I need help with a major overhaul to 5e's spell system

[SunderedWorldDM]

Howdy, homebrewers of the Playground! I come to you with a conundrum I would love your help in resolving.

http://goblinpunch.blogspot.com/2015/01/heartbreaker-magic-system.html
Recently I've been reading through Goblin Punch and similar OSR-type bloggy things, and this idea for a spell system was germinating in my head. For a while I've been courting the idea of a free form spell system (you don't choose spells from the PHB, you make X different evocative spell names and we see what they do in play), a spell point system (granular slots go away, finally!), and some other tweaks to really make magic feel more chaotic and more personal to the individual mage. I saw this post by Goblin Punch and instantly fell in love, and I would love some help in porting these ideas over to 5e so that I can make 5e casting feel like this.

EDIT: Here are the beginnings of me explaining and calcifying the system in a way that other people can make sense...

Okay, so you make up spells, and now they’re capital S Spells. And you use Mana Points, or MP, to cast those spells. Each Spell has a name, an effect, and a boost, which is what happens when you spend more than 1 MP to cast it. You know a number of Spells at 1st level equal to your Casting Stat plus your Proficiency Bonus (CS plus PB). They’re in one of two modes, depending on your class: Memorized, which means you can’t change them, and Prepared, which means that after a rest you can choose to switch one Spell out for another. (The distinction between these modes becomes important in multiclassing, we’ll get there.)

But you can’t just choose your Spells willy-nilly. Your class (and possibly subclass) will give you Tags: these are short sentences that vaguely describe what your Spells should do. Use common sense here, but feel free to stretch the definitions a bit for something cool, and be sure to check your Spells with the DM before play.

So at Level 1 you have a pool of MP and a list of Spells you’ve made, which are either Prepared or Memorized. Again, to cast a Spell, you use an action to spend 1 or more MP. The DM will then adjudicate what effect the Spell has- perhaps it’s damage, or a door unlocking, or a creature being summoned. Spells will have effects more or less similar to spells you’ve seen in the PHB and other DnD books.

There are some other special things that some casters have access to. One of these are Repositories. A spellcaster that uses a Repository must have it on hand whenever they take a rest, else they cannot prepare spells or regain MP. If your Repository is ever destroyed or lost, well, good luck- you’ll probably have to spend a bunch of time and gold to get it back, or go on some quest to find a suitable replacement. In addition, since cantrips aren’t a thing anymore, any full/half caster who would have cantrips instead have the following feature:

Sundry Lore
You can examine a non-humanoid creature and ascertain its weak points from your studies in magizoological anatomy. If you use an action inspecting an individual creature, you gain a bonus to weapon damage against it equal to your Proficiency Bonus for the rest of the combat. However, if the creature’s nature/species identity is being masked by an illusion spell or shapeshifted in some way, you will not gain the bonus, but you will learn of the creature’s disguise.

Incoming explanation of multiclassing rules, adjudicating Spells, a master list of every caster class and some of the necessary stats, and MP/level tables.

Things I have to define for every class:
-Cast stat
-Tags
-Full/half/third
-Memorized/Prep
-Sundry Lore
-Repository
-Do Subclass Tags be a thing

[SunderedWorldDM]

Sorry, the above post is a mess, there's a lot of ambiguity and rambling! I'm working on polishing up a formal first draft so that you can see my vision and all of these moving parts in progress. If you're having trouble understanding quite what I'm getting at, I hear you, and soon I'll have something more polished to present! Though if you have input now I'd be happy to hear it.

[clash]

I have created a spellcasting system very similar to what you are describing and it has been in playtest and fine-tuning for the last 2 years in my own tabletop-rpg Vanguards and Villains. The math for balance works very similar to 5e. Here is a description of the system:

How to use
1. Take damage and add weak or medium effect. Use min of element or shape, whichever is higher. If you have an ability that allows you to cast strong or ultimate effects you may choose one of those instead of the weak effect.
2. If specified add the minimum mana cost of element effect and shape. Anything with a duration does half damage.
3. Add any effects from other elements. Extra mana = minimum of other effect adding at least 1 mana per element.
4. Can choose to instead create new effects by combining elements.
* Mirage +1 Mind to create a illusion that strike fear into your enemies. (Praestigiae Animo Sagitta)
* 1 Mirage + 1 Fire to create a 10ft cube illusion of lava that actually hurts when they enter it. (Praestigiae Ignis Inspiratione)
* 1 Body + 1 Darkness to blind a single target. (Corporis Tenebris Sagitta)
* 1 Mirage + 2 Darkness to make a targets invisible. (Tenebris Praestigiae Triplicata)
* 2 Air + 1 Earth in wall shape makes a sandstorm wall.
When someone tries to cross it they must make a resist check or take 1d6 bludgeoning damage and be thrown back 10ft and knocked prone. (Caeli Terra Domus)
5. You can only use one Ultimate magic/day
6. You can choose one enhancement for a spell and add the additional mana cost. Only enhancements may take a spell above your normal mana limit.
7. You may only have one effect that requires concentration. If you cast a second the first is lost. Anytime you are concentrating on an effect and take damage you must succeed on a resist check difficulty == 1/2 damage dealt or 50 whichever is greater. If you fail your lose the effect.

