D&D 5E Is It Time to Partition Ritual and Non-Ritual Spells?

[Falling Icicle]

With the new playtest packet, the number of spell slots wizards get has been drastically reduced. Mike Mearls said that they are considering making rituals free of charge as compensation for this, so that wizards don't lose too much utility with this change.

While I wholeheartedly approve of making most rituals not cost gp to cast, having these spells mixed in with non-ritual spells seems like a trap choice, especially now that wizards get so very few daily spells. Anyone who prepares a ritual spell in a daily spell slot is making an inferior choice. He could have prepared a fireball or some other non-ritual spell, but still have the ritual spell available to him. Remember back in 4e when they said "you don't have to choose between Fireball and Phantom Steed anymore"? Maybe wizards in DnD Next shouldn't have to, either.

Right now, the only advantage to preparing a ritual spell is the reduced casting time. But most rituals are utility spells and the extra casting time usually doesn't matter. I'm starting to think it might be best to partition ritual spells from non-rituals entirely. I really liked how they did rituals in 4e, with the exception of the gp cost. Now that the gp cost is being removed, I wouldn't mind rituals and spells being separated once again.

Thoughts?

 

[Blackwarder]

I prety sure that you got it wrong, the entire idea behind ritual casting is that you don't need to prepare the spell...

The problem with free rituals would be that it might make the caster too versatile and outshine other classes.

I think that it can be done if you cap the number of spells per level a caster know.

Warder

 

[Falling Icicle]

I prety sure that you got it wrong, the entire idea behind ritual casting is that you don't need to prepare the spell...

No, I didn't get it wrong. I'm well aware that, in the current system, the primary benefit to rituals is that you don't need to prepare them (there's also the benefits of reduced casting time and cost, but the cost is going away). However, much has changed and much is going to change. With the enormous reduction in daily spell slots, wizards just can't afford to prepare highly situational spells anymore. I rarely even see such spells prepared in all my years of playing 3.x and Pathfinder, where wizards get many more spell slots. And since most of those highly situational spells have a ritual option, it makes it an even worse choice to spend one of your precious few daily spell slots on it.

The problem with free rituals would be that it might make the caster too versatile and outshine other classes.

Free rituals is not my idea, it's Mike Mearls' idea. Just saying.

Now that that's cleared up, as someone who played 4e with house-ruled free rituals, I never ran into that problem. If it takes a wizard 10 minutes to unlock a door, the rogue isn't outshined. The biggest balancing factor to rituals has always been the lengthy casting time. Puting a gp cost on all of them just makes players not want to use them at all.

I think that it can be done if you cap the number of spells per level a caster know.

No thanks. I like wizards that can collect libraries full of spells.

 

[Li Shenron]

I would totally hate to have them partitioned.

First of all, I want to be free to choose how many utility spells my Wizard knows. I want to be able to both play a Wizard with no utility spells, a Wizard with only utility spells, a Wizard with most utility spells, a Wizard with just a touch of utility spells, a Wizard with half utility spells etc. Partitioning means I will only have one of these options, so no.

Second, I want rituals to be optional in the game as much as possible. As long as they have a cost to cast, they are practically optional because ignoring them or forcibly removing them from the game is equivalent to the perfectly valid tactical choice of having them but not using them to save the cost.

Rituals with no cost are essentially at-will spells (of any level) with just increased casting time. That's quite an alien concept for traditional pre-4e D&D, and this is why I would like them optional. Until the second-last playtest package they were quite like that, it wasn't a big deal to say "no rituals in this campaign". In the very last package it's getting a bit harder because if you don't use them then all the casters really have quite a few spells per day, but it's still doable. If they become totally free then they will be pretty hard to ignore... And if they are partitioned i.e. all casters must know some ritual spells then they really have a heavy impact on class balance.

Also and much worse, all ritual spells will be then unavailable as regular slot-based spells, and will be balanced among their own, which might make it tricky to house rule them back to normal spells.

 

[Blackwarder]

I understood you the first time...

As for not needing to learn spells that you can cast as a ritual, if we take the knock spell as a blueprint you can see that the ritual version is weaker than the memorized version...

