Reducing preppared spells?

[Kaiisaxo]

One thing I notice is that with the new preparation rules prepared casters no longer feel dynamic, "I didn't prepare that spell today" no longer happening with casters more or less settling into a fixed list with little changes to it on the day to day. and I was thinking, would it be too restrictive to change prepared spells from Level+Bonus+school/domain to 1/2 level(min 1) + bonus + school/domain? or even to 1/4 level (min1)?

[MadGrady]

My intial thought is because the amount of spell slots has been reduced from earlier editions (ability score no longer grants additional spell slots), I would be cautious of reducing their available prepared spells as well. Lower levels already have a few slots to use anyway, so i don't want to completely hamstring the class.

Do you have a specific example that perhaps might illuminate the issue a bit more?

[Person_Man]

I think the Warlock provides something very close to my preferred mechanic for memorizing spells. Basically give casters a very small number of memorized spells that automatically scale. (You don't have to memorize them at a higher level). But it only requires a Short Rest to memorize them. You also get Cantrips so that you always have useful at-will options available (and you get more of them, to compensate for having fewer spells), and some reasonable number of Rituals so that you don't need to memorize utility spells. Remove spells that are completely game breakingly crazy, like Wish and Simulacrum and True Polymorph. Give casters Proficiency in Constitution so that Concentration isn't profoundly difficult to maintain.

That way, every spell cast is truly awesome and useful, and the choice of what to memorize and cast is actually an important strategic decision. But you can also adjust your choices and renew your spells once or twice in the middle of the day, so you're not completely boned if you make the wrong choices or run out of spells.

[Segev]

The thing that strikes me as weird is that nearly every prepared caster will have more spells prepared at every level than the spontaneous casters will know. While this was somewhat true in 3e, too, it never was so glaringly obvious because the spontaneous casters spontaneity contrasted so sharply with the need for prepared casters to prepare multiple copies of the same spell.

Nonetheless, I think this is intentional. I think non-prepped casters are meant to strictly be inferior in terms of versatility in every way, and ideally to have class abilities that make up for this lack by being better than the prepared casters' class abilities.

I have yet to figure out if this is both the goal and, if so, it was successful.

[Slipperychicken]

The thing that strikes me as weird is that nearly every prepared caster will have more spells prepared at every level than the spontaneous casters will know. While this was somewhat true in 3e, too, it never was so glaringly obvious because the spontaneous casters spontaneity contrasted so sharply with the need for prepared casters to prepare multiple copies of the same spell.


Don't forget rituals which wizards don't need to prepare. Those let wizards pull even farther ahead in terms of spell-options.

[Kaiisaxo]

My intial thought is because the amount of spell slots has been reduced from earlier editions (ability score no longer grants additional spell slots), I would be cautious of reducing their available prepared spells as well. Lower levels already have a few slots to use anyway, so i don't want to completely hamstring the class.

Do you have a specific example that perhaps might illuminate the issue a bit more?

Well I have a reason: I think that preppared casters can have preppared a very high number of spells. Just contrast the non-preppared caster with most spells known (the lore bard) with the preppared casters with the least (wizard and moon druid). At first level a bard knows 4 spells, while the wizard/druid can prep 3 or 4, at 10th level lore bard knows 16, and the wizard/moon druid preps 14-15, at 20th lore bard 24, wizard/moon druid 24-25. Compare with the 20 spells a chain warlock knows at that level, or the 33-35 a cleric/land druid can prepare.

Basically prepared casters can prepare -at least -as many spells as non-preppared casters know(or more). So they have a full supply of spells ready and no incentives to ever change it. The only non-prep caster that can know more spells than a preppared caster is a bard11/sor9 with 27 spells, but a cleric10/land druid10 can easily prepare 46.

So reducing it to 1/2 level instead of full level gives more leverage to non prep casters and has prepared casters working dynamically once again (not to mention it makes the clerics of a domain/land druids of different areas more distinctive as domain spells are a bigger portion of the prepared spells)

[hymer]

I'll just go in the opposite direction and say I feel highly constrained as a prepared caster. I used to be able to prepare as many different spells as I had spell slots. Now I'm down to a base close to two spells per spell level and my casting stat to pad it out a bit.
So far I've not played any caster other than a druid, so I may be biased, of course. But it doesn't seem something that needs to be reduced any further to me, so I thought I'd throw that out there.

Edit: Also worth mentioning, I think, is that pretty much every addition to the prepared spell list from domain or land will soon or late saddle you with more or less situational spells that will just take up space on most days. The bard can build their spell list to avoid these, and get to cherrypick some of the best spells from other spell lists. Sorcerers cast inherently from a stronger spell list than druids and clerics do.
Make of that what you will.

[rollingForInit]

The Wizard's only strength lies in versatility and number of spells. A Wizard has nothing else. Clerics and Druids have a bit more, but fewer spell slots per day (unless you go Circle of the Land for Druid). If you nerf the Wizard's versatility, you're removing the only thing where they are superior to other classes.

