D&D General Progressive Spells?

[Voadam]

In the 3e era I designed a feat to allow knowing one spell in a specific chain to know them all, so a sorcerer could spend a feat to be a signature monster summoner and learning monster summoning I-IX with the cost of a feat and one first level spell known. This seemed reasonable and desirable in 3e looking at both cost and power gained and how sorcerers fit into the power progression of 3e.

In 5e the rarity and power of feats are different so it would not be the same, perhaps do out a bunch of chains and choosing any spell in those chains gives you the whole chain known.

The spell progression in the themed chains is the tricky part as not every theme has 1-9 level spells in the PH.

 

[dave2008]

I actually see progressive more in the inverse direction, where having both spells can empower the later.

Example: fly, while this spell is active, you can cast the levitate spell to refresh the duration.

normally fly is superior to levitate, but this gives a benefit for a caster who prepares both to get extra mileage.

I like the idea, but it a different concept really and not mutually exclusive either. You could easily do both.

 

[HomegrownHydra]

No thought of restricting (well at least not with this idea), just a reorganizing really.

Requiring a PC to pick x spell before they are allowed to select y spell is a restriction.

 

[Maxperson]

No worries!

To be honest I am thinking less of how the current spell list magic system is set up an how it might work a new set up. If I were to try this I would first throw out the current spell list then build it back up with that idea in mind, filling in gaps where needed. I also don't think you need spell at every level (so you don't need a fire spell at each level to cast a 5th level fire spell).

I might do something like. Levels 1 and 2 require no prerequisites. Levels 3 and 4 require 1 prerequisite. Levels 5 and 6 require 2 prerequisites. Levels 7 and 8 require 3 prerequisites. And level 9 spells take 4 of them.

 

[dave2008]

Requiring a PC to pick x spell before they are allowed to select y spell is a restriction.

That is a valid perspective, my point is that is not the reason I was thinking about this idea. I think if done well it can be quite liberating

 

[dave2008]

I might do something like. Levels 1 and 2 require no prerequisites. Levels 3 and 4 require 1 prerequisite. Levels 5 and 6 require 2 prerequisites. Levels 7 and 8 require 3 prerequisites. And level 9 spells take 4 of them.

Something like that, but they could be added. So fireball would have 2 prerequisites, but DBF only has one: Fireball

 

[Maxperson]

Something like that, but they could be added. So fireball would have 2 prerequisites, but DBF only has one: Fireball

I would make it Fireball and Slow or something like that. It's fun coming up with the combinations.

 

[ECMO3]

I was thinking about the magic in D&D today and how some magic in D&D comes at such a low level compared to what we see in most fiction. That lead me to the idea of requiring spells to be learned in progression. So in order to learn the fly spell, you must learn the spells: gust of wind and levitate. To learn fireball you must first learn: burning hands and firebolt. Basically, you can't learn higher level spells without first learning lesser related spells, regardless of your level. I thought it was an interesting, if not original, concept and I was wondering if anyone has tried it their campaigns.

While thematically, it is ok, I think this is an awful idea and to implement on PCs. It only serves to limit choice and really screws players.

What happens at level 5 after you have firebolt and burning hands and realize the rest of the campaign is going to be mostly devils and Red Dragons fighting arial battles?

I think is a fine way to build NPCs and would bring some depth into their characters, but it would be bad to force on players.

 

[dave2008]

While thematically, it is ok, I think this is an awful idea and to implement on PCs. It only serves to limit choice and really screws players.

What happens at level 5 after you have firebolt and burning hands and realize the rest of the campaign is going to be mostly devils and Red Dragons fighting arial battles?

I think is a fine way to build NPCs and would bring some depth into their characters, but it would be bad to force on players.

I disagree. I mean that is only 2 of the minimum 10 spells a 5th level wizard would know. If it is really a concern, you could group the spells and give them as bonus spells like cleric domains, or just allow them to know a lot of spells! You could increase the minimum to 3 or even 4 per level and you have no loss of choice, and could even gain some flexibility.

Also, I personally allow my wizard to retrain at level up / downtime. So at most it is a limit for 1 level.

 

[dave2008]

I would make it Fireball and Slow or something like that. It's fun coming up with the combinations.

Yes, i thought meteor swarm could require fireball and earthquake or something like that. I haven't really given it a lot of thought, but coming up with combinations does seem like some fun.