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

[Tony Vargas]

Nope. I'm arguing it's not nearly common or as significant for sorcerers as people claim. As demonstrated by the reasons I gave to back up that statement.

I'm not sure how 'common' figures into it. And I must have missed the claims.

I mean, the point of picking a class with unprecedented versatility is to be able to adapt when needed, not to need to do so with a specific frequency.

You've equated a single spell at a single level using the sorcerer spell list to multiple spells regardless of levels using the wizard spell list.

I have not. My objection to Spell Versatility is not that it actually closes the gap between Tier 2 and 1 at all dramatically, but, rather that it is erodes the uniqueness of the sorcerer class and it's suitability for build to concept.

The wizard was long since a lost cause, that way, even had it not been given the perks of spontaneous on top of prepped casting, and at-will cantrips, and free rituals.

These things are not equal just because they can both be categorized as spell swapping.

No question, but they are less differentiated because they're both spell swapping.

For the same reason people aren't complaining about rangers using spell versatility, which is the exact same ability sorcerers are using.

TBF, they may not care about the ranger, or just feel sorry for it.

Accepting the spell versatility is a concern because of how it works is accepting that the argument regarding how it works applies to all classes.

Agreed. IMHO, the issue of re-jiggering a build that turns out to be off by a bad choice or two should be addressed with a universal retraining mechanic, instead of class-by-class. And, that mechanic should be kept out of actual play, it should be a chargen/level-up, at most, between-sessions, out-of-character, option.

Sorcerers cannot just swap out large numbers of spells even if we accept the sorcerer has prior knowledge and a better spell worth swapping.I

He can:

Sure, the sorcerer could change his or her entire spell list during downtime. That's only relevant to downtime activities, which is a minor consideration and still situational based on whatever those downtime activities might be.

Well, and the rest of the campaign after that stretch of downtime, because you're essentially playing a completely different sorcerer, at that point.

That hurts the sorcerer as a go-to build-to-concept class choice. (Not that it's as good for that purpose in 5e as it was in 3e, anyway.)

Swapping spells because the campaign changed is removing the penalties inflicted in having the campaign change. Removing a penalty that did not exist before and exists now is not a buff.

Removing a restriction is a buff. Casters have so few restrictions left in 5e, it's can't be an insignificant one, at this point.

The argument is not that sorcerers cannot swap a spell in. They can. The argument is in how often that will actually be relevant to the point it's a minor detail.

Then there's no need to let it intrude on play, the extant mechanism is more than adequate.

spell swapping for sorcerers was always intended and there was a concern that it was not happening as often as intended.

Which is also kinda a weird statement. Why would it be intended to happen at a given frequency, and how is at level-up not a fairly predictable frequency?

Are more people using slower leveling via reduced exp or milestones or something?

Or there are spells that can be outgrown or situational so the intent of being able to change them is valid. Spell versatility doesn't make anything worse. It makes things better.

Again, at level-up is fine - ideal, even - for spell you outgrow, since growth, in that sense, happens at level-up.

Why should it intrude in play?

You are making a lot of statements but not actually backing them up. The premise cannot be that there is always a better spell to take just because the ability to swap spells exists.

You just made the point that spells are situational. For any spell (not strictly inferior to another), there could be a situation where it's ideal.

No it doesn't because sorcerers already have the ability and were expected to swap spells. It just wasn't happening after years of observation did not show that expectation was being met.

I'm not sure I see why that's even an issue.

"Y'all aren't swapping spells as much as we thought, so here's some rules that let you choose not to swap them every day instead of choosing not to swap them only when you level up"

Really?

The premise that sorcerers already have selected their preferred spells so there needs to be a good reason to swap any of them hasn't changed.

How good a reason depends on how readily it can be swapped back if it wasn't such a good reason, afterall, too, I guess.

I think the whole thematic sorcerer is a separate issue that isn't really impacted by spell versatility regardless. My point was that not all sorcerers are the same just because the player selected the spells he or she thinks work the best for that build.

Did you ever try to do a thematic wizard, back in the day, before we had sorcerers?
The known-spell design is solid for a build-to-concept, precisely because there isn't the option of compromising that concept in play out of simple pragmatism, or even "the party really needs this spell..." The original sorcerer, introducing spontaneous casting and with more slots than the wizard was even better, because it not only let you choose and stick to a concept-supporting list of known spells, it let you display them relatively more often.

5e sorcerers lack that last bit, a little, and there are more known-spell classes now, and everyone's now spontaneous. So they'd already lost a bit of suitability, that way. An in-play retraining mechanic just further erodes that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I have not. My objection to Spell Versatility is not that it actually closes the gap between Tier 2 and 1 at all dramatically, but, rather that it is erodes the uniqueness of the sorcerer class and it's suitability for build to concept.

I'm still not sure I understand this point. What uniqueness is lost by changing a single spell?

Are we talking "everyone will always prepare the same spells for the same situations now instead of just dealing with the hand they had?" or are we talking "Sorcerers become too much like wizards if they can reliably have the answer to a problem?"