Sorcerers know fewer spells, but they get additional spell slots if they need to, with Sorcery points. Even better, they get their Metamagic which makes them far superior spellcasters for the fewer spells they use. If a Wizard would only be able to prepare as many spells, or fewer, than a Sorcerer, that removes an incentive to go with Wizard. Bards also have fewer spells, but up for it by having access to spells from any class. They're also more skill-based than Wizards, and can easily be able melee fighters.

[Kaiisaxo]

The Wizard's only strength lies in versatility and number of spells. A Wizard has nothing else. Clerics and Druids have a bit more, but fewer spell slots per day (unless you go Circle of the Land for Druid). If you nerf the Wizard's versatility, you're removing the only thing where they are superior to other classes.

Sorcerers know fewer spells, but they get additional spell slots if they need to, with Sorcery points. Even better, they get their Metamagic which makes them far superior spellcasters for the fewer spells they use. If a Wizard would only be able to prepare as many spells, or fewer, than a Sorcerer, that removes an incentive to go with Wizard. Bards also have fewer spells, but up for it by having access to spells from any class. They're also more skill-based than Wizards, and can easily be able melee fighters.

Oh but I had forgotten that! Wizards get three other spells for their spell mastery! That is three spells over sorcerer, and don't forget wizard ritual casting which is the strongest in the game, and all of their school abiliittes that don't consume spell slots. And their own arcane recovery actually comes ahead in number of slots than sorcerer fon of magic (which is also consumed to perform metamagic and bloodline powers). And Wizards still have lots of exclusive spells.

[Segev]

What makes wizard ritual casting "the strongest in the game?" How is it weaker than, say, the cleric or druid's?

[Galen]

Sorcerers also have a far better casting stat. As an old-time 3.5-er it I feel weird saying this, but Cha is better than Int in 5E, because better skills are attached to it, and Int no longer gives you more free skills. All in all, doesn't seem like nerfing wizards is necessary.

[hymer]

What makes wizard ritual casting "the strongest in the game?" How is it weaker than, say, the cleric or druid's?

Clerics and druids must have the spell prepared to cast it as a ritual, but wizards can cast any spell in their spellbook as a ritual.

[rollingForInit]

Oh but I had forgotten that! Wizards get three other spells for their spell mastery! That is three spells over sorcerer, and don't forget wizard ritual casting which is the strongest in the game, and all of their school abiliittes that don't consume spell slots. And their own arcane recovery actually comes ahead in number of slots than sorcerer fon of magic (which is also consumed to perform metamagic and bloodline powers). And Wizards still have lots of exclusive spells.

Actually, a Warlock with a Tome feature and the Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation has the best ritual casting in the entire game, since they can learn rituals from all spell lists.

A Sorcerer's spell slots aren't consumed to perform metamagic. A level 20 Sorcerer has 20 Sorcery Points, and regain 4 at each short rest. A Sorcerer can convert slots into Sorcery Points, though. Likewise, 20 Sorcery points is enough for 10 extra level 1 spell slots. Or two 5th level slots and one 4th level slot. Or four 3rd level slots.

Just like Wizard's get nice school abilities, Sorcerers get really great bloodline powers. I'm not really a fan of the Wild Magic bloodline, but its abilities are pretty powerful. And a Draconic Sorcerer can fly at will at level 14. How awesome! Bards get tons of skills, and lots of spell from other schools! A Bard can have the healing of a Cleric, the utility of a Wizard and the Blasting of a Sorcerer. All at the same time! Imagine that. Or, the Bard can be a full level 20 caster, wear medium armor, martial weapons and two attacks per round.

And Warlocks ... their spell slots recover on short rests. On level 20, they can recover all of them in 1 minute. They have plenty of special abilities, such as 120 feet sight through normal or magical darkness and 60 feet almost truesight. They can cast spells such as Levitate or Arcane Eye at will. They've a cantrip that deals a maximum of 60 force damage (a Wizard can do at most 44 fire damage) per round, has 4 chances of crits, that's cast at a minimum of 120 feet, and maximum of 600 with Invocations and a feat. Oh, and it can push people around the battlefield. At will. They cast all their spells as 5th level spells, except ther 1/day 6-9. And in addition, they get a number of pretty decent subclass features. Oh, and as mentioned earlier, they can get ritual casting that outclasses even the Wizard's.

Yes, the Wizard is strong. In versatility, it's a lot stronger than any other spellcasting class, because that's the point of the class. Bards have more skills and melee (or ranged) fighting abilities. Sorcerers have much fewer spells, but they can use those spells much better than any Wizard. A Sorcerer can Counterspell a Wizard without being Counterspelled himself. He can outdistance and outdamage a Wizard. He can cast a Twinned Haste on two of his allies (and have double of any single-target Concentration spell).

Having a lot of spells doesn't make the Wizard overpowered. Removing the Wizard's versatility would make the Wizard underpowered. In fact, it would remove almost any variety when casting spells. A 9th level Wizard who can prepare 1/2 level + mod spells would prepare 7 spells, across 5 spell levels. That leaves most levels with only one spell to use. It wouldn't make other classes more attractive (they're already attractive enough), but you would succeed in making Wizards less interesting to play.

