5E UA Spell Versatility: A deeper dive

Sword of Spirit

Adventurer
There are some pretty strong reactions to this proposed rules option in the new Unearthed Arcana article. While the discussion is still young, I'm seeing a good amount of non-nuanced evaluation. "Love it!" "Hate it!" Since something like this potentially can have a huge effect on the game(1) and since they are going to want survey feedback fairly soon, I decided it is probably a good idea to get into a deeper analysis right now so people can answer the survey with considered opinions.

Let's start by examining the two relevant features. Both of these features are enhancenments to the core rules, not substitutions, and take effect at the first spellcasting level of the class (2nd level for ranger, 1st for everyone else).

Cleric, Druid, and Wizard gain this feature:

Cantrip Versatility
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one cantrip you learned from this Spellcasting feature with another cantrip from the <class> spell list.


In the core rules, it is not possible to replace a cantrip. Once you have it, you are stuck with it. That wizard who didn't learn light with his limited cantrip allotments may become an archmage knowing every spell on the wizard list, with the mighty power of wish but the light cantrip will forever elude him.

I find this particular benefit to be rather benign, and have seen no objections to it. I'll assume it's a good thing that should apply to every class and won't discuss it further.

Bard, Ranger, Sorcerer, and Warlock gain this feature instead:

Spell Versatility
Whenever you finish a long rest, you can replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting (or Pact Magic) feature with another spell from the <class> spell list. The new spell must be the same level as the spell you replace.


A text box clarifies that cantrips are valid targets for Spell Versatility.

The effect of this is to allow bards, sorcerers, and warlocks to theoretically use downtime to completely change all of their spells known. (I'm not 100% certain whether or not it applies to a bard's Magical Secrets as written, but it's quite possible it does.) Unlike a wizard, they are not limited to a personal list, but have their entire class spell list available to them, much like a cleric, druid, or paladin, just requiring more long rests to accomplish the same thing.

As a quick review, here is how the classes work by default:

Cleric, Druid, Paladin:
Choose each of the spells(2) you have daily spellcasting access to (prepared) after each long rest, choosing from your entire class list. Clerics, paladins, and some druids also gain set extra spells they always have access to (prepared) (up to 10), which may be from their own spell lists or others.

Bard, Ranger, Sorcerer, Warlock:
Choose each of the spells you have daily spellcasting access to (known) from a class list at the points when you level up and learn new spells. Change one of those spells to another one (of any level you have access to) when you gain a level. Warlocks, and some rangers and sorcerers, can choose to learn some of those spells from additional lists(3).

Wizard:
Choose each of the spells you have daily spellcasting access to (prepared) after each long rest, choosing from a personally available list (spellbook) of spells, which is a subset of the wizard spell list. Add 2 new spells to this personal list of available spells when you gain a level, and possibly additional ones during play.

Here is a brief comparison. I've separate the classes into those that have flexible daily spellcasting access (prepared casters) and those that have set daily spellcasting access (known casters). I haven't included the proposed expanded spell lists, and I've left out cantrips for simplicity, though neither of those should make a substantial difference.

Flexible (Prepared) Casters:

Clerics have flexible daily spellcasting access to (prepared) the largest number of spells by a significant margin(4). Their available spell list is of moderate size.

Druids have flexible daily spellcasting access to (prepared) the second largest number of spells(4). Their available spell list is relatively large (somewhat bigger than the Cleric's).

Paladins are half-casters, but have flexible daily spellcasting access (prepared) to a large number of spells, at least equal to the Bard, and possibly as high as the Druid or Wizard(5). Their available spell list is tiny, equivalent to a Ranger or Wizard.

Wizards have daily spellcasting access to (prepared) a large number of spells, equivalent to a Druid, and can reach the level of a Cleric when Ritual Casting from a robust spellbook is included. Although they have access to an enormous list of spells to create their personal available spell list (spellbook) from, the actual size of their available spell list is only comparable to that of a Paladin or Ranger (ie, the lowest number)(6).

Set (Known) Casters:

Bards have set daily spellcasting access to (known) a reasonably large number of spells, similar to the Paladin. They have a relatively large available spell list to choose those spells from on level up (about the size of the Druid's), and a select number of those can be chosen from any spell in the game via Magical Secrets.

Rangers are half-casters and have set daily spellcasting access (known) to the smallest number of spells of all. Their available spell list is also tiny, equivalent to a Ranger or Wizard.

