D&D 5E 5e "Anyspell," Would You Allow the Enclosed Spell?

[TiwazTyrsfist]

Consider the 3.X spells Shadow Conjuration, Shadow Evocation, and the greater version of each.

They let you cast any spell of lower level from a specific school and on top of that as a rider, the spells are 80% illusion so in addition to any other save from the sub-spell, they get a will save and if successful take only 20% damage or effect.

Say for example I cast a Shadow Evocation Fireball as a 10th level spell, and lets pretend I roll MAX DMG, 60.
Targets get a Reflex save for Half. They also get a Will save to Disbelieve.
They fail both, 60 dmg
Make Reflex but not Will, 30 dmg
Make Will but not Reflex, 12 dmg
Make Both, 6 dmg.

And that a prefect 10d6 max roll.

That's an example of a balanced spell (Which was probably dropped for being too fiddly)

 

[Inanity]

Consider the 3.X spells Shadow Conjuration, Shadow Evocation, and the greater version of each.

They let you cast any spell of lower level from a specific school and on top of that as a rider, the spells are 80% illusion so in addition to any other save from the sub-spell, they get a will save and if successful take only 20% damage or effect.

Say for example I cast a Shadow Evocation Fireball as a 10th level spell, and lets pretend I roll MAX DMG, 60.
Targets get a Reflex save for Half. They also get a Will save to Disbelieve.
They fail both, 60 dmg
Make Reflex but not Will, 30 dmg
Make Will but not Reflex, 12 dmg
Make Both, 6 dmg.

And that a prefect 10d6 max roll.

That's an example of a balanced spell (Which was probably dropped for being too fiddly)

This spell allowed an illusionist to take evocation and conjuration as their prohibited schools... 3.x had limited wih, anyspell, arcane matrix, pnemonic enchancer and some more I think...i dont think this is the paradigm of a balaned (and relevantly similar spell) as it served somewhat of a different role (which really was to give illusionists or other people that didnt have evocation or enchantment to have somewhat access to those spells... Without prohibitted spells shadow conjuration sort of loses it places in the game...

 

[Bacon Bits]

Would you allow this spell into your game? Any helpful suggestions welcome!
Anyspell
2nd Level Spell [see below]

• Casting Time: 1 reaction [but see below]
• Range: Self [but see below]
• Components: V S
• Duration: Instantaneous [but see below]
• Classes: Sorcerer, Wizard
• You can cast any level 1 spell or any Cantrip on your class(es) spell list(s) without expending a spell slot. If the chosen spell is not a cantrip then the spell is cast as if you expended a 2nd level spell slot (so its cast as 2nd level spell) . You must meet all of the requirements for casting that spell (including verbal, somatic and material components, and action cost; after casting this just cast the other spell as normal is the idea).
• At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, you can cast a spell that is one level higher for each slot above 2nd and the spell cast is treated as if cast as a spell one level hgiher for each slot.

If one wants to temper its power then require a feat to learn the spell, maybe.

Clarifications: Given how I wrote it you couldnt really cast a spell of 1 reaction using this spell (should that be change? Should we change the duration to 1 or more rounds and have it be able to trigger later?)... you could cast it on someones turn but it would do nothing unless you somehow could cast a spell using no action. and if you cast it on your turn then you have alredy expended the reaction... EDIT: how I wrote it you COULD cast a spell with a casting time of 1 minute or whatever.

The big problem is I imagine: It makes Sorcerers/bards/warlocks to powerful. I dont know, any feedback?

EDIT: another question: should it even have a separate action cost?

I think you just word it like:

Anyspell
2nd-level conjuration

Casting Time: As the spell copied
Range: Self
Components: As the spell copied, plus V
Duration: Instantaneous

Choose a spell from one of your spell lists. If that spell is 1st level or a cantrip, then as a part of casting this spell, you cast the chosen spell. If the spell you chose was a cantrip, casting this spell does not expend a spell slot. If the spell is not a cantrip, it is cast as though it were a 2nd level spell. You must meet all of the requirements for casting that spell (including verbal, somatic and material components, and action cost; after casting this just cast the other spell as normal is the idea).

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, you can cast a spell that is one level higher for each slot above 2nd level, and the spell cast is treated as if cast as a spell one level hgiher for each slot.

Like the templating doesn't matter that much. Just describe what the spell does. It's homebrew so you'll be at the table to adjudicate.

As for my opinion on the spell? No, I don't really care for it and would probably not allow it. Unlike others here, I don't think it's too powerful. It's very flexible, yes, but not too powerful. The problem is that the spell existed in the first place to solve a problem that no longer exists.

As you say, this spell existed in prior editions. However, in 3.5e and earlier, you had to prepare spells into a specific slot. You didn't choose which spell to cast on the fly throughout the day. Not even cantrips! Spells like Anyspell, Limited Wish, and Mordenkainen's Lucubration existed because spellcasters had to make their exact spell selections at the start of the day rather than on the fly. Spontaneous casting wasn't really a thing except for the Sorcerer, who gave up a considerable amount of power for that benefit (no bonus feats, slower spell progression, limited spells known). Spellcasters used to be significantly more potent, but they were much less flexible than they are now. That's why the above spells don't exist in 5e. They're spell designs that don't belong in the game anymore because that problem has been solved, and without spell preparation the spells simply don't feel appropriate.

 

[LordEntrails]

I dont think it does any of those things and would lke to hear your reasons for the above (except maybe "doesnt fix the broken" as that is not a desiderata of mine). As a note, I intended this spell to be available to any class and didnt change that in the description. Also, I am thinking about making this change:
(i) the spell cast must be one you can learn or prepare (where "can" is (class) level dependent word).

