How would making spells prepared be spells known alter the balance of those classes?

[Randarkal]

For example: A level 5 Cleric with 16 in Wis would normally be able to prepare 8 spells a day, if they instead only knew 8 spells (plus any on the domain lists). Would this make other casters dramatically outperform them somehow?

I ask because my players generally like this idea. The feeling being that it adds more personality to the characters, who can't just change their spells on a (relative) whim and must think carefully on what their characters take. Secondly, some of them feel it a bit odd that someone could cast a spell all the time for several days or longer and then not have a clue how to do it the next.

They could just limit themselves but it wouldn't have the same feel. "I don't change my spell list when it would be useful because ???" vs "I only know these spells because my deity has allowed me this knowledge and power" or "I have studied the magic of nature and this is what I have learned".

I however would hardly want to do this if it meant players who selected an affected class would end up feeling far behind and as a result, presumably less fun.

It also leaves a question about Wizards and if they should be touched, and if so how to do it without ruining potential fun a Wizard might have from building up a spell book. Otherwise, it would seem simple to allow them the six spells at level one and two more each level after.

[leogobsin]

The answer is probably: not terribly. Classes would be losing out on some possible versatility, but to make use of that versatility you need some idea of what you'll be encountering in a given day, so it's hard to say how useful that versatility actually is though.

Something that could be an issue: as it currently stands there's often no real reason to prepare Reincarnate/Raise Dead/etc. If a party member dies as long as you can keep the body around you could just prepare it the next day. If classes went to a spells known system these would become kind of a 'spell tax': something it's almost mandatory to learn because there's always the possibility you'll need it and if you don't take it you'll be kicking yourself when you do need it.

The other thing to consider if you do this: if Spells Prepared becomes Spells Known, is the number still based on your casting stat? If so, you'd have to consider various magic items that can affect your stats. What happens if your Cleric uses a Tome of Understanding? What about if they've got an Ioun Stone of Insight orbiting their head? And then what happens when an enemy grabs that Ioun Stone?

As for Wizards, I would say don't change them. As is, the way Wizards spellbooks and spell preparation play together works well and is a unique part of the class, not to mention being more complicated for mucking around with versus Clerics/Druids/Paladins.

[Crgaston]

My guess is that it will really come down to the way your players feel about it. Mechanically, it’ll have a increasingly negative effect on versatility as they level up, and also discourage experimentation.

Maybe changing them to “spells known” but allow them to swap out up to (casting stat mod) number of spells at each level up instead of just one?

[Unoriginal]

For example: A level 5 Cleric with 16 in Wis would normally be able to prepare 8 spells a day, if they instead only knew 8 spells (plus any on the domain lists). Would this make other casters dramatically outperform them somehow?

Yes.

One of the advantage of Clerics is that they have access to all their spells provided they have the time to prepare.

Now, it's not going to leave them horribly outperformed, but it's going to have a dramatic effect on what a Cleric is and what they can do, and make them a lot less fun to play. Especially given how Cleric spells are already limted in their scope by design.

Being able to select your spells from an huge list each day is a big power and a balancing factor. That's one of the reasons why Wizards are considered strong, despite having less selection than Clerics.



I ask because my players generally like this idea. The feeling being that it adds more personality to the characters, who can't just change their spells on a (relative) whim and must think carefully on what their characters take.

...so they like the idea of all spellcasters being Sorcerers, but without the things the Sorcerers get in exchange to make it viable?



Secondly, some of them feel it a bit odd that someone could cast a spell all the time for several days or longer and then not have a clue how to do it the next.

Cleric spells are not something they "have a clue how to do", it's divine power granted to them



They could just limit themselves but it wouldn't have the same feel. "I don't change my spell list when it would be useful because ???" vs "I only know these spells because my deity has allowed me this knowledge and power" or "I have studied the magic of nature and this is what I have learned".

Well, if they *want* to be weaker...



I however would hardly want to do this if it meant players who selected an affected class would end up feeling far behind and as a result, presumably less fun.

