D&D (2024) Should bring back diverse spellcaster level design.

[TaranTheWanderer]

I’ve had an idea bouncing in my head for a while. Dangerous Journeys had a really rich magic system and it would be nice to have something similar:

with the official books out, there are around 506 spells. If you broke them up(or made new spells - you’d have to to make the lists even) you could have 16 distinct spellcasting lists if you put 30 spells per list. (I suggest less)

(this is just brain storming)

illusion
White (healing and buffing)
Dark (necromancy and death)
General
Divination
Abjuration
Etc…

Each list has 3 or 4 spells per level: one utility, attack, defence maybe crowd control. Some lists will lean more to specific types: divination might have more utility while elemental might have more attack. All lists go to 9th level. Or 8th or whatever.

a wizard starts with General magic which has a good mix of offence and defense and utility but can only access 4th or 5th level spells at most.

at 3rd, as a class feature, they take a specialty (a major)which allows them to pick from one of the other lists and a spell level cap of 9th in that school and grants them access to some powers as they level. They take a minor which allows them access to a 3rd list but can only access, at most, 3rd level spells from their minor school. So a 20th level wizard might have up to 5th level General spells, 9th level dark magic spells and 3rd level elemental spells. And access to NO other spells.

another mage might have White and illusion. So, as they level up, wizards really look different.

a generalist, on top of whatever powers you give to them can access minor spells from any list and gets access to 9th level general spells, including Wish.

Spellsinging (for bards)

clerics have own spell list with small lists based on the portfolios of their gods. Or portfolios gave access to some of the spell lists above. It would be cool if they had long religious ceremonies that did cool stuff.

warlocks just take spells from whatever list is thematically appropriate for their patron.

way less overlap.

 

[the Jester]

I'd rather have 20 distinct levels of spellcasting.

No more weird corner cases where one spell of a level is just way better for that level, but not as good at the next level. No more clunky attempt to scale non-damage spells up.

Oh, and everyone gets a separate spell list. No copies.

The pare down the number of spells in the book, we remove the wizard.

Sounds like you'd enjoy the powers from 4e. They were basically what you describe.

 

[cbwjm]

I think if I was going to redo spell lists, I'd follow pathfinder and create 3 or 4 types of magic with each class having access to a single list. There would be crossover in this system with many spells appearing on more than one list.

Possibly I'd base it on the colours of magic the gathering but each class would be able to add additional colours to their repertoire.

Or I'd throw all of the spells into a single list, create a single magic-user class and your subclass would alter your access, perhaps outright limiting some spells, otherwise improving your skill with certain spells.

I don't think any of these methods will actually happen, though maybe wotc will simplify things like pathfinder in the future. I do feel like the way dnd magic is now is so ingrained though that they'll keep individual spell lists for each class.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Sounds like you'd enjoy the powers from 4e. They were basically what you describe.

Yes. Yes I did.

Except the Daily part.

And the removing wizards.

 

[steeldragons]

I don't know if a breakdown of 16 magic topics is necessarily the way to go. ..30ish spells per grouping, divided across (let's say) 9 spell levels.

It is certainly doable, of course. You need to use more than 3 or 4 spells per level, though...simply to provide the "greatest hits" of different spells D&D folks expect. In my homebrew, I have 10-15 basically, for lower levels, with the standardized lists of "known spells" diminishing in number into the 5th, 6th, and 7+ levels. So, I get it, and its possible.

But I don't think it would really work for a D&D flavor of magic.

First, there is a certain amount of overlapping stuff that is, not only expected, but makes sense. Clerics would (and should) have a good deal of Abjuration magics...so do Abjuring mages, "White" witches, druids protecting their sacred sites... Conjurers sure need to know how to defend themselves from specific kinds of creatures. Trying to work a system without overlap, again possible, but I don't think preferred by the majority of players.

That said, I am fully on board that a reimagining of the "specialist school" structure we've had since 2e is definitely possible, warranted, and -I would think- could improve the flavor and archetypes of casters significantly more than what we are used to. I completely think different classes should have access to different spell lists...but that doesn't mean every spell has to be different.

In the second, it just seems like a bit more complicated than our "simplified/back to basics" D&D sensibilities have been for this past edition.

The third issue, I see, is basically related to #2 in that you begin to venture down the rabbit hole of "divine spheres" -which started in 2e with, what, like a dozen? And then 3.x comes along and we get umpteen more. Why have a dedicated spell list of "Nature spells," that includes your elemental and weather and animal and plant spells... when you can have a spell list of "Plant" and "Animal" and "Elemental?" NO WAIT, no "Elemental" (that includes weather), but "Fire" and "Air" and "Water" and "Earth" and, then, a separate "Weather," and ya know, some people count "Spirit/Soul/Aether" as a fifth element, do them too! Some use "Stone" and "Metal" and "Wood" as individual "Earth" spheres/flavors....and...and...and... You see how this goes?

I think it would be more palatable for a new iteration to have a more defined and distinct breakdown of Magical "sources" and types/ways of making magic, beyond Divine/Arcane with VSM components.

I've seen the breakdowns used by some homebrewers as : Arcane, Divine, Nature ("Primal"), Psychic, and Occult. I think that really covers/provides umbrellas for pretty much any flavor of magic-user we would traditionally need.

