Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whizbang Dustyboots" data-source="post: 9005651" data-attributes="member: 11760">The 2014 corebooks provided the absolute bare minimum in guidance on how to make custom spells, something I as a player and DM have done for a long time.  So I was thrilled that the April 2023 UA provides concrete guidance for how this works for wizards -- at least as long as one is modifying a published spell. I hope we'll see expanded guidelines in the DMG for creating one from scratch, although not doing so is a great way to ensure more sales of books with new spells to be modified.But I have a few quibbles:First, making abilities into spells is the new hotness in this UA, but in this case, it means someone playing a ninth level or above wizard has to flip back and forth through the spell listings just to get the rules for making new spells. I suspect they were made spells so the process wouldn't be a big intimidating wall of text, but from a usability standpoint, this isn't great. Just make them abilities and stick them in the class write-up so the wizard player can find them all in one spot.Second, Modify Spell doesn't change the level of the spell it modifies. For some changes, that's fine. For others, well, I have some concerns.Here's the text of Modify Spell, just for reference:So, multiple things about this list:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">As has been pointed out on the other threads, Create Spell strips the Arcane tag off these modified spells, so you can only modify them once. If you want to modify spells more, you'll need to gain some levels.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">At level 18, when you can cast ninth level spells, you can make a total of five modifications to a spell.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Some of these changes are better than others and I feel the most powerful changes need a level adjustment on them, similar to how spells were balanced in 3E, with both spell creation and metamagic.<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Removing a non-expensive material component isn't a big deal. I can't imagine anyone going through the hassle of customizing a spell this way, since you'll need to spend gold to make the change, but sure, that's fine.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Removing Verbal and Somatic components, on the other hand, is more of an issue. It's a tactical upgrade to remove these from illusion and enchantment spells, but it makes any spell modified this way one that can be cast while paralyzed. Every wizard fighting ghouls, for instance, needs to do this. But just removing Verbal components means than that Silence spell no longer holds any terror for the prepared wizard, taking a huge tactical element off the table. Removing Verbal or Somatic components are worth bumping up the resultant spell a level, IMO, and removing both is worth two level bumps.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Making Concentration spells that can't be interrupted by damage is definitely worth at least a level bump.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The most dangerous damage type, Force, isn't one a spell can be modified to do, but I'm confident that there's someone out there with a spreadsheet that lists which of Acid, Cold, Fire, Lightning, Necrotic, Poison or Thunder is the least commonly resisted energy type. (Also, having Necrotic on the list, but not Radiant, feels like an oversight.) The moment an evoker hits level nine, they should be modifying all of their damaging spells to whichever is the most likely type to bypass resistances. If these were all roughly equally likely to be resisted, it wouldn't be worth a level bump, but I suspect there are some significant disparities. This might be worth a level bump.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Modifying range seems powerful, but in actual practice, I'm not sure that being able to cast an attack spell 600 feet away is a big deal, although it's probably a great way to irritate the party's archer.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Are there really many spells that take 10 minutes to cast that aren't Ritual spells already? And if so, why aren't they? This feels like they're empowering players to fix poor editing in the 2024 edition.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Finally, making spells that automatically ignore allies is a huge change, especially since "allies" doesn't have a definition that I can see. Is everyone who voted me Most Attractive Wizard permanently my ally? Is everyone in my army of 100,000 conscripts all my ally? Are people who secretly did something nice to me that I don't know about my ally? I guess we'll find out when I start blasting away with Fireball! Even in the less extreme scenarios, being able to throw fireballs around in small spaces filled with the close-range attacker members of my party is a game changer. Without a level bump, why wouldn't every single group immediately subsidize Fireball being customized the moment their wizard hits level 9? Anything that obviously everyone should immediately do is no longer a matter of player choice -- it's overpowered. This absolutely needs a level bump, maybe two.</li> </ol></li> </ol>As someone who's been playing a gnome illusionist for more than 15 years, if the spell creation system goes in as-is, fantastic, I look forward to tweaking all the spells to be still and silent and, depending how I feel about the rest of the party, ignore allies.As a DM for a lot of casters, though, I don't want to have to house rule a system that is such a good foundation for both players and DMs to have a lot of fun.</blockquote>

Verification