What wizard spells would be uncommon and have to be quested for?

[soldersbushwack]

Lots of media has the idea of wizards questing for secret, lost and powerful spells. If you wanted to implement such an idea in D&D what spells would make uncommon?

Obviously, wizards don't know how to cast spells from other spell lists such as cleric and bard spells. The spell book of a wizard who has figured out how to replicate Cure Wounds as an arcane spell would be very valuable and would be a neat quest object.

Necromancy has a lot of stigma against it and so many wizards wouldn't know how to cast spells like Animate Dead or Create Undead. If a PC wanted to learn such kinds of necromancy they might have to plunder the tomb of an evil lich or find a dark teacher like a mad prophet or strange devil.

I'd also imagine a lot of mind control spells such as Dominate Person would have a stigma against them and so many wizards wouldn't know how to cast it.

[Tanarii]

Easy answer: any spell the Wizard doesn't select using his two free spells / level.

Necromancy, specifically raising the dead, is not a good action, and only evil casters do it frequently. PHB p203.

Longer fluff-type answer:
So yeah, necromancy shouldn't be commonly selected or easy to find, unless that's the kind of campaign you're running.

Enchanters/mind control, and even illusions, might be very common in some campaigns, and could be a reason wizards are feared. After all, it's the same reason the fey are feared so much.

Diviners should be mysterious, if respected.

Evocations, Abjurations, conjurations, and transmutations should definitely be the most common in a bog-standard D&D world. They're the bread and butter battle magics, used by war wizards everywhere. Right up until you start summoning fiends of course ...

[Sigreid]

You could recreate the Rain of Colorless Fire spell from Greyhawk. Added bonus for it being a stunningly bad idea to actually cast it.

[Slipperychicken]

Restricting wizards' access to magic seems hypocritical when every cleric in the land is eight hours away from prepping their own mind-control and necromancy, and other spellcasters' access cannot be controlled by any means at all.

[Tanarii]

Restricting wizards' access to magic seems hypocritical when every cleric in the land is eight hours away from prepping their own mind-control and necromancy, and other spellcasters' access cannot be controlled by any means at all.Clerics are (potentially) dependent on the goodwill of their deities granting them the spells.

And IMO that's part and parcel of the reason Sorcerers and Warlocks would be feared too. Easy access to forbidden lore.

(None of that is guaranteed of course. All DM & campaign dependent.)

[soldersbushwack]

Restricting wizards' access to magic seems hypocritical when every cleric in the land is eight hours away from prepping their own mind-control and necromancy, and other spellcasters' access cannot be controlled by any means at all.

Actually I'm radically reworking the Cleric class to have their spell list much more restricted by the portfolio of the deity they worship.

[kaoskonfety]

Kinda setting dependent... but generally anything over the "typical wizards level" and "anything taboo within the wizard communities"

If most casters don't make 5th level any magical school or library worth the name will have all the 1st level and a good selection of second level spells. A moderate array of 3rd... and whatever handful 4th they could find and whatever 5+ they have lucked into/staff know.

By default I make most spells over level 1-3 a bit hit and miss regardless. Most NPC wizards are low level and not very interested in combat magics. You can find them, but it take doing (tracking down a master, guild dues with the big wizard organization etc.).

Restrictions on the availability of necromancy (or any school) will depend more on the type of wizards around than anything else. If the local wizards are all (or mostly) necromancers it doesn't matter if society frowns on it, you can get a copy of animate dead - just don't use it in polite company.

[jas61292]

If you restrict spells, which I sometimes do, it is generally good to do so for all classes (or at least full casters), and not just wizards. The fact that a cleric "gets spells from their god" doesn't mean that their god necessarily needs to grant them anything they choose. Maybe certain spells are ancient and secret, and a cleric could not know to ask for it without discovering it first. This can work for pretty much any class. While the reasons might change, simply saying that the spell is too rare for a normal person to just take upon leveling up to the proper level is fine, so long as everyone is treated fairly.

As for what specific spells, I would typically look to do this for the most powerful and complex spells, as well as any spells that, if they were commonplace, might have major impact on the way the world works. While the powerful and complex spells might be obvious, ones that could have major impacts might not be. One example might be Continual Flame. If a spell like this exists, its very likely that, at least in bigger cities, actual lighting systems would exist. If you don't like that kind of magical pervasiveness in your cities, it might be good to have it be a rare spell.

[R.Shackleford]

Lots of media has the idea of wizards questing for secret, lost and powerful spells. If you wanted to implement such an idea in D&D what spells would make uncommon?

Obviously, wizards don't know how to cast spells from other spell lists such as cleric and bard spells. The spell book of a wizard who has figured out how to replicate Cure Wounds as an arcane spell would be very valuable and would be a neat quest object.

