D&D (2024) What's your opinion on the standardization of Spellcasters?

[doctorbadwolf]

Not really, 2014 treats known spells as somehow better than prepared. If it treated them as equal, sorcerers and bards would get an equal amount of know spells to wizards and clerics prepared ones.

That is the opposite of treating known spells as better than prepared.

The game treats them as equal, in spite of the spells themselves being unchanged, and the only difference being that one gets less versatility and fewer spells castable.

If knowing enough known spells to be equivalent to a certain amount of prepared spells is somehow broken, how is that same amount of prepared spells not equally broken?

What on earth are you talking about? I can’t parse this in any way that follows from any previous statement in this thread, much less in the post you’re replying to.

Maybe you misread my post?

Forcing everybody to prepare isn't a fix but a copout, and one very antithetical to the nature of sorcerers. A sorcerer that prepares spells is not a sorcerer IMO.

If sorcerers prepare spells, I’ll be willing to have the sorcerer discussion. Not until then.

It’s not arbitrarily different. It’s so people who like different things can all play characters that suit their tastes. Don’t like vancian casting, don’t play the vancian class. Don’t like AEDU, don’t play the AEDU class. Etc.

But that is exactly arbitrarily different. It’s different literally so that a different option exists.

I agree with you, personally. But you know, earlier today I was talking with a colleague about a D&D character she was thinking about making. Had a neat story idea but wasn’t sure what class to play. Someone else mentioned druid and she said, “oh, but is that one of the casters that has to prepare their spells every day?” I get the impression @Vaalingrade feels similarly. They might say something similar about prepared casting to what you said above about classic vancian. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were some classes those people could play where they don’t have to do that, and there were classes you and I could play that do prepare spells?

That would be terrible, IMO, for the reasons I said upthread (I think). Variant Spellcasting types in the PHB as a player facing option would be rad as hell. Making a whole class unplayable to some folks just so other folks can have their spell points caster would be the worst of all possible options, IMO.

 

[tetrasodium]

You prepare the niche spells on the days when you have a particular scheme in mind for them. I don't see much difference.

And I'm not opining on what made sense in a pre-5e system or the relative merits of 5e by comparison. OneD&D so far is keeping the same lower number of slots, and just weirdly fixing the spells prepared to it for no particular reason. I don't see how that repairs anything. Now if a prepared caster decides they need a paricular obscure level 3 spell for a paricular scheme, say Feign Death, that is one of their 3 level 3 spells for the day (exclusive of special class or subclass bonus options), and level 3 is brimming with amazing spells. This is much more restrictive on using an obscure spell than 5e where a prepared caster could boot a prepared spell of any level. 5e is still more restrictive than prior editions where there were more slots, but this doesn't fix that (to the extent it's a problem) except to the extent that if your list had a real dud level of spells you'd be obligated to prepare 1-3 of them anyway.

Of course it's hard to gauge because so far we've only seen it in the context of memorized casters who are being turned into prepared casters, which makes them much less restricted under this scheme on the whole. In overall power level this is an upgrade, even if an unnecessarily complex limitation.

Upon further reflection I also have to ask WotC what ludonarrative they are actually telling with the weird retro-vancian rework of neo-vancian casting. The spell slot and preparation system has always been a metagame conceit, but having spells prepared proportionate to spell slots but not actually tied to them seems like a whole additional level of gamey abstraction, telling no game narrative, but rather just preferring a slightly simpler progression grid over actual balance or actual meaningful simplicity or accessibility.

Playtest what a good, balanced number of spells for each class to have prepared at each character level is, and give them that number in a column on the character progression chart. That's all they've got to do.

It has nothing to do with what made sense pre-5e. Those spells still exist in 5e just the opportunity cost to prepare them is much much higher than it was before, "I could prepare it & we could come back tomorrow" is not the same thing as having a niche spell prepared at a low opportunity cost & casting it when the niche comes up. 5e full casters lost up to 11 prep slots total, the flex-vancian prep solves that & makes room for those other spells at a justifiable opportunity cost as lower level slots start losing their value for the spells they once were used for

 

[Benjamin Olson]