Sorcerers have daily spellcasting access to (known) a small number of spells, clocking in halfway between the Ranger and the Warlock. They have the second largest available spell list to choose from.

Warlocks have daily spellcasting access to (known) a moderate number of spells. They also have a moderate sized available spell list.

Bards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks get some of the nice traditionally arcane spells on their spell lists. They tend to have the flashier effects. This, along with their lists being larger and more varied than those of prepared casters (with the exception of Warlock) is one important defining reason that they were limited to having set (known) spells rather than flexible (prepared) spells. Letting them prepare their choice of some of the "best" spells each day is considered to be rather powerful. By contrast, Clerics, Druids, and Paladins, are viewed as having less impressive and varied spell lists. Their spell lists themselves restrict them somewhat to a theme, while the arcane lists allow you to build your own theme.

Before we continue, let me reveal my own biases.

-I like classes to maintain some semblence of traditional mechanical-thematic(7) differences in their spellcasting.
-I am generally on board with the core spellcasting design, with some exceptions.
-I think Rangers should have been prepared casters, since they get nothing in exchange for the incredible loss of flexibility compared to the similarly designed Paladin.
-I think Sorcerers should retain their position of having a relatively small number of spells known, but I think that number needs to be higher than it is by default (and that they need access to a larger list to choose from)(8).
-In general, I don't think the game design sufficently took account of the fact that being a known rather than prepared caster in 5e is a complete and total downgrade (there is literally no benefit to it) and some additional abilities should exist specifically to balance that when comparing to prepared spellcasters.
-So, in theory, I like the idea behind Spell Versatility

And some basic play assumptions.

-Characters get some downtime. This doesn't necessarily mean they are taking months off all the time. It does mean that we should not assume the PCs are adventuring every day, and that they get regular stretches of at least 2 or 3 days off.
-Play should be balanced for both single-classed and multi-classed characters, groups who use feats and groups who don't. We start with the game's baseline assumption of single-classed, no feats balance, and once that looks good, we balance for the existence of feats and multiclassing.

Now we can dig into analyzing the effects of the Spell Versatility enhancement on the classes.

This enhancement does not affect Clerid, Druid, Paladin, or Wizard, and therefore it is inherently increasing the spellcasting effectiveness of the classes is does effect relative to the effectiveness of those classes. This is something to keep in mind when examining overall balance.

In the case of Ranger, it merely moves its spellcasting a bit closer to Paladin, while still leaving it quite a bit behind. It is literally a lesser version of a Paladin's spell preparation, where you can only change one prepared spell a day instead of all of them. Since you could just straight-up make Ranger a prepared caster like the Paladin and it still would be behind by virtue of not having access to Oath spells, this enhancement still leaves Ranger as the weakest of the spellcasting classes.

For Bards, the effect is slightly different depending on whether or not it works with Magical Secrets. If it does then Magical Secrets allows the Bard to literally access any spell in the game from any list, with a day's notice. With more days notice, they can switch out all of their Magical Secrets for any other spells in the game of the same level. This would seem to give them more overall flexibility than even a wizard, given a bit of downtime. If they had an idea of what they were going to be going up against in their next adventure, they could make sure to have the best possible known spells for those challenges. This makes them arguably the most effective spellcaster in the game for most adventures. In addition, if you allow the creation of scrolls (and you probably should, since the game is littered with them), then a Bard can also make any scroll in the game. Even if it doesn't work with Magical Secrets, the variety of the Bard spell list makes it a huge boost. You have to think, "Would it be too good for the Bard to be a flexible (prepared) caster rather than a set (known) caster?" If the answer is "yes", then this is probably too good, because that is what they become between adventures.

For Warlocks, Pact Magic inherently limits this to spells of 5th-level or higher. They also have a smaller available spell list than Bards or Sorcerers (though it is much bigger than Rangers). That being said, they do have quite a lot of variety and impactful spells in their available spell list. The boost here would give them the ability with a day's notice to have access to any spell on their list, and with a few days of downtime to effectively be a prepared caster from a respectable arcane spell list.

For Sorcerers, the ability to access any spell with a days notice, and be a prepared caster with a few days time is almost as impactful as a Bard with Magical Secrets, because they have the second largest spell list which includes a lot of the best Wizard spells. While the Wizard class spell list is a lot larger, they are personally limited to their spellbook, and even with a really respectable spellbook this feature should give Sorcerers the ability to choose from at least twice as many available spells, and most likely closer to three times as many (9). You have to ask yourself here, "Would Sorcerers being able to prepare their known spells from 3x as many as a Wizard can be too good?" If the answer is "yes", then this is probably too good also.

