D&D 5E Reducing High Magic (6th-9th levels) Spell Slots Option

[DND_Reborn]

I know many games don't get above 10-12th levels, so this is probably not an issue for most games. I am only playing in one game currently that has gotten into levels 19-20 for the PCs, but I am curious about an idea I had and wonder if anyone might like it:

I've adjusted the spell slot progression tables so from levels 11-19 you get only one "high magic" spell slot. At level 11, you can use it to cast a 6th level spell, at level 13 it can be used for 6th or 7th level spells, etc. At level 20, you gain one permanent 6th level spell and one other high magic slot for a 6th-9th level as you want.

Here is the revised progression:

So, at level 20, you lose a 6th, 2 7th, and an 8th, but gain an additional 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th.

The basic idea is casters have one big whammy spell (two potentially at 20th level) when they learn high magic. To compensate, they pick up some lower level spells. This keeps the total number of spell slots equal to RAW but lowers the power of tier 3 and 4 casters to bring them more on par with non-caster classes.

That's it. I'm running it by some of our group tomorrow. Any thoughts? Yes? No? Maybe? I know it won't be for a lot of people, but I thought some of you might like the idea. shrug

EDIT: If you want a bit more power, but not the high magic this idea is removing, I have an alternate progression which has 5 spell slots per spell level for 1-5, but limits high magic to a single 9th or lower (no extra free 6th).

EDIT: another option is to limit high magic to 6th (level 11-14), 7th (level 15-17), 8th (level 18-19), and 9th (level 20).

EDIT: How about this idea: instead of getting more high magic than one slot, the casters get a pool of spell levels they can use for any spell level from 1-5?

So, a level 20 caster would still have a 6th and 9th, but the additional 6, 7, 7, and 8 create a pool of 28 spell levels. He could use them for any spells up to 5th level and get 5 more 5th's if he wanted, or a dozen 2nd's, or whatever?

EDIT: keep the spell slots normal, but make it so you can only recover one high magic spell slot per long rest. This way you can start with multiple slots but if you spend too many, it will take longer to recover them all.

 

[Laurefindel]

I’ve been thinking of doing something similar. well, different, but in the same mindset.

I don’t have an issue DMing in a game where the wizard can cast wish. I find it heavy DMing in a game where the wizard can cast wish everyday with little opportunity costs.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I’ve been thinking of doing something similar. well, different, but in the same mindset.

I don’t have an issue DMing in a game where the wizard can cast wish. I find it heavy DMing in a game where the wizard can cast wish everyday with little opportunity costs.

Actually, using wish to copy 8th or lower level spells doesn't bug me much, but there are a lot of 9th level spells that are just crazy IMO.

So, what were you thinking???

 

[BlivetWidget]

So, at level 20, you lose a 6th, 2 7th, and an 8th, but gain an additional 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th.

I would suggest more lower level slots if you're not attempting to straight up nerf casters. See DMG288 for a better way to balance this (the table effectively extends the sorcery points / spell slot table up to 9th level spells). You say you're removing 40 points-worth of spell power and compensating by adding 21 points. To me, that is not a fair trade.

If you gained two additional slots at 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th, then I think you have a more interesting alternative that plays by a version of the official rules.

That said, it is still a significant nerf to casters. While the aforementioned table might lead someone to believe that a 9th level spell is 6.5 times as good as a 1st level spell, in reality you can expect it to be closer to 256 times better.

 

[TheSword]

Sorry, what problem is this fixing? You’re still giving access to higher level spells, you’re just reducing the number of an already reduced slot number. Wizards only cast 1 of their top two or three level spells anyway. Wizards get little other than their spells to play with.

Its your call, but this sounds like a solution looking for a problem.

If you find particular spells a problem, ask your PC wizards not to take them, remove them from the game or modify them.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would suggest more lower level slots if you're not attempting to straight up nerf casters.

EDIT: If you want a bit more power, but not the high magic this idea is removing, I have an alternate progression which has 5 spell slots per spell level for 1-5, but limits high magic to a single 9th or lower (no extra free 6th).

Yeah, the first edit to the OP handles this. You end up with 5 spell slots for spell levels 1-5 instead of 4 each, which makes up for the lost high magic spells more.

 

[Laurefindel]

Actually, using wish to copy 8th or lower level spells doesn't bug me much, but there are a lot of 9th level spells that are just crazy IMO.

So, what were you thinking???

Yeah, I often « wish » as the poster child for powerful spells, while it isn’t necessarily...

i started to work on a three-tier magic system where lvl 1-3 is quick to cast, 4-6 takes more time and dedication, and 7-9 even more, to the point of being virtually un-castable. Then, you could « buy » time with items, spellcasting foci, spell components, and celestial events etc. Celestial events went from « at sunset or sundown », « during new or full moon », « at solstice or equinox », or « when the moon is in the house of Pisces » and other nonsense like that. Casting a 9th level spell required a few such « time-saving coupons ».

it was patchy to say the least, but it brings me to this point: you don’t necessarily have to change spell slot progression. « Spending a spell slot of equal level or higher » is one of the requirements to cast a spell, but you could add more.

you could have a « high magic 1/day » clause, increasing to 2/day at 20th level, leaving 6-9 level spell slots for up-casted spells. Off course if you’re trying to restrict those too that won’t work.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Sorry, what problem is this fixing?

It's fixing that (especially what I'm seeing at tier 4) having a handful of high magic slots, instead of just 1 (or 2 perhaps at level 20), is just too powerful IMO. I made a L12 variant of the game which limited casters to a single 6th level spell, so this is a variant of that allowing casters in tier 3 and tier 4 to access spells above 6th level.

So, I like the idea of limiting high magic, but to try to balance it out offering more lower level slots, which can of course be very useful still.

 

[DND_Reborn]

you could have a « high magic 1/day » clause, increasing to 2/day at 20th level, leaving 6-9 level spell slots for up-casted spells. Off course if you’re trying to restrict those too that won’t work.

That was an option I was considering. You keep the slots the same, so lower level spells could be upcast as you mention, but making casting a high magic spell require a check when you finish. If you fail it, you can't cast another one until you finish a long rest. The DC would probably be 10 + the spell level, so a 6th level spell would be DC 16 and if you had a +11 modifier, you would have a 20% chance of not casting another high magic until you finished your long rest.

 

[Laurefindel]

That was an option I was considering. You keep the slots the same, so lower level spells could be upcast as you mention, but making casting a high magic spell require a check when you finish. If you fail it, you can't cast another one until you finish a long rest. The DC would probably be 10 + the spell level, so a 6th level spell would be DC 16 and if you had a +11 modifier, you would have a 20% chance of not casting another high magic until you finished your long rest.

Even with a hard 1/day cap, you’re better off leaving as many things intact as possible and keep spell progression as-is. That is, if up-casting isn’t an issue.