Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
UA Spell Versatility: A deeper dive
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 7850728" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>Like others I have spent some time thinking on all this and here's where I am at:</p><p></p><p>1. I don't like the idea of swapping out spells. I makes little sense. True, "if you don't use it, you lose it" is a valid maxim, but it takes a long time to honestly forget how to do something you once could. In this respect, changing spells out at new levels was acceptable, especially at higher levels when it takes longer.</p><p></p><p>2. The concept of "known spells" is a bit silly IMO. When a character comes across a new spell, the idea of "gee, my brain is full (or whatever) so I can't learn this until am more experienced..." has <em>always</em> bothered me. Wizards make sense because the can always learn a new spell, and with the time needed to prepare them that is understandable.</p><p></p><p>3. Now, with spell versatility, there is no longer "known spells" more of a "long-term prepared spells" thing since you can always forget a spell to learn a new one. Essentially, this makes classes with known spells the same as classes with prepared spells, even if it requires more downtime to change the prepared spell list. Note also, the number of known spells more or less matches the number other casters can prepare.</p><p></p><p>4. Wizards become less "powerful" due to the versatility of the other casters. Clerics, Druids, and Paladins already knew their full lists and could prepare from those lists. Now, Bards, Rangers, Sorcerers, and Warlocks know their full lists, it just takes <em>much</em> longer to prepare a new spell that was previously unprepared.</p><p></p><p>While a wizard can eventually learn all the spells in their list, they don't know them all by default, but now all other caster classes do. Wizards gain two spells per level and must hunt down the rest. Granted they have a much longer spell list to compensate.</p><p></p><p>5. The Spell Versatility casters, however, are locked into the spells of levels they initially learned since you can't swap out a level 1 spell for a level 2, etc. Yet even this can still be changed at a level when the known spells can be shifted, so to speak.</p><p></p><p>Conclusion:</p><p></p><p>I don't see spell versatility as a bad thing, but I do see it as too quick and in essence making known spell casters more like delayed prepared-casters. Keeping the simple long rest requirement, IMO, demands a boon to wizards to compensate as now all these other casters can be versatile as well; and versatility was a key feature of a wizard.</p><p></p><p>Wizards still have ritual spells and ritual casting without spell slots, which <em>is</em> great.</p><p></p><p>My suggestion for our table if we decide to employ spell versatility will be to boost wizard's learned spells. Instead of only two spells per level, I propose a number of spells equal to the wizard's INT modifier. If their INT improves, new spells are learned retroactively (just as HP and CON). They can still learn more, but by default this will increase their known spell list.</p><p></p><p>Another option would be to increase the number of spells a Wizard can prepare.</p><p></p><p>Ok, this is long enough LOL.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 7850728, member: 6987520"] Like others I have spent some time thinking on all this and here's where I am at: 1. I don't like the idea of swapping out spells. I makes little sense. True, "if you don't use it, you lose it" is a valid maxim, but it takes a long time to honestly forget how to do something you once could. In this respect, changing spells out at new levels was acceptable, especially at higher levels when it takes longer. 2. The concept of "known spells" is a bit silly IMO. When a character comes across a new spell, the idea of "gee, my brain is full (or whatever) so I can't learn this until am more experienced..." has [I]always[/I] bothered me. Wizards make sense because the can always learn a new spell, and with the time needed to prepare them that is understandable. 3. Now, with spell versatility, there is no longer "known spells" more of a "long-term prepared spells" thing since you can always forget a spell to learn a new one. Essentially, this makes classes with known spells the same as classes with prepared spells, even if it requires more downtime to change the prepared spell list. Note also, the number of known spells more or less matches the number other casters can prepare. 4. Wizards become less "powerful" due to the versatility of the other casters. Clerics, Druids, and Paladins already knew their full lists and could prepare from those lists. Now, Bards, Rangers, Sorcerers, and Warlocks know their full lists, it just takes [I]much[/I] longer to prepare a new spell that was previously unprepared. While a wizard can eventually learn all the spells in their list, they don't know them all by default, but now all other caster classes do. Wizards gain two spells per level and must hunt down the rest. Granted they have a much longer spell list to compensate. 5. The Spell Versatility casters, however, are locked into the spells of levels they initially learned since you can't swap out a level 1 spell for a level 2, etc. Yet even this can still be changed at a level when the known spells can be shifted, so to speak. Conclusion: I don't see spell versatility as a bad thing, but I do see it as too quick and in essence making known spell casters more like delayed prepared-casters. Keeping the simple long rest requirement, IMO, demands a boon to wizards to compensate as now all these other casters can be versatile as well; and versatility was a key feature of a wizard. Wizards still have ritual spells and ritual casting without spell slots, which [I]is[/I] great. My suggestion for our table if we decide to employ spell versatility will be to boost wizard's learned spells. Instead of only two spells per level, I propose a number of spells equal to the wizard's INT modifier. If their INT improves, new spells are learned retroactively (just as HP and CON). They can still learn more, but by default this will increase their known spell list. Another option would be to increase the number of spells a Wizard can prepare. Ok, this is long enough LOL. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
UA Spell Versatility: A deeper dive
Top