log in or register to remove this ad

 

5E New class options in Tasha

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Supporter
2) Yes, I agreed that wizard spell list is stronger than sorcerer list, but not cleric list + sorcerer list. Right?
I...don't know? I wasn't quoting you.

Edit: Personally, if it's really a point of contention in a game, I'd just let wizard put any spell in the game in their spellbook, assuming they find a scroll (or some other source) for it. It gives wizards a cool niche.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Hmmhm. Maybe the sorcerer could have been done differently. Yes, the warlock structure would also fit the sorcerer. But I see them as different concepts thematically.

Yes, well, the Champion, the Gunslinger, and the Eldritch Knight are thematically different, but all work off the Fighter class as their core. We don't need to use class as the main method of differentiating theme.
 


Three points.

1) Being able to change your entire list of spells prepared is still a stronger option than being able to change a single spell.
2) The wizard spell list is still much stronger than the sorcerer spell list. Factoring in PHB and XGtE, it's 296 spells to 188. And a lot of those spells are good.
3) The amount of spells in a spellbook is only limited by access, money, and time. All things that are under the purview of the DM. Like most things in 5e, the balance of sorcerer versus wizard is going to be strictly dependent on the DM's playstyle.
Point 1: Agreed, partially. Know any mage that has his entire spell list from the begining? No? I thought so. With enough long rest, the sorcerer now has a full access.

Point 2: Ho... Versatility is supposed to be on the side of the wizard. But still, full cleric's list with the right subclass? At no cost but a simple long rest?

Point 3: Yes and no. At the base core, the wizard to have access to the full spell list will need both a lot of money and time. Two things that in any game save Monty Haul you'll never see. Never, ever.

I...don't know? I wasn't quoting you.

Edit: Personally, if it's really a point of contention in a game, I'd just let wizard put any spell in the game in their spellbook, assuming they find a scroll (or some other source) for it. It gives wizards a cool niche.
Very generous of your part, but this changes nothing. The wizard still has to find the spell and not the sorcerer or warlock. They only have to sleep it through...

There is a reason why the arcane spell list is either limited (sorcerer and warlock) or hard to obtain (wizard). Having everything available at a moment's notice is in the long run, quite unbalancing. If I don't want a wizard to have wizard eye, it is easy. The wizard either don't find or must sacrifice one of his "spell choice" on leveling up. There is a cost. The same for the sorcerer, warlock, eldritch knight and arcane trickster. With this rule, there is no cost but a simple rest. All the spells in the world for the cost of a sweet dream. A caster's dream come true!

Note: I am the one who complains that I don't see enough sorcerer and warlocks in my games because people really like the wizard's versatility. At the same time, this rule will make wizards almost non-existent in the long run. This is simply too good, way too good.
 

TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Supporter
There is a reason why the arcane spell list is either limited (sorcerer and warlock) or hard to obtain (wizard). Having everything available at a moment's notice is in the long run, quite unbalancing. If I don't want a wizard to have wizard eye, it is easy. The wizard either don't find or must sacrifice one of his "spell choice" on leveling up. There is a cost. The same for the sorcerer, warlock, eldritch knight and arcane trickster. With this rule, there is no cost but a simple rest. All the spells in the world for the cost of a sweet dream. A caster's dream come true!

Note: I am the one who complains that I don't see enough sorcerer and warlocks in my games because people really like the wizard's versatility. At the same time, this rule will make wizards almost non-existent in the long run. This is simply too good, way too good.
<shrug> I guess to me it feels like more of a hypothetical concern than a real in-game problem. If it makes sorcerer and warlock a stronger, more common choice than wizard, I don't really see that as a problem. I'm sure wizards will bounce back just fine in 6E. :)
 

MikalC

Explorer
Good. I like these a lot more than the racial “versatility”.

this one actually allows variety among PCs, vs paying lip service.
 

Point 1: Agreed, partially. Know any mage that has his entire spell list from the begining? No? I thought so. With enough long rest, the sorcerer now has a full access.

Depends what you mean by "mage" since that isn't a DnD class.

If you mean spellcaster, then yes, 4 of them (five with my homebrew). Cleric, Paladin, Druid, Artificer (Ranger)

If you mean "wizard" then no.



Point 2: Ho... Versatility is supposed to be on the side of the wizard. But still, full cleric's list with the right subclass? At no cost but a simple long rest?

I love how it can't be the sorcerer spell list that is overpowered for the normal sorcerer. We have to go to the Divine Soul Subclass and add in the entire Cleric Spell List to get overpowered.

