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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What's your opinion on the standardization of Spellcasters?
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8793325" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>I don't care.</p><p></p><p>- If everyone is listed as a Prepared caster and you don't want to go through the hassle... then you just make your initial spell selection and just never swap the spells out. You essentially make yourself a Known Spell caster if that's really important to you.</p><p></p><p>- The number of Prepared spells being set based on your matching spell slots is understandable from an gameplay ease-of-use point of view... but I do agree that it does make things weird for high-level casters-- where they still have to Prepare four 1st level spells despite probably never actually casting any of them except in the most dire of circumstances. In the 2014 method you can just choose to Prepare like one or two 1st level spells knowing you probably won't ever actually cast them in the day... and thus it lets you have more higher-level spell options that are more likely to be cast. Granted... this does mean that if we assume for the sake of argument that Rituals will maintain the current rules that you must have the spell Prepared in order to cast it as a Ritual, then the non-Wizards can make use of their Ritual casting by Preparing a lot of low-level ritual spells. Of course... this would also assume a caster would actually potentially cast all four of their 1st level slots in the day wherein they'd need to save their slots by using Rituals... but I don't know how likely that will be. (This was always the advantage of Wizards, who could cast ritual spells that they had in their spellbooks even without the spell being Prepared-- so they had all Ritual spells available at all times, <em>and</em> still had the four 1st level spell slots available for casting other spells.) But really, at the end of the day I do not know if the lower number of Prepared higher-leveled spells versus more 1st, 2nd & 3rd levels ones is really going to be that big of a deal-- and honestly I don't think this particular rule is going to stay in the game anyway.</p><p></p><p>- I don't consider it any big deal whether a class has an individual spell list that is written out strictly for the class (which usually consists of them only getting certain types of spells anyway) versus only getting certain schools of spells (which results in pretty much the exact same framework other than some spells being different for them in 2024 than in 2014.) Whether you have a hand-picked selection of spells available to you, or a list of spells from only certain schools, there's no real difference (except for those individuals who think "X class HAS to have spells A, B & C, otherwise THEY AREN'T TRULY THAT CLASS!). But to me those are the select few that you can't base your entire design paradigm around, because every single person in that group will choose a different set of spells they think has to be available anyway.</p><p></p><p>At the end of the day my feeling is this... true character individuality and uniqueness comes from the <em>player</em> and the backstory and personality the player gives to their PC-- basically how they roleplay. And game mechanics do not a unique or cool character make. After all... pretty much every single Fighter in AD&D looked mechanically exactly the same-- it was only the individual player and how they played their character that made all of these Fighters different and memorable and awesome.</p><p></p><p>Are there players out there that play the "best in slot" game, where they only take the best options every time a game mechanic choice comes up... and thus find themselves playing and seeing the exact same mechanics appearing over and over and over-- especially when they become available to more characters and more classes? Sure. But I do not believe the designers need to cater to them-- the players who could make <em>wildly</em> mechanically-varied characters if they wanted to just by making different choices... but never do because those options aren't "optimal". WotC cannot save those players from themselves.</p><p></p><p>If you want your PC to be different and unique compared to the other characters in your party? Just don't choose the exact same options everyone else does because you ALL have this need to only take "best in slot". Take the options you think would assist your character in being cool, rather than demand WotC not make options more widely available so that you all have no choice but to be forced to play differently because the rules won't let you overlap.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 8793325, member: 7006"] I don't care. - If everyone is listed as a Prepared caster and you don't want to go through the hassle... then you just make your initial spell selection and just never swap the spells out. You essentially make yourself a Known Spell caster if that's really important to you. - The number of Prepared spells being set based on your matching spell slots is understandable from an gameplay ease-of-use point of view... but I do agree that it does make things weird for high-level casters-- where they still have to Prepare four 1st level spells despite probably never actually casting any of them except in the most dire of circumstances. In the 2014 method you can just choose to Prepare like one or two 1st level spells knowing you probably won't ever actually cast them in the day... and thus it lets you have more higher-level spell options that are more likely to be cast. Granted... this does mean that if we assume for the sake of argument that Rituals will maintain the current rules that you must have the spell Prepared in order to cast it as a Ritual, then the non-Wizards can make use of their Ritual casting by Preparing a lot of low-level ritual spells. Of course... this would also assume a caster would actually potentially cast all four of their 1st level slots in the day wherein they'd need to save their slots by using Rituals... but I don't know how likely that will be. (This was always the advantage of Wizards, who could cast ritual spells that they had in their spellbooks even without the spell being Prepared-- so they had all Ritual spells available at all times, [I]and[/I] still had the four 1st level spell slots available for casting other spells.) But really, at the end of the day I do not know if the lower number of Prepared higher-leveled spells versus more 1st, 2nd & 3rd levels ones is really going to be that big of a deal-- and honestly I don't think this particular rule is going to stay in the game anyway. - I don't consider it any big deal whether a class has an individual spell list that is written out strictly for the class (which usually consists of them only getting certain types of spells anyway) versus only getting certain schools of spells (which results in pretty much the exact same framework other than some spells being different for them in 2024 than in 2014.) Whether you have a hand-picked selection of spells available to you, or a list of spells from only certain schools, there's no real difference (except for those individuals who think "X class HAS to have spells A, B & C, otherwise THEY AREN'T TRULY THAT CLASS!). But to me those are the select few that you can't base your entire design paradigm around, because every single person in that group will choose a different set of spells they think has to be available anyway. At the end of the day my feeling is this... true character individuality and uniqueness comes from the [I]player[/I] and the backstory and personality the player gives to their PC-- basically how they roleplay. And game mechanics do not a unique or cool character make. After all... pretty much every single Fighter in AD&D looked mechanically exactly the same-- it was only the individual player and how they played their character that made all of these Fighters different and memorable and awesome. Are there players out there that play the "best in slot" game, where they only take the best options every time a game mechanic choice comes up... and thus find themselves playing and seeing the exact same mechanics appearing over and over and over-- especially when they become available to more characters and more classes? Sure. But I do not believe the designers need to cater to them-- the players who could make [I]wildly[/I] mechanically-varied characters if they wanted to just by making different choices... but never do because those options aren't "optimal". WotC cannot save those players from themselves. If you want your PC to be different and unique compared to the other characters in your party? Just don't choose the exact same options everyone else does because you ALL have this need to only take "best in slot". Take the options you think would assist your character in being cool, rather than demand WotC not make options more widely available so that you all have no choice but to be forced to play differently because the rules won't let you overlap. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What's your opinion on the standardization of Spellcasters?
Top