D&D 5E The format of the spell list in the PHB is just plain awful.

[Asatru009]

Those 8 pages wouldn't be trivial.

The PHB is a 320 page book. Most books of this size are assembled in what is known as a "signature". A signature is a group of 4 pages 17" wide by 11" tall that, when folded, make 16 8.5" by 11" pages. If you deviate from a number divisible by 16 (which 320 is (320/16=20)) your printing costs rise substantially. They may have also been given a maximum page count by the people who made the printing deal. So even if they were willing to go to a 336 page count, they couldn't.

All of that being said, there were ways to add information to make the spell lists more usable for the customers that wouldn't have expanded page count at all.

Wow, that's a whole bunch of info that restrains page count I was unaware of. Although I may have seen something about all that floating around somewhere.

Since I am not a layout or design person, care to fill me in on how that could be done? I'm assuming changing font size or something?

 

[GX.Sigma]

There are plenty of ways to add text and keep the same page count. For example, some of the appendices could be trimmed. Halfling art could be deleted. Gnomes and Bards could be removed.

 

[Agamon]

Adding classes on the Level line would not have added 47 pages to the spell list.

1. Exaggeration is exaggerating.

2. That is not every change wanted by every person in this thread.

Otherwise, good point!*


*I'm being somewhat facetious here, just in case you also want to take it at face value.

 

[Agamon]

There are plenty of ways to add text and keep the same page count. For example, some of the appendices could be trimmed. Halfling art could be deleted. Gnomes and Bards could be removed.

Exactly. I hate spells, they could just get rid of those, too. Then there would be lots of spare pages for a big spell list.

 

[Iosue]

Looking up spells in the middle of a game can be a pain, and in that case, alphabetical spell descriptions is awesome.

The only thing I think they should have had is page numbers next to the spells in the spell lists.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Even little icons denoting the school would have been sufficient. I also find it a pain that you can't just look at the list and identify which spells are rituals.

I like the approach that they've taken with a number of recent products by having additional material online for download. Yes, it's also somewhat annoying, but the majority of the monsters for Hoard of the Dragon Queen are not in the book, the are online only. I mention this because I think the list of monsters in the back is far less useful than more thorough spell lists. And while it wouldn't maintain consistency in presentation, if they really felt the need to include the monster section, they could have done it in a table like the 1st Ed DMG did.

I do think that listing the descriptions alphabetically makes the most sense, (and avoids duplicate entries), and it's really not that difficult to compile your own list or use some of the online tools that other have generated. I'm also happy that the two spell casters in the current campaign are a ranger and a druid. This is particularly important to me because I'm also using the majority of the spells available in earlier editions and it would have taken a lot longer to compile lists of cleric and wizard spells for them!

Randy

 

[Agamon]

Looking up spells in the middle of a game can be a pain, and in that case, alphabetical spell descriptions is awesome.

The only thing I think they should have had is page numbers next to the spells in the spell lists.

If this actually helped, it would be marginal, at best. If the spells weren't listed alphabetically, page numbers would be a must. But they are.

Let's say I'm trying to find Detect Magic. If it listed the page number (IDHTBIFOM, so let's say, pg 287), I'd flip over, see pg 295, flip back a bit, see pg 284, then page forward to 287.

Right now, I want to find Detect Magic, I open the (color-coded) Magic section to roughly the D section, maybe see Healing Word, flip back to Call Lightning, page forward to Detect Magic. And I can do that without having to reference the spell in the list first to see what page its on.

 

[steeldragons]

The problem I can see, and it's not really a problem actually, with those who want the schools noted (and I agree! They should be!), is that most spells are applicable to multiple schools.

In the case of WotC, I suspect it was the daunting task of making the choice for the player, if they were going to list only 1 school...which history suggests they would want to do. Keeping it open/leaving for the player/DM to decide is more "open" design. Fluff to taste.

Take, say, Shield. "It's an evocation!" many yell as a kneejerk because it is one of those "generic magical energy/force" spells. It is, most certainly, abjuration also as it is specifically a defensive/protection spell. But could it also be a conjuration? You are bringing this energy shield into being out of nothing...conjuring it up...Necromancy? You create a shield-like field of necrotic energy or shadow-stuff (same dimensions, same everything) that blocks incoming missiles/protects you.

Secure Shelter? Same story (though I'd be more inclined to make conjuration and abjuration the base and evocation the alternate possibility).

Is Prismatic Spray an evocation -just harnessed energy/-ies mashed together by the spell? A transmutation -many of the beams change things from one to another or teleport/maze you? A conjuration -bringing all of these many effects into existence at once? Are you conjuring a sliver or opening a rift to the Plane of Magic Rainbows? Or even a necromancy spell (are heavy damage and insta-death different beams anymore?)?? Or [I would think it's a stretch, but...] is it the uber-powerful version of the illusionist's staple, Color Spray...making it an illusion spell at its base (and conjuration to infuse with that lil' extra oomph of "reality" high-level illusion spells typically get)? What does it get labelled as?

Fluff can be written to explain (maybe not fully or entirely logical, but it is magic after all) pretty much anything.

Now, I don't get why WotC couldn't have just listed more than one school as was done once upon a time. But I suspect that that desire not to pinpoint...and to create a demand for their handy-dandy spell-by-class card packs...are the main reasons you don't see a "school" line in the spell descriptions.

For things that would be applicable to more than, say, 3 schools (and there really aren't many) just making it a "universal" tag, allowable by any school, would suffice...for me.