They probably will end up feeling like that, yes.



It also leaves a question about Wizards and if they should be touched, and if so how to do it without ruining potential fun a Wizard might have from building up a spell book. Otherwise, it would seem simple to allow them the six spells at level one and two more each level after.

Well, if you don't modify them, Wizards will clearly get a big advantage. If you do modify them, they're going to be less fun to play.

You could offer your players to try for a few sessions and see if they still like it afterward.

[hymer]

Something you may want to take into consideration is how many spells belogning to the prepared classes are (or can be) quite niche, and yet can seem required. Detect Magic, (Lesser) Restoration, healing spells, water walking/breathing...
The spell lists are not the same. They are not equally powerful, or equally versatile, or equally rich in obviously useful spells. And this is taken into consideration in the design that includes spell preparation.

[MrStabby]

Yes it is a step backwards for clerics and the like - although that doesn't mean it is a bad idea. If you do this you may want to give them another boost.

I agree that "permanent" spell selections would add character and differentiate members of the same class so I think it is a nice touch.

I think a little of everything could work. Pick one spell per level to know. In addition you can select each day a number of spells equal to your wisdom modifier.

This gives you a fixed core of spells but lets you pick the situational spells when you need them.



There was a recently a discussion about potent spellcasting and divine strike and swapping them about. I would suggest that if you were to restrict swapping spells then giving clerics both of these would be a nice little bit of compensation.

[PhoenixPhyre]

The biggest effect is that situational spells (detect X, X =/= magic, purify food and drink) just won't get used. You'll see more similarity between clerics in practice, rather than less.

And if you do this to the wizard, then you've removed a large chunk of their features and flavor.

Honestly, I have new people playing druids and wizards (clerics are rare for some reason). There's no big deal here, especially if they have the spell cards.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Ironically, I think the Cleric list is probably the single worst list to convert to a flat "spells known" list-- apart from domain spells, most of its contents are either "everyone uses this" standard-issue spells like Spiritual Weapon and Healing Word, or "once in a blue moon" overspecific spells like Remove Curse and Raise Dead.

That said, it shouldn't be too big a deal. I'd probably go with, oh...

Base spells known as a Sorcerer, from both the base Cleric list and your Domain spells.
One free Domain spell known at 1st/3rd/5th/7th/9th
Every morning, you can prepare, oh... [Wisdom Modifier] spell levels worth of additional spells.


For Wizards, you could replace the "one free Domain spell" with "one free spell from your chosen school."

[MrStabby]

Ironically, I think the Cleric list is probably the single worst list to convert to a flat "spells known" list-- apart from domain spells, most of its contents are either "everyone uses this" standard-issue spells like Spiritual Weapon and Healing Word, or "once in a blue moon" overspecific spells like Remove Curse and Raise Dead.

That said, it shouldn't be too big a deal. I'd probably go with, oh...

Base spells known as a Sorcerer, from both the base Cleric list and your Domain spells.
One free Domain spell known at 1st/3rd/5th/7th/9th
Every morning, you can prepare, oh... [Wisdom Modifier] spell levels worth of additional spells.


For Wizards, you could replace the "one free Domain spell" with "one free spell from your chosen school."

Rough list of spells of level 1 to 5 that I might be wanting to swap out for something else (i.e. things I want, but maybe not every day or at every level):

1:
Guiding bolt (great till high levels when it isn't much better than a cantrip - advantage always remains relevant but it loses it's shine)
Detect magic (great, useful but not everyone in the party needs it. If others learn it you can drop it)

2:
Aid (good at low levels but can suck a bit at higher levels. Never totally worthless but if you had limited spells to know I think this is one that could be dropped)

Continual flame (yeah you want the effects, but don't need to cast it that often. Prepare if you are needing to light an entire area, otherwise drop)

Find traps (depending on party composition you may not need this. If your rogue dies then you might want to swap it in)

Hold Person (If you find your campaign in revolving more and more around monsters/non humaoid/undead then this is less useful)

