D&D (2024) What spells should be dropped?

[Corinnguard]

I like the flavor of separate elements.

That said, there are a few Fire cantrips that should consolidate into a single cantrip.

Spells - Archives of Nethys: Starfinder RPG Database Or you could have a spell like Flight here that condenses Feather Fall, Levitate, and Fly into one spell that produces different effects depending on which spellcasting level you upcast it to. Starfinder's Sylphs have this as a 1/day spell-like ability.

 

[Stalker0]

Spells like Fabricate, Guards and Wards, and yes, Hallucinatory Terrain aren't things you just have prepared every day of the week. You have a limited amount of prepared spells to work with, so now Hallucinatory Terrain has to meet the following requirements to be useful:

1) you had the opportunity to learn the spell after getting all of the more useful ones.
2) you managed to work the spell into your prepared spells list for the day.
3) the actual situation where this would be more useful than any other spell you know.

Can this happen? Sure. And I might also occasionally need Guards and Wards to fortify an abandoned keep to hold off bandits, or Fabricate to turn a bunch of scrap into useful weapons to arm a village. But this isn't something you use on a standard adventuring day, or even more than once per adventure, most likely.

I think that is a poor criteria to drop spells (which I have changed my mind on as the thread has continued). Ultimately how often a spell is used isn't the primary metric, but whether that spell serves an interesting function.

The real question is: Is the spell hitting a niche we think makes sense for a spellcaster to have? For example, is the idea of a spellcaster disguising a large amount of terrain to look like something else a niche that we think is cool for a spellcaster to do?

If the answer is yes, than its about ensuring the mechanics fit the flavor. People have noted that the area of hallucinatory terrain severely impacts its use. If that's the case then it might make sense to bump up the area (and maybe increase the spell level if a large area illusion is just too good for lower levels).

For other spells, its really about duplication. Damage spells are the classic ones here, there are a LOT of damage spells in the game. Are all of them REALLY needed....probably not. A few flavors certainly, but you don't need 20 different damage spells to do the job, and so you could put several of them on the chopping block without really impacting the game.

 

[James Gasik]

I think that is a poor criteria to drop spells (which I have changed my mind on as the thread has continued). Ultimately how often a spell is used isn't the primary metric, but whether that spell serves an interesting function.

The real question is: Is the spell hitting a niche we think makes sense for a spellcaster to have? For example, is the idea of a spellcaster disguising a large amount of terrain to look like something else a niche that we think is cool for a spellcaster to do?

If the answer is yes, than its about ensuring the mechanics fit the flavor. People have noted that the area of hallucinatory terrain severely impacts its use. If that's the case then it might make sense to bump up the area (and maybe increase the spell level if a large area illusion is just too good for lower levels).

For other spells, its really about duplication. Damage spells are the classic ones here, there are a LOT of damage spells in the game. Are all of them REALLY needed....probably not. A few flavors certainly, but you don't need 20 different damage spells to do the job, and so you could put several of them on the chopping block without really impacting the game.

Consider if there was a spell called Arcane Assault. It attacks a single target, and it gives you a choice of, say, fire or cold damage at level 1. Upcast it to level 2, now it can be a cone and you can choose poison or electricity. Upcast it to level 3, now it can be a line, and you can choose acid or necrotic. Upcast to level 4, now it can be a radius burst at range, and deals sonic or force.

Each time it's upcast, it's damage increases to what is appropriate for it's spell level. You can add other options here if you want, like damage over time or whatnot, but you could replace most of the damage spells in the game with one, perpetually evolving spell.

I'd be happy with this, but I'm willing to bet a lot of people would hate it because "legacy" or "it makes casters too good, they only need one spell" or some other such nonsense, lol.

