Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
3.5 Sorcerer Nerf?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 1912337" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>Who says that "fill a spell slot" means preparing?</p><p></p><p>I say it means put a spell in there for use as per the general definition of the word "fill". This is done instantaneously by a Sorcerer.</p><p></p><p>You can interpret fill to mean prepare and only prepare, but the book does not state that. If it meant prepare there, it should have stated prepare. Prepare has a specific meaning in the game and the word prepare is not used in this sentence.</p><p></p><p>You are also missing other quotes from the Spell Slot section that are STILL applicable to Sorcerers such as:</p><p></p><p>"A spellcaster who lacks a high enough ability score to cast spells that would otherwise be his or her due still gets the slots but must fill them with spells of lower level."</p><p></p><p>If they had meant Wizards only here, they would have stated Int instead of "ability score".</p><p></p><p>And it is nonsensical that Sorcerers and Bards lose their higher level slots for not having a high enough ability score whereas all OTHER spell casters (i.e. clerics, druids, paladins, rangers, and wizards) do not.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is the only rule that supports your interpretation. However, this can be interpreted two ways based on the rest of the rules:</p><p></p><p>1) Your way. That spell level slot and that spell level slot only can be used for spells of that spell level and that spell level only.</p><p></p><p>2) My way. Any spell level which is applicable. So, if a Sorcerer has a second level spell slot and the rules of spell slots indicate he can put a first level spell in that slot, then that IS a legitimate spell for "that spell level".</p><p></p><p>Or putting specifics into this sentence:</p><p></p><p>"He can cast any spell he knows [of zero, first, or second] at any time, assuming he has not yet used up his spells per day for that spell level [second]."</p><p></p><p>My interpretation is just as valid as yours with the English language.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Another note on this sentence: "a sorcerer need not prepare his spells in advance". This means he can if he wants to, so your "fill" argument is null and void.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If the authors had meant to change such a significant aspect of Sorcerers (and Bards), they would have explicitly put in an unambiguous sentence of:</p><p></p><p>"A bard or sorcerer cannot put a lower level spell into a higher level spell slot."</p><p></p><p>They did not do this, hence, I suspect you are making a mountain out of a mole hill here.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The problem here is that they did put in an ambiguous sentence in the Sorcerers section (the Bard's section states "the spell level" instead of "that spell level" btw).</p><p></p><p>It happens.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 1912337, member: 2011"] Who says that "fill a spell slot" means preparing? I say it means put a spell in there for use as per the general definition of the word "fill". This is done instantaneously by a Sorcerer. You can interpret fill to mean prepare and only prepare, but the book does not state that. If it meant prepare there, it should have stated prepare. Prepare has a specific meaning in the game and the word prepare is not used in this sentence. You are also missing other quotes from the Spell Slot section that are STILL applicable to Sorcerers such as: "A spellcaster who lacks a high enough ability score to cast spells that would otherwise be his or her due still gets the slots but must fill them with spells of lower level." If they had meant Wizards only here, they would have stated Int instead of "ability score". And it is nonsensical that Sorcerers and Bards lose their higher level slots for not having a high enough ability score whereas all OTHER spell casters (i.e. clerics, druids, paladins, rangers, and wizards) do not. This is the only rule that supports your interpretation. However, this can be interpreted two ways based on the rest of the rules: 1) Your way. That spell level slot and that spell level slot only can be used for spells of that spell level and that spell level only. 2) My way. Any spell level which is applicable. So, if a Sorcerer has a second level spell slot and the rules of spell slots indicate he can put a first level spell in that slot, then that IS a legitimate spell for "that spell level". Or putting specifics into this sentence: "He can cast any spell he knows [of zero, first, or second] at any time, assuming he has not yet used up his spells per day for that spell level [second]." My interpretation is just as valid as yours with the English language. Another note on this sentence: "a sorcerer need not prepare his spells in advance". This means he can if he wants to, so your "fill" argument is null and void. If the authors had meant to change such a significant aspect of Sorcerers (and Bards), they would have explicitly put in an unambiguous sentence of: "A bard or sorcerer cannot put a lower level spell into a higher level spell slot." They did not do this, hence, I suspect you are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. The problem here is that they did put in an ambiguous sentence in the Sorcerers section (the Bard's section states "the spell level" instead of "that spell level" btw). It happens. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
3.5 Sorcerer Nerf?
Top