I am running 5e on a grid with minis. The only thing I hate is when
a sorcerer or wizard launches a fireball that perfectly hits enemies in
the aoe. The player counts the squares on the grid to determine
exactly where he can hit the fireball and he knows the perfect way
for the fireball to take effect. It will hit enemies but surprisingly
the explosion stops right in front of an allied face. A player who was
attacked by 2 melee enemies in my game released a fireball behind the
enemies so that the enemies were hit in the explosion but he was not.
In my opinion, this loses plausibility.
There are few meta-problems here that I think are at the heart of the problem …
"Likelihood": The game is about fighting fire breathing dragons; foiling the machinations of evil gods; defeat vampires, liches and other undead; riding a unicorn or a faucet; and yes, cast and manipulate magic! All of those things require a little imagination to conjure, let alone play in a meaningful and balanced way. The game allows players to cast fiery magic Troll-death balls Y it's fun!
Sorry, but the plausibility is out the door, go play Twilight 2000 if you want realistic combat.
Keep it up…
That being said, I agree that there is a problem with players planning the perfect AoE circle for only hitting enemies However, the problem is not spells, it is that the game practically stops while the player (usually the players) discovers the perfect place to cast the spell.
I see that magicians have a clear idea of what their magic can and cannot do. They will know your limits as clearly as a cleric who heals the wounded, or a thief who opens a lock, or a fighter who measures an enemy. But unlike the cleric, thief, or fighter, the magician can point his magic … And that is fine. Although unlike the Cleric, Thief, Fighter, or any other class, a spellless wizard is as good as a commoner with a gallows. Let them have their moment.
However, I think if you gave the player as much time to pin down their attack as you give the fighter to roll their attack dice, I have a feeling you'll see a lot more roasted PCs, or at least more surviving enemies. Assistant can point out an attack doesn't mean you have more time to think about the best place to point. With this in mind, the PC could move a little further to keep PCs out of the way, but that means compromised enemies can be lost too!
If they can pinpoint. But if you keep playing… they won't have time to do it.
Create … create … house rules are something we all do. And many of those house rules can make a bad situation worse. I have learned both professionally (designing computer games) and in my own board games that you must take a level of care in making rules, especially those designed to & # 39; fix & # 39; other rules.
I've seen several suggestions here, as well as elsewhere, to impose new requirements or restrictions: randomize the benchmark, add a skill check or attack roll, apply stat-based modifiers, etc.
- Random Pin-Point: In these rules, the desire is to add a random factor in Magic that the other classes have to support. The main problem in doing this is that you can nerfise the Wizrd: remember, the Wizard has a finite number of attacks while the other classes do not support this restriction! The power of the Mage class is the inherent ability to signal an attack, eliminating it is actually a severe limitation.
- Skill checks or Attack Scrolls: These can be either right or wrong, usually wrong, as a player generally invests in Int or similar abilities and forgoes combat prowess to maximize his magic (and accuracy …) applying these rules In-character creation can be fair as long as abilities / attacks are something the player could normally choose Y don't play down the Wizard's main focus: casting Magic. Applying these rules after character creation only affects the player for pre-made and in-game choices already made, causing a new problem … an unhappy player!
- Stat modifiers: Unless the stat in question is Intelligence, don't bother: you end up with the same results as the previous skill / attack … an unhappy player.
After learning the hard way, I stay away from house rules that modify rule X with rule Y, as doing so invariably causes new problems (usually with disgruntled players due to new restrictions on any type of desired game) .
I hate when a sorcerer or wizard throws a fireball that perfectly hits enemies.
Sorry, but that's what magic users do, and you as GM should leave them. If you hate It is a lot to create limitations, the problem is not the rules, or the knowledge of the players of those rules …
Do not create rules that restrict, limit or hinder players' desire to play the way they I want to play!
The way you create your encounters is by far the best solution for players to use AoE. Yes it's not a rule per se and yes, it does not target players by signaling their attack (see above). But it's the best you as a GM can do to reasonably change the way players use Spot AoE. In a way, this is the best rule of all: you can use you imagination in making interesting encounters. A large part of the problem of players using AdE spells can be mitigated by creating encounters in the first place.
Anyway, what is good for the goose is good for the goose! Why are there no enemy magicians throwing fiery balls of fire? exactly where only PCs are hit ???
While I'm out of breath, I strongly I urge you to NO apply any rules to address the problem. Just keep things going and keep the combat interesting and yes, every once in a while players will shoot a fireball that only roasts enemies … But, that's because doing it is so much fun, and your main job as GM is make sure that's what the players are having … FUN!