We also have the issue of story theme. Being able to totally change which spells your character knows with a little bit of downtime weakens the character concept that was partially defined by those spells known. I think that is an important part of the identity of the Sorcerer at the very least.

My thought is that the Spellcasting Versatility enhancement, as described, is too strong (except for the Ranger). It is a little much for Warlocks, and way too much for Bards and Sorcerers. It also weakens the theme of any particular Sorcerer unless their theme is "I can cast all the spells!"

That being said, I like the intent behind it. Assuming that Wizard gets something to maintain their flexibility advantage, there is merit in creating a weaker version of it.

My proposal is:

Spell Versatility
Whenever you finish a long rest, you can temporarily replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting (or Pact Magic) feature with another spell from the <class> spell list. The new spell must be the same level as the spell you replace, and cannot be higher than 5th-level. You are not considered to know this spell for any purposes other than casting it. For instance, you cannot create a scroll with this spell on it, nor use it as a prerequisite for using or acquiring another ability. This benefit lasts until you finish a long rest.


I would not allow it to work with Magical Secrets.

This doesn't allow the character to completely change their spell list. It preserves the theme of the spells they chose, but it does allow them to have one flexible spell per day which still gives a substantial boost to any set (known) caster.

This does, however, step on the toes of the Wizard(10), because their available spell list (spellbook) is now much smaller and there is nothing they can do about it other than find more treasure(11). Their flexibility is one of the best things they had going for them, and this really does still challenge it. As an eclectic player that likes all classes (and most core subclasses), it really makes Wizard, traditionally a favorite of mine, a much harder sell. I'd pretty much resent it the whole time I was playing a wizard.

So what would I give them? I'm not sure. It will be tricky to give them something that feels like a sufficient compensation for the loss of their niche, but at the same time it would be very easy to overdo it, since giving a Wizard access--even highly limited access--to every spell on their class list seems a bit much. For the moment, I think that they should at least get the following.

Arcane Versatility
1st-level wizard feature (enhances Arcane Recovery)
Whenever you use your Arcane Recovery feature, you can also replace one of the spells you have prepared with another one of the spells in your spellbook. Neither the spell you replace nor its replacement can be higher than 5th-level.


I need to bring up one more element that relates to one of the baseline assumptions I noted. If your party does not get any down time; if you level up after every 2-3 short rests, then of course you are going to view this entirely differently. There is much less of a problem (possibly no problem at all) if these classes only get to switch out a couple spells between level up. But that is not a good baseline assumption with the mechanic. The baseline of consideration needs to be that with downtime characters can use these features to entirely replace their complement of known spells with a completely different complement. If you haven't thought about it that way yet, I'd encourage the thought experiment, because that is how it will be most naturally viewed at many tables.

Hopefully this has given some useful food for thought.


(1) That's a whole different discussion. Suffice it to say that I think additional rules, and particularly enhancements, that don't have multiple options (an example of multiple options would be the 2, and soon to be 3, magical item creation systems) affect the D&D experience of almost all players as part of a broader community, whether they indivdually use those enhancements or not, in the same way that directions taken in the Star Wars franchise affects everyone who discusses one of the movies, as part of a broader community, even if they (like me) aren't a major enthusiast and don't follow the details.
(2) Technically you only change the ones you want, but you can change all of them, so my statement is effectively accurate.
(3) A smaller number of subclasses also learn additional, usually set, spells beyond their normal known spells, but this is true of most classes in the game, and is irrelevant to the discussion.
(4) Circle of the Land Druids have the same number as Clerics.
(5) Depending on their Charisma modifier.
(6) Assuming gaining one additional spell per level beyond the free ones from leveling up. Hopefully your DM is more generous, but apparently many aren't. However, you would have to get over 7 additional spells per spell level just to reach the next lowest tier (Clerics and Warlocks) of personal available spell list size.
(7) I mean differences in mechanics that are traditional, and highlight some sort of theme. There can be flexibility here (mechanics don't have to remain exactly the same), but mechanics matters in this concept.
(8) For an in-depth discussion, see 5E - Sorcerer class improvement house rule
(9) And if you are playing a Divine Soul, you get the Cleric spell list too, which gives you a huge number of varied spells.
(10) Some people don't care. A lot do.
(11) Generally not something completely in player hands.
 