Zone of truth (swap it in if you are doing a bit more of a social chapter)

3:
Daylight (a lot of things don't like bright light, a lot more things don't like their advantage for hiding in dim light stripped away from them. Situationally awesome spell)

Beacon of Hope (My experience of this is from the DM side, there have been a few encounters in my campaign that this has trivialised (and one it should have done, but the PCs kept failing saves even with advantage))

Clairvoyance (sometimes really useful and can sidestep whole encounters on information gathering quests, usefulness dependant on other classes/divination in the party. Generally same is true of the other divination spells as well)

Water walk (really glad it is on the cleric list, certainly not an every day spell though)

5:
Dawn (yeah, this gets a lot better on some adventuring days - arguably it is good enough to be full time on a list though)

Greater restoration (Another one I would miss if it were not on the cleric list, another one I don't use every day)

Hallow (you want to set up camp? defend a location? great. On the move - a little less valuable)

Planar binding (you got cash?)



I am not saying you are wrong with it being the worst list for it - just that there are a lot of spells I would use rarely but would miss if they were not on the list. Often enough to not be considered niche but certainly not every day and usually with enough time to prepare for in the morning.

[rbstr]

With Clerics and Druids the spell list flexibility is kind of important given how situational some things are. They'd need to have too big of a "spells known" number or else they're gonna have entirely too much pressure to pick certain things.

I could get behind a mixed system sort of like Grod suggested with learned spells but ~wis-mod prepared. You might have to scale the prepared spells number, since wis mod would be too many early on.

[MrStabby]

With Clerics and Druids the spell list flexibility is kind of important given how situational some things are. They'd need to have too big of a "spells known" number or else they're gonna have entirely too much pressure to pick certain things.

I could get behind a mixed system sort of like Grod suggested with learned spells but ~wis-mod prepared. You might have to scale the prepared spells number, since wis mod would be too many early on.

Actually, it was me that suggested that... but yeah. I think a mix is the best way to go.

As you say the pressure to pick certain things doesn't leave a lot up to discretion. Ideally you need it both open enough and restrictive enough to make different casters feel they can learn different spells.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'll admit that I don't like the a la carte spell-selection of D&D generally--picking from the whole list (even only at level up) creates a strong incentive to not be thematic and eliminates opportunity costs for spell selection. That's good from a game perspective, but causes me verisimilitude issues. Why does that red dragon sorcerer (or worse phoenix sorcerer, child of elemental fire) (hypothetically) stock his list with buffs and ice spells? Because those are (hypothetically) better spells.

But fixing this is hard. I made a stab (linked in my sig), but I'm not satisfied with it (and so never put it into actual play). You'd probably end up with a Spheres of Magic-style casting system.

Wait...sorry. This got way off subject.

Being able to switch spells out is a good thing, as it allows a class to have a wide range of utility spells. Note that most of those with whole-list systems (clerics, paladins, some druids) have domain-style bonus spells that they always have prepared. This is, I'd guess, where the designers intended the build/theme dependence to come in. A war cleric and a knowledge cleric are different due to different domain spells and features, not the rest of the list. But YMMV.

[UrielAwakened]

I think a system like this would be great if you made one small change.

Instead of learning a set number of spells per level, you get a number of spell points you can spend on learning spells, equal to twice the highest level of spell you can currently cast.

So instead of learning two spells when you know up to 3rd level spells, you get six spell points that you can spend on two 3rd levels, or a 3rd, a 2nd, and 1st, or six 1sts if you want.

Then you could choose to trade versatility for power or vice versa. And then you could probably do away with the whole, "Prepare from any spell" thing.

[dickerson76]

If you go this route, I'd still give them access to all ritual spells as rituals. If they don't know them, they can't prepare them (and cast them as an Action), but I'd still allow them to have a ritual book (or something similar) that would allowed them to cast those spells using the 10-minute ritual cast time.

[JoeJ]

One effect of this change would be to somewhat reduce the value of gathering information about a target before going after it.