It has nothing to do with what made sense pre-5e. Those spells still exist in 5e just the opportunity cost to prepare them is much much higher than it was before, "I could prepare it & we could come back tomorrow" is not the same thing as having a niche spell prepared at a low opportunity cost & casting it when the niche comes up. 5e full casters lost up to 11 prep slots total, the flex-vancian prep solves that & makes room for those other spells at a justifiable opportunity cost as lower level slots start losing their value for the spells they once were used for

Look it's a little hard to conceptualize because, as I mentioned before, we have only gotten write-ups so far of classes that were not prepared before, but I just don't think "niche" spells are going to get prepared by the prepared casters any more than they already were. You're still just going to prepare the two or three most generally useful spells of each level unless you have a plan to do something specific with a niche spell. It's now a little less restrictive in terms of overall number, but more restrictive in terms of each level. Nystul's Magic Aura, or whatever you consider a niche spell is still not going to make the cut at the expense of Invisibilty, Suggestion, or Mirror Image on a daily basis. I would argue that at levels with lots of great spells (like 1-3) this actually makes it a lot harder for someone to justify preparing a niche spell unless they are 100% sure they are using it that day.

 

[Charlaquin]

But that is exactly arbitrarily different. It’s different literally so that a different option exists.

It isn’t arbitrary, it’s for a very specific purpose, to give players options to play the way they like.

That would be terrible, IMO, for the reasons I said upthread (I think). Variant Spellcasting types in the PHB as a player facing option would be rad as hell. Making a whole class unplayable to some folks just so other folks can have their spell points caster would be the worst of all possible options, IMO.

I don’t understand why you would even want to play (for example) the Vancian class if you don’t like Vancian magic. So what if it’s “unplayable” for you, when the reason it’s unplayable is that it’s something you wouldn’t want to play. You can just not play it, and everyone wins.

 

[MoonSong]

If sorcerers prepare spells, I’ll be willing to have the sorcerer discussion. Not until then.

Not a betting bunny, but I'd bet carrots to dollars that it is the designer's intention. There is nothing so far that is reassuring otherwise, and we have lots of antecedents that indicate it is the case. The multiclassing rules, the UAs in the run towards Tasha's, the rewrite of Magic Initiate, and the language of Crawford during the videos.

I'm confident that they intend to have a sorcerer that will prepare spells. So the discussion is unavoidable, and I'd rather have it sooner rather than later. Particularly when later could mean ending up with another rushed design round away from the public eye and an equally underwhelming design.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Don't all* casters in 5e prepare Level + Attribute bonus in spells? Don't you have to decide to make room for niche spells regardless?

* Not warlock and bard, obviously.

 

[Charlaquin]

Not a betting bunny, but I'd bet carrots to dollars that it is the designer's intention. There is nothing so far that is reassuring otherwise, and we have lots of antecedents that indicate it is the case. The multiclassing rules, the UAs in the run towards Tasha's, the rewrite of Magic Initiate, and the language of Crawford during the videos.

I'm confident that they intend to have a sorcerer that will prepare spells. So the discussion is unavoidable, and I'd rather have it sooner rather than later. Particularly when later could mean ending up with another rushed design round away from the public eye and an equally underwhelming design.

I don’t doubt that it’s the developers’ intent. However, I think it’s far from unavoidable. It’s no accident that they showed it off on the Bard and Ranger first. They want to get the audience’s impression of the flex-Vancian system before they put forward a sorcerer that uses it. So that if the system itself proves unpopular, they can pivot on the sorcerer (and, you know, other casting classes) and try something else with them. But if it proves popular, I’m sure we’ll see it on more casters (possibly all casters) in the future.

 

[tetrasodium]

Not a betting bunny, but I'd bet carrots to dollars that it is the designer's intention. There is nothing so far that is reassuring otherwise, and we have lots of antecedents that indicate it is the case. The multiclassing rules, the UAs in the run towards Tasha's, the rewrite of Magic Initiate, and the language of Crawford during the videos.

I'm confident that they intend to have a sorcerer that will prepare spells. So the discussion is unavoidable, and I'd rather have it sooner rather than later. Particularly when later could mean ending up with another rushed design round away from the public eye and an equally underwhelming design.