I think that speaks loudly about Sorcerers, myself.



Point 3: Yes and no. At the base core, the wizard to have access to the full spell list will need both a lot of money and time. Two things that in any game save Monty Haul you'll never see. Never, ever.

But, you could work to alter the balance, if you find it unbalanced. You know what would be required to do it. That was the point, not whether or not you would actually start making it rain gold and scrolls.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
Am I the only one who feels like Spell Versatility would have virtually no effect on my games? My players almost never swap out their prepared spells, even Clerics and Druids who can choose from any spell on their list. Once in a blue moon, a Cleric might swap out a spell for a day, if they expect to need something particularly niche that they wouldn’t otherwise prepare. But for the most part, my players pick their go-to spells and stick with them. This rule might allow a sorcerer or a bard who wanted to try Ice Knife or something to get rid of it without having to wait for level-up, and it might allow them to grab a spell one day that they didn’t anticipate needing to use all the time, but that’s about it. NBD, really.
 

Depends what you mean by "mage" since that isn't a DnD class.

If you mean spellcaster, then yes, 4 of them (five with my homebrew). Cleric, Paladin, Druid, Artificer (Ranger)

If you mean "wizard" then no.
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.


I love how it can't be the sorcerer spell list that is overpowered for the normal sorcerer. We have to go to the Divine Soul Subclass and add in the entire Cleric Spell List to get overpowered.

I think that speaks loudly about Sorcerers, myself.
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...

But, you could work to alter the balance, if you find it unbalanced. You know what would be required to do it. That was the point, not whether or not you would actually start making it rain gold and scrolls.

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.

Am I the only one who feels like Spell Versatility would have virtually no effect on my games? My players almost never swap out their prepared spells, even Clerics and Druids who can choose from any spell on their list. Once in a blue moon, a Cleric might swap out a spell for a day, if they expect to need something particularly niche that they wouldn’t otherwise prepare. But for the most part, my players pick their go-to spells and stick with them. This rule might allow a sorcerer or a bard who wanted to try Ice Knife or something to get rid of it without having to wait for level-up, and it might allow them to grab a spell one day that they didn’t anticipate needing to use all the time, but that’s about it. NBD, really.
You are probably not the only one. But think about it. You'll see things our way. A lot of the cleric and druid spells are niche by definition and intent. Not so with the arcane list. Having the whole spell list, and in some cases two (a subclass) or even all spell lists (lore bards) is incredibly powerful! At level up, it forces the player to think carefully about his/her choice. At a simple long rest (especially the non gritty variant), it is simply overpowered. If you ever saw a powergamer or min/maxer, you'd understand.
 


TwoSix

Unserious gamer
Supporter
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...
You do remember they get access to ONE single spell after a long rest, not the whole list.

You are probably not the only one. But think about it. You'll see things our way. A lot of the cleric and druid spells are niche by definition and intent. Not so with the arcane list. Having the whole spell list, and in some cases two (a subclass) or even all spell lists (lore bards) is incredibly powerful! At level up, it forces the player to think carefully about his/her choice. At a simple long rest (especially the non gritty variant), it is simply overpowered. If you ever saw a powergamer or min/maxer, you'd understand.
I am a powergamer, and this really only has a small amount of weight in terms of build consideration. You already memorize/learn most of the best spells on your list already, there simply aren't that many spells that will become encounter winners in niche situations that you'll also know about ahead of time. Maybe some divinations for planning in long downtime situations?
 

You do remember they get access to ONE single spell after a long rest, not the whole list.
No, you are absolutely wrong there. It is one from a minimum of two whole lists for a few subclasses and ALL SPELL LISTS for the Lore Bard. If that is not over powered nothing is. That it is one spell per long rest is irrelevant. It is two whole lists or the entire lists that you will choose from. That alone is worth more than the magic initiate feat where you are limited to a first level spell. Now you get that feature for absolutely free.

I am a powergamer, and this really only has a small amount of weight in terms of build consideration. You already memorize/learn most of the best spells on your list already, there simply aren't that many spells that will become encounter winners in niche situations that you'll also know about ahead of time. Maybe some divinations for planning in long downtime situations?
Divinations? This is a standard tactic at my tables. When going for an adventure, any group worth its salt will know a lot of what there is to know about the layout, potential enemies and even possible reinforcements. The lore bard will have immediately the best spells at his disposal and the sorcerer and warlock will also have the best spells at their disposal. Not always, but most of the time and it will be a certainty if they have time to prepare. I have a whole group of power gamers. We talked about this rule and even them warned me not to use it because they will use it to its fullest. It took them less than a minute to see the potential abuses. These are old timers that won many tournaments in our younger years. And even my "young" (our youngest is only 34...) saw the same potential. Hell... even one of the younger DM that I coach (he's 14) called me to check if he had seen correctly.