Salthorae

Imperial Mountain Dew Taster
I had a lot of the posts in the other thread about this, so while I'll follow along, I doubt I'll chime in much.

The only thing I'd like to add here is that the proposed option would not work with Magical Secrets because it explicitly states that you can change out spells gained through the Spellcasting (or Pact Magic) feature.

Magical Secrets is a different feature.
 

Weiley31

Villager
I honestly see nothing wrong with it.

Sorcerers are pretty much chaotic enough as is by magic standards. Their blood should allow them a more personalized touch over the control of their spells.

Wizards will be fine. It's a BIG multiverse out there and plenty of scrolls to find and spellbooks to write.
 

Ruin Explorer

Adventurer
I can't see any case in which is this "too much" of a boost for Sorcerers. They're a weaker class than other spellcasters, by and large. They're vastly weaker than Wizards. This would help them - it won't fix them, and indeed the other stuff for them is mostly just mucking around charmingly than boosting their power, but it's the right direction.

With Bards, I think you can't make a reasonable case that it's "too much" except with level 7/8/9 spells, because they know sufficiently few of those, and they're sufficiently dramatic that I could see limiting them to changing out spells of level 6 or below, and perhaps being allowed to change out a 7/8/9 spell with a month's notice or something.

I feel like your analysis doesn't really look at how Clerics are already rather more powerful and flexible than any of these guys, whilst wearing good armour + shields, having decent weapons, and in many cases having extremely good non-spell abilities.
 

Krachek

Adventurer
I think you made a much deeper analysis than the WotC team.

my idea of their work discussion:
  • would it be cool to let sorcerer change one spell on long rest?
  • definitively
  • is it OP?
  • it is just one spell. It won’t change the game.
  • so let’s do It.
 

Salthorae

Imperial Mountain Dew Taster
I think you made a much deeper analysis than the WotC team.

my idea of their work discussion:
  • would it be cool to let sorcerer change one spell on long rest?
  • definitively
  • is it OP?
  • it is just one spell. It won’t change the game.
  • so let’s do It.
That is giving incredible short shrift to the WotC team who has done great work and on something that is playtest material.

Playtest material is always "over designed" so that they can reign it in as necessary based on player feedback. If they under designed it, then when they got that feedback, they'd have to up a feature in power and re-release it in playtest to see where they were. More work than is necessary.
 

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen... Be nice plz n_n
My idea is to grant an additional spell known -maybe limited to one level lower than the highest level you can cast and always below 6th level- which can be changed after a long rest. Maybe if you must, limit it further to imply it cannot have an attack roll nor call for a saving throw to avoid damage or a condition.

That's it. No rewriting your full character every month, no poaching with magical secrets.

Edit: or you know what?, just plain more spells known. Let sorcerers start with four spells known and let them keep learning spells up to 20th level.
 

Ashrym

Adventurer
For Bards, the effect is slightly different depending on whether or not it works with Magical Secrets. If it does then Magical Secrets allows the Bard to literally access any spell in the game from any list, with a day's notice.

Magical secrets is less complicated than people make it out to be. When secrets are chosen, that spell becomes a bard spell for that character if it's not already on the bard spell list.

All anyone needs to do is write "fireball" under 3rd-level bard spells on the spell list and that's what secrets has done for that character, for example. If a person swaps it out later, spell swapping doesn't change that fireball has become a 3rd-level bard spell for that character and it doesn't make something else on the wizard list suddenly a bard spell to be swapped into.

The UA mechanic isn't any different than the level up mechanic. It's just more frequent. "The chosen spells count as bard spells for you" is literal RAW and the time of selection. This has been confirmed in the Sage Advice Compendium as well as far as swapping the spells out on leveling up is concerned.
 
Last edited:

Al'Kelhar

Explorer
Many thanks Sword of Spirit, a very thoughtful and expansive post.

My colours were nailed to the mast on this topic from the get-go. I honestly think Spell Versatility is bad design. It is to address a perceived problem with the inflexibility inherent in the "spells known" classes. It is a fundamental change to the way in which those classes "know" spells. It is, quite simply, making "spells known" classes into "spells prepared" classes. It breaks down the distinction between the two different mechanics.

(I also agree with Krachek's post. As a person, I'm sympathetic to the suggestion that it's selling WoTC's design team short, but as a pragmatist, having a deep understanding of organisational psychology and having attended thousands or tens of thousands of meetings over many, long, decades of professional life, he's basically captured how most decisions are made. Both decisions about a game of make-believe where people pretend to kill orcs and take their stuff, and decisions about how to spend many, many millions of taxpayers dollars. Sad, but that's reality).