 

[Clint_L]

Geez, everyone is so shy about pruning stuff. When I spring clean, I spring clean. After almost a decade, the current spell lists are like a hoarder's basement: "Gotta keep that because one day it will be super useful!" My rule of thumb of spring cleaning is: unless it's a carefully curated keepsake, if it hasn't been used in the last year, it goes. I would say the same for spells.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Geez, everyone is so shy about pruning stuff. When I spring clean, I spring clean. After almost a decade, the current spell lists are like a hoarder's basement: "Gotta keep that because one day it will be super useful!" My rule of thumb of spring cleaning is: unless it's a carefully curated keepsake, if it hasn't been used in the last year, it goes. I would say the same for spells.

You can totally do that for your home game. Have a curated set of X spells and rules objects that make for a tight and limited game. As long as it is acceptable to everyone at your table, that's great. Other groups value a broad array of options, professionally designed, that let them pull obscure solutions out of nowhere and surprise people. I just want those obscure options to be a bit more balanced and valid compared to each other. I also think some players want themes to have more options. Like having thunder and lightning options at each level, so they can play a Storm sorcerer better, or more necromantic options to play a necromancer better.

As for less powerful or rarely used spells, many people say Witch Bolt isn't that great (I agree it's meh), and it could be cut. But I loved an encounter when Witch Bolt was used to cook a villain whose panick grew until they died from it, because there were circumstances preventing them from getting full cover or getting away. That encounter had some proton pack-level shock and awe factor.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Geez, everyone is so shy about pruning stuff. When I spring clean, I spring clean. After almost a decade, the current spell lists are like a hoarder's basement: "Gotta keep that because one day it will be super useful!" My rule of thumb of spring cleaning is: unless it's a carefully curated keepsake, if it hasn't been used in the last year, it goes. I would say the same for spells.

Nah, spells should be even weirder and less efficiently curated.

When a wizard (and it shouldn’t just be wizards) goes hunting for spells, they should find 2 weird spells you’d only use while at home and 1 spell you gotta really think about to see the genius potential of.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Nah, spells should be even weirder and less efficiently curated.

When a wizard (and it shouldn’t just be wizards) goes hunting for spells, they should find 2 weird spells you’d only use while at home and 1 spell you gotta really think about to see the genius potential of.

I am second to no one in my love of wizard spells, but I disagree.

Put that stuff in a big fat supplemental book. The core book should be the iconic core spells, the steak and potatoes spells. Stuff like Resilient Sphere, movie appearance notwithstanding, doesn't need to be there alongside Wall of Fire or Magic Missile.

Putting in all the crazy stuff creates trap scenarios for new players, where they can end up picking terrible spells because WotC wanted to have 1,000 spells in the PHB or some other nonsense.

The primary audience for weird esoteric spells is experienced players who will know those core spells and be ready to go beyond them. Put those in the next ring out of books.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I am second to no one in my love of wizard spells, but I disagree.

Put that stuff in a big fat supplemental book. The core book should be the iconic core spells, the steak and potatoes spells. Stuff like Resilient Sphere, movie appearance notwithstanding, doesn't need to be there alongside Wall of Fire or Magic Missile.

Putting in all the crazy stuff creates trap scenarios for new players, where they can end up picking terrible spells because WotC wanted to have 1,000 spells in the PHB or some other nonsense.

The primary audience for weird esoteric spells is experienced players who will know those core spells and be ready to go beyond them. Put those in the next ring out of books.

I disagree so strongly I don’t even know how to describe it.

Don’t underestimate new players, nor the place of weird stuff in creating the appeal of D&D in the first place.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I disagree so strongly I don’t even know how to describe it.

Don’t underestimate new players, nor the place of weird stuff in creating the appeal of D&D in the first place.

The true core of D&D spells are plenty weird. But a lot of the secondary and tertiary spells are simply not nearly as good and are definitely trap options.

I play with a lot of new players and multiple times, I've seen people come to the table having picked terrible spells just because their names sounded good and reading all of the choices for cantrips and first level spells was too much for them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The true core of D&D spells are plenty weird. But a lot of the secondary tertiary spells are simply not nearly as good and are definitely trap options.

I play with a lot of new players and multiple times, I've seen people come to the table having picked terrible spells just because their names sounded good and reading all of the choices for cantrips and first level spells was too much for them.

Perhaps those players just need a little help with their spell choices, if they want it.