D&D 5E (2014) Expanding spells capabilities with upcasting

[Li Shenron]

Thinking again about those two original examples, I agree that detect magic is problematic to expand this way. I think I've always used this spell just to see IF something nearby is magic, more rarely when you are searching for something specific (and probably already know what it is) and want to pinpoint the location, which is what showing the aura is for. The spell design is odd because the second functionality costs an additional action, which is relevant only during a battle or a chase, when spending such action can be quite costly while out of combat is pretty much a no-cost.

Looking at other detect spells, detect poison and disease always includes identifying in addition to detecting, so you can use it when you want to check IF something is poisonous, but also when you already know it and you want to know also WHAT exactly. This is pretty much already all you need (unless you wanted to reveal poison's stats like DC or damage).

Detect evil and good doesn't tell you the creature exactly, which could be occasionally useful for a random encounter in case it gives you time to prepare against a specific potential threat (such as casting Death Ward). But if it's a random encounter, then you probably wouldn't upcast this, with the risk of wasting a higher slot for anything. And if it's not a random encounter, you may already know which creature you are up against, so even this spell is not a good candidate for adding extra functions through upcasting (it could have offered extra information at the cost of an action, similar to detect magic though).

Find Traps could definitely be expanded to reveal the location and further on to reveal more details on how to bypass or disable the trap, but once again we're in the situation of casting this spell typically just to check IF something is there in the first place, so probably wanting to risk wasting the lowest spell possible. This spell also notoriously conflicts with the Rogue's job, so let's leave it alone.

 

[Silam]

Not entirely related, but I wish there were some spell synergy effects in the game. For example, concentrating on Detect Magic could give a boost when casting Dispel Magic or Counterspell. Or else if not a boost, maybe a "downcasting" effect, meaning you could cast DM or CS as 2nd level spells rather than 3rd level! So you would have a choice of paying a 1st level slot + a 2nd level slot (and 2 actions and your concentration) OR a single 3rd level slot. In a pinch, a 5th level Wizard can pull off the whole thing in one fell swoop, but with careful planning, a 3rd level Wizard can achieve the same with more resources. Even the 5th level Wizard could take their time and do it the newbie way if it suits them better for some scenario.

 

[el-remmen]

In my homebrewed 5e ruleset, I have made detect magic a cantrip (but cantrips require spell rolls, so the more you cast them the greater the likelihood of losing the spell for the day) and I have added a bunch of “cast at higher level” modifications to some existing spells, including things like increasing duration. And for some the caster has a choice between effects. However, as someone else suggested, I avoid totally different instances of the spell using a higher slot, and would just make that a different higher level spell.

 

[Li Shenron]

However, as someone else suggested, I avoid totally different instances of the spell using a higher slot, and would just make that a different higher level spell.

I get that, but it is not really what I want... I am not really looking to create new spells, and I would do so only if the new spell was really significantly different from the original. A completely different spell means it is even harder for the caster because the decision has to be made in more advance i.e. when preparing spells.

Others already pointed out that deciding which spell slot to use (at casting time) would be already bad for a detect spell, because many times you don't even know if there is something to detect and you'd be wasting the spell slot. If I make it a completely different spell, you'd be wasting both the spell slot and the "preparation slot".

Also, having a separate "Improved Detect Magic" spell would be no-cost for clerics, mildly expensive for wizards, and very expensive for sorcerers, in terms of learning the spell. This is another thing which I don't like. My idea was to help the PCs a bit with regard of few selected spells, for a tactical cost (using a higher level spell slot) but not for a strategic cost (at level up).

 

[Maxperson]

Last session I cast Detect Magic while in a Wizard's mansion, lots of magic kept showing up, and each time I spent my action (though we were out of combat so it hardly mattered) to see the auras and identify the school of magic, but not the actual spells.

