D&D 5E New class options in Tasha

[DND_Reborn]

I can't remember the numbers, but at one point I'd made the math. Sorcerers and Clerics already share a 20% of their spells, and some of the spells clerics have that sorcerers don't are also on the wizard list. The rest tend to be thematic divine spells like healing, raising the dead and growing back lost limbs. If I remember well, the wizard list is still bigger than sorcerer+cleric and has a lot of wizard-only spells that only bards get to poach.

Yes, the full wizard list is about 295 spells. Cleric + Sorcerer is around 252 or so. The exact number depends on all the sources you have...

 

[Azzy]

Do you realize it could cost a wizard over 50,000 gp to be able to have access to every spell in their spell list?

Yes, and I realize that this beside the point and isn't an issue if you actually compare the sorcerer and wizard and what they both get:

To recap, sorcerers have a number of spells known (of a level they can cast) equal to their sorcerer level + 1 (until 11th-level, after which they gain 1 addition spell known every other level). Wizards, on the other hand, can prepare a number of spells from their spellbook equal to their wizard level plus their Int modifier (with a minimum of 1). Their spellbook contains, at 1st-level, 6 1st-level spells plus two spells of any level they can cast at each additional level.

Here’s a quick comparison to see how this looks at various levels:

Level 1
The sorcerer has 2 spells known. The wizard can prepare 3 spells (assuming a 14-15 Int) and has 6 spells in their spellbook (all 6 being 1st-level spells).

Level 5
The sorcerer has 6 spells known. The wizard can prepare 7 spells (assuming a 14-15 Int) and has 14 spells in their spellbook (assuming they don’t purchase, discover, or research additional spells to add to their spellbook)—assuming they always pick the highest-level spells available to them, this would be 8 1st-level, 4 2nd-level, and 2 3rd-level spells).

Level 10
The sorcerer has 11 spells known. The wizard can prepare 12 spells (assuming a 14-15 Int) and has 24 spells in their spellbook (assuming they don’t purchase, discover, or research additional spells to add to their spellbook)—assuming they always pick the highest-level spells available to them, this would be 8 1st-level, 4 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level, 4 4th-level, and 4 5th-level spells).

Level 15
The sorcerer has 14 spells known. The wizard can prepare 17 spells (assuming a 14-15 Int) and has 34 spells in their spellbook (assuming they don’t purchase, discover, or research additional spells to add to their spellbook)—assuming they always pick the highest-level spells available to them, this would be 8 1st-level, 4 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level, 4 4th-level, 4 5th-level, 4 6th-level, 4 7th-level, and 2 8th-level spells).

Level 20
The sorcerer has 15 spells known. The wizard can prepare 22 spells (assuming a 14-15 Int) and has 44 spells in their spellbook (assuming they don’t purchase, discover, or research additional spells to add to their spellbook)—assuming they always pick the highest-level spells available to them, this would be 8 1st-level, 4 2nd-level, 4 3rd-level, 4 4th-level, 4 5th-level, 4 6th-level, 4 7th-level, 4 8th-level, and 8 9th-level spells).

With this optional rule, the sorcerer can trade out one of their known spells per long rest while the wizard can trade out all of their prepared spells during the same. Also, sorcerers can choose to trade out this one known spell from their entire spell list (which is rather smaller than the wizard's spell list, for what it's worth) while wizards can change out the entirety of their prepared spells from a more limited list in their spellbook (while still having more spells prepared than the socerer's available known spells).

So, no, I'm not seeing how this is in any way overpowered or gamebreaking.

 

[MoonSong]

Yes, the full wizard list is about 295 spells. Cleric + Sorcerer is around 252 or so. The exact number depends on all the sources you have...

Did you account for the overlap in Sorcerer+Cleric?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think you already knew that I was refering to wizards. And no, a cleric, paladin, druid and artificer (and much even less rangers) are not mages in any editions of D&D. Better luck next time.