The creating new effects doesnt see much play as it is dm dependant but the rest can be used with relative ease. PM me if you want more info on this.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The game that usually jumps to my mind when people talk about magic systems like this is Mutants and Masterminds. It's a point-buy superhero system, and the main schtick is that there are no pre-established powers. Instead, you build your own by combing "Effects" and "Modifiers." Any power that involves hurting an enemy uses the Damage effect, any one that involves debuffing them uses the Affliction effect, any one that works at range uses the Increase Range modifier, and so on. To figure out how much it costs, you just add up the costs of the various effects and modifiers.

So something like that is probably a good starting point. I'm seeing... hmm... I'm seeing a casting system based on a long list of terms, each with an associated effect of roughly comparable power:

Burn: The spell deals 1d6/MP fire damage
Blast: The spell has a range of 25ft/MP
Chorus: Each other spellcaster targeted can contribute 1MP towards augmenting the spell
Remote Sense: You project one sense/MP to a distance of up to 1 mile..
Rune: The spell is anchored to a certain spot, and only goes off when the rune is disturbed. When casting the spell, you may place 1 rune/MP, though if a target triggers multiple runes simultaneously they're only damaged once.

When you cast a spell, you combine any number of terms you know. The minimum MP cost is equal to the number of words you use (not terms, words-- that way you can have longer terms like "remote sense" that are more powerful), but you can add as much MP as you want on top of that. Casters don't have spell slots; instead, they have an MP limit that restricts how many MP they can spend on a given spell (or turn, or round, depending on how you want to balance it).

So if you want to lay a fireball trap, you might cast Blasting Rune and spend an extra 2 MP to augment it, letting you place a total of 4 traps that each do 4d6 fire damage when triggered.

[KittenMagician]

What if you turned spell casting into a d100 style check. you have to get equal to or under you level in a spell casting class + your spell bonus + however much mana you spend on the spell. a 100 is a failure no matter what. add in that cantrips are kinda like spells that always succeed. then you factor in power of spell as a minus to the check. Wish is an auto +25 (or something like that) and cure wounds is a +0 while fireball is +5. obviously there is a little bit of hammering out and as you gain mana it becomes easier to ensure spells cast properly. (you can change it to a d20 instead of a d100)

[aimlessPolymath]

Some observations:
-There is an extant spell point system for 5e, in DMG 288-289. Defining "level X spell costs about X MP", and the MP/day allotment determined by the unmodified tables for spell points, will roughly increase the spells per day by about 50%. Therefore, you can then cut the spell points given by the "spell points by level" table to about 2/3 their current value to roughly mimic the current spell slot economy. To handle warlocks, maybe multiply their maximum spell slot level by their spell slot count to get their MP per short rest? Maybe less, I'm not sure. Sharply restricting the number of spells prepared linearizes the wizard on its own in my opinion, and further restriction on the resources they can spend on those slots seems unnecessary.

-Having prepared casters only change one spell per long rest imposes a new, longer-term time structure on characters- the difference between having a two- or three-day long trip is suddenly significant. Downtime may become more relevant.
-Spells automatically added to prepared list: I'd say you add +1 (maybe 2) spells prepared, subject to the restriction that those spells relate closely to the appropriate theme.

-Spell Restriction/Discovery/Creation: First of all, I don't think clerics or druids should need to seek out new spells; as divine casters, the idea that they need to find a prayer written down before they're allowed to ask their god (or nature) for a particular kind of miracle seems somewhat ridiculous. I think you can ask the player to describe how the spells they cast relate to the nature of their power, and check if the response is reasonable.

In the case of wizards, put some thought into how the wizards gained or gain their magic: If they learned from a mentor, their starting spells should be heavily influenced by their mentor, if they learned from research, then their spells should reflect the nature of that research, etc. The reason why they need to go out and seek new spells would be because their own studies don't fully cover the spells they wish to study.

