D&D 5E Reworking Spell Lists (Reducing "Sameyness")

[Fenris-77]

^ @Fenris-77 Oh, for sure! Easy-peasy. I would just like it baked in to the class(es), especially if healing through spells is being removed from them.

Yeah, a class feature was what I was thinking. They get proficiency with the herbalism kit and on a successful WIS check it does cool healing X, whatever that needs to be. Maybe 1d8 plus WIS on a rest. I'd scale it for level too, so 2d8 at 5th and so on. Something like that anyway. You could even work in some downtime herb gathering whatnot to buff the base ability. I like it a lot. Coincidentally, poison is the flip side of this coin, and that's something that it also seem reasonable for Druids and Rangers to be good at.

 

[TwoSix]

I think the Druid would be way cooler if the Fey thing was a core part of the class. You have your Feywild Druid, your Shadowfell Druid, and maybe some Elemental Flavors. Cooler than just a dude dressed in green who like animals and whacking people with magic sticks.

Yea, the homebrew druid I use has similar themes. It has explicit elemental subclasses, and several fey-themed and death-themed ones.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So, the idea is that the warlock won’t be casting spells at all?

I think the idea is that all arcanist will use the wizard list.

The combination of reliable damage dealing and ... I’m wondering what makes the warlock fun in this model?

Well, given that it's removing damaging cantrips everywhere else, I figure the Warlock could just have an EB that grinds DPR like a Fighter archer, and it'll be fine.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Is it too "samey" that all three lists have a way to create light? This goes back to the how part of the process. Is the how distinct enough to justify the what?

If the cleric having light and the wizard having dancing lights is too samey, then one of those spells just shouldn't exist, either, right? Because it's redundant?

 

[Fenris-77]

Something else that just occurred to me is what the distribution of ritual spells is going to look like. If they end up outside the rubric of ritual casters you're taking away a pretty significant rock from those classes. That point will keep until the lists are done the first pass though.

 

[Stoutstien]

While reorganizing the spell list distribution any thoughts on going ahead a 'fixing' the spells that while have a lot of flavor lack meaningful impact? A good quarter of the spells never see gameplay because of one reason or another.
Example: Ray of sickness needing both a successful attack and a failed save be worth the slot/action.

 

[TwoSix]

If the cleric having light and the wizard having dancing lights is too samey, then one of those spells just shouldn't exist, either, right? Because it's redundant?

I think tossing out redundant spells is definitely something to consider on a later pass through the spells.

I do think it's valid to think of some capabilities as fitting into a broader "caster" niche, as opposed to a "specific caster" niche. Making light seems like a fit for "any caster" to me, but like any of these considerations, is up to a debate.

 

[TwoSix]

While reorganizing the spell list distribution any thoughts on going ahead a 'fixing' the spells that while have a lot of flavor lack meaningful impact? A good quarter of the spells never see gameplay because of one reason or another.
Example: Ray of sickness needing both a successful attack and a failed save be worth the slot/action.

I thought about it, but fixing spells is much broader exercise. Dumping spells into a spreadsheet and changing some flags around is a lot more my speed.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

While I see your point, this is just the start.
What sort of problems do you think this is creating? I know so of the spell placements will not be to some individuals' liking, but there is nothing new in that.
And thanks for your interest!
IIRC from the other thread, the basic idea with Warlock was to give them their Expanding Spells list as per short rest spells, and then give more and maybe expanded Invocations. I can't say for certain, however.

Some of the potential issues I see rising up are stated below in response to tony. Other potential issues I would be aware of;

What is the plan to make up the difference in combat capability for the main casters? It’s not a viable option to simply leave them out of luck when spells run low. my cleric thread shows what I think is a strongly thematic and non-samey alternative to cantrips. Another might be simply to give clerics extra radiant damage on all weapon attacks at 5. Keep them capable of wading into the fray at all levels.

Sorcerers being half casters is...unthematic. The power balance will be very hard. Upcasting lower level spells is just dramatically less powerful than getting 6-9th level spells. Not to mention, sorcerers should have at Will magic much more than wizards should, thematically. But mostly, the balance.

I think the idea is that all arcanist will use the wizard list.

Well, given that it's removing damaging cantrips everywhere else, I figure the Warlock could just have an EB that grinds DPR like a Fighter archer, and it'll be fine.

So, that would mean that at the end, the 3 “main” spellcasters are less “samey”, but every other spellcaster is much, much, more samey. And that the warlock is super boring. look, I won’t try to dig into why it is the case here, but spamming the same cantrip all day is more boring than attacking with a weapon.
But, it seems like that isn’t quite what the OP has in mind. EB is a great basis to start from. Invocations help.

I would still let each “lesser” caster has at least a couple unique spells, though. To me, the primary source of sameyness is common spell lists. Taking the already lacking ranger and making all of their unique spells be Druid spells would just be depressing.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So, that would mean that at the end, the 3 “main” spellcasters are less “samey”, but every other spellcaster is much, much, more samey.

Yes. Though the impression I get is that the other casters will actually be lesser casters, with combat ability (Ranger, Paladin) and/or more class features. Because the 3 primary casters will lack attack cantrips and meaningful weapon attacks, that provides the lesser casters both consistent contribution and differentiation.

And that the warlock is super boring. look, I won’t try to dig into why it is the case here, but spamming the same cantrip all day is more boring than attacking with a weapon.

It seems like it necessarily would be almost exactly as boring (slightly less, perhaps, in that at least every humanoid that you encounter of stone-age or greater technological sophistication, is not also attacking with the same cantrip every round) - which, can't be too boring at all or just attacking with a weapon (2+ times per round, even) wouldn't be so highly-valued in the 5e design paradigm.

I would still let each “lesser” caster has at least a couple unique spells, though. To me, the primary source of sameyness is common spell lists. Taking the already lacking ranger and making all of their unique spells be Druid spells would just be depressing.

Hey, the ranger gets to attack meaningfully with a weapon and cast spells.