Which is also kinda a weird statement. Why would it be intended to happen at a given frequency, and how is at level-up not a fairly predictable frequency?

Are more people using slower leveling via reduced exp or milestones or something?

Yes, by a lot.

In fact, the one time I had a DM try and play with the XP tables, we quickly abandoned it in favor of milestones, simply because it was far easier to keep track that way (he tried giving xp for social encounters, and we quickly realized that some of us in the play by post game were far more active and engaged than others, which was going to lead to a level disparity very quickly).

And, I am very certain there are a lot of tables that use reduced XP to prevent leveling up quickly.

Even in my own games, where I try to be fairly regular about level ups and fairly quick since I tend to run for college semesters, it can be between 2 and 6 sessions for a level up, which means it could be every other week or every other month. Which is a decent expansion and I know I level up faster than a lot of people.

 

[Ashrym]

we quickly abandoned it in favor of milestones

I find milestones are used often.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm still not sure I understand this point. What uniqueness is lost by changing a single spell?

Per level, outside the context of an adventure? Little, it could even refine a concept.

Daily, in play, as a tool to overcome challenges, via versatility?
You're turning into wizard lite - you're distinct in the sense of not as good rather than in the sense if different (and not as good).

Are we talking "everyone will always prepare the same spells for the same situations now instead of just dealing with the hand they had?"

There's too much of that already, I suppose, but solutions might be found in balancing spells better.

or are we talking "Sorcerers become too much like wizards if they can reliably have the answer to a problem?"

more that they become less like Sorcerers, because they are incentivised to break concept.

Yes, by a lot.

Interesting.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Per level, outside the context of an adventure? Little, it could even refine a concept.

Daily, in play, as a tool to overcome challenges, via versatility?
You're turning into wizard lite - you're distinct in the sense of not as good rather than in the sense if different (and not as good).


more that they become less like Sorcerers, because they are incentivised to break concept.

Okay, I find myself confused here.

What about changing their spells is breaking the concept of "Sorcerer"?

Part of what you are saying sounds like "A fire sorcerer breaks concept by speccing in acid spells for the Fire Plane adventure" and part of what you are saying sounds like "Sorcerers being able to have the right spell for the job just makes them crappy wizards" but you are saying them both as though those are the same thing.

In fact, there was a moment where I was confused if you somehow thought that there were spells on the Sorcerer spell list that broke the concept of being a sorcerer, which would make no sense, but how else would them "being incentivized to break concept" make sense in the terms of them being able to swap one sorcerer spell for a different sorcerer spell?

 

[Kinematics]

Okay, I find myself confused here.

What about changing their spells is breaking the concept of "Sorcerer"?

OK, I feel that Tony is almost entirely wrong in his arguments over the last few pages, but in this case, I believe he's suggesting that it's breaking the concept of "a sorcerer", not the concept of "the sorcerer class". And in that respect, I agree with him.

For example, a fire dragon sorcerer has an expected theme (which is almost entirely ignored by optimizers, but ignoring that...). A fire sorcerer going to the plane of fire is gonna suck. If he could swap some fire-based spells over to ice spells (eg: Fire Bolt to Frostbite, Fireball to Slow, Hold Monster to Cone of Cold, etc), then he's basically just ditching his theme whenever it's inconvenient, which harms character concept and identity.

This isn't violating the wizard's scope, but it is violating the spirit of the Sorcerous Origin. Of course, the game doesn't make it easy to adhere to the Sorcerous Origin's theme anyway (except for maybe Divine Soul), which means you'll probably have already violated it just to get a functional character. At that point swapping spells out using Spell Versatility doesn't mean much, as the game itself doesn't uphold the spirit of the law, either.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What about changing their spells is breaking the concept of "Sorcerer"?

The concept of the individual sorcerer, which, as with any known-spell caster who doesn't get to completely change out his choices, is heavily defined by those spell choices.

(Aside: The concept of Sorcerer, in the RL or English-language-dictionary-definition sense is completely un-supported by the class of the same name in D&D.)

Part of what you are saying sounds like "A fire sorcerer breaks concept by speccing in acid spells for the Fire Plane adventure" and part of what you are saying sounds like "Sorcerers being able to have the right spell for the job just makes them crappy wizards" but you are saying them both as though those are the same thing.

Yes. The first part is the utility of the class for build-to-concept being eroded, the second is the differentiation of the class being eroded.

In fact, there was a moment where I was confused if you somehow thought that there were spells on the Sorcerer spell list that broke the concept of being a sorcerer, which would make no sense, but how else would them "being incentivized to break concept" make sense in the terms of them being able to swap one sorcerer spell for a different sorcerer spell?

Heck, the Sorcerer class could hypothetically choose from all spells, if one could devise a workable theme-based limit on the spells any given individual sorcerer could choose.

 

[Kinematics]

Heck, the Sorcerer class could hypothetically choose from all spells, if one could devise a workable theme-based limit on the spells any given individual sorcerer could choose.