I suspect the same. Going by the wording of elements that we have in the packet and what sorcerer has had in the past I wouldn't be surprised to see some of this for the sorcerer:

• May go back to being con based as it was in at least part of Next
• Will follow a similar flex-vancian style of prep that bard & ranger uses
  • possibly with a wider (or similarly narrowed) selection from the arcane list
• The sorcerer will go back to having more spell slots
  
  Spoiler: ie this was their 3.5 progression for example of 'more'

  ——————— Spells per Day ———————————
  1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
  3 — — — — — — — —
  4 — — — — — — — —
  5 — — — — — — — —
  6 3 — — — — — — —
  6 4 — — — — — — —
  6 5 3 — — — — — —
  6 6 4 — — — — — —
  6 6 5 3 — — — — —
  6 6 6 4 — — — — —
  6 6 6 5 3 — — — —
  6 6 6 6 4 — — — —
  6 6 6 6 5 3 — — —
  6 6 6 6 6 4 — — —
  6 6 6 6 6 5 3 — —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 4 — —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3 —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
  Or they will have the same number of prep slots with a bunch of sorcerery points each long rest that they can use to create slots
• Will almost certainly shed the old learn 1 spell/level & just prep from the arcane list or a selection of it like bard& ranger do.
• Be the home to swordmage & other gish flavored caster archetypes with dragon sorc & such following suit (especially if it's con based)
  • This might go with a shift from 1/1 caster progression to 2/3 caster progression to make room in the class budget for more powerful bloodline themed abilities to fit those

The wizard:

• Might have a different spellbook growth to limit dip power since so many ritual spells are first level (ie start with 2-5 in spellbook & gain 3/level with some archetypes giving school or theme based spells on top)
  • or that will be similar to now but there will be much better guidance on ensuring scrolls spellbooks & places to copy spells from
• Will have spell slot numbers & progression similar to they have now
• Will have a quantum or semiquantum spellbook where much if not all of the spells within are always considered prepared
• Will be fragile & squishy again to a meaningful degree either directly or via other system changes that seem likely
• Will be the home of pure caster type archetypes that already tend to lean towards wizards
  • Those archetypes are likely to bring more oomph to spells within their niche that is made available by rebalancing existing & often borked spells as we've seen a couple examples of already.

Warlock & priest group I have no guesses on yet.

 

[MoonSong]

May go back to being con based as it was in at least part of Next

It has never been con-based. Only in derivative games like Radiance. Warlock was Con based in 4e, but sorcerer has never been that.

• Will follow a similar flex-vancian style of prep that bard & ranger uses
  • possibly with a wider (or similarly narrowed) selection from the arcane list
• The sorcerer will go back to having more spell slots
• ——————— Spells per Day ———————————
  1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
  3 — — — — — — — —
  4 — — — — — — — —
  5 — — — — — — — —
  6 3 — — — — — — —
  6 4 — — — — — — —
  6 5 3 — — — — — —
  6 6 4 — — — — — —
  6 6 5 3 — — — — —
  6 6 6 4 — — — — —
  6 6 6 5 3 — — — —
  6 6 6 6 4 — — — —
  6 6 6 6 5 3 — — —
  6 6 6 6 6 4 — — —
  6 6 6 6 6 5 3 — —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 4 — —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3 —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 —
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 3
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4
  6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Or they will have the same number of prep slots with a bunch of sorcerery points each long rest that they can use to create slots
• Will almost certainly shed the old learn 1 spell/level & just prep from the arcane list or a selection of it like bard& ranger do.

I see these as very likely to happen. Which I personally don't like.

Be the home to swordmage & other gish flavored caster archetypes with dragon sorc & such following suit (especially if it's con based)

• This might go with a shift from 1/1 caster progression to 2/3 caster progression to make room in the class budget for more powerful bloodline themed abilities to fit those

On the other hand, I don't think these have a shot at even showing up.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It isn’t arbitrary, it’s for a very specific purpose, to give players options to play the way they like.

There are other ways to do that, like allowing one class to use different Spellcasting methods.

I don’t understand why you would even want to play (for example) the Vancian class if you don’t like Vancian magic. So what if it’s “unplayable” for you, when the reason it’s unplayable is that it’s something you wouldn’t want to play. You can just not play it, and everyone wins.

No class is just their Spellcasting specifics. I’m never playing a Paladin rather than a ranger just because I prefer prepared casting, and even the wizard is more than just how they learn and prepare spells.

I want to play a wizard over a sorcerer because of the narrative and themes of the two classes and how wizard fits my character.