Then, you need to decide on the right distinctions of flavor and [flavorful] mechanics for the kinds of casters.

Then, the rest of the ballgame are the actual lists of spells [and/or supernatural powers] for specific casters.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

I think if I was going to redo spell lists, I'd follow pathfinder and create 3 or 4 types of magic with each class having access to a single list. There would be crossover in this system with many spells appearing on more than one list.

Isn’t that how it already is? Several lists with crossover in each list? I suppose it’s currently a curated list for each class (with piles of crossover) rather than a set of lists that classes have access to.

but, yeah, that’s kind of what I’m suggesting: several spell lists that each have unique spells. Class FEATURES give characters access to specific lists. So there may be some overlap there.

interestingly, dangerous journeys used a colour system for magic:
Black (evil stuff like hexing)
White(curing and beneficial)
Grey(illusion)
Red(elemental?)
Green(nature magic)

it also had: witchcraft, necromancy, sorcery, mysticism, and lists of ‘divine’ spells.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

I don't know if a breakdown of 16 magic topics is necessarily the way to go. ..30ish spells per grouping, divided across (let's say) 9 spell levels.

It is certainly doable, of course. You need to use more than 3 or 4 spells per level, though...simply to provide the "greatest hits" of different spells D&D folks expect. In my homebrew, I have 10-15 basically, for lower levels, with the standardized lists of "known spells" diminishing in number into the 5th, 6th, and 7+ levels. So, I get it, and its possible.

But I don't think it would really work for a D&D flavor of magic.

First, there is a certain amount of overlapping stuff that is, not only expected, but makes sense. Clerics would (and should) have a good deal of Abjuration magics...so do Abjuring mages, "White" witches, druids protecting their sacred sites... Conjurers sure need to know how to defend themselves from specific kinds of creatures. Trying to work a system without overlap, again possible, but I don't think preferred by the majority of players.

That said, I am fully on board that a reimagining of the "specialist school" structure we've had since 2e is definitely possible, warranted, and -I would think- could improve the flavor and archetypes of casters significantly more than what we are used to. I completely think different classes should have access to different spell lists...but that doesn't mean every spell has to be different.

In the second, it just seems like a bit more complicated than our "simplified/back to basics" D&D sensibilities have been for this past edition.

The third issue, I see, is basically related to #2 in that you begin to venture down the rabbit hole of "divine spheres" -which started in 2e with, what, like a dozen? And then 3.x comes along and we get umpteen more. Why have a dedicated spell list of "Nature spells," that includes your elemental and weather and animal and plant spells... when you can have a spell list of "Plant" and "Animal" and "Elemental?" NO WAIT, no "Elemental" (that includes weather), but "Fire" and "Air" and "Water" and "Earth" and, then, a separate "Weather," and ya know, some people count "Spirit/Soul/Aether" as a fifth element, do …

The magic system, as is, is a huge list of spells for each class. As I stated, 506 spells. So dividing them into different categories isn’t any more confusing than having a list for each class.

as far as having too few spells/ level, I just imagined class features giving you access to more than one list. So, having two lists gives you 6 to 8 spells/level.

in any case, it’s all theory. I’d just like to see casters look different. Maybe I’m hijacking the thread. If so, I apologize to @Steampunkette

 

[cbwjm]

Isn’t that how it already is? Several lists with crossover in each list? I suppose it’s currently a curated list for each class (with piles of crossover) rather than a set of lists that classes have access to.

It kind of is, but in pathfinder 2e it is split into 4 lists: Arcane, Divine, Primal, and Occult (or eldritch or something, I always forget the name of the 4th one. I looked it up, it was Occult). Then the different classes gain access to a specific list.

Arcane: wizard
Divine: cleric, paladin
Primal: druid, ranger
Occult: bard, witch
Sorcerer: check your bloodline. Might be the same with the witch, I'd have to reread core rules again (actually, it looks like the witch isn't out in Pathfinder 2e, or at least not in the books I have for it.).

I've been reading the old d20 WoW RPG and I quite liked how they worked. You have the main arcanist or healer list that everyone had access to, and then your path (subclass) gave you access to additional spells. Warlocks got conjuration, necromancers got necromancy, makes got various arcane spells. Same with the healer class and the priest, druid, and shaman paths. I'm somewhat tempted to ask my friends if they want to play that system next.

 

[Steampunkette]

You're good, @TaranTheWanderer!

I just want greater variation and interest in the casters.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

It kind of is, but in pathfinder 2e it is split into 4 lists: Arcane, Divine, Primal, and Occult (or eldritch or something, I always forget the name of the 4th one). Then the different classes gain access to a specific list.

Arcane: wizard
Divine: cleric, paladin
Primal: druid, ranger
Occult: bard, witch
Sorcerer: check your bloodline. Might be the same with the witch, I'd have to reread core rules again.

I've been reading the old d20 WoW RPG and I quite liked how they worked. You have the main arcanist or healer list that everyone had access to, and then your path (subclass) gave you access to additional spells. Warlocks got conjuration, necromancers got necromancy, makes got various arcane spells. Same with the healer class and the priest, druid, and shaman paths. I'm somewhat tempted to ask my friends if they want to play that system next.

Yeah, that sounds cool. I really don’t like the direction they went with conjurers being all about teleporting instead of summoning. Maybe there should be a summoner.