D&D 5E Couple new Ideas, gauging interest

So I'm looking at doing some new spells and design around the core spellcasting classes to make them more mechanically distinct... and I had a few ideas I wanted to toss out to get opinions on.

1) New spell components.
Yes. We have V,S,M... but what about P and C? P would be "Partner". Spells that you cast with another person and you both benefit from the spell. For an example, consider the following, loosely detailed, spell:

I didn't bother with the schools or spell level or anything, yet. But it's a spell meant to mimic those delightful moments in action-comedies where a couple literally waltzes, tangos, or otherwise dances through violence doing perfectly timed dips and spins to avoid bursts of gunfire or swinging swords. Everyone involved still gets their actions and such, and your speed 'effectively' becomes 40ft between the two of you spending movement on each other.

Partner spells could even scale up to C. Chorus.

A Chorus spell typically, but does not always, involve getting a group of people to sing or otherwise act in harmony together. Consider, for example, a spell which mimics a Paladin's aura of courage centered upon each person who continues to sing in the Chorus. Or chant. Or recite epic poetry. Or does a choreographed dance like a line of Chorus Girls. Or whatever.

While the outlined concepts would certainly best fit Bards... having spells you need a partner for could certainly work for most classes.

2) Class Revamp
Rather than designing new classes for a project, I'd be writing up new versions of the Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, and Wizard. Primarily to restructure their spellcasting and create differentiation between the classes. For example:

2a) Wizards would gain a specific number of 'Utility Spell' slots and a separated out list of utility spells, rather than casting all of their spells out of the same bucket of spell slots. They'd also be the primary caster of utility spells in general. Things like Knock, Levitate, Find Object, and Simulacrum would use these separate slots. Further, these slots would be built to scale with your level, and recover on a short rest, giving Wizards more of a reason to go for the hour long break the Warlock is begging for.

2b) Sorcerers would become Spell Point casters with a twist... Sorcery Points would be folded into their spell points so that you spend your spell points on metamagic feats. To offset the loss of Sorcery Points, however, you could spend hit dice during a short rest to recover SP in place of HP. Their spell list would be trimmed down a bit to have practically no utility spells, however. Instead, they'd gain class ability options which largely replace utility spellcasting with a sorcerous bent to them. Things like the ability to use your inherent magic to augment your persuasiveness or be captivating to allow allies to sneak past.

2c) Clerics and Druids would have baked-in healing powers rather than spending spell slots on healing. Again, this would be accompanied by a few class ability choices with class-specific flavor to offset some loss of utility spellcasting. Further, Revivify, Raise Dead, and Resurrection would become 1/long rest class abilities rather than spell slots. Though as you level, Revivify and Raise Dead would both have the benefit of becoming multi-target spells. So everyone get your dying out of the way, together, so no one has to pick who gets revived!

2d) Bards would likewise get baked-in healing powers to the class itself, and a drastic revamp of spell list with a ton of new spells that are musically, artistically, and illusion or enchantment inclined. Bards, like all classes, deserve their own spell list. But more than that they deserve one that better reflects their identity as artists and creatives who change the world around them through performance.

So I ask... is this something you'd have interest in? If nothing else, it would be new ways to play favorite classes. And, of course, it would all be balanced around the 5e compatibility standard.
Overall, I really like this. Very warlock-esque: instead of spells being a big nebulous, catch all for a spellcaster's class features, give that spellcaster interesting class-specific features, while slimming down and focusing the class' spell list on thematically interesting spells.

10/10, would eat here again.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

We've been using the spending HD to refresh ANY ability now for almost 7 years.
The HD spend is determined via whether it is a Long or Short rest ability and the level required at which you are using it.
For instance, an Action Surge for 1 attack has a different spend for an Action Surge with 2 or 3 attacks.
I should add we tied it to the exhaustion track i.e. if you're desperate enough and you do not have HD you can expend levels of exhaustion (2014) on a 1-to-1 basis.
I should also add, PCs are considerably stronger in my game because of this HD spend, therefore the Rest mechanics had to be amended and monsters now gain features or feats for every 3 HD they have.

The P and C is a really nice concept! I had only used it for spells of 10th and higher but your idea allows for much more creativity.

Your wizard utility spell list reminded me very much of 4e with its AEDU structure along with the use of Rituals.

I'd be very much interested to see what you come up with and how you work out the necessary balance in power structure.
 

So I ask... is this something you'd have interest in? If nothing else, it would be new ways to play favorite classes. And, of course, it would all be balanced around the 5e compatibility standard.

D&D's initiative mechanics make such coordination seem a bit difficult, such that I'd call those rituals you aren't doing in combat.

Not that you can't work something out, but I'm not sure the combat time scale really needs the addition, and the Ritual-only space is kind of empty.
 

Sounds cool to me. If you're looking for other component ideas can I suggest (E) Energized? I call it charged in my games, but C is already taken. Anyway, I use it for powerful enemies, items, and spells. You have to use some amount of action economy to "power up" before using the ability. This almost always requires the charge taking place on a different turn than the ability it is charging. PCs and NPCs can use that intervening time to take cover, try to break the charge (mechanically the same as concentration, but distinct), or kill the charged creature.

I like splitting utility spells into their own bucket for wizards. I did the same thing with Warlock invocations and it worked well (sample size of one table).
 

D&D's initiative mechanics make such coordination seem a bit difficult, such that I'd call those rituals you aren't doing in combat.

Not that you can't work something out, but I'm not sure the combat time scale really needs the addition, and the Ritual-only space is kind of empty.
That's true. This leans more into 'Group Ritual' territory though. An interesting twist (if you can make it work).
 

So I ask... is this something you'd have interest in? If nothing else, it would be new ways to play favorite classes. And, of course, it would all be balanced around the 5e compatibility standard.
I like the partner/chorus spells idea. I've seen attempts in the past at rules for multiple spellcasters casting a spell together (circle spells? group rituals?) but then you'd need multiple PCs choosing the same spell if not the same class, and I think it ends up used as an occasional NPC thing (which probably wouldn't require rules anyway). But your idea doesn't require this, a single caster plus any other PC, so it's interesting!

OTOH I am not really interested in rewriting classes. But if someone wants to, then differentiating spellcasting rules by class certainly meets my favour, it was one of those early DnDNext (2014 5e playtesting) innovations I endorsed but didn't make the cut.

Embedding some magical abilities into a class instead of being spells is OK but I'd rather keep it very limited. Clerics and Druids could very much have a Lay on Hands ability instead of using slots. Utility spells being separate for Wizards raises some questions because then every Wizard is forced to have utilities... but consider that the typical Wizard identity is "can do everything with magic", I wouldn't oppose making the class core concept more limited but also distinct. What I don't like is making a single spell become a class ability "because everyone takes it anyway", like Hunter's Mark for Rangers or Eldritch Blast for Warlocks.
 

Remove ads

Top