D&D 5E UA Spell Versatility: A deeper dive

[Tony Vargas]

Because wizards have a good chance of wanting to scribe any spell that might be useful they only have better & better odds of having more & more useless pages in spellbooks they find.

Sounds like a First (class) Tier problem, to me.

 

[Ashrym]

Not the same arguments because there’s a number of differences in the sorcerer and ranger classes and their overall relationships with the rest of the system.

There are differences in those classes. Those differences don't invalidate the points given. Those differences do highlight the fact that just because spell versatility can give access to any spell on the list it doesn't make one class into another.

There's no difference in claiming the party can rest 24 hours so the ranger can swap in locate objects or water breathing when the wizard might not have the relevant spell in his or her spell book. The only significant difference is that sorcerers and wizards share more spells than rangers and wizards. Given that the argument was the ability to swap spells steps on toes and wizards and not the spells themselves it's still an ability given to rangers under the same rules.

A ranger can swap the entire spell list in downtime too but a sorcerer or bard can never have access to the full range of over 3 dozen exclusive wizard spells. If the mechanic is the issue for sorcerers because it's too similar to spell prep swapping the principle applies to rangers. If the difference in the spell list applies to rangers then the same principle applies to sorcerers because wizard list is far more comprehensive.

 

[Ashrym]

Because wizards have a good chance of wanting to scribe any spell that might be useful they only have better & better odds of having more & more useless pages in spellbooks they find. That issue is not helped by WotC's adventure design where spellbooks are rarely found by anything other than cr6 creatures & up.

The various options go up to purchasing spell scrolls of 1st through 5th level. That destroys any "poor wizards don't have enough spells in their books" arguments. It also destroys "the ritual caster feat is limited" and "book of ancient secrets is limited" arguments.

Limitations on spell / ritual books is only limited by the DM. That would be the same DM creating situations where taking a long rest because a specific spell is needed and only available to a certain class and not already available is a thing.

Sounds like a First (class) Tier problem, to me.

The ability to add spells to a spell book is definitely an advantage and not a disadvantage. Regardless of the tier thing.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Indeed that research is sorely lacking from the wizard class & even moreso that it didn't even get mentioned in ths UA or the downtime UA that eventually made it into xge (unless my memory is off & it just got cut). There is a useless spell though, every single spell on the wizard spell list can be useless if they already have it scribed. Knock & arcane lock might be super niche spells unlikely to see much time in a prepped list, but a wizard who has knock arcane lock & fireball who finds a spellbook with knock arcane lock & fireball is pretty much finding the equivalent of "yay... another mundane longsword".

Because wizards have a good chance of wanting to scribe any spell that might be useful they only have better & better odds of having more & more useless pages in spellbooks they find. That issue is not helped by WotC's adventure design where spellbooks are rarely found by anything other than cr6 creatures & up. When those spellbooks are noted as being carried by a baddie the contents are depressingly often going to be "all of the spells listed as prepared on the cr6 mage/cr12 archmage statblock" There are a few incredible exceptions from killing things like storm giants in stk or one of the ringleaders at the end(?) of PoTA, but getting a spellbook that looks like a wizard uses it at the end of a campaign is problematic in the extreme for character building.

Yes, there are game dependent options like hoping a gm knows the system well enough & is comfortable enough as a gm to change up the treasure awards or make their own adventures... but that goes back to the problem of hoping for gm involvement against a feature crawford would eventually like to publish in an official source that the less comfortable/experienced gm is IME likely to allow as an official thing published by wotc.

Well, I am actually looking through the XGtE right now and trying to think up house-rules for spell research. Also, training needs to be included for more than simply tools. I find it comical that the book art shows a dragonborn practicing with a bow, but nothing in the book supports learning a weapon proficiency.

I can't say about published adventures since I don't run those and neither does our DM. The player who is just trying his hand at DMing now is running CoS, so we'll see how that goes.

For myself and the DMs I've played with in the past, all were fairly experienced and usually ran homebrew games.

One thing I personally wonder, however, if spell versatility had been in the PHB from the beginning, and thus what people were used to for 5+ years, would it be a big deal???

 

[tetrasodium]

Well, one sole ability of wizards that is lacking in 5E is the option to research spells, so they don't have to find them. And, since there is no limit to the number of spells a wizard can have in his book and thus learn, there is no such thing as a useless spell. Will it be worth the money to scribe it? That is up to the player, of course. Since it is also downtime, I would not be concerned with the time required to scribe a spell, and IME most games have enough gp that I would not be overly concered with the cost, either. Of course, your experience may differ.

If spell versatility makes it into an official book, it is always still optional, just like everything in 5E. And finally as I said, once the downtime is over and the adventure is underway, I can't see much chances for extended long rests to permit multiple spell swapping. Even so, I think most of the time we are talking about a handful of spells at most, since most players choose spells that they think (and often find) are most useful from the start. In our games, characters rarely even swap out spells at level advances other than to trade-up to a higher level spell.

Indeed that research is sorely lacking from the wizard class & even moreso that it didn't even get mentioned in the downtime UA that eventually made it into xge (unless my memory is off & it ust got cut). There is a useless spell though, every single spell on the wizard spell list can be useless if they already have it scribed. Knock & arcane lock might be super niche spells unlikely to see much time in a prepped list, but a wizard who has knock arcae lock & fireball who finds a spellbook with knock arcane lock & fireball is pretty much finding the equivalent of "yay... another mundane longsword".