-Cantrips: 5e generally assumes that a character will be able to do something with their action without spending a limited resource, and this is it in core. One alternative would be to replace them with a class feature that grants a couple of innate semi-magical abilities; a wizard who can prestidigitate at-will, but can spend an action to advise 2-3 allies, giving them the benefit of the Help action.

-Freeform Casting: This is a pretty big issue- consistency is not a desired attribute of your magic system, but combats can be won or lost depending on whether you decide that the Thunder Flash spell deals damage and blinds, or just deals damage. In particular, boosts may be something that gets forgotten- will you remember if boosting Darkvision is supposed to increase the vision distance, the number of targets, or the duration? Would you allow the players to argue with you to go back to an old interpretation, if that was what they expected when they spent the MP? I would upgrade spell descriptions from just a name, to a name and a sentence describing their general effects and the effect of boosting them, ex.
Thunder Flash: Deals damage to those near a lightning strike, and blinds them. Boost: More bolts fall.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Okay, so I feel like I wasn't clear on what the system needed. So for reference, here's what I'm working with so far:

A funky new spell system

Memorized: You can’t change your Spell list once you have it.
Prepared: If you're a preparation caster, after every rest, you may choose one Spell off your list and change it.
Spell List: A number of spells equal to your SB (Spell Bonus) that you have available to cast.
Spell Bonus: Proficiency plus casting stat. Add 8 to it to get your Spell DC.
MP: Mana Points. Spend 1 (or more) to cast a Spell. Regain all upon a long rest.
Repository: If you keep physical copies of your Spells, you need them to regain MP/prep Spells.
Tags: Suggestions for spell effects for each class. If a spell falls too far outside of the Tags, you can’t learn it. Some subclasses may have further Tags to add on.

Artificer- INT, ½, Memorized, Repository (Blueprints)
Tags: Gadgets, Unstable, Constructs, Flashy
Bard- CHA, 1, Memorized, Repository (Fake Book)
Tags: Music, Enchant, Subtle, Assist
Cleric- WIS, 1, Prep, Repository (Scripture)
Tags: Prayer, Gods, Non-destructive, Elevate
Druid- WIS, 1, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Nature, Earth, Wrath, Crude
Eldritch Knight- INT, ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Arcane Textbook)
Tags: Body, Blade, War, Focus
Paladin- CHA, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Stalwart, Divine, Sight, Rebuke
Ranger- WIS, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Survival, Tracker, Commune, Speak
Arcane Trickster- INT (CHA?), ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Stolen Notes)
Tags: Deceptive, Illegal, Stealth, Crafty
Sorcerer- CHA, 1, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Wild, Destructive, Vast, Primordial
Warlock?- CHA, funky, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Occult, Secretive, Communion, Beyond
Wizard- INT, 1, Prep, Repository (Spellbook)
Tags: Intricate, Manipulation, Sight, Flexible

Rules for adjudicating spells:
-Damage/healing: (1+MP spent)d8/d4 (if effect is fancy)
-Generally, the more MP spent, the higher utility
-MP spent approximately equals level of slot used

EXAMPLE:
Sam is rolling up a 3rd level Wizard, Maeros. They roll a +4 for Intelligence- jackpot! That means their SB at Level 3 is going to be 6, so they’ll be able to learn 6 Spells. The Wizard tags are Intricate, Manipulation, Sight, and Flexible, so Maeros has to keep those in mind while naming his 6 Spells. He settles on:
1: Aura Vision
2: Unlock
3: Earth Swim
4: Telekinesis
5: Flame of the Eternal
6: Heat Metal
Sam looks at Maeros’s list. Pretty well rounded, lot of earth and fire spells, and each of them relate back to the tags somehow, so that works well. He has 4 MPs to cast those spells (from the table, see below).

Maeros finds himself in combat with a few Gerblings over an ancient scroll of Genie Summoning- a new Spell he can add to his Repository! Thinking fast, Maeros uses 2 MP to cast Telekinesis, flinging a bit of rusty metal on the floor of the room towards one Gerbling. Rolling an attack and adding their SB, the Gerbling is skewered by 3d8 damage ((1+2 MP)* d8)! After another turn passes, Maeros decides to play it safer and use 1 MP to cast Heat Metal on the chunk already in the Gerbling. Since they don’t have the chance to dodge this damage, the DM rules that the damage is unavoidable, but it’ll be d4s instead. 2d4 is enough to finish off the Gerbling, and another MP spent on Heat Metal on the last Gerbling’s blade is enough to clear them from the room. Maeros copies Genie Summoning into his Repository, and adds it to his list: a cool 7! Though now that he’s spent all his MP, he’s not going to be able to do too much until he can get a rest...

