D&D (2024) Arcane/Divine/Primal Spell Lists: Are the Benefits Real?

[Minigiant]

Or 7.

5 is better for a start and they can add more.

5 is also how MTG does it and they are under the same roof.

With 5, they can easily future proof it by adding new lists if they include the new lists and classes that use them in the same books.

 

[tetrasodium]

Yes the benefits are real & two fold even beyond the ability to have setting/theme specific drop in replacements.

• Full casters who are masters of their particular power source at the cost of not getting a bunch of notable class features like the close runnerup who only gets all the top shelf spells & most of the rest actually get to feel like being a master of it is a meaningful thing
• Classes that are competent niche casters with a bunch of class abilities get to have more meaningful abilities for their niche while anything they take to expand that niche to be wider or deeper (ie race/feat/mc/magic item/etc) actually feel s special rather than an extra free csast of X spell or whatever

I did some test games with L6-L7 characters & the drow/infernal tiefling bard/ranger both noted how it felt cool that their race really made them play different because of the spells those races added.

 

[Dausuul]

Identify all of the spells which the new system allows Class X to take. Put them together in a list. Repeat for all classes. Boom, you have just replicated the functionality of the new system using the old. There is literally nothing that the new system does which cannot be done by the old system.

The reverse, however, is not true; there are many things the old system could do which the new system can't, which is why they had to kludge in healing magic for bards via class feature.

So the only question is whether the new system offers some kind of operational benefit, such as being easier to use (it isn't), or "future-proofing" (an argument which OP solidly demolishes and I have nothing to add).

 

[shadowoflameth]

Personally, I think three is fine. That said, IMHO we also need class spell lists. No one wants to sort through in character creation going by the individual school. Especially players using the physical books. Books that WotC is still going to want to sell. Make Arcane, Divine and Primal a Tag, example; Magic Missile, 1st level Evocation, Vocal, Somatic, Arcane. If every caster got the whole Arcane list or in the case of the Bard, the chance to cherry pick every list and change what they pick, it takes space to shine away from other classes, and if everyone knows every spell, what is the benefit of being the Wizard? Up to now, the ability to learn new spells outside of level ups. And if every enemy is potentially the Ranger's favored enemy, then why wouldn't anyone who wants to fight against a backstory enemy choose Ranger or a 1 level dip?

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

If they do keep this spell list system, and bar certain classes from certain schools, I hope they make the lists more user friendly by parsing out the spells by school at each level. I'd make it a lot easier to know which spells to notice and which to ignore.

 

[cbwjm]

One of the problems with these Source Lists is, a spell can be Arcane AND Divination AND Primal simultaneously, making the lists and the spell description an ambiguous unclear mess.

I don't actually think that's an issue, DnD has always had spells that crossed between lists and I think that I actually prefer it that way rather than having some spell lists missing out. I wouldn't want animate dead to be just arcane or divine, I want there to be necromancers or death cultists that have access to the spells like animate dead that help the theme.

 

[Yaarel]

I don't actually think that's an issue, DnD has always had spells that crossed between lists and I think that I actually prefer it that way rather than having some spell lists missing out. I wouldn't want animate dead to be just arcane or divine, I want there to be necromancers or death cultists that have access to the spells like animate dead that help the theme.

By referring to School lists instead, any class (or subclass) that has Necromancy will have access to Animate Dead.

 

[cbwjm]

If they do keep this spell list system, and bar certain classes from certain schools, I hope they make the lists more user friendly by parsing out the spells by school at each level. I'd make it a lot easier to know which spells to notice and which to ignore.

I thought they have been doing this with their later books, including the school next to the spell. Granted I don't know of I'd rather have them organise the lists by level, then school, then spell or just keep doing it how they're doing it now with school listed after the spell.

 

[Amrûnril]

I think it's an improvement, much easier to say X spell is an arcane spell rather than adding it to wizard, sorcerer, artificer and wondering if it should also be a warlock spell. Having three spell lists is much better than the 8 spell lists we have now.

The way I see it, being able to design a spell available to wizards and warlocks but not sorcerers (for instance) is a feature, not a bug. And I think it's going to be easier to do that on a case by case basis than by keeping track of the implications of each spell school/power source combination.

5 is better for a start and they can add more.

5 is also how MTG does it and they are under the same roof.

With 5, they can easily future proof it by adding new lists if they include the new lists and classes that use them in the same books.

Five works well in MTG because the game was built from the ground up around five power sources with distinct mechanical and conceptual identities. D&D's spell lists are instead seeking to emulate a lot of ideosyncratic genre history. They could in theory be rebuilt in a more systematic way (perhaps something along the lines of @Yaarel 's proposal), but this would require a willingness to break with a lot of traditions, and I don't think the product would look at all like the Arcane/Divine/Primal lists.

Yes the benefits are real & two fold even beyond the ability to have setting/theme specific drop in replacements.

• Full casters who are masters of their particular power source at the cost of not getting a bunch of notable class features like the close runnerup who only gets all the top shelf spells & most of the rest actually get to feel like being a master of it is a meaningful thing
• Classes that are competent niche casters with a bunch of class abilities get to have more meaningful abilities for their niche while anything they take to expand that niche to be wider or deeper (ie race/feat/mc/magic item/etc) actually feel s special rather than an extra free csast of X spell or whatever

I did some test games with L6-L7 characters & the drow/infernal tiefling bard/ranger both noted how it felt cool that their race really made them play different because of the spells those races added.

I think there are definitely benefits to having classes with extensive spell repetoires (like Wizards) alongside classes with shorter spell lists but more non-spell abilities (like Bards). But I think that customized lists can accomplish this better than shared lists with school restrictions.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

I thought they have been doing this with their later books, including the school next to the spell. Granted I don't know of I'd rather have them organise the lists by level, then school, then spell or just keep doing it how they're doing it now with school listed after the spell.

Maybe it's just me, but I'd find it easier to scan past a block of school sorted spells than individual spells tagged by school in an alphabetical list.