D&D 5E A Slower Caster Spell Progression and other Suggestions

[Neonchameleon]

While I admit that 5E damage-dealing cantrips as a player are pretty fun, story-wise it takes a lot of the mysticism out of magic by having it. I'd feel a lot better if cantrips were not "always-on". Maybe proficiency bonus uses per short rest for Cantrips or somesuch, I'm not sure. I just don't like how easily they're spammed.

At least for me mysticism gets removed from magic when it becomes 100% predictable and reliable with zero chance of failure. D&D magic is already technology and has been right since the beginning; there's no mysticism to remove by the addition of reliable repeatable cantrips.

 

[DND_Reborn]

While I admit that 5E damage-dealing cantrips as a player are pretty fun, story-wise it takes a lot of the mysticism out of magic by having it. I'd feel a lot better if cantrips were not "always-on". Maybe proficiency bonus uses per short rest for Cantrips or somesuch, I'm not sure. I just don't like how easily they're spammed.

We made it spellcasting ability modifier + 1 uses per long rest, but this is only for damaging cantrips, which we've renamed jinxes. All other cantrips (utility, etc.) have unlimited uses and are still cantrips.

 

[DND_Reborn]

All this and more makes the problems hard to spot, and harder still to fix. It's not like this is scheming, conniving optimizers wresting control from poor, beleaguered DMs. It's all pretty above-board, no abuse required. "Hey, I'm out of spells, maybe we should call it a day" is perfectly rational, especially if it's the party healer, or there's a major challenge ahead and the party needs every resource it can get. Worse, with 5e SR being 1 hour, the gap between "enough time pressure that a day's wait is too much" and either "too much so even 1 hour is unwise" or "too little so it made no difference" is narrower than it seems. Particularly when you must sell the players on this being consistently true session after session for most, if not all, of a campaign. 24 hour or smaller time pressure induces a lot of anxiety, making it hard to maintain long-term.

(bold added)

While perfectly rational, adventures should hardly ever be (IF ever!) perfectly rational. This is why I express to my players (and play myself) to be very conservative when it comes to spell use. In my games (anyway) when you are "on the adventure", you really never know when you will get a chance to rest. Sure, there are some spells, etc. that make it more likely, but then you are basically using a resource to help recover resources.

Now, rests are common enough in my games, but most of the time a rest is taken and casters still have spells available. The point is you just never know, so you are best off only using your spells when necessary, not just because they are the "easy solution".

There's never been anything "mystic" about regular ol' spells in 5e. The whole point of spells is that (assuming the rolls go in your favor) they work exactly as described. All cantrips are is ready-to-hand magic. In principle, it's fine to say that you want magic to feel special or unusual...but if that's the case, you really shouldn't be letting people play classes fundamentally built around casting spells in the first place. (And, honestly, that may mean 5e just isn't for you; I hate gatekeeping arguments but when a full half of all PHB classes are full 9th-level-spells casters, I'm not sure that you're being offered a game where magic is mystical.)

Yes and no.

I think it really just depends on how your world views it. While magic for PCs might be commonplace due to all the spellcasting capable classes and subclcasses, that doesn't mean it is commonplace in the world. Spellcasters could be insanely rare in your game world, the PCs happening to be part of that rarity.

Which is how my own games are usually run, so 5E works fine for it IMO.

Now, I know many tables have a more magical world view, in which case your point is well taken if people struggle with finding a balance they want.

 

[DND_Reborn]

My preferred fixes for casters would include:

As a player I'd be happy to play a spellcaster in such a game.

 

[DND_Reborn]

At least for me mysticism gets removed from magic when it becomes 100% predictable and reliable with zero chance of failure. D&D magic is already technology and has been right since the beginning; there's no mysticism to remove by the addition of reliable repeatable cantrips.

I agree. I was thinking about including a "spellcasting check" for spells that don't require an attack roll in the OP. But what about spells that allow saves instead? Requiring it for those would be like double-rolling: 1) a roll to cast the spell, 2) a roll to resist it.

Of course a lot depends on how common you want "casting failure" to be.

Another mechanic I like is spell drain instead of spell slots, then you don't have guaranteed spells per day. Once your drain fails, you'd be done until you could rest maybe?

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

If I were in charge of doing this, the first thing I'd do is get rid of the current spellcasting system.

I would replace it with each "magic" class having specific class or subclass features that do spell-like stuff, but only a few per class/subclass, with as little overlap as possible. There would be no choice in which of these you get outside of choosing a class and subclass.

I wouldn't care about how they were limited per-rest because I still can't wrap my head around in-world pacing.

Everything else would be magic items that anyone can use regardless of class. Or based on non-class features like background.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would replace it with each "magic" class having specific class or subclass features that do spell-like stuff, but only a few per class/subclass, with as little overlap as possible. There would be no choice in which of these you get outside of choosing a class and subclass.

Off-hand that sounds very structured and limiting. If you could provide an example that would be appreciated, but otherwise it sounds sort of like a restricted Warlock (which others seem to like so it might appeal to them)?

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Off-hand that sounds very structured and limiting.

Which is often what I desire after reading caster vs martial threads: in my mind, the problem is that the two systems are too different to balance effectively.

If you could provide an example that would be appreciated...

A 1st level Wizard would get "Move Stuff At a Distance", which lets them move and throw objects. That's the only magical thing they can do until they pick their subclass at level 3, which gets them a new ability based on the theme of the subclass. If they want to do any other magic they need a magic item.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Which is often what I desire after reading caster vs martial threads: in my mind, the problem is that the two systems are too different to balance effectively.

Ok, good point. I can see that.

A 1st level Wizard would get "Move Stuff At a Distance", which lets them move and throw objects. That's the only magical thing they can do until they pick their subclass at level 3, which gets them a new ability based on the theme of the subclass. If they want to do any other magic they need a magic item.

So, sort of like Jedi??? I mean, IME most jedi have maybe a handful or two of things they can do with the Force. They typically seem to have a few signature powers, and then some more that are not used as often.

What if the spell progression I suggest in the OP (only one 1st level slot at level 1) instead became the spell you know and a single use per long rest. So, using the suggested progression a caster would have a total of 20 "spell" powers, each usable once per long rest. If you wanted to be able to fireball twice, you have to pick it twice, and so on.

Since you are concerned about martial vs. caster power levels, you could cap spell level and/or improve martial features so they are balanced.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

So, sort of like Jedi??? I mean, IME most jedi have maybe a handful or two of things they can do with the Force. They typically seem to have a few signature powers, and then some more that are not used as often.

I have to admit: the sort of psychic powers often seen in sci-fi are often more attractive to me then pages of spells.

What if the spell progression I suggest in the OP (only one 1st level slot at level 1) instead became the spell you know and a single use per long rest. So, using the suggested progression a caster would have a total of 20 "spell" powers, each usable once per long rest. If you wanted to be able to fireball twice, you have to pick it twice, and so on.

That could be interesting: spellcasting would be one-short (per rest) that you either save or work around.

I'm not sure I'd want to play that, though: I'm one of those people who hoards anything with limited use for "just the right moment" and then ends up never using it.

Since you are concerned about martial vs. caster power levels, you could cap spell level and/or improve martial features so they are balanced.

"Buff martials" is my usual response to balancing the two systems.