At lower levels, 1 to 6, it will not change too much things. But as you get higher level and have access to more powerful reconaissance/divination tools, the problem will escalate almost exponentially. Just a wizard eye used before entering a dungeon/castle/town/complex will reveal a lot. When you can change whatever you want before getting in... unless you're the kind of DM that put time constrains in every adventures/missions/sessions the abuses will be there.
 

Hohige

Explorer
No, you are absolutely wrong there. It is one from a minimum of two whole lists for a few subclasses and ALL SPELL LISTS for the Lore Bard.
I beg to disagree. Bard has your own spell list, Spells added from Magical Secrets is a specific feature that is fixed, Versatile Spell doesn't work here.
"Whenever you finish a long rest, you can replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting feature "
Magical Secrets isn't Spellcasting feature.
 

DnD Warlord

Explorer
If Wizards are now spontaneous casters in 5e it's only fair that everyone else gets a limited ability to change spells every day. And my goodness, will it be a welcome change.
I do wonder if the sorcerer can swap out every night (long rest) doesn’t that make them MORE versatile then the wizard who can’t swap spells in his book??
Example: playing a 3rd level wizard and a 3rd level sorcerer neither knows knock... only one can learn it over the extended rest...and it isn’t the one we think of as versatile
 

I beg to disagree. Bard has your own spell list, Spells added from Magical Secrets is a specific feature that is fixed, Versatile Spell doesn't work here.
Being able to choose a spell from any spell list pretty much means any spell list. And now you will not be stuck with your choice until you level up but you will change the spell at the end of a long rest. This, again, means a lot of possible spells. Acutally, all of them.
 

Stalker0

Legend
People are saying this change would lower the Wizard in favor of the sorc...I actually think it’s the cleric that gets hit.

divine spells are on the whole weaker than arcane ones...but with the benefit of complete spell flexibility. A cleric has full access to his list through rests. Any niche spell that the cleric needs is one rest away.

giving that to the sorc is a tremendous power boost, and it weakens the divine niche
 

I do wonder if the sorcerer can swap out every night (long rest) doesn’t that make them MORE versatile then the wizard who can’t swap spells in his book??
Example: playing a 3rd level wizard and a 3rd level sorcerer neither knows knock... only one can learn it over the extended rest...and it isn’t the one we think of as versatile
It does. The weakness of the sorcerer has been eliminated and with their capacity to add spell slot with sorcery point or even their metamagic... wizards are now obselete.
 

Hohige

Explorer
Being able to choose a spell from any spell list pretty much means any spell list.
Wrong, Spellcasting feature from bard is restricted by Bard List.

Spell Versatility:
Whenever you finish a long rest, you can replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting feature with another spell from the bard spell list. The new spell must be the same level as the spell you replace.
 

No, you are absolutely wrong there. It is one from a minimum of two whole lists for a few subclasses and ALL SPELL LISTS for the Lore Bard.

It's not true for Lore Bards. Spell Versatility specifically lets you swap spells gained from the Spellcasting class feature. Spells gained from the Magical Secrets class features are different and not eligible. As for the Divine Soul Sorcerer... it's not power creep if you're buffing something starting a lower level.

Divinations? This is a standard tactic at my tables.

...

I have a whole group of power gamers.

I think these are important clues that your group of players and their preferred playstyle is significantly outside the norm for most groups. So if this specific optional rule would cause issues with your specific group of players, then by all means, disallow it for your table. That's why it's optional. But that doesn't mean it isn't a useful and well balanced rule for many, even most, of the play groups out there.
 

People are saying this change would lower the Wizard in favor of the sorc...I actually think it’s the cleric that gets hit.

divine spells are on the whole weaker than arcane ones...but with the benefit of complete spell flexibility. A cleric has full access to his list through rests. Any niche spell that the cleric needs is one rest away.

giving that to the sorc is a tremendous power boost, and it weakens the divine niche
So does the druid. This rule is totally OP! Make a divine soul sorcerer, all the healing you need and all the niche spells of the cleric at your finger tip. Who needs a cleric? Who needs a wizard? We have sorcerers and lore bards to do the trick.
 

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top