Alzrius
The EN World kitten
Prior to D&D Third Edition, there were certain spells that were "reversible." That is, you could prepare the spell backwards, and when cast it had the opposite effect. So flesh to stone became stone to flesh, haste became slow, etc. This essentially allowed wizards to double-up on spellbook space for those spells, and gave clerics some flavor in that a lot of deities either had certain categories of spells for which they allowed their clerics to either cast only the reversed form, or only the standard form.
Now, that all went away with the last few editions of the game, but would it be worth bringing back for spontaneous spellcasters such as sorcerers? Given how sharp their Spells Known limits are, this might be a way to allow for some greater thematic diversity in what they can do, particularly as spells tend to be one of the greatest points of proliferation over the life of an edition. In terms of layout in the rules, it would essentially merge two different spell descriptions under a single heading, with the standard listing and then a subsequent "Reversed" section.
Wizards, clerics, and other preparatory spellcasters, under this paradigm, would still have access to the "reversed" versions of those spells, but would treat them as separate, discrete spells (i.e. the way they do now).
Thoughts on this?
Now, that all went away with the last few editions of the game, but would it be worth bringing back for spontaneous spellcasters such as sorcerers? Given how sharp their Spells Known limits are, this might be a way to allow for some greater thematic diversity in what they can do, particularly as spells tend to be one of the greatest points of proliferation over the life of an edition. In terms of layout in the rules, it would essentially merge two different spell descriptions under a single heading, with the standard listing and then a subsequent "Reversed" section.
Wizards, clerics, and other preparatory spellcasters, under this paradigm, would still have access to the "reversed" versions of those spells, but would treat them as separate, discrete spells (i.e. the way they do now).
Thoughts on this?
Last edited: