D&D 5E Spell Preparation - A Better Vancian or a Bridge Too Far?

[KidSnide]

One thing that I really like about the new packet (at least on first impression) are the new spell preparation rules.

By forcing characters to pick their spells, you get much of the tactical interest of old-school D&D. The number of spells a character gets to prepare is still fairly limited, so there is a cost to preparing knock (or other utility magic) instead of other spells. Even a scholarly wizard can't prepare enough utility spells to cover the full range of what he would want to have available without seriously limiting his combat options.

Plus, spell preparation doesn't depend quite so much on being able to predict the type of adventure. If your investigation turns combat intensive, a caster can rely on a few combat spells to make it through the adventure. Preparing the right spells is still important, but it's no longer the type of make-or-break decision that would make a group retreat from an adventure because the casters have the wrong spell package prepared. I think this is important if we don't let wizards have it both ways by memorizing combat spells and using scrolls and wands for unlimited on-demand utility spells.

At the same time, these rules don't offend my sense of "how magic works" to the same extent as traditional Vancian magic. A caster can run out of power, but they don't forget how to cast a spell just because the prepared a single copy instead of two. Also, because this system is a sort of middle ground between Vancian and spell point, I think it will be easier for a DM to substitute their preferred mechanic without undue consequences.

But, I don't know, is it too much of a change? Thoughts?

-KS

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I think you pretty much nailed it.

My biggest complaint about the current system is that from a flavor perspective it seems like a compromise that doesn't please anyone: if you're thinking of spells as something that drains your willpower, a spellpoint system makes a lot more sense, whereas if you're thinking of spells as something you cast/prepare 90% of the way ahead of time and then trigger in battle (a la 3e), a traditional Vancian system makes more sense. So if this was the ONLY way for wizards and clerics to prepare spells I'd be disappointed. But by making this "compromise" the default, it becomes easier to include modules for spellpoint casters and for traditional-Vancian casters.

The interesting thing to me is how much this new system depends on the number of spell slots per level available: with two per level, this seems pretty appropriately balanced, but with even three per level (after first level), it might seem overpowered.

I also wonder how they'll work in sorcerers, bards, warlocks, etc.: will they "default" to this semi-Vancian system with the option of using modules for other casting systems, or will the default be determined by class, or will most of them have their own fixed casting system and not even work into the modular system? (I can certainly imagine having sorcerers that ONLY use spell points, for example.)

One quick question for those who've read the packet more carefully: if you prep Magic Missile as a level 1 spell, can you use a level 2 slot to cast a more poweful version? Or do you have to prepare the spell at the level you intend to use it?

 

[TerraDave]

Its still feels pretty vancian while being more flexible and seems (on average) better then 3E style spontaneous casting, which requires strict limits on number of known spells, or a spell point system, which spam prone.

 

[Kobold Stew]

One quick question for those who've read the packet more carefully: if you prep Magic Missile as a level 1 spell, can you use a level 2 slot to cast a more poweful version? Or do you have to prepare the spell at the level you intend to use it?

Neither -- you can use a higher level slot, but the potency of the spell remains unchanged (for both Wizard and Cleric)

EDIT: ... though some spells do allow more powerful versions. [oops. Thanks, GX.Sigma]

 

[GX.Sigma]

Neither -- you can use a higher level slot, but the potency of the spell remains unchanged (for both Wizard and Cleric)

You sure about that?

The Wizard class says "You can prepare a number of spells equal to 1 + your wizard level...When you cast a spell, choose one of your prepared spells and expend a spell slot of that spell’s level or higher. Some spells have improved effects when they are cast at higher levels." Magic Missile says "When you cast this spell using a spell slot of a level higher than 1st..."

The preparation section doesn't mention preparing them at certain levels, and the casting section clearly says you can cast them at higher levels. So it seems to me that you can just prepare Magic Missile (not "in a slot," just have it as one of your X spells prepared that day), and then cast it with any level of slot. It will have an effect based on what level of slot you use on it.

 

[variant]

As someone who likes the old Vancian system, I think this is type of system is a good compromise. However, I wish it was limited by spell levels. A first level spell should be more difficult than a second level spell to prepare.

 

[Kobold Stew]

You sure about that?

You are correct. Some spells do have higher potency versions. My bad. Edited accordingly.

 

[Sunseeker]

There's not a point on your list I don't agree with.

 

[Mezzer]

I really love it, since it still retains the best part of Vancian casting, ie the fact that a Wizard has to prepare spells. The added flexibility also makes a lot of sense, particularly relative to the power of the other classes atm. Another good thing is that they can introduce cool new mechanics that modify spell memorization and spell slots if they so chose.

And on top of that, it also mirrors the way Wizards are portrayed in novels and other media far better than traditional full-on Vancian casting.

 

[Salamandyr]

I've seen this as a houserule going all that way back to 1e. I've used a time or two in games I've run and it works out well. I think it's a good compromise.