Necromancy has a lot of stigma against it and so many wizards wouldn't know how to cast spells like Animate Dead or Create Undead. If a PC wanted to learn such kinds of necromancy they might have to plunder the tomb of an evil lich or find a dark teacher like a mad prophet or strange devil.

I'd also imagine a lot of mind control spells such as Dominate Person would have a stigma against them and so many wizards wouldn't know how to cast it.

Personally I like the idea of them searching for spells that they may already have but want to change.

Want to change fireball to lightning ball? Well, if you can get a certain flower you can learn what makes that flower change the spell and then you can prepare lightning ball (fireball but lightning damage).

Want to change the target of a spell? Need to go talk to (amd find) old Manerva, she was the only one that knew how to do that.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Personally I like the idea of them searching for spells that they may already have but want to change.

Want to change fireball to lightning ball? Well, if you can get a certain flower you can learn what makes that flower change the spell and then you can prepare lightning ball (fireball but lightning damage).

Want to change the target of a spell? Need to go talk to (amd find) old Manerva, she was the only one that knew how to do that.
I like that idea. Have a reward for questing without upsetting any expectations.

[Temperjoke]

I'd imagine that any spell above a certain level would have to be quested for, just due to the idea that wizards at a high enough level to use them would be rare. Frankly, I'd imagine that the knowledge of powers at higher levels would be rare for all caster classes, relegated to myths and legends about the last caster who was powerful enough to use them.

[Firechanter]

From a game balance pov, I'd nominate any spell that skews the action economy. Such as
- Dominate X
- Magic Jar
- Simulacrum

Also, probably the Power Words, as they require neither Attack roll nor Saving Throw.

And maybe, for reasons of verisimilitude, spells that basically allow the caster to take over entire kingdoms.

[Thrudd]

All of them, except cantrips. Any spell a wizard possesses should be coveted and only surrendered or shared at a cost- an equal trade of similarly powered spell or better. Reduce to one spell awarded at level up, and require expenditure of money and time to get it. All others must be quested for.

[Rhaegar14]

@Thrudd, that's basically like saying scientists or mathematicians should never share knowledge for free. Not all wizards are automatically selfish/power-hungry/paranoid. Some of them might share their spells with others for the sake of spreading knowledge or love of the art.

Not to mention that the two spells per level are meant to be the result of personal research, so reducing them and requiring exchange doesn't make any sense.

To the OP, I'd suggest any set of spells with a name attached to them, such as "Mordenkainen's X," might be a good candidate, since a single (albeit famous) wizard was responsible for their creation.

[Iguanodon]

Just from a mechanical perspective, if you don't want to gimp wizard players, it might be cool to let them quest for spells from other classes' spell lists, or maybe refluffed/made-up spells ("lightning ball," etc.).

[JackPhoenix]

As for what specific spells, I would typically look to do this for the most powerful and complex spells, as well as any spells that, if they were commonplace, might have major impact on the way the world works. While the powerful and complex spells might be obvious, ones that could have major impacts might not be. One example might be Continual Flame. If a spell like this exists, its very likely that, at least in bigger cities, actual lighting systems would exist. If you don't like that kind of magical pervasiveness in your cities, it might be good to have it be a rare spell.

Continual Flame needs 50gp worth of ruby dust per casting. Sure, that's something nobles can afford, but for most of the city, it would still be better to have them bring their own torches. And people would want to steal the eternal light sources.

On the other hand, that could explain why there isn't enough rubies for Simulacrum...everything was already used in public lightning.


@Thrudd, that's basically like saying scientists or mathematicians should never share knowledge for free. Not all wizards are automatically selfish/power-hungry/paranoid. Some of them might share their spells with others for the sake of spreading knowledge or love of the art.

Well, you usaly can't set someone on fire with math equation or physical theory. And if you could, it would be well worth to keep it a secret (nuclear bomb comes to mind...)

[R.Shackleford]

@Thrudd, that's basically like saying scientists or mathematicians should never share knowledge for free. Not all wizards are automatically selfish/power-hungry/paranoid. Some of them might share their spells with others for the sake of spreading knowledge or love of the art.

Actually due to how funding and copywriter work a lot of scientist don't like to share data until they are finished with their project.

Quite recently they have decided to get all cancer researcher under one panel (in the U.S, not sure about overseas) so that they will finally start sharing data and work together instead of against each other.

So, humans have a history of not sharing data even though doing so would move the work forward.

[Sigreid]

IMO a wizard is just as excited about getting someone else's version of a spell he already knows for what it might reveal. Your fireball spell may be a touch different than my fireball spell and if I get both, maybe I can deduce something new and wonderful about elemental fire!