Cheers, Al'Kelhar
 

MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen... Be nice plz n_n
Many thanks Sword of Spirit, a very thoughtful and expansive post.

My colours were nailed to the mast on this topic from the get-go. I honestly think Spell Versatility is bad design. It is to address a perceived problem with the inflexibility inherent in the "spells known" classes. It is a fundamental change to the way in which those classes "know" spells. It is, quite simply, making "spells known" classes into "spells prepared" classes. It breaks down the distinction between the two different mechanics.

(I also agree with Krachek's post. As a person, I'm sympathetic to the suggestion that it's selling WoTC's design team short, but as a pragmatist, having a deep understanding of organisational psychology and having attended thousands or tens of thousands of meetings over many, long, decades of professional life, he's basically captured how most decisions are made. Both decisions about a game of make-believe where people pretend to kill orcs and take their stuff, and decisions about how to spend many, many millions of taxpayers dollars. Sad, but that's reality).

Cheers, Al'Kelhar
I have similar feelings. Maybe not for the bard and warlock. The bard has been all over the place in terms of casting mechanics and nothing in the Warlock story contradicts some kind of preparation-light. But indeed, if one class has to remain "pure" with no traces of preparation is the sorcerer, not only because it is the OG spontaneous caster, but also because losing that purity takes away the very core of the archetype it represents -the innate caster, the magical creature that happens to be humanoid shaped-.
 

ad_hoc

Adventurer
I'm also someone who highly dislikes the 'change a spell on long rest' mechanic.

Regardless of whether it is published or not I will never use it.

I fear that people will be giving this change (and others) positive feedback simply because it is an increase in power.
 

Ashrym

Adventurer
I'm also someone who highly dislikes the 'change a spell on long rest' mechanic.

Regardless of whether it is published or not I will never use it.

I fear that people will be giving this change (and others) positive feedback simply because it is an increase in power.
You must loathe wizards, druids, clerics, and paladins then, lol. ;)

I suspect it will be an optional mechanic anyway. If not, it will probably be contentious enough that many people will simply not allow it.

Alternatively, a person could level-gate it in at 11th level or something, and only allow 1st or 2nd-level spells. The only real concern I see is with plenty of downtime or in the case of high level spells. It's one of those things that would see a lot of house-ruling even if allowed given the current presentation.
 

Vael

Adventurer
So, first, as a DM, I generally allow my PCs to retrain their cantrips. They're bread and butter spells, and if a PC is finding that they just aren't working out, then I don't want to punish them. To be blunt, I don't see an issue with any of the spell versatility options in the UA, but I'll dig a little deeper.

Bard: Magical Secrets is not part of spellcasting, so I don't actually think you can swap out those spells. That said, you're always swapping a spell for a spell of the same level, so even a more lenient approach doesn't really bother me.

Ranger, Warlock: Swapping out a spell known after a long rest, again, of the same level, seems to add some versatility without compromising anything.

Sorcerer: I really like this feature for the Sorcerer. If I were to play a Wild Sorcerer I'd be tempted to consider one of my spells known to be a "Flex Slot" and then create a random table for it. So, say I choose a 2nd level spell to be a flex slot, after every long rest, I'm assumed to have "retrained" the Flex slot and the first time I cast the Flex Slot, I roll a random 2nd level spell that is on the list. Now, for the rest of the day, that spell is locked in, but who knows about tomorrow? Also, given how many times I've seen a thread about the underpowered nature of Sorcerers, I don't mind something that might be considered a power boost.

A final thought ... my experience with players is very few that play prepared casters are super aggressive with switching out their spells. Most players have a favoured list of spells, and they might change a spell or two as necessary, but they practically play out the same as a character that knows their spells.
 

Ashrym

Adventurer
Bard: Magical Secrets is not part of spellcasting, so I don't actually think you can swap out those spells. That said, you're always swapping a spell for a spell of the same level, so even a more lenient approach doesn't really bother me.
Oh, no, you can definitely swap out magical secrets. Bards don't have 2 separate lists of spells known.

When I level up from 5th level to 6th level on a lore bard I get extra magical secrets. At that time, I can select spells from any class using the magical secrets rules. So I could add fireball and alter self, for example. The magical secrets rules state specifically that those are bard spells from me.