This reminded me how I thought before about some design space left unused with regards to spells that could have improved effects if upcasted. 5e has this wonderful mechanic of spending a higher than necessary level slot to boost a spell, and lots of spells deal more damage, more healing, last longer or affect more targets; many spells otherwise cannot be upcast.

I am looking here to see if any DM has expanded the use of some spells that normally don't have a "cast at higher level" option by allowing it, but I interested in additional functional effects, not in numerical boosts.

For example with regards to Detect Magic this could mean upcasting to identify the exact spells or effects, and then maybe upcasting even more to know additional information.

Another spell I have which could be expanded is Clairvoyance which allows to either see or hear but not both simultaneously; upcasting by one level could allow both, and then why not upcasting further could add darkvision, blindsight and finally truesight.

Anyone already doing this sort of thing?

I haven't, but that's a really great idea.

 

[Maxperson]

Do we really need to make spellcasters even more exponentially powerful?

It's not at all exponential and it encourages spellcasters to burn through higher slots, which ultimately makes them weaker.

 

[Maxperson]

Do you really need to comment on a thread you're not interested in?

"Exponentially" is entirely in your mind, I have thought of TWO spells so far, and nobody has given more examples so far.

Examples are unlimited and just require imagination. I grabbed Fly at random and thought to myself, "Maybe it could be cast as a 4th level spell and when it wears off the caster is affected as if under a Feather Fall like it worked in 3e. Then I thought maybe with a 5th level slot it could work as an 80 fly speed instead of 60, or a speed of 60 for twice as long." The possibilities are endless.

Right now upcasting is terrible. A Fireball cast with a 9th level slot does 14d6 damage in a 20 foot radius. Compare that to Meteor Swarm which does 40d6 in a 40 foot radius at 4 different spots within a mile of the caster, 20d6 of which is physical, so fire resistant/immune creatures still get walloped. It's no contest. Your upcasting idea would make upcasting worthwhile, rather than be any kind of power increase.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It's not at all exponential and it encourages spellcasters to burn through higher slots, which ultimately makes them weaker.

...

Giving them the power...to do even more with the same spells...

Makes them weaker.

Really.

Gaining the ability to juice a spell for more power...is introducing a weakness.

Really.

I just want to be a hundred million percent clear that that's what you're arguing. That the addition of higher-power options...is adding a weakness to spellcasters.

 

[Rabulias]

Giving them the power...to do even more with the same spells...

Granted,, for wizards, this goes against one of their primary limitations: spell acquisition. I would point out that by 3rd edition, we had so many spells in the system that no wizard could get them all. And as @Li Shenron points out above, adding new spells to the system is no limitation for clerics and druids, and makes spell choice really difficult for casters like sorcerers. Also, some very neat spell ideas have been developed over the years, but no one ever took them because they were not optimal. Folding some of those effects into versatile spells gives them a chance of being used in game. I feel that upcasting can address these concerns.

Gaining the ability to juice a spell for more power...is introducing a weakness.

The juicing is not free -- it costs a higher, more limited resource. And as @Maxperson says, upcasting is often a bad deal in terms of raw damage. I am more than fine with that. Upcasting is a boost to versatility -- already an area of strength for spellcasters (especially for wizards). I feel the costs and tradeoffs are balanced. As always, YMMV.

 

[Maxperson]

...

Giving them the power...to do even more with the same spells...

Makes them weaker.

Really.

Gaining the ability to juice a spell for more power...is introducing a weakness.

Really.

I just want to be a hundred million percent clear that that's what you're arguing. That the addition of higher-power options...is adding a weakness to spellcasters.

Give me a break. You have one 6th level slot. You can use it on................................a 6th level spell that does lots. Or an upcast that is far weaker than a 6th level spell. Adding riders to an upcast 3rd level spell to give it a bit more oomph doesn't make it as strong as a 6th level spell, so it's.................................still weaker! As it stands, the upcast is far weaker, so most people don't do it.

So yes, making them a bit more fun so that the caster casts a weaker spell in the 6th level slot is weakening the caster.