D&D 5E Spell research

[MG.0]

Has anyone used spell research in 5th edition? Would you restrict it to Wizards?

Spell research would seem to not fit well with the concept of 'Spells Known' used by Sorcerers and Warlocks and archetypes of several other classes, but it seems unduly unfair that Wizards would be the only class that can research spells.

Regardless of whether or not you allow research, there is an issue DM custom spells will probably face: namely what class spell list they should belong to. I think it is more difficult to determine than in 1st or 2nd edition (I have no experience with 3rd or 4th). For example, in 1st you had Cleric spells (healing, alignment, dealing with undead, etc.) and Magic-User spells for elemental evoking, illusions, etc. But in 5th, what criteria do you use to say a spell is a better fit for say a Sorcerer or Warlock than a Wizard? I don't see a reliable pattern looking at the PHB.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Yes, I've used it. No, I don't restrict it to wizards. I've let druids research spells, and I would let a Sorcerer or Warlock research spells to add them to his personal "warlock spell list" so he can select them as "known spells" on his next level-up. Think of it kind of like a kid adding sheet music to his piano folder--he still has to practice the music until he really "knows" it enough to cast it at will under pressure.

I don't think the issue is any harder in 5E than it was in 2nd edition. Both clerics and wizards had incredibly broad portfolios in 2nd, especially once the Tome of Magic came out (two years after the PHB? pretty early anyway). Clerics had illusions in 2nd, they were just kind of different from wizard illusions--I remember one spell called Solipcism from the sphere of Mind which created an illusion visible only to the cleric, which he could nevertheless treat as if it were real. Clerics had spells for evoking (Flame Strike), they were just never quite as efficient as the wizard equivalents.

So both 2nd edition and 5E rely on the DM to make a judgment call for what spells "fit." I think I'd say that if the wizard's theme is "be prepared," the theme of the Sorcerer is "reactively dealing with trouble after it appears". I'm less sure about warlocks, but I do like what Frog God's Book of Lost Spells does with warlocks and voodoo dolls, so I'd allow any of those spells to be researched in my game by a warlock.

 

[Wik]

Yeah, we've had a bit of spell research going on - basically, the PCs are trying to find a way to make a sentient magic pool transfer its soul into a mechanical ferret (long story). This will be a series of quest lines, of course, because it's D&D and that's how I like to run things.

As for spells that have mechanical benefits in play, I'm all for PCs trying... but they rarely do. I think really, though, you just need to find a similar spell, and see how it'd work. Remember that if a spell does two different things, it should be of a much higher level, because of the way the action economy works. For example, if the spell was both a fireball (3rd level spell) and a protective spell similar to resist energy (2nd level spell), it shouldn't just be a 4th or maybe even 5th level spell, but higher, because it's letting the caster get away with two different spells at once.

As for spell lists and where they belong - I think [MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION] got it right. Give it a quick glance. Wizards are all about preparing, sorcerers are about brute force. I'd add that warlocks get spells that are creepy in nature, and often deal necrotic or psychic damage... and might have a bad side tradeoff to them. Also, if you're not entirely sure... you can always put the spell on multiple lists!