Thanks, I will need luck to guess what class you mean when you don't use the class name. It does make it kind of hard to make sense of.

In fact, going back and rereading your post with this correction, it is now kind of nonsensical.

"Do you know any wizard that has his full spell list from character creation" is fairly similiar to "Do you know any gnomes that can fly 50 ft per turn at level 1?"

Considering that isn't something you can do under the rules, the answer is fairly self-evident. No, obviously the thing the rules don't allow doesn't happen.

The normal spell list is already strong. But have two full spell list at the cost of a single long rest??????? If you find this is balanced...

Misses my point.

My point was that very few people in this thread are saying "Access to the entire Sorcerer spell list?! That's broken!" most of them are saying "Divine Sorcerers now have access to the entire Sorcerer and the entire Cleric Spell List! That's broken!"

I find it an interesting point, since Divine Soul seems to have taken over as the default Sorcerer model.

Why would I want to work to balance what was already balanced?????????????????? It is that rule that is unbalancing things. Not the other way around. It is obvious that this rule was not and I mean really not thougth through, for all the implications it would bring. Leveling was too slow in some games so they thought it would be a good idea for those games. But guess what? For regular games, it is quite unbalancing. And even for these games where leveling is really slow, this is again, unbalancing as it allows for quite an abuse.

I don't find the current status quo balanced. So, I am seeing an unbalanced situation get potentially over-corrected into being slightly unbalanced the other way.

I am not happy with the Sorcerer as it stands. Never have been. This is a change that will help them, and it allows for minor corrections. Where a lot of people are looking at the on paper potential, I'm reminded that Sorcerers already pick the absolute best spells for their concept. Sometimes bypassing utility or thematic spells that they may be interested in. This gives them a chance to use those spells.

So, I find it at worse, slightly unbalanced in the opposite direction that it is currently unbalanced. And, if I find this puts out wizards too much, I'll correct. But, frankly, I doubt I will even notice if people use this rule or not.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And yeah, I agree with @Azzy

I know some people say that those fewer spells balance the sorcerer's "incredible Metamagic potential" but as far as I've ever noticed in play... that is a load of manure.

Ritual casting is a far far more powerful tool than Spell Versatility, especially the wizard's special version of it. The tilt to unbalanced in favor of the bard, warlock and sorcerer is minor at best I think. There simply isn't enough reason to believe that this option is going to lead to them always constantly having the perfect spell, perfectly prepared to perfectly end every challenge or encounter.

And of course, there is the ultimate question of "what if the party doesn't have both side of this equation?" People playing with this rule, when they have never seen wizards anyways, pr at least rarely, aren't going to notice a sudden weakening of the class. And people who never played Sorcerers anyways aren't going to see a massive uptick, and if they do... more options at the table sounds good to me. More people being able to use their abilities in more interesting ways sounds amazing. I want that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So, no, I'm not seeing how this is in any way overpowered or gamebreaking.

It's one of those things that people who are really bad at game-math and often bad at looking at the whole-system implications of things think is "game-breaking". It's barely even worth arguing about.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It's one of those things that people who are really bad at game-math and often bad at looking at the whole-system implications of things think is "game-breaking". It's barely even worth arguing about.

More than game breaking it is theme breaking.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

More than game breaking it is theme breaking.

That's an even less convincing argument, given there's no major thematic element for Bards, for example, only knowing a few spells. You might try and make the case for Sorcerers, but that's it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That's an even less convincing argument, given there's no major thematic element for Bards, for example, only knowing a few spells. You might try and make the case for Sorcerers, but that's it.

Yes, I'm mainly referring to sorcerers. But it kinda makes the wizard look silly when they're now the most inflexible spell casting class.

 

[Azzy]

More than game breaking it is theme breaking.

What is the theme of the sorcerer that this is breaking?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What is the theme of the sorcerer that this is breaking?

It is breaking the most important mechanical differentiation between them and wizards.