Okay... then why are these 0 level spells rather than just say 1st level spells?
If you can do as you say you should be able to pick any spell of your choice (of 1st level) that you have learned in such a manner but that is not how it works you pick a spell form a spell list that does not exist within the normal framework (1st to 9th for those who cantrips are not available).
I agree that some class should be more of these than others but I abjectly disagree that any spell caster should not have access to these at all. I mean for those classes that do not have it what would be the harm in giving them 1 when they can cast 1st level spells and then an additional one much later on? Does upset the precious game mechanics in some way or is it just an issue of that is not how it has been done kind of thing which seems to propagate through all the versions of DnD every since 2nd Ed
Ah okay so it is that age ole issue of "That is not how it was done and no matter how much sense it might make in game terms to fix it properly we are just going to copy/paste it as is as that speeds things up for publication purposes" go it
Didn’t like Travel Domain in previous editions get teleporting spells? I don't see why it necessarily can't be on a divine spell list.
Personally I do not like it from a GMs point of view as it requires me to keep track of more variables than I see necessary.
Way back in 2nd Ed I created a more generic magic system and many of its elements are in the 3.5 Ed/Pathfinder as well as different elements now in the 5 Ed but the two major things it had, which adhere to the K.I.S.S. it principle, is that it only had two magic paradigms Divine and Arcane
and it only had 1 Spell List. Granted Mages still generally stayed away from the Necromantic magic (the magic used to Heal - Positive/Negative Energy manipulation) due to its tendency to have nasty side affects but it made for a much easier magic system to run and the two paradigms were different enough to make a Cleric fairly different from a Mage even if they happened to have the same list of spells (which was rare since a deity limited what they supplied to their priests) and wizards were only limited by their abilities and whether they wanted to risk being a wizard or not.
However, 5th Ed at a glance would make this very problematic to implement so not sure if I am even going to try or just leave that one on the shelf for 3.5 Ed or earlier
Clerics and Druids don't get Misty Step at all.
Unless you're referring to the vancian/spell slot casting system in general in which case they did it because they've tried other other magic systems, but they've so far all proven less marketable for the D&D brand.
What does it require you to keep track of? It is not as if the spells on different class spell lists have different kinds of mechanics.
In practical terms that is one more than 5e has. AFAIK (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm missing something) the distinction between arcane and divine in 5e is just fluff.
Yeah, I'm still not sure what game problem you are trying to solve.
But two headaches you're going to hit anyway, no matter what you do.Okay first with multiple spell lists with the same spell having different levels for different casters -- that means as a GM you have to keep track of that either when creating a magic scroll that gets found or when creating bad guys as they may all have different spell lists. Two more headaches than necessary.
These can be beaten down a little. Paladin and Cleric would be (close to) the same. Ranger and Druid could be (close to) the same. Sorcerer, Wizard and Warlock can all be (close to) the same overall, though if you separate Wizards out into school-based subclasses (Illusionist, Necromancer, Summoner etc.) you'll have a bunch more lists instead of a few less.In practical terms, based on my outline, 5th Ed has 8 (Bard, Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard) magic paradigms if you go no further than just the separate magic lists which are then reflected within each of these classes.