As for caping known spells, I don't like playing wizards where you get bogged down with tons of spells, especialy if you can cast a lot of them for free.

Warder

 

[Falling Icicle]

I would totally hate to have them partitioned.

First of all, I want to be free to choose how many utility spells my Wizard knows. I want to be able to both play a Wizard with no utility spells, a Wizard with only utility spells, a Wizard with most utility spells, a Wizard with just a touch of utility spells, a Wizard with half utility spells etc. Partitioning means I will only have one of these options, so no.

Second, I want rituals to be optional in the game as much as possible. As long as they have a cost to cast, they are practically optional because ignoring them or forcibly removing them from the game is equivalent to the perfectly valid tactical choice of having them but not using them to save the cost.

Rituals with no cost are essentially at-will spells (of any level) with just increased casting time. That's quite an alien concept for traditional pre-4e D&D, and this is why I would like them optional. Until the second-last playtest package they were quite like that, it wasn't a big deal to say "no rituals in this campaign". In the very last package it's getting a bit harder because if you don't use them then all the casters really have quite a few spells per day, but it's still doable. If they become totally free then they will be pretty hard to ignore... And if they are partitioned i.e. all casters must know some ritual spells then they really have a heavy impact on class balance.

Also and much worse, all ritual spells will be then unavailable as regular slot-based spells, and will be balanced among their own, which might make it tricky to house rule them back to normal spells.

Good points. I'd give you xp for your well thought out rebuttal but it won't let me.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I believe EVERY spell should have ritual and non ritual versions. And the ritual cast time should be as long as you usually would prepare the spell.

Maybe have a pool of spellpoints to power rituals...

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Rituals with no cost are essentially at-will spells (of any level) with just increased casting time. That's quite an alien concept for traditional pre-4e D&D, and this is why I would like them optional. Until the second-last playtest package they were quite like that, it wasn't a big deal to say "no rituals in this campaign". In the very last package it's getting a bit harder because if you don't use them then all the casters really have quite a few spells per day, but it's still doable. If they become totally free then they will be pretty hard to ignore... And if they are partitioned i.e. all casters must know some ritual spells then they really have a heavy impact on class balance.

Ritual spells aren't an alien concept in pre-4E editions, they were present in scrolls, wands and potions. In 3E in particular, utility spells were most often relegated to a scroll.

I love Rituals because they accept the fact that some spells just can't competitive for preparation, because they are highly circumstantial. I think they should extend them if anything, so that skills can access the Ritual system rather than just spellcasters. So many archetypal fantasy features such as alchemy, herbalism, poisons and curses have been difficult to implement in D&D previously, and I think Rituals offer considerable flexibility. The best thing about them, in my opinion, *is* the cost - it means that the party can leverage effects towards their goals at the cost of party resources - nobody has to be the cleric stuck healing or the wizard stuck preparing nothing but fly, the burden can be shared.

I will say that also, in world-building terms, free Rituals would break that sense of exoticism magic has - if a free ritual exists to cure disease, why isn't everyone healthy? If it costs gold, or rare ingredients, then the economics works. Oh and the way that the designers think they can make a weaker spellcaster acceptable is to *modify an entire subsystem*, without regard for the consequences, in compensation suggests to me that they are accountants, not designers.

 

[Raith5]

I agree with the OP. I think there are some spells of such magnitude or rare circumstantial use which should be ritual only. I think this both makes magic more magical but also opens up the capacity of spell users to help with exploratory parts of adventure with out weakening their combat ability. For me it is a win - win for both mechanical and style reasons.

However, I do like a small costs to be cast for material components except for rituals like raise dead which need to be either cast in a sanctified place (ie a temple) and/or have major components involved.

 

[Raith5]

I will say that also, in world-building terms, free Rituals would break that sense of exoticism magic has - if a free ritual exists to cure disease, why isn't everyone healthy? If it costs gold, or rare ingredients, then the economics works. Oh and the way that the designers think they can make a weaker spellcaster acceptable is to *modify an entire subsystem*, without regard for the consequences, in compensation suggests to me that they are accountants, not designers.

Good points. I think all rituals need a minimum level to cast and yes there has to be some real world economy costs, but my feeling is that 4th ed costs may have been too much.