[Rhaegar14]

Actually due to how funding and copywriter work a lot of scientist don't like to share data until they are finished with their project.

Quite recently they have decided to get all cancer researcher under one panel (in the U.S, not sure about overseas) so that they will finally start sharing data and work together instead of against each other.

So, humans have a history of not sharing data even though doing so would move the work forward.

Yes. And a completed spell is a finished project. I'm talking about things like publishing studies to increase human scientific knowledge, not "oh hey, look at this cool data I just gathered for this experiment I'm in the middle of."

If mathematicians were hoarding information, calculus would have never gotten far past Newton/Leibniz.

To be fair, I'm not saying NOBODY acts like this, and NO wizard would act like this. I'd even say that most wizards (just like most people) act motivated by self-interest, though with a pretty broad interpretation of self-interest (even internally motivated altruism is still self-interest after a fashion because it makes the altruist feel good about themselves). But it's foolish to say that ALL wizards WITHOUT EXCEPTION would jealously guard every iota of their magical knowledge and only give it up in equivalent exchange.

[Thrudd]

Yes. And a completed spell is a finished project. I'm talking about things like publishing studies to increase human scientific knowledge, not "oh hey, look at this cool data I just gathered for this experiment I'm in the middle of."

If mathematicians were hoarding information, calculus would have never gotten far past Newton/Leibniz.

To be fair, I'm not saying NOBODY acts like this, and NO wizard would act like this. I'd even say that most wizards (just like most people) act motivated by self-interest, though with a pretty broad interpretation of self-interest (even internally motivated altruism is still self-interest after a fashion because it makes the altruist feel good about themselves). But it's foolish to say that ALL wizards WITHOUT EXCEPTION would jealously guard every iota of their magical knowledge and only give it up in equivalent exchange.

That all depends on the setting and how you want to represent wizards and magic in general. If all known magic is shared freely in a spirit of bettering society and progress, then civilization will look much different than the standard D&D setting. It might look more like Eberron, or "Tippyverse". What I described is almost literally the description of how magic is treated in the AD&D books. It creates a setting where magic is more rare, and magic-users need to go on adventures in order to gain new spells and greater power. Treating magic as a jealously guarded secret is an important factor in keeping the setting a bit more grounded, with a more swords & sorcery feel versus final fantasy/magitech.
Magic is slippery, hard to understand, dangerous, and those that know how to use it keep it to themselves in case they need to maintain an advantage over challengers that want to steal their stuff!

[2D8HP]

Lots of media has the idea of wizards questing for secret, lost and powerful spells. If you wanted to implement such an idea in D&D what spells would make uncommon?

Obviously, wizards don't know how to cast spells from other spell lists such as cleric and bard spells. The spell book of a wizard who has figured out how to replicate Cure Wounds as an arcane spell would be very valuable and would be a neat quest object.
After seeing the debate spread over multiple threads as a DM I'd be inclined to make rare not just the spells:
Simulacrum and Wish but most PC arcane spellcasters! Sheesh people!
Note: I have only DM'd older D&D and so far I've only PC'd a "Champion" Fighter, so sadly it never even occured to me to try the spellcaster shenanigans listed on the ther 5e threads. But wow!
That all depends on the setting and how you want to represent wizards and magic in general. If all known magic is shared freely in a spirit of bettering society and progress, then civilization will look much different than the standard D&D setting. It might look more like Eberron, or "Tippyverse". What I described is almost literally the description of how magic is treated in the AD&D books. It creates a setting where magic is more rare, and magic-users need to go on adventures in order to gain new spells and greater power. Treating magic as a jealously guarded secret is an important factor in keeping the setting a bit more grounded, with a more swords & sorcery feel versus final fantasy/magitech.
Magic is slippery, hard to understand, dangerous, and those that know how to use it keep it to themselves in case they need to maintain an advantage over challengers that want to steal their stuff!
For setting reasons, I really like this!

[Flashy]

it's foolish to say that ALL wizards WITHOUT EXCEPTION would jealously guard every iota of their magical knowledge and only give it up in equivalent exchange.

Among other things what wizard wouldn't want to publish a famous spell like those lucky jerks Mordenkainen, Melf, Leomund, Abi-Dalzim, etc? Think of the glory, fame, and legacy.

[Tanarii]

If mathematicians were hoarding information, calculus would have never gotten far past Newton/Leibniz.
Newton was (in)famous for carefully keeping his research and theories to himself until he could present them as a finished and complete result that couldn't be (in his view) stolen, twisted to say something he didn't mean, or even effective argued against.

[R.Shackleford]

Among other things what wizard wouldn't want to publish a famous spell like those lucky jerks Mordenkainen, Melf, Leomund, Abi-Dalzim, etc? Think of the glory, fame, and legacy.

