D&D 5E What high-level spells could warp society?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The rules only give us very limited ways to gain class levels, so if it still requires going on adventures and either killing monsters or achieving quests, it might not be possible for an entire village to get that many high level PCs, because there just aren't that many "quests" around. (And they kinda drain the pool of quests, once you defeated the evil baron, the goblin hordes and the manticore, they are gone and don't regrow).
If you can gain levels by just attending school, definitely a lot more would go to schools for the various types of magic.

Spells that cleanse or create food and water and spells that help growing plants would be very important and would likely allow sustaining much higher populations with less people working on the fields. (Kinda like the invention Haber-Bosch process and all other agricultural advances.). This would free a lot of people doing other jobs. if magic can be studied like science and you can actually advance magical knowledge (which the rules don't state how, you can't invent new spells), this might transform society considerably. But if magic remains "arcane", unscrutable, and you can just learn the rotes that exist, it might lead to very different technological advancement then ours. There is clear advantage to just studying all the various forms of magic, becoming a bard, cleric, druid or wizard, but it would be a lot less obvious to do real "science". This might actually stunt technological development - there wouldn't be magic-powered cars, because there aren't existing rules for that. The best you can get are summoned animals or elementals to drag your vehicles (and many such spells don't have sufficient duration. But maybe you could "rent" a Mount spell instead of a horse. It's gone when the spell expires, but you don't need to worry about food.)

All the various healing spells would probably create a health care system where the "medical casters" would be called to heal any ailments people suffer from. Resourrection spells tend to be very expensive and require highly trained clerics, so many people might not be able to afford it, but maybe there would be a kind of "life insurance" system where people can buy in so they can be raised if they die prematurely from accident or muder, but if you want to live forever, you might need to be rich yourself. I don't know the exact 5E spell lists, but it might lead to interesting organzations. Obviously, Clerics and chruches would play an important role in the health care system, but Druids might be more common among the lesser populated, wilder area, and Bards might also be popular. Imagine brothels and bars becoming important health care providers?

 

[Reynard]

1. Rules aren't physics.

This is the most important bit. The world doesn't operate on "the rules" and people in the world don't follow PC rules. The farther one assumes the baseline everday reality of the fiction is from the real world, the harder it is to have a world that makes any sense.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I like to turn to some of my most favorite points from the 2024 DMG.

1. Rules aren't physics.
2. The game is not an economy.
3. Combat is for enemies.
4. Rules rely on good faith interpretation.

The rules are designed to ensure a fun experience while playing rather than offering a realistic model for how the world as a whole works. Don't get me wrong, if that's something you want to do, more power to you, but it's not the intent of the authors of 5th edition.

That said, if I'm a Wizard, I'm level 17 by the time I can cast a 9th level spell. I've probably got my own magical interests to pursue and don't want to waste a lot of time on whatever petty problems the local nobles have. Do I need money? Probably not. Maybe the baron can offer some political favors or considerations but odds are I'll exact a steep price. Is he going to force me to help? How does he like the idea of Meteor Swarm or Earthquake targeting his castle? (I can cast Wish and get Earthquake that way.)

The first three rules are to me the worst parts of 5.5. None of that is what I want.

 

[Reynard]

The first three rules are to me the worst parts of 5.5. None of that is what I want.

Those have been present mostly forever. The rules weren't physics in AD&D even. The gp economy never worked. And what does "combat is for enemies" even mean? Once you start stabbing someone, it is an enemy?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Those have been present mostly forever. The rules weren't physics in AD&D even. The gp economy never worked. And what does "combat is for enemies" even mean? Once you start stabbing someone, it is an enemy?

They mean the combat rules don't apply to non-PC action.

Those rules used to be far less clear about these ideas and had some wiggle room, even to the point that it didn't always apply. Now it is more clear and they apply all the time, and that focus makes the game less welcoming to those who want more support for anything else.

 

[Reynard]

They mean the combat rules don't apply to non-PC action.

I don't know what this means.

Those rules used to be far less clear about these ideas and had some wiggle room, even to the point that it didn't always apply. Now it is more clear and they apply all the time, and that focus makes the game less welcoming to those who want more support for anything else.

This seems like a weird criticism to throw at 5E, which traditionally has been criticized for NOT having consistent rules for many things and requiring GMs to (or giving them the freedom to, depending on your perspective) make rulings over rules. I would buy it if that was your criticism of 3.x or Pathfinder, where rules try and cover "everything" but that is just not the case with 5E.

That said, my DMG does not arrive until today so maybe they have altered their philosophy on this front, but I somehow doubt it based on the rules presentation in the PHB.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't know what this means.

This seems like a weird criticism to throw at 5E, which traditionally has been criticized for NOT having consistent rules for many things and requiring GMs to (or giving them the freedom to, depending on your perspective) make rulings over rules. I would buy it if that was your criticism of 3.x or Pathfinder, where rules try and cover "everything" but that is just not the case with 5E.

That said, my DMG does not arrive until today so maybe they have altered their philosophy on this front, but I somehow doubt it based on the rules presentation in the PHB.

It's not the WotC 5e rules themselves I want to apply; I homebrew a lot of stuff I don't agree with in the rulebooks. My issues are the principles embodied in those three rules mentioned above. I don't want those to apply to any D&D-style game I run, no matter the specific rules in that specific system.

 

[Reynard]

It's not the WotC 5e rules themselves I want to apply; I homebrew a lot of stuff I don't agree with in the rulebooks. My issues are the principles embodied in those three rules mentioned above. I don't want those to apply to any D&D-style game I run, no matter the specific rules in that specific system.

So since no D&D has ever conformed to what you want, what house rules or other methods have you used to get them there?

 

[Micah Sweet]

So since no D&D has ever conformed to what you want, what house rules or other methods have you used to get them there?

Level Up comes closest in modern D&D (and I do modify it as needed) but my actual favorites are OSR games like the Without Number games and ACKS. I just lack a group of like-minded OSR players.

 

[Reynard]

Level Up comes closest in modern D&D (and I do modify it as needed) but my actual favorites are OSR games like the Without Number games and ACKS. I just lack a group of like-minded OSR players.

That doesn't really answer my question. I am asking you how the rules you use represent physics, how the economies work, and how how combat is "not just for PCs." Specifically. What in LevelUp, for example, makes the rules more aligned with the physics of the world than 2014 5e?