(There's also an MP per level table, but tables on GitP confuse me, so I'll show that later.)

So right now the problems are a fewfold. One, are Tags enough to distinguish magics and make room for each type of caster? Two, how do I make finding Spells in the wild worthwhile when the system is already so freeform without implementing crazy "spell tags" or whatnot (that's too much bookkeeping for me)? Three, the ideas of "preparation" and "repositories" seem flimsy to me right now, and I feel they should be more important... how do I make these sort of distinctions more important in play? Especially preparation- I really hate how it works now, and I want to make it fit with the rest of the system better.

Thanks so much for your help, and I' sorry if I'm being unclear as to what I'm looking for or what I want! I hope this post clarifies things.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Some observations:
-There is an extant spell point system for 5e, in DMG 288-289. Defining "level X spell costs about X MP", and the MP/day allotment determined by the unmodified tables for spell points, will roughly increase the spells per day by about 50%. Therefore, you can then cut the spell points given by the "spell points by level" table to about 2/3 their current value to roughly mimic the current spell slot economy. To handle warlocks, maybe multiply their maximum spell slot level by their spell slot count to get their MP per short rest? Maybe less, I'm not sure. Sharply restricting the number of spells prepared linearizes the wizard on its own in my opinion, and further restriction on the resources they can spend on those slots seems unnecessary.
I already looked at the 5e spell point tables and they feel clunky to me. Like, a 2nd level spell costs 3, but a 3rd costs 5, and a 9th costs 13? I want something more intuitive and less restrictive. Plus, when I'm playing a spellcaster, I don't really think about my prepared spells all that much- I find it most fun when I work with what I have, especially in unique ways. I want to gift that experience to my players, and giving them a limited list but the potential to boost any one to high heaven does that for me. Plus, in this MP system there's no cap to how many you can spend at a time. You can drop 10 MP on a super-spell if you want, but that'll be a significant tax for the day, and that's a deliberate choice you have to weigh.


-Having prepared casters only change one spell per long rest imposes a new, longer-term time structure on characters- the difference between having a two- or three-day long trip is suddenly significant. Downtime may become more relevant.

-Spells automatically added to prepared list: I'd say you add +1 (maybe 2) spells prepared, subject to the restriction that those spells relate closely to the appropriate theme.
I think that's a good idea, let me add that in.


-Spell Restriction/Discovery/Creation: First of all, I don't think clerics or druids should need to seek out new spells; as divine casters, the idea that they need to find a prayer written down before they're allowed to ask their god (or nature) for a particular kind of miracle seems somewhat ridiculous. I think you can ask the player to describe how the spells they cast relate to the nature of their power, and check if the response is reasonable.
Also makes sense. But wizards fall under the blanket umbrella of prep, and they're also restrained by their knowledge? So I want to make something that fits both of these sorts of ideas decently well. Is the solution, though, to just cut prep out of the wizard and give them something else that's fancy? Perhaps...


In the case of wizards, put some thought into how the wizards gained or gain their magic: If they learned from a mentor, their starting spells should be heavily influenced by their mentor, if they learned from research, then their spells should reflect the nature of that research, etc. The reason why they need to go out and seek new spells would be because their own studies don't fully cover the spells they wish to study.
That makes a lot of sense. I've added in Tags, do you think that is enough or should there be some other sort of thing to further specify? I know the Goblin Punch uses some sort of bane and boon system, and that could also work to address the question below as well, if the boon is some constant action the mage has avaliable.


-Cantrips: 5e generally assumes that a character will be able to do something with their action without spending a limited resource, and this is it in core. One alternative would be to replace them with a class feature that grants a couple of innate semi-magical abilities; a wizard who can prestidigitate at-will, but can spend an action to advise 2-3 allies, giving them the benefit of the Help action.
Right, and this is the struggle: if I try and limit the number of choices these spellcasters have in the way that I have, I eliminate the stable choice. Classes like Warlock and Cleric have some choices that mitigate this, but I don't want playing a wizard to be that dangerous. You're absolutely right, I have to find some way to figure this out!