Clerics and Druids, at least, have other stuff going for them, even though their spellcasting is pretty damn important, but Wizards have only their spells, nothing else. Don't nerf the versatility. It won't make them more "balanced".

[Kaiisaxo]

Actually, a Warlock with a Tome feature and the Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation has the best ritual casting in the entire game, since they can learn rituals from all spell lists.

Warlock's ritual book is less reliable than a Wizard's, yes they can get rituals from any list, but 1) it comes online later than wizard's 2) it costs an invocation that could have been used for extra spells known 3) it is reliant on treasure to get more than the starting 2 first level spells 4) the wizard can keep adding rituals without needing treasure and use them as regular spells on top.


A Sorcerer's spell slots aren't consumed to perform metamagic. A level 20 Sorcerer has 20 Sorcery Points, and regain 4 at each short rest. A Sorcerer can convert slots into Sorcery Points, though. Likewise, 20 Sorcery points is enough for 10 extra level 1 spell slots. Or two 5th level slots and one 4th level slot. Or four 3rd level slots.

The sorcerer needs those sorcery points to power up bloodline and class abilities. (And some can be costly) so they can either get those 10 extra slots /2 5ths and 14th or actually cast with any flexibility. A wizard of the same level on the other hand can pick between 10 extra 1st level slots, or two 5th level ones withouth having to sacrifice other class features on top of at will spells of 1st through third level (and ritual casting). Reducing prepared spells would only force them to be more strategic, I mean they can still change the spells they prepare each day. Maybe even allow them to change them during a short rest.


Yes, the Wizard is strong. In versatility, it's a lot stronger than any other spellcasting class, because that's the point of the class. Bards have more skills and melee (or ranged) fighting abilities. Sorcerers have much fewer spells, but they can use those spells much better than any Wizard. A Sorcerer can Counterspell a Wizard without being Counterspelled himself. He can outdistance and outdamage a Wizard. He can cast a Twinned Haste on two of his allies (and have double of any single-target Concentration spell).

That assuming the sorcerer has enough spells known to cover all of them.



Having a lot of spells doesn't make the Wizard overpowered. Removing the Wizard's versatility would make the Wizard underpowered. In fact, it would remove almost any variety when casting spells. A 9th level Wizard who can prepare 1/2 level + mod spells would prepare 7 spells, across 5 spell levels. That leaves most levels with only one spell to use. It wouldn't make other classes more attractive (they're already attractive enough), but you would succeed in making Wizards less interesting to play.

Clerics and Druids, at least, have other stuff going for them, even though their spellcasting is pretty damn important, but Wizards have only their spells, nothing else. Don't nerf the versatility. It won't make them more "balanced".

Wizards are already pretty versatile, they've got access to 20 of the 34 rituals in the game and many of those are exclusive to them. They also have exclusive access to tons of spells nobody else (but a bard dabbling) can have. Reducing their tactical versatility just a little won't harm them. Maybe allowing them a single extra spell per spell level up to 5th from their school could help?

[rollingForInit]

Warlock's ritual book is less reliable than a Wizard's, yes they can get rituals from any list, but 1) it comes online later than wizard's 2) it costs an invocation that could have been used for extra spells known 3) it is reliant on treasure to get more than the starting 2 first level spells 4) the wizard can keep adding rituals without needing treasure and use them as regular spells on top.

It comes at level 3, Invocations for extra spells known sucks really hard because there are so many other options that are better, Warlocks can also cast Warlock spells as rituals. It's a really great Invocation. If a Wizard takes most ritual spells when leveling up, he won't be getting any damaging spells or things that are useful outside of specific situations. A Wizard would have to rely on treasure as well. And a Wizard is limited to Wizard spells. A Warlock can find any ritual.



Wizards are already pretty versatile, they've got access to 20 of the 34 rituals in the game and many of those are exclusive to them. They also have exclusive access to tons of spells nobody else (but a bard dabbling) can have. Reducing their tactical versatility just a little won't harm them. Maybe allowing them a single extra spell per spell level up to 5th from their school could help?

But that versatility is severely limited if they can only have access to a very limited selection of spells each day. Just slightly more than one spell per level will not only mean that they'll have few spells to use, it also means that they'll have to use the same spell for the same level all the time. Boring? Again, at 9th level, a Wizard would by your houserule have 7 spells prepared. That's even less than a Sorcerer, meaning that during any given day, a Sorcerer will not only have greater versatility and a wider range of spells to use, he'll also outdamage and outperform the Wizard.

Wizards are all about versatility. Nerfing that hits them where it hurts. The would mean that the only advantage they have over other spellcasting classes is that they can choose between combat/utility spells per day, and that they will have a few more spell slots than Sorcerers, Clerics and Bards.

But if you feel that the Wizard is too strong and needs to be nerfed, that's your prerogative. I wouldn't be interested in playing the Wizard under those circumstances, though. Much better to go Bard/Warlock or Sorcerer/Warlock then.