance in the DMG'14.

For what I'll call "automatic damage" I believe having single-target automatic damage be ~75% of single-target save-to-halve damage is a decent baseline for the highest it should ever be; in practice a bit lower than 75% would be better. (Assuming saves succeed half the time, this 75% figure results in the same average damage. But in practice a monster's save probably succeeds less than half the time, and a spell with automatic damage is most useful against a monster you expect to have high saves+AC anyway.)

Anyway, I still believe this column should not exist. As far as I know there isn't a strong enough justification in official material for the values such a column would have. At most I believe just a note saying automatic damage should be half the damage of save-negates columns (or whatever). - Guy 23:32, 18 November 2024 (MST)

Thank you for the clarification, if the column lacks a reasonable basis I'll go ahead and remove it. Would you be willing to write up a short paragraph on the particulars of spell damage without saves, akin to the damage over time and smite damage segments? I'd try it myself but I believe it'd be inferior. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 07:47, 19 November 2024 (MST)