-Freeform Casting: This is a pretty big issue- consistency is not a desired attribute of your magic system, but combats can be won or lost depending on whether you decide that the Thunder Flash spell deals damage and blinds, or just deals damage. In particular, boosts may be something that gets forgotten- will you remember if boosting Darkvision is supposed to increase the vision distance, the number of targets, or the duration? Would you allow the players to argue with you to go back to an old interpretation, if that was what they expected when they spent the MP? I would upgrade spell descriptions from just a name, to a name and a sentence describing their general effects and the effect of boosting them, ex.
Thunder Flash: Deals damage to those near a lightning strike, and blinds them. Boost: More bolts fall.
That makes sense, and I like limiting it to a non-mechanical sentence. I think I'll implement that. Thanks so much!



Thanks so much! I really appreciate it, and this is the sort of feedback and thoughts I'm looking for!

[SunderedWorldDM]

Changing the example above, here's Maeros's list with the sentence/boost structure:
1: Aura Vision

See magical auras for 1 minute. Boost: duration.
2: Unlock

Open locks and allow passage through doors. Boost: more complex/larger obstacle.
3: Earth Swim

Make your way through the earth like water for 1 minute. Boost: duration.
4: Telekinesis

Move objects with your mind remotely. Boost: strength of telekinesis.
5: Flame of the Eternal

Create flames that last until put out. Boost: size of flame (damage).
6: Heat Metal

Heat up handprint-sized area of metal. Boost: heat (damage).

[aimlessPolymath]

I already looked at the 5e spell point tables and they feel clunky to me. Like, a 2nd level spell costs 3, but a 3rd costs 5, and a 9th costs 13? I want something more intuitive and less restrictive. Plus, when I'm playing a spellcaster, I don't really think about my prepared spells all that much- I find it most fun when I work with what I have, especially in unique ways. I want to gift that experience to my players, and giving them a limited list but the potential to boost any one to high heaven does that for me. Plus, in this MP system there's no cap to how many you can spend at a time. You can drop 10 MP on a super-spell if you want, but that'll be a significant tax for the day, and that's a deliberate choice you have to weigh.

To rephrase: My calculations tell me, extrapolating from the Spell Point tables, that you can roughly have an MP-point table with a number of MP granted to a spellcaster of level X equal to 2/3 the number of spell points the spell point table would give a spellcaster of level X, and end up with a roughly similar number of spells cast per day.


That makes a lot of sense. I've added in Tags, do you think that is enough or should there be some other sort of thing to further specify? I know the Goblin Punch uses some sort of bane and boon system, and that could also work to address the question below as well, if the boon is some constant action the mage has avaliable.
I don't think the tags you describe are very useful. In the case of Maeros the Wizard, it's not clear to me which tag the various fire spells are related to, and I don't understand what Intricate or Flexible are supposed to be as tags. Can I just do anything, since everything falls under the auspice of Flexible? For the Cleric, what does Elevate even mean- can I cast levitate?

I think that literally, the spellcaster should be able to say how they learned the spell. Here's my example for a wizard:
-At level 1, name your research subject, and/or a mentor with their own research subject.
-Describe how the spells you learn are derived from your research, or your mentor's research.
-Ex. A wizard with the subject of "The spirits of the dead" can make use of the spirits of the dead to understand any language spoken by someone dead, can conjure a swarm of bones to harass their enemy, or can fuse someone with a ghost to give them the unnatural vigor of a zombie.
-If your research subject is accidentally too narrow or useless, you can decide to expand or tweak it as new knowledge about the world arises. Explain how.
-Ex. the wizard realizes that fire magic would be incredibly useful in the campaign, so he expands his research into the afterlife, picking up a Hellfire spell.

[SunderedWorldDM]

To rephrase: My calculations tell me, extrapolating from the Spell Point tables, that you can roughly have an MP-point table with a number of MP granted to a spellcaster of level X equal to 2/3 the number of spell points the spell point table would give a spellcaster of level X, and end up with a roughly similar number of spells cast per day.
Oh, now I see. Let me take a look and see if that stacks up better!


I don't think the tags you describe are very useful. In the case of Maeros the Wizard, it's not clear to me which tag the various fire spells are related to, and I don't understand what Intricate or Flexible are supposed to be as tags. Can I just do anything, since everything falls under the auspice of Flexible? For the Cleric, what does Elevate even mean- can I cast levitate?
Yeah, the Wizard one in particular was a dodgy one, I wanted to emphasize versatile, precise spells, but the Tags missed the mark. Meanwhile, with Elevate I meant things like buffs and allowing your allies or yourself to ascend into celestial or heroic sort of archetypes. But I can see why that one is a bit dicey. That was definitely a first draft list, and I plan on overhauling it.