Currently working on that, actually. Gonna take a while to go through a couple hundred spells for 9 class themes (5 dragon elements and 4 other origins), and I expect the first draft to be pretty rough.

 

[NotAYakk]

Heck, the Sorcerer class could hypothetically choose from all spells, if one could devise a workable theme-based limit on the spells any given individual sorcerer could choose.

I've thought about giving Sorcerers spells in bundles.

So the Teleportation "bundle" would have Misty Step, Dimension Door, Teleportation Circle and Teleport.

While these are all thematically tied, the interesting thing is that by default a sorcerer is less likely to pick all of these, because they overlap in utility.

Giving a sorcerer fewer "bundles" but more total "spells known" would thus be a reasonable tradeoff. Less types of spells, but more spells.

A zero-effort first pass:

CHARM Charm Person	1
CHARM Confusion	4
CHARM Dominate Beast	4
CHARM Dominate Monster	8
CHARM Dominate Person	5
CHARM Hold Monster	5
CHARM Hold Person	2
CHARM Mass Suggestion	6
CHARM Sleep	1
CHARM Suggestion	2
CURSE Blindness/Deafness	2
CURSE Circle of Death	6
CURSE Dispel Magic	3
CURSE Eyebite	6
CURSE Finger of Death	6
CURSE Insect Plague	5
CURSE Power Word Kill	5
CURSE Power Word Stun	5
CURSE Slow	3
ENHANCE Enhance Ability	2
ENHANCE Haste	3
FIRE Burning Hands	1
FIRE Delayed Blast Fireball	7
FIRE Fire Storm	7
FIRE Fireball	3
FIRE Incendiary Cloud	3
FIRE Meteor Swarm	3
FIRE Scorching Ray	2
FIRE Wall of Fire	4
FLIGHT Feather Fall	1
FLIGHT Fly	3
FLIGHT Levitate	2
FORCE Animate Objects	5
FORCE Earthquake	5
FORCE Knock	2
FORCE Magic Missile	1
FORCE Move Earth	6
FORCE Reverse Gravity	6
FORCE Shatter	2
FORCE Telekinesis	5
HYPNOTIC Color Spray	1
HYPNOTIC Hypnotic Pattern	3
HYPNOTIC Prismatic Spray	3
HYPNOTIC Time Stop	3
ILLUSION Blur	2
ILLUSION Disguise Self	1
ILLUSION Major Image	3
ILLUSION Mirror Image	2
ILLUSION Seeming	5
ILLUSION Silent Image	1
LANGUAGE Comprehend Languages	1
LANGUAGE Tongues	3
MOVEMENT Expeditious Retreat	1
MOVEMENT Jump	1
MOVEMENT Spider Climb	2
NECRO False Life	1
POLYMORPH Alter Self	2
POLYMORPH Enlarge/Reduce	2
POLYMORPH Polymorph	4
PROTECTION Counterspell	3
PROTECTION Globe of Invulnerability	6
PROTECTION Protection from Energy	3
PROTECTION Shield	1
PROTECTION Stoneskin	4
SHADOW Blight	4
SHADOW Darkness	2
SHADOW Disintegrate	6
SHADOW Fear	3
SHADOW Greater Invisibility	4
SHADOW Invisibility	2
STORM Chain Lightning	6
STORM Fog Cloud	1
STORM Gaseous Form	3
STORM Gust of Wind	2
STORM Lightning Bolt	3
STORM Sleet Storm	3
STORM Thunderwave	1
SUMMONING Banishment	4
SUMMONING Cloudkill	5
SUMMONING Creation	5
SUMMONING Gate	9
SUMMONING Mage Armor	1
SUMMONING Plane Shift	1
SUMMONING Stinking Cloud	3
SUMMONING Wall of Stone	5
SUMMONING Web	2
SUNLIGHT Daylight	3
SUNLIGHT Sunbeam	6
SUNLIGHT Sunburst	6
TELEPORT Blink	3
TELEPORT Dimension Door	4
TELEPORT Etherealness	4
TELEPORT Misty Step	2
TELEPORT Teleport	2
TELEPORT Teleportation Circle	5
VISION Clairvoyance	3
VISION Darkvision	2
VISION Detect Magic	1
VISION Detect Thoughts	2
VISION See Invisibility	2
VISION True Seeing	6
VISION Wish	6
WATER Cone of Cold	5
WATER Ice Storm	4
WATER Water Breathing	3
WATER Water Walk	3

Very unbalanced, just first word that came to mind for each one.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The concept of the individual sorcerer, which, as with any known-spell caster who doesn't get to completely change out his choices, is heavily defined by those spell choices.

Okay, that makes far more sense.

I'm not worried about that aspect of it, because that is up to the player.

I might not want my fire sorcerer breaking theme, but I can justify illusions easily through the concept of desert mirages, so that doesn't break theme for me.

The individual decides how much they want to stick by the theme they chose, and if they chose to break it, I would rather let them do so.