Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Koren" data-source="post: 6872862" data-attributes="member: 6802236">Some people prefer a lower magic campaign world, more sword and sorcery style.  While not directly leading to this sort of world, restricting the spells available to those the DM adds to the campaign will likely lead that way.  I think this style of play has its merits, though I haven't seen it pulled off well using D&D as a basis.  It can certainly work in theory, though.  Changing spell acquisition methods in 5e, you're fundamentally altering power levels of classes which have theoretically been balanced against each other; maybe not in a straight damage-per-round balance, but balanced for overall level of usefulness in a party.  It would almost require rebalancing all classes against this new paradigm, which then spirals to needing to rebalance all encounters to compensate, and so forth.Such a setting works with if the low-magic rules changes are applied to all magic classes equally, and a number of magic-lite class options are banned or seriously restricted, like sunsoul and shadow monks, arcane tricksters, eldritch knights, maybe even paladin and ranger (or converted to more "classic" versions through homebrew archetypes).  Full caster classes would all need to acquire their known spells through means similar to the wizard, though clerics, druids, etc. would add the spell to their known list rather than scribe it in a spellbook (or maybe they would require prayer books of a similar sort).  The warlock and sorcerer don't fit this paradigm well, as warlocks spells are granted/powered by the patron, but the warlock could still have to seek out new ones through questing or petitioning his/her patron.  Sorcerers are the hardest to justify, as their mechanics are tied to the fluff of their magic being intrinsic due to bloodline.All classes which use magic should operate under the same guidelines for spell research and acquisition.  The actual fluff of the mechanics can be different (wizard spends x days scribing an ancient fireball spell in his spellbook, priest communes with his deity in seclusion in a temple until knowledge of the miracle of spiritual weapon is granted, a druid sits out in a thunderstorm on the top of a mountain in order to gain enough insight into nature to harness the call lightning ability, and warlock requires x days of service to her patron before the patron reveals the secrets of hexing her foes.Further, you could/should enforce similar training requirements for non-magical class features which directly add combat prowess to a character, such as battle master maneuvers, rogue sneak attack increases, monk chi abilities, or learning new feats.Arbitrarily forcing this only on the wizard class will likely result in a lot more sorcerers and warlocks at the table, and likely fewer players at the table as some won't want the restrictions of this kind of gameplay on their character concept.</blockquote>

Verification