About multiclass wizard and adding spells to spellbook.

[Thunderbird]

Hello Playground, long time lurker, first time poster.

So, assume a 20th level character, Eldritch Knight 16/Wizard 4. According to the rules about adding spells to your spellbook (PHB p.114) and the "spells known and prepared" paragraph on the multiclassing section (PHB p.164), the character would be able to copy spells only of first and second level to his spellbook.

Additionally, he would know up to third-level spells through his Eldritch Knight class, and up to second-level spells through his wizard class, while being a 9th level spellcaster in aspect of spell slots, as explained in the multiclassing section of PHB (having 3 4th level slots and 1 5th level slot).

That said, would it be game-breaking to let the character add a 4th or 5th level spell to his spellbook, and letting him prepare it? There might be balance issues with certain spells, for sure, but with some utility spells (the Teleportation Circle, for instance) would it cause much trouble?

I know this is not RAW, but I'm interested in seeing your opinions on the matter. :)

[Ixidor92]

Speaking from a GM's point of view, I would consider this a big issue if it was allowed in campaign for a couple of reasons. First off, the advantage you get by taking 4 levels of wizard vs continuing into eldritch night is versatility. You have access to a much wider range of spells than a 20th level eldritch knight does. The tradeoff that is built into the system for that is that you don't have access to higher level spells, but they give you the higher spell slots so that you can buff the spells you do know above what the normal power limit of each class at their individual level would allow. If you stayed with eldritch knight for example, you would only have a couple of 4th level spell slots and no 5th level spell slots to speak of. In essence, you are proposing "let me bypass the penalty for multiclassing between these two classes while keeping the benefits of doing so".

The one thing I could see MAYBE working, for a bit of character flair and/or for story reasons, is if this character could maybe use a spellbook to cast a 4th or 5th level spell with the ritual tag ONLY as a ritual. Especially if there isn't another arcane spellcaster, this would allow for some interesting problem solving options, but wouldn't simply hand combat power to the character. From the player's handbook that gives them access to "Contact other plane" and "Rary's telepathic bond." Neither of which are particularly strong in combat, but have interesting uses that could lead to creative problem solving.

[bid]

You are asking 2 things at the same time:

- allowing your wizard half to know your EK spells
This allows you to replace your 3rd spell at fighter 14-16 while adding 3 more 3rd spells to your wizard spellbook.
You gain 3 2nd spells, which would have been replaced by 3rd. You are writing a 3rd to spellbook, then replacing it by another 3rd.
You also gain 2 unrestricted spells, 2nd and 3rd levels. You would have replaced your EK 8 unrestricted spell by a 3rd. You can now replace your EK 14 unrestricted twice by writing it to your wizard spellbook.
This has a minor impact.

- merging your wizard and EK spellcasting
This allows a wizard 4 / EK 9 to learn the same spells as a wizard 7.
You gain access to 4th spells at character level 13. A RAW pure EK gains access to 3rd spell at that level.
This has a major impact.


So no, you should never gain access to 4th spells as a wizard 4 / EK 16. The edge given by both houserules is too strong.

[Sorlock Master]

I second the above. There is a reason he can't access the 4th and 5th spells as a wizard. Giving him the ability to do so is adding artificial levels to the charcter and would probably make him too strong. Keep in mind tgis is a massive expansion to his possible spells known, since EK only get access to a few spells outside of Evocation and Abjuration schools.

[Thunderbird]

Thank you for your answers. I see it would give quite the edge to the character if he would be able to do that.

I wasn't actually considering this as "gaining the benefits of multiclass while negating the drawbacks", more about a few corner cases that it would benefit the entire party, since there aren't other utility casters in it (pretty much what Ixidor92 described in his second part of his answer).

[Crgaston]

Yes, it is a powerful expansion and not legal RAW. However, it's really only "OP" if, in the context of your game, it rains on the other players. Especially if they are your last 4 levels. You're essentially trading in the 17-20 fighter features for some relatively low level spells and a few more slots. So, I'd say it's really a question for your table/GM.

[bid]

more about a few corner cases that it would benefit the entire party, since there aren't other utility casters in it (pretty much what Ixidor92 described in his second part of his answer).
That would be similar to the ritual caster feat and not an issue since the DM can control which 3rd+ rituals are found by the party.

[JNAProductions]

I'd say allow it, on a very limited basis. You say more utility is needed? Allow them to take ONLY utility spells.

In addition, explain your reasoning. Don't just say "You can take spells X, Y, and Z." Say "You can take these utility spells, because that's needed for the party, but not the more combat intensive spells, because that would be unnecessarily powerful."

[Ixidor92]

I'd say allow it, on a very limited basis. You say more utility is needed? Allow them to take ONLY utility spells.

In addition, explain your reasoning. Don't just say "You can take spells X, Y, and Z." Say "You can take these utility spells, because that's needed for the party, but not the more combat intensive spells, because that would be unnecessarily powerful."

In keeping with the above, you could use casting time as a measure for whether they have the ability to use it or not. I mentioned spells with the ritual tag above, but if it has a casting time of 10 minutes or an hour, it's probably okay if you talk with your GM about possibly being able to use it (though maybe you can only learn one or two of these in TOTAL for your character). If the spell has a casting time of say one action or one minute, then it's probably too strong a boost, since you can cast it on short notice and/or in combat.

[Gignere]

Why not just drop a staff of badass utility? Why bake it into class abilities?

[Ixidor92]

Why not just drop a staff of badass utility? Why bake it into class abilities?

point here: you could utilize any staff/wand that requires attunement by a wizard

[Thunderbird]

I'd say allow it, on a very limited basis. You say more utility is needed? Allow them to take ONLY utility spells.

In addition, explain your reasoning. Don't just say "You can take spells X, Y, and Z." Say "You can take these utility spells, because that's needed for the party, but not the more combat intensive spells, because that would be unnecessarily powerful."

You're right, I'll keep that in mind for future posts. Sorry for being misanderstood.

The idea for an item requiring attunement from a wizard is actually very nice, probably solving any issues.
Again, thanks for all the answers guys.


In keeping with the above, you could use casting time as a measure for whether they have the ability to use it or not. I mentioned spells with the ritual tag above, but if it has a casting time of 10 minutes or an hour, it's probably okay if you talk with your GM about possibly being able to use it (though maybe you can only learn one or two of these in TOTAL for your character). If the spell has a casting time of say one action or one minute, then it's probably too strong a boost, since you can cast it on short notice and/or in combat.

That was what I was thinking myself, actually. :)

[Gignere]

It doesn't even have to be a dedicated staff, you can easily adjust the spell list on the staff of power or staff of arch magi.

It is definitely not inconceivable for a level 16+ character to have one of these staves.