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

[doctorbadwolf]

Just to clear this up for some people.

DND Beyond just dropped this which is worth the watch. URL is time stamped to about 7m into it, where Crawford is talking about Spell Versatility of the Sorcerer.

DND Beyond Talks with Jeremy Crawford

The Ranger and Fighter video also clears some misunderstandings up, although it bums me out that Crawford expects to see Hunter’s Mark as part of Favored Foe require concentration in the next step of testing. That’s the main thing that makes it work as a replacement feature. I don’t actually care half as much about the spell slots or it not eating a known spell as I do about HM precluding the use of the Ranger’s Smite-esque spells and buffs.

 

[Salthorae]

The Ranger and Fighter video also clears some misunderstandings up, although it bums me out that Crawford expects to see Hunter’s Mark as part of Favored Foe require concentration in the next step of testing. That’s the main thing that makes it work as a replacement feature. I don’t actually care half as much about the spell slots or it not eating a known spell as I do about HM precluding the use of the Ranger’s Smite-esque spells and buffs.

The concentration thing is a big deal for stacking. As it is now, you can stack HM with Hex from Magic Initiate or something like the Smite type Ranger spells.

I'd like to see the math on how it worked with the different spells stacked vs. a fighter or barbarian's damage output of similar level.

A quick look has: 1d8 Bow +1d6 HM + 3-4 Ability = 11-12 per hit at 1st level for a couple of HM hours potentially per day

Barbarian has 2d6/1d12 + 3-4 Ability + 2 Rage = 11.5-13 per hit for 2 combats a day, 9.5-11 the rest

Fighter (BM) could have similar: 2d6/1d12 + 3-4 Ability +1d8 for 4 hits per Short Rest = 14-15.5. 9.5-11 the rest
Or Fighter (BM) Duelist could have 1d8 + 3-4 + 2 + 1d8 for 4 hits = 14-15, 9.5-11 the rest

So even without stacking any other spells on there, the Ranger at 1st level is going to dish out more damage on average than a fighter or barbarian for most of your combats in a day. Doing that without Concentration is a pretty big deal.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The concentration thing is a big deal for stacking. As it is now, you can stack HM with Hex from Magic Initiate or something like the Smite type Ranger spells.

I'd like to see the math on how it worked with the different spells stacked vs. a fighter or barbarian's damage output of similar level.

A quick look has: 1d8 Bow +1d6 HM + 3-4 Ability = 11-12 per hit at 1st level for a couple of HM hours potentially per day

Barbarian has 2d6/1d12 + 3-4 Ability + 2 Rage = 11.5-13 per hit for 2 combats a day, 9.5-11 the rest

Fighter (BM) could have similar: 2d6/1d12 + 3-4 Ability +1d8 for 4 hits per Short Rest = 14-15.5. 9.5-11 the rest
Or Fighter (BM) Duelist could have 1d8 + 3-4 + 2 + 1d8 for 4 hits = 14-15, 9.5-11 the rest

So even without stacking any other spells on there, the Ranger at 1st level is going to dish out more damage on average than a fighter or barbarian for most of your combats in a day. Doing that without Concentration is a pretty big deal.

I mean, I’d settle for it replacing the second favored enemy choice, ie waiting till a later level to get it without concentration. But the main thing is, the ranger feels like a bootleg Paladin because it can’t ever stack anything.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

So... "Git gud"?

Git patient. It doesn't take long to level up, and it's not like anyone accidently took a spell that was completely useless, because there aren't any.

 

[5ekyu]

Git patient. It doesn't take long to level up, and it's not like anyone accidently took a spell that was completely useless, because there aren't any.

As noted by the interview, how long it takes to level varies from casmpaign to campaign. Some might do 1-2 levels per year, others a month.

My game varies by tier, at 9th we are now yo around 10 sessions per level over a three month period - four levels a year. It will slow a bit more after they hit tier-3.

Is that " long" to you or "short" to someone else? Beats me.

But as a GM I really like the expansion of spell versatility myself not because it affects the git God or whatever. I do it because I like the players to have more adaptability to meet changing needs. For wizards, clerics and others - it's pretty big. Allowing a slower method for sorcerers, bards, warlocks I think goes a long way towards fixing the double stagnation of "switch-at-level" and "few-known-at-a-time" those share.

Side Bar - fighters should get a maneuver that enhances intimidation before they get the silver tongue. Or include it in silver tongue.

 

[NotAYakk]

One approach to the impinging on Wizards would be Spell Versatility for Wizards:

Let them swap out a spell known in a short rest.

This also gives them a reason to take short rests, even at lower levels.

 

[RSIxidor]

One approach to the impinging on Wizards would be Spell Versatility for Wizards:

Let them swap out a spell known in a short rest.

This also gives them a reason to take short rests, even at lower levels.

They do already have Arcane Recovery, but I don't think this is an unreasonable rule to add if you're using the variants for other classes.

 

[DND_Reborn]

One approach to the impinging on Wizards would be Spell Versatility for Wizards:

Let them swap out a spell known in a short rest.

This also gives them a reason to take short rests, even at lower levels.

This is already one of our house-rules for all classes with prepared spells. You can swap out a number of spell levels worth of spells equal to or less than your spellcastin ability modifier. So, a wizard with a INT 18 and +4 mod could do a single 4th, a 3rd and a 1st, 2 2nd levels, etc.

 

[Ashrym]

So many responses after I said the best plan if someone doesn't agree with my interpretation the best thing to do is put it in the survey feedback, lol. I changed my mind after listening to the video, and will still give feedback on poor wording.

It should really read "the spellcasting feature from this class" to be more clear.

 

[DND_Reborn]

So many responses after I said the best plan if someone doesn't agree with my interpretation the best thing to do is put it in the survey feedback, lol. I changed my mind after listening to the video, and will still give feedback on poor wording.

It should really read "the spellcasting feature from this class" to be more clear.

Because of the wording I agree it makes sense why you thought that way but unfortunately word selection has led to numerous debates over intent for 5E.