Many published spells like that aren't exactly known as... Great.

Cool? Yes. But not exactly the best spells of those levels.

Melf's Meteors and Tash's Hideous Laghter are two off the top of my head that are both cool and great for their level.

[jas61292]

Continual Flame needs 50gp worth of ruby dust per casting. Sure, that's something nobles can afford, but for most of the city, it would still be better to have them bring their own torches. And people would want to steal the eternal light sources.

On the other hand, that could explain why there isn't enough rubies for Simulacrum...everything was already used in public lightning.

I like this explanation.

[Fighting_Ferret]

As stated... personal research is responsible for 2 spells gained from leveling up. As the DM you could limit at least one of them to be from the arcane tradition that was selected at level 2... I mean...that is their specialty (that selection harkens back to 2e specialist wizards).

Scrolls/spell books found were created by someone with a purpose... who/what was that someone... more importantly what type of arcane tradition did they follow... then just roll randomly or assign their spells for that level/tradition/school.

Also allow player to come up with their own spells! look at the current spells and break down what affects you can get from what level spell and make them available, say charm with an area affect, concentration and save type. Someone had mentioned lightning ball from fireball... both are level 3 spells... both use the same damage dice ... both offer saves for half damage... the only difference is the area of effect. Lightning bolt is easier to avoid hitting allies, but fireballs hits more enemies. The flavor is there based upon an actual lightning bolt and an explosion. Now even though it isn't supported by default... what is the harm in letting our evocation traditionalist Sven create Sven's Static Sphere, a 3rd level, electricity based, 20 foot radius, 8d6 damage, save for half spell? Most damage types have a certain damage die associated with them, as well as a preferred area affected.... as long as the spell doesn't out perform a spell of the same level... there shouldn't be a big problem.

[Slipperychicken]

Many published spells like that aren't exactly known as... Great.

Cool? Yes. But not exactly the best spells of those levels.

Melf's Meteors and Tash's Hideous Laghter are two off the top of my head that are both cool and great for their level.

Ehh. It's still a pretty great legacy. Everyone knows their names, which is more than could be said for the brilliant soul who invented Fireball.

[R.Shackleford]

Mostly homebrew spells and non-wizard spells.

So, Armor of Agathys is an easy one to point out: very strong potential, but limited to Warlock. For a pure wizard build, finding that spell is amazing.

Bless would be another one (maybe rework the name to envigor or something), because it is not typically in the domain.

Grabbing a really cool higher level spell and scaling it down also works.

I used to create my own spells, but alas I have no wizards in my party at present.

For an Abjuration Wizard it borders on cheesy/OP.

You want to have more effective HP than anyone else? That's how you get more effective HP than most everyone else.

[gfishfunk]

For an Abjuration Wizard it borders on cheesy/OP.

You want to have more effective HP than anyone else? That's how you get more effective HP than most everyone else.

Ack, I deleted this post because I realize that it did not address the actual question. I was thinking in terms of rare spells found in crypts and the like in the form of loot. And I definitely would not give it to a wizard with Abjuration as their specialty.

[OldTrees1]

Thematic answer:

1) Any worthless spell is commonly forgotten
2) Any spell deemed immoral or spell that can be abused is forbidden lore*
3) Low level spells of great utility would be widespread(see Read Magic and Invisibility) but high level spells of great utility(say Simulacrum or Wish) would be guarded secrets


*For example the 1st level Necromacy spell "Heal Light Wounds" would usually be classified as immoral despite being perfectly benevolent (essentially it had a worse guild than its twin Cure Light Wounds).

[KorvinStarmast]

What wizard spells would be uncommon and have to be quested for?

All of them. If you want to add depth to the wizard class (and have excuses for a variety of quests/side quests) part of that character's entire career is the obsessive quest for "one more spell to add to my book!"

I've seen this work very well in (of all editions) 1e.

It forces choices sometimes: we found a spell in that treasure pile, do we use it or does it go into the book?

Caveat: this takes some care and feeding by the DM. You really have to give thought to your wizard PC's needs, and goals and dreams and then balance that with all of the other players' story lines.

[R.Shackleford]

Ack, I deleted this post because I realize that it did not address the actual question. I was thinking in terms of rare spells found in crypts and the like in the form of loot. And I definitely would not give it to a wizard with Abjuration as their specialty.

I kinda figured I just thought I would point out a potential... Issue with that specific spell.

Depending on the game and if everyone was playing casters or whatever... I totally would give a abjuration wizard this spell. HP is the least fun way of screwing with players.

1: Role play pains
2: Non-Crippling debilitating effects
3: Crippling debilitating effects
4: HP