The rules for swapping out spells state I can change a bard spell I know for a spell on the bard spell list. If I decide I don't like alter self I can swap it for any spell on the bard list because alter self is a 2nd level bard spell for me as specified by that secrets choice when chosen. I cannot swap it out for lightning bolt using the level up mechanic because I'm swapping a bard spell for a bard spell on my bard spell list using the swapping spells mechanic. How alter self actually became a bard spell for me is irrelevant to the swapping RAW. Any spell not on the bard list is off limits to swap in because the swapping mechanic doesn't create a condition to consider lighting bolt (from the example) a bard spell or on the bard spell list.

Mistaking spells known via secrets as somehow special bard spells is what leads to confusion. Treating them exactly like any other bard spell is how they work and why they are part of the spells known table. This is how the UA version works:

"Whenever you finish a long rest, you can replace one spell you learned from this Spellcasting feature with another spell from the bard spell list."

Again, magical secrets gives the bard a bard spell regardless of list. A bard spell is a bard spell is a bard spell and how it became a bard spell is irrelevant. The language on the swap is also specific to the bard spell list and doesn't include any mechanic to swap a bard spell for a non-bard spell.

Don't overcomplicate the definition of a bard spell. ;)

EDIT: the fact that it says "from this spellcasting feature" would prevent swapping entire lists during downtime because the one swapped in is always the one swapped out RAW. ;)
 
Last edited:

dnd4vr

Adventurer
While I am not against the idea of Spell Versatility, I would change the time requirement to 1 day per spell level you want to swap out. Given enough downtime, this won't make a difference to the UA concept, but in a time -sensitive situation it could be interesting.
 

Ashrym

Adventurer
While I am not against the idea of Spell Versatility, I would change the time requirement to 1 day per spell level you want to swap out. Given enough downtime, this won't make a difference to the UA concept, but in a time -sensitive situation it could be interesting.
Reread it. Downtime doesn't change multiple spells. When you swap a spell one day, that's the spell you swap out next time. The spell traded out would have to be the same spell traded in via the feature per the RAW.
 

dnd4vr

Adventurer
Reread it. Downtime doesn't change multiple spells. When you swap a spell one day, that's the spell you swap out next time. The spell traded out would have to be the same spell traded in via the feature per the RAW.
You take a long rest, you can swap out a spell, right? Pretty simple provided they are the same level.

I am just saying instead of a long rest, make it a "day" (24-hours) per level of the spell you are swapping out. Ex. A sorcerer knows Fireball, wants Lightning Bolt. Three "days" later and he now knows Lightning Bolt instead of Fireball. Next, he wants to swap out Invisibility for Knock. Two more days later, and now he knows Knock instead of Invisibility. Several days of downtime later, and all his spells are changed.

So... what am I missing?
 

ad_hoc

Adventurer
Reread it. Downtime doesn't change multiple spells. When you swap a spell one day, that's the spell you swap out next time. The spell traded out would have to be the same spell traded in via the feature per the RAW.
It's not referring to the enhanced feature. It's referring to the class' spellcasting feature.
It is "enhancing spellcasting". It is an addition to their spellcasting feature, not its own feature.
There is no keeping track of what your original spell was. Once it is swapped out that is your new spell list. They would not intentionally make something so finicky.
 

dnd4vr

Adventurer
It's not referring to the enhanced feature. It's referring to the class' spellcasting feature.
It is "enhancing spellcasting". It is an addition to their spellcasting feature, not its own feature.
There is no keeping track of what your original spell was. Once it is swapped out that is your new spell list. They would not intentionally make something so finicky.
Yeah, I just saw your post in the other thread. I agree @Ashrym is not reading it correctly. His understanding would limit it to one use and they done. Makes it pointless.
 

Ashrym

Adventurer
It's not referring to the enhanced feature. It's referring to the class' spellcasting feature.
It is "enhancing spellcasting". It is an addition to their spellcasting feature, not its own feature.
There is no keeping track of what your original spell was. Once it is swapped out that is your new spell list. They would not intentionally make something so finicky.
Yeah, I just saw your post in the other thread. I agree @Ashrym is not reading it correctly. His understanding would limit it to one use and they done. Makes it pointless.
No. It says "this feature" while using the spell versatility feature. 5e uses specific language and it would have said "bard spell you know" or which ever class if that were the case.

EDIT: it's not one use either. It's one spell known that gets swapped on a long rest, like a floater.
 

Advertisement

Top