D&D 5E I think I've cracked a fair way to buff sorcerers

[DND_Reborn]

By costing less I meant by retaining the spell for a full minute when you use the feature, in so you could cast it more than once. I wasn't clear on that sorry.

Ah! Sure, no problem.

I added that simply because I put in the bonus action, so I wanted the effect to linger more than just the "end of your turn." I could probably change it to the "end of your next turn" so they could possibly use the spell twice... Either way, since they still have to use a spell slot for it each time the cast it (as normal), it doesn't bother me if it is a bit more useful.

 

[clearstream]

Here is my version of a write-up:

View attachment 115858

This grants sorcerers versatility, but at a significant cost. Also, the spell is known for as long as 10 rounds, in case the character wants to use it more than once.

I think it mostly follows the idea of the OP, if only in spirit if not exactly.

@Quirriff , thanks for the idea! I am going to run this by our table next session.

Not bad. I would trial it without the doubled up limits. Often it is better to playtest the simpler, stronger version of a mechanic first.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Not bad. I would trial it without the doubled up limits. Often it is better to playtest the simpler, stronger version of a mechanic first.

Thanks. My tip-o-the-hat to the OP for the concept. I'll pitch it to the table as is, and see if they are interested in adding it. Personally, I like the idea of using sorcery points to bring out magic normally not accessible.

 

[clearstream]

Thanks. My tip-o-the-hat to the OP for the concept. I'll pitch it to the table as is, and see if they are interested in adding it. Personally, I like the idea of using sorcery points to bring out magic normally not accessible.

The issue with first playtest with doubled-up limits (costs points, and has a rest-recharge) is that it adds complexity that might be unnecessary, and perforce gives a less clear picture of the base power-level (the real power of the ability) in part because rests vary from group to group and in part because you've prevented yourself knowing what happens if a player can just use all their points that way. Maybe that's fine... but you will never know as the CHA limit will distort the use in play.

The goal of prototyping is (or should be) to test the the most important dimensions of the mechanic. Constraints can always be layered on after. What is this mechanic for? It is to add versatility by allowing sorcerers to spend their points on broadening their spell choice.

IMO you correctly remove the no meta-magic application limit, but then you arbitrarily add a per rest limit. The action and duration you've added are right, because they are basic to making it work in play... how/when can I use it, how long do I have the gained spell for: those have to be answered.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The issue with first playtest with doubled-up limits (costs points, and has a rest-recharge) is that it adds complexity that might be unnecessary, and perforce gives a less clear picture of the base power-level (the real power of the ability) in part because rests vary from group to group and in part because you've prevented yourself knowing what happens if a player can just use all their points that way. Maybe that's fine... but you will never know as the CHA limit will distort the use in play.

The goal of prototyping is (or should be) to test the the most important dimensions of the mechanic. Constraints can always be layered on after. What is this mechanic for? It is to add versatility by allowing sorcerers to spend their points on broadening their spell choice.

IMO you correctly remove the no meta-magic application limit, but then you arbitrarily add a per rest limit. The action and duration you've added are right, because they are basic to making it work in play... how/when can I use it, how long do I have the gained spell for: those have to be answered.

The CHA limit per long rest was to prevent higher level sorcerers from routinely adding 1st and even 2nd level spells throughout the day. It might be overkill since I imagine more sorcerers a likely to hoard sorcerer points for metamagic. But, when you consider that you can swap a spell slot for additional metamagic, it might result in too many uses per long rest.

Also, since CHA represents inner strength or whatever, tapping into that inner wellspring of magic only a few times makes sense to me flavor-wise as well.

We can play test it with the limit in place, and if we find it is in greater demand (I don't think that will be the case), we can switch it to a short or long rest, or remove it entirely.

 

[FrogReaver]

I like it lore-wise. The power to cast any of the spells is within them, but those they have not mastered are difficult and taxing.

Yea at least the flavor is more in line with a sorcerers flavor. I'm not sure it's a good plan from a game standpoint or even a good plan from a mechanics/balance standpoint. It definitely leaves the sorcerer and wizards identity as distinct though.

 

[FrogReaver]

The CHA limit per long rest was to prevent higher level sorcerers from routinely adding 1st and even 2nd level spells throughout the day. It might be overkill since I imagine more sorcerers a likely to hoard sorcerer points for metamagic. But, when you consider that you can swap a spell slot for additional metamagic, it might result in too many uses per long rest.

Also, since CHA represents inner strength or whatever, tapping into that inner wellspring of magic only a few times makes sense to me flavor-wise as well.

We can play test it with the limit in place, and if we find it is in greater demand (I don't think that will be the case), we can switch it to a short or long rest, or remove it entirely.

I prefer the initial limit as well.

 

[FrogReaver]

The issue with first playtest with doubled-up limits (costs points, and has a rest-recharge) is that it adds complexity that might be unnecessary, and perforce gives a less clear picture of the base power-level (the real power of the ability) in part because rests vary from group to group and in part because you've prevented yourself knowing what happens if a player can just use all their points that way. Maybe that's fine... but you will never know as the CHA limit will distort the use in play.

The goal of prototyping is (or should be) to test the the most important dimensions of the mechanic. Constraints can always be layered on after. What is this mechanic for? It is to add versatility by allowing sorcerers to spend their points on broadening their spell choice.