[MrStabby]

One effect of this change would be to somewhat reduce the value of gathering information about a target before going after it.

Depending on the make up of a group this could be either a good thing or a bad thing. I like it as part of a game but it is also one of the activities that seems to leave some characters unable to contribute equally for an extended period of time. If there are PCs without much to add during this stage then reducing it's frequency/importance might be a good thing. Depends on the table.

[Kane0]

It probably would be a huge difference. Most prepared casters end up with a selection they favor and don't really swap around much, known casters would get some extra breathing room but will probably also settle on their favourites in the same manner.

[bid]

who can't just change their spells on a (relative) whim and must think carefully on what their characters take. Secondly, some of them feel it a bit odd that someone could cast a spell all the time for several days or longer and then not have a clue how to do it the next.
1- You realize a level 20 needs to meditate for 90 minutes whenever a single spell is changed for the day?
2- A cleric doesn't run around with raise dead, you only prepare it in the morning if there is a need.
3- A cleric could prepare only 5th spells and leave none for the lower slots.

And if what's good for the goose is good for the gander, wizard are screwed without the spellbook mechanic.


At the very least, clerics could have a missal containing their known spells and work like wizards. It still doesn't make sense for druids though.

[JoeJ]

Depending on the make up of a group this could be either a good thing or a bad thing. I like it as part of a game but it is also one of the activities that seems to leave some characters unable to contribute equally for an extended period of time. If there are PCs without much to add during this stage then reducing it's frequency/importance might be a good thing. Depends on the table.

Absolutely. That's why I didn't characterize it as either an advantage or a disadvantage. Personally, I'm happy with a game in which the characters spend much more time creatively preparing for a confrontation than they do playing it out, but not everybody would enjoy that.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Personally, I'm happy with a game in which the characters spend much more time creatively preparing for a confrontation than they do playing it out, but not everybody would enjoy that.

Put me on that list. Mainly because my highest value for fun is Exploration: the discovery of the unknown. The "and what happens next? What happens when I do <that>?" And the heist-style "prep for all the things" games are all about minimizing the unknown. Ideally, everything goes exactly according to plan and you steamroll the opposition. But in any case, you've nailed down as many variables before hand as possible. And that, to me, is the antithesis of fun. It's excruciatingly boring. I want each action to advance (in some direction, not necessarily a planned one) the scenario somehow. Force everyone to improvise, to adapt to to new twists.

BTW, that includes as DM. I'm happiest when I planned 3 ways it could go and the players find a 42nd. Something that completely blindsides me and makes me scramble to improvise a reaction. Those are my best sessions as well, when I'm outwardly trying to pretend I saw it coming but internally I'm blinking in shock.

De gustibas and all that.

[Theodoxus]

but I'd still allow them to have a ritual book (or something similar) that would allowed them to cast those spells using the 10-minute ritual cast time.


At the very least, clerics could have a missal containing their known spells and work like wizards. It still doesn't make sense for druids though.

I was going to suggest this very thing. It always seemed odd to me that wizard carried a spellbook (even though the iconic one that Elminster was built around, never did), but clerics don't have holy texts to utilize outside of fluff?

[Randarkal]

Thanks everyone. I particularly like the idea of allowing all ritual spells for clerics and druids. Both of which I find it easy to flavor allowing that. Not much said for paladins. I assume it is because they are mostly fine with smiting and a much more limited spell list anyway.

[Beelzebubba]

Divine casters are support casters. Their spells do less damage and are often less powerful. (Just look at Druid and Cleric cantrips compared to Wizard.)

They often contain amazing utility to handle niche situations, and to support the other classes getting into more interesting situations and support a wider variety of adventures. (Water Breathing. Locate Object.)

If you didn't let them grab those things, you'd basically force everyone to be 'spreadsheet optimizers' since so many of those niche spells are useless outside of most contexts.

I wouldn't play that game. It would create boring divine casters, and that would have ripple effects to others.