Because wizards have a good chance of wanting to scribe any spell that might be useful they only have better & better odds of having

Sounds like a First (class) Tier problem, to me.

how are those metamagics, sorcery points,

The various options go up to purchasing spell scrolls of 1st through 5th level. That destroys any "poor wizards don't have enough spells in their books" arguments. It also destroys "the ritual caster feat is limited" and "book of ancient secrets is limited" arguments.

Limitations on spell / ritual books is only limited by the DM. That would be the same DM creating situations where taking a long rest because a specific spell is needed and only available to a certain class and not already available is a thing.



The ability to add spells to a spell book is definitely an advantage and not a disadvantage. Regardless of the tier thing.

Remember, I'm not the one who brought up that wizards can resort to "the various options of purchasing scrolls", someone suggested that a wizard just go looking for spells during downtime & I asked what methods were being discussed, you mentioned xge & the dmg but have not been willing to point at any specific methods.. are they not as simple & affordably priced as you were hoping or just not existing in the form you expected to see them?




------------

Well, I am actually looking through the XGtE right now and trying to think up house-rules for spell research. Also, training needs to be included for more than simply tools. I find it comical that the book art shows a dragonborn practicing with a bow, but nothing in the book supports learning a weapon proficiency.

I can't say about published adventures since I don't run those and neither does our DM. The player who is just trying his hand at DMing now is running CoS, so we'll see how that goes.

For myself and the DMs I've played with in the past, all were fairly experienced and usually ran homebrew games.

One thing I personally wonder, however, if spell versatility had been in the PHB from the beginning, and thus what people were used to for 5+ years, would it be a big deal???

Yea, A lot of that "downtime activities" section in chapter2 "dungeonn master tools"was pretty bizarre in that it was absurdly specific towards players but pretty lacking in gm advice that might help newer less experienced gm's feel more comfortable making up things not listed as if it ere an AL addendum mislabeled as a tool.

I think if it had been in from the start, people would have been quite a bit more demanding for spell research rules & such..

 

[Tony Vargas]

how are those metamagics, sorcery points,

Not enough of 'em, apparently, poor Sorcerers.

Sounds like a Second (class) Tier problem.

 

[Ashrym]

Knock & arcane lock might be super niche spells

I find knock super niche and arcane lock useful for quickly locking and barring doors.

how are those metamagics, sorcery points,

The only reason to end my existential crisis in playing a sorcerer in the first place.

I asked what methods were being discussed, you mentioned xge & the dmg but have not been willing to point at any specific methods.. are they not as simple & affordably priced as you were hoping or just not existing in the form you expected to see them?

The rules are intentionally vague because it was one of those trigger topics in the game and left to DM's. "Buying a magic item" gives pricing based on rarity to follow. Crafting gives a more concrete number and quick reference point if you want it because the crafting rules cost half the standard purchase price.

There was never a point where I was unwilling to point to specifics on it. I simply didn't see the need if you have the resources available.

 

[tetrasodium]

I find knock super niche and arcane lock useful for quickly locking and barring doors.



The only reason to end my existential crisis in playing a sorcerer in the first place.



The rules are intentionally vague because it was one of those trigger topics in the game and left to DM's. "Buying a magic item" gives pricing based on rarity to follow. Crafting gives a more concrete number and quick reference point if you want it because the crafting rules cost half the standard purchase price.

There was never a point where I was unwilling to point to specifics on it. I simply didn't see the need if you have the resources available.

unfortunately, spell versatility is decidedly not vague at all & people are rebuffing concerns with suggestions that wizards just "Similarly, during the same downtime, a wizard can potentially hunt down and add more spells to his book." Unfortunately for spell versatility it is that missing spell research & the "intentionally vague" rules/guidelines for acquiring new spells through any method other than luck & hoping for a confident GM that causes the sorcerer/wizard problems you were remarking about not existing in ranger/druid, bard/wizard earlier. These problems were pointed out earlier, but it had to be pushed to expecting the rules people kept implying/suggesting/outright saying should be used get dragged out for examination. Now with examination forced, you seem to acknowledge that they are so lacking that even discussing them in specific terms is silly.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Indeed that research is sorely lacking from the wizard class & even moreso that it didn't even get mentioned in ths UA or the downtime UA that eventually made it into xge (unless my memory is off & it just got cut).

Here is a first draft for Spell Research (based on the Scribe Scrolls in XGtE):

Of course, numbers can be tweaked to the needs of the table.

 

[Ashrym]

unfortunately, spell versatility is decidedly not vague at all & people are rebuffing concerns with suggestions that wizards just "Similarly, during the same downtime, a wizard can potentially hunt down and add more spells to his book." Unfortunately for spell versatility it is that missing spell research & the "intentionally vague" rules/guidelines for acquiring new spells through any method other than luck & hoping for a confident GM that causes the sorcerer/wizard problems you were remarking about not existing in ranger/druid, bard/wizard earlier. These problems were pointed out earlier, but it had to be pushed to expecting the rules people kept implying/suggesting/outright saying should be used get dragged out for examination. Now with examination forced, you seem to acknowledge that they are so lacking that even discussing them in specific terms is silly.

The wizard could just use the AL rules for purchasing scrolls reprinted on page 174 of XGtE, too. Vague magic item purchase is a thing because different DM's and players like different styles with magic items. That's unnecessary for spell versatility, which was a specific solution in response to a specific issue (not changing spells as often as was originally intended).

Everything else in your post translates to "I'm scared the DM won't do what I want". That's something to address with the DM who interprets or allows optional rules in the first place and not an actual issue with any of the rules given in the UA.