IMO you correctly remove the no meta-magic application limit, but then you arbitrarily add a per rest limit. The action and duration you've added are right, because they are basic to making it work in play... how/when can I use it, how long do I have the gained spell for: those have to be answered.

I believe when designing abilities the important starting point is to get them as close as possible to what you anticipate they will be in the end state and then tweaking with your play experience from there. That's one flaw I find with some UA material they produce, they leave it too strong and then nerf it too much from all that feedback heading into release.

 

[FrogReaver]

Classically D&D is based around 4 Achetypes: the Warrior, Thief, Mage and Priest.

As a Mage Archetype sorcerer is way too specialised, being specialised is fine and all but even a fighter or ranger who specialises in archery isn't too bad with a rapier.

So what is the point of playing a sorcerer over a wizard besides role playing elements?

Sorcery points and Metamagic.

However metamagic often doesn't make up for lack of versatility sorcerers have. With "Flexible Casting" you can create new spell slots but so can wizards with Arcane recovery and they have ritual casting and sorcerers do not.

Also oftentimes you're limited by your Meta magic choices too sometimes you can end up at the end of the day with unspent sorcery points.

My solution: Sorcerers can cast any spell on the sorcerer spell list (which BTW is much smaller than the wizard list) that is not on their spells known of a level they can cast. In order to do so they must spend sorcery points equal to the level of slot used. This cannot be used with Metamagic.

This should also make sorcerers an option over Wizard for those that wish to multi-class remember that Wizards have ritual casting and a lot more potential spells known even with this improvement.

It will make spell selection more about what the player wants and how their spell selection would work with their metamagic options. But if they keep using it to cast spells that are not innate to them they'll run out of sorcery point incredibly quickly, but then again you're not using a sorcerer to its full potential if you're not using those sorcery points.

My concerns with this:

1. A player is being forced to know every spell on the sorcerer spell lists effects during combat. That's not something likely to occur. There's 3 table effects this change will produce. Some players will scour the sorcerer list for potentially better options and slow down combat pacing to a crawl. Some will ignore it to keep play fast. Some will write an expanded list of spells they think will be good that they can remember and then keep up with that and only ever cast from it - thus not slowing down play much but also not fully utilizing the ability.

2. I actually think that it will be rare for players to use this ability over metamagic. Perhaps Charisma mod uses per day with no sorcery point component might be more appropriate or if that's too much drop it down to 2 uses per day. I think I like 2 uses per day as a starting point.

I don't think loading sorcery points up with more uses is good design when there's already a complaint of not having enough sorcery points.

 

[clearstream]

The CHA limit per long rest was to prevent higher level sorcerers from routinely adding 1st and even 2nd level spells throughout the day. It might be overkill since I imagine more sorcerers a likely to hoard sorcerer points for metamagic. But, when you consider that you can swap a spell slot for additional metamagic, it might result in too many uses per long rest.

Also, since CHA represents inner strength or whatever, tapping into that inner wellspring of magic only a few times makes sense to me flavor-wise as well.

We can play test it with the limit in place, and if we find it is in greater demand (I don't think that will be the case), we can switch it to a short or long rest, or remove it entirely.

The question is not what the CHA limit is hedging against.

Hedging against issues one imagines might arise at high level on the first prototype of a rule is not the most effective approach. @FrogReaver So far as I can tell, that is exactly why UA material is typically over, rather than under, powered. It's not a flaw, it is an approach that professional designers use to their advantage. Big caveat: it's homebrew so of course one should do as one enjoys. I'm just chiming in to offer tools that could help enhance what people can achieve.

So if you think about what would be (and is) a methodology likely to consistently produce strong mechanics that play well. There will need to be problems or goals to solve for (here we have a great example), divergent solutions, and then prototypes of solutions. The most likely looking prototypes will need to be tested in a range of circumstances, although the focus will be the way the game is mostly played.

A really effective technique is to look at a mechanic that captures as simply as possible your intent, with minimum trimming. It's hard to do, and usually you over-design to start with. The trimming is almost always a layer of obfuscation, that clouds what you could achieve.

Think then about @dnd4vr's speculation. Maybe he is exactly on the money? How would one even know if one only tests a CHA/rest limited version? The best outcome he can get from playtests is to learn if CHA/rest limit comes into play sooner than the sorcery points limit does (meaning, ironically, that it is unwarranted). Or he will discover that the CHA/rest limit does kick-in before SP runs out and then...? He still won't know if allowing more was going to be egregious.

And think about @FrogReaver's speculation (2), which strikes out in the opposite direction. The overwhelming majority of opinion I have read about SP is that they are too few, not too many. So I agree with @FrogReaver. Even if I did not, however, I don't think you prove this as quickly as possible by double-braking.

And that is the point, really. Playtesting is a scarce resource. It's hard enough to get the group together, explain the rule, try it out in only one circumstance! Let alone do it for the necessary canon. Playtesting also aligns with better game mechanics: there's a strong correlation between more testing and better games. One needs to make each bout of testing as effective as possible. Any obfuscation introduced into the solution just gets in the way of quickly judging how well your core idea has solved the problem.