See below, used my quote to expand.

As a note: there is precedence for wizards to learn spells like this (the shadow conjuration line of spells, spells like arcane matrix,allspell, anyspell these were all spells a wizard COULD, of the appropriate string of prestige cheese, get . WISH is a precedent LIMTED WISH; so your point (i) above is somewhat shaky.

Wish is a 9th level spell. Limited Wish is a 7th level spell. Anyspell is a 2nd level spell, and Anyspell is arguably better than either of those spells and you gain it as a third level caster. You don't see a problem there? Wish has downsides, Anyspell doesn't.

• Changes the concept of how and why a wizard has mastered the arcane.

So a wizard no longer has to learn or prepare spells? This is a flavor thing I know, but now how is a wizard different than a sorceror and how is that different than a cleric?

And you do know some Bards have access to spells from every spell list, so now you can get a bard that can cast almost any spell, with no preparation, no need to learn the spell, have it in a spell book or even know more than its name.

It also means that how does a DM reward a wizard with a new spell? Cuz anyspell already gave them access to every spell the DM has allowed in their game on that list, how do you come back later and say, "here's a new spell..."

• Makes spell preparation nearly meaningless.

So this is obvious right?

• Practically obsoletes all other casters.

Again, what would now distinguish the casters?

• Steals the fun from other classes.

Are you going to somehow give equal diversity and utility to other classes? Can a fighter now use any sub-class trait/ability? Can a rogue now be an assassin and an inquisitive? Or are arcane casters super versatile but others not?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

No, I would not allow that spell into my game. I'm generally careful to run a decent number of encounters per rest, and even so, preventing the spellcasters from dominating some challenges is an issue. Even outside of the combat capability of the spell, its utility value makes it just too powerful.

The Reaction cost is a little kooky, since it looks like the spell would have to be used on your turn. Making it a bonus action, or just the same casting time as the spell it is replicating would make more sense. Out of the various ways in which I regard this spell to be too powerful, the action economy to cast it is a pretty minor factor.

 

[Horwath]

This might, and only might work if you limit it to spells that are 2 levels lower than spell casted.

So,

Anyspell
level: 3
casting time: varies
spell components: varies

when casting this spell, you can cast any spell of 1st level or a cantrip from your class spell list.
If you cast a cantrip, it stayes prepared in your mind until your next long rest.

Casting time and spell components are same as the spell it immitates.

you can cast this spell at higher level than 3rd, then you can cast any spell that is 2 levels lower than slot you expended.
I.E. if you spend 9th level slot, you can cast any 7th level spell or lower level spell hightened to "7th level" effect.

 

[Inanity]

The Blood Hunter has some seriously bad design. I commented on this in another thread. It's a badly-designed third-party class, that is only on Beyond because Critical Role was cool at the time (and Critical Role IS cool but Matt Mercer is NOT particularly good at designing classes, mechanically).

And no, you can't trigger that by hitting your leg, because that doesn't require an attack roll. Nor does touching your friend to cast a spell on them. But yeah, that's bad design.

You have to get rid of the Reaction element. You say it's a "easy to fix". Yeah by removing it and replacing it with an Action or Bonus Action. Which last I looked, you haven't done.

I dont want to beat a dead thread but while preusing some boos I ran into a rules precedence for open ended reaction trigger mehancis.. wanted to know what you thought;

Shifter class feature in "Eberron: Rising from The Last War."

Shifting Feature.

While shifted you walking speed increases by 10 feet Additionaiiy, you can move up to 10 feet as a reaction when a creature ends its turn within 5 feet of you. This reactive movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.

This was exactly the kind of trigger I was looking for but so it does seem that specifying an open ended trigger is a tool of a designer.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I dont want to beat a dead thread but while preusing some boos I ran into a rules precedence for open ended reaction trigger mehancis.. wanted to know what you thought;

Shifter class feature in "Eberron: Rising from The Last War."

Shifting Feature.

While shifted you walking speed increases by 10 feet Additionaiiy, you can move up to 10 feet as a reaction when a creature ends its turn within 5 feet of you. This reactive movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.

This was exactly the kind of trigger I was looking for but so it does seem that specifying an open ended trigger is a tool of a designer.

I don't really care about the whole 'reaction needs a trigger' debate. It's nonstandard but I'm indifferent to it. You could just make it a free action and say you can't take reactions until the start of your next turn (and you can't use it if your reaction isn't available), and then it's pretty standard.

However, a creature ending its turn within 5 feet of you is a specific trigger. It has to either start next to you and not move, or walk up to you and not move away. That's a defined trigger.

 

[seebs]

I don't understand; once this exists, what purpose does any other spell of 2nd level or higher have in being prepared?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

While shifted you walking speed increases by 10 feet Additionaiiy, you can move up to 10 feet as a reaction when a creature ends its turn within 5 feet of you. This reactive movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.

This was exactly the kind of trigger I was looking for but so it does seem that specifying an open ended trigger is a tool of a designer.

That's simply not "open-ended".

That's narrow and extremely precise. "when a creature ends its turn within 5 feet of you". That's a very specific situation.

This is strong evidence against your approach. As @Fanaelialae says, even making it a free action would be better than this completely rule-wrong (not something I say easily - but you are getting the rules wrong, not merely taking a different approach) deal where you are acting like this is 3E and you can "charge" a reaction for something. You cannot. I'm pretty sure you know this at this point.