The Actual Table of Contents for Xanathar's Guide to Everything

A lot of good stuff there.

Of course, on the DM side, a lot of stuff is not there, but I like what I see.

Actually, one of the most useful things will be the appendix of sample names.

 

[Yaarel]

Heh, have all the spells entered into a database, so I can look them up in any order, including nested order. But I havent ‘tagged’ them yet.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Could somebody clarify whether the basic Ranger Class will be modified in this book - as I think was mentioned sometime in previous Unearthed Arcana?

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I would have loved organzation spells by level first and then name. Since spells are now universally at a certain level, unlike in adnd or 3.x where the same spells had different levels for different casters, you wouldn't have the problem of adnd where you needed to print spells twice in the wizard and cleric list.
So a spells by level organization would not be bad. Since most spells for creatures lists spells known or prepared by level you should be able to easily find them.
For all other cases it is easy to just note the level of spell directly in the monster entry or habe a spell list by name somewhere.

Picked this posted to reply to, as it was the last one in the thread on the topic, so not aimed at you.

For all the complainers about this, you apparently missed this that was put out by WotC a year or two ago for the PHB spells:

http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/DnD_SpellLists_1.01.pdf

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Could somebody clarify whether the basic Ranger Class will be modified in this book - as I think was mentioned sometime in previous Unearthed Arcana?

There will be no base class update for the Ranger in this book. This has been said many times by Crawford and Mearls. They have also said that when it is finally ready to put out, it will be done in a way that is free for everyone, since it is considered a part of Core.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

And now for a third post in a row. lol

I am surprised that people are treating this as the "major mechanical expansion" book that has been hinted at. I think that is still coming next November and will include the Mystic and Artificer and many more character option than this book contains. There is not enough in this book for it to be "major" in any way.

 

[cbwjm]

I tend to ignore the Wizard schools. They are less useful for organizing spells. Things that should be Abjuration arent, like Healing. Things that shouldnt be in a school are, and so on.

The way the Cleric class organizes spells by domain, is more helpful thematically.

I wish each spell came with several relevant tags. A character who focuses on ‘Fire’ spells. Done. ‘Plant’ spells, done. ‘Mind’ spells, done. ‘Attack’ spells, ‘Movement’ spells, ‘Protection’ spells, and so on.

I disagree that healing should be abjuration since healing doesn't really seem to fit what abjuration does, which is protect or banish. Healing spells have moved around the schools a lot over editions. Originally necromantic effects (which fits, you're manipulating life energy), moving to conjuration in 3e, and now evocation in 5e (I guess this kind of fits, you're creating healing energy and applying it to a target). They probably didn't want to link something positive (healing) with something that many perceive as negative since I'd say most associate necromancy with the creation of the undead.

Some tags might be useful, but I think some of those are pretty much self explanatory if you're looking through the lists since anything with fire or flame is likely a fire spell and anything with plant is a plant spell. If you're using a program, being able to type in fire to create a list of spells would be useful, much as UndeheuerLich said in his post following yours.

 

[Yaarel]

I disagree that healing should be abjuration since healing doesn't really seem to fit what abjuration does, which is protect or banish. Healing spells have moved around the schools a lot over editions. Originally necromantic effects (which fits, you're manipulating life energy), moving to conjuration in 3e, and now evocation in 5e (I guess this kind of fits, you're creating healing energy and applying it to a target). They probably didn't want to link something positive (healing) with something that many perceive as negative since I'd say most associate necromancy with the creation of the undead.

Some tags might be useful, but I think some of those are pretty much self explanatory if you're looking through the lists since anything with fire or flame is likely a fire spell and anything with plant is a plant spell. If you're using a program, being able to type in fire to create a list of spells would be useful, much as UndeheuerLich said in his post following yours.

I am cool with healing as ‘evocation’ − literally positive energy from the positive plane, similar to fire energy from the fire elemental plane.

My point was the nine-school system fails to work well. This is especially true when one spell might belong to more than one school. But the schools themselves are less conceptually useful for the systematic organization of spells.

Healing protects from death, to me nothing is more clearly ‘abjuration’. Also it magically removes an injury.

I feel ‘abjuration’ is a useful category, but I might name its tag ‘protection’. I would have it include spells like ‘Mend’ too.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Picked this posted to reply to, as it was the last one in the thread on the topic, so not aimed at you.

For all the complainers about this, you apparently missed this that was put out by WotC a year or two ago for the PHB spells:

http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/DnD_SpellLists_1.01.pdf

No. That is not what I or we mean. I and we i guess know that link and I (can only speak of me here) now use dndbeyond as you can see in my post above.

We would have appreciated spells listed by level instead of alphabetically. This way you can go theough every level 1 spell and can easily compare their usefulness if you chose spells. If thdy would list which clases they belong to, even better.
I and we know that it has disadvantages too, bit in my opinion not constantly flipping between spell lists per class and spells when chosing a new spell is better. Also finding same level spells close to each other helps. Organizing them by schools would also have advantages, but since non wizards or derivates don't really use schools that is not my preferred solution.
Adnd organized wizard spells by level and cleric spells by level. That was necessary because of different levels for the same spells in different list. That problem does not exist anymore. So it may be time looking at and reconsider old concepts that were dropped because of a concept which was later also dropped.
And since the discussion is about wasted space, as felt by some, there could be an argument that a comprehensive spell list with all previously published spells would habe felt more valuable.
My personal preference would be an abbreviated spell description of spells per level. With school, concentration, ritual tag, maybe healing, summoning etc. Damage, condition and saving throw if appliciable.
I know dndbeyond does this in a better way as you can easily sort spells by each tag, but sometimes habing things offline is faster than using google.

And since using google to look up spells during character creation is easier than googling for names during play, I might even prefer names in the free space. Bit since I bought xgte It is a wash. Or still better with names in the appendix, because i have the other thing already.



Sent from my GT-I9506 using EN World mobile app

 

[Yaarel]

On the topic of spell descriptions, I feel ‘concentration’ and ‘ritual’, should be considered spell components, along with ‘verbal’ and ‘somatic’. I would also distinguish between a costly material component that costs ‘gold’ pieces, from a flavorful hodgepodge of materials that an other ‘focus’, such as a wand, can obviate. So, the full array of abbreviated initials would look like this:

Spell components: C, V, S, F, G, R

 

[Charles Rampant]

For what it’s worth, I think the name lists will be something that I use at the table. I always forget to prepare them ahead of time, and it’s nice to have a list to draw from when it matters. Also, as someone mentioned before this whole spell list discussion started, it makes this a fun book to have open while making characters – you have life paths, extra subclasses, name lists, and, most importantly, knot rules, all together in one package.

I’m curious to see how good the name lists are, to be honest. It could be a good execution, or it could be a terrible one…