I think that literally, the spellcaster should be able to say how they learned the spell. Here's my example for a wizard:
-At level 1, name your research subject, and/or a mentor with their own research subject.
-Describe how the spells you learn are derived from your research, or your mentor's research.
-Ex. A wizard with the subject of "The spirits of the dead" can make use of the spirits of the dead to understand any language spoken by someone dead, can conjure a swarm of bones to harass their enemy, or can fuse someone with a ghost to give them the unnatural vigor of a zombie.
-If your research subject is accidentally too narrow or useless, you can decide to expand or tweak it as new knowledge about the world arises. Explain how.
-Ex. the wizard realizes that fire magic would be incredibly useful in the campaign, so he expands his research into the afterlife, picking up a Hellfire spell.
That makes sense to me, and I like that, but I have a few little quibbles.
1) I'm drastically limiting spellcaster resources, and this paradigm would lock them in even further, which would probably cause some frustration. (I know that if I picked, say, all afterlife spells, and we encountered, like, a locked and trapped door, I would be kinda screwed by my choice because I never had a chance to interact with that)
2) When things are already so nebulous in this system, I want the idea of each class having a niche somehow to be a constant: you shouldn't be able to confuse a sorcerer and a wizard and a cleric by their spell lists. These would really blend them together: what separates the Spell lists a sorcerer who studied ice magic from a wizard who studied ice magic?
3) Also, this doesn't really carry over to the divine casters. You don't expect a knowledge cleric to not have healing spells and load into divination, so why wouldn't you expect a wizard or a sorcerer not to pick up their ubiquitous spells? This system has a chance of barring those from them if they don't pick a general enough subject.

Though I like the concept, for those reasons, I don't think it's workable as-is. What say you on the matter?

[aimlessPolymath]

That makes sense to me, and I like that, but I have a few little quibbles.
1) I'm drastically limiting spellcaster resources, and this paradigm would lock them in even further, which would probably cause some frustration. (I know that if I picked, say, all afterlife spells, and we encountered, like, a locked and trapped door, I would be kinda screwed by my choice because I never had a chance to interact with that)
2) When things are already so nebulous in this system, I want the idea of each class having a niche somehow to be a constant: you shouldn't be able to confuse a sorcerer and a wizard and a cleric by their spell lists. These would really blend them together: what separates the Spell lists a sorcerer who studied ice magic from a wizard who studied ice magic?
3) Also, this doesn't really carry over to the divine casters. You don't expect a knowledge cleric to not have healing spells and load into divination, so why wouldn't you expect a wizard or a sorcerer not to pick up their ubiquitous spells? This system has a chance of barring those from them if they don't pick a general enough subject.
1) Behold... the skeleton key. Kidding aside, I think it's probably okay that the wizard will not have a spell ready for every occasion. (Also, they can summon a ghost to open the door from the other side.)

2) Sorcerers definitely aren't wizards, and I wouldn't give them the same "research project" requirement as a wizard. An ice magic sorcerer would get it through an ice-aligned bloodline of some kind, which would most likely be draconic (giving them additional access to spells that relate to a dragon's might, senses, wealth, presence, etc.) or elemental (giving them additional access to related elements such as water, as well as planar magic). In contrast, a wizard studying the elemental nature of winter would have some weather-related spells, as well as possibly some spells relating to death or endings. The closest overlap would be a water elemental sorcerer and a wizard studying the elemental plane of water, which... does seem pretty similar, except that sorcerers get their bloodline features to distinguish them somewhat.

3) I do expect that the specifics of the research will change or mutate as new things arise, and I hope that this came through with the Hellfire example. Divine casters having "cure wounds" as practically a required spell is an issue that I'll think about; I'm not aware of other "required spells" that end up everywhere which can't be replaced with a variant (Fireball can be replaced by Iceball, Deathball, etc. as needed, Teleport can become Teleport Through (medium), Fly can become Carry Into Air On A Chariot of X, etc.). Maybe resurrection?
Currently, I'm imagining that all clerics will have their gods' domains, plus the ability to "tend to their flock", in whatever form that takes- unless there are other class staples that I'm not thinking of.

[SunderedWorldDM]

1) Behold... the skeleton key. Kidding aside, I think it's probably okay that the wizard will not have a spell ready for every occasion. (Also, they can summon a ghost to open the door from the other side.)
Ah yes, how could I have forgotten? And yes, wizards don't need to be catch alls. I can actually kill 2 birds with one stone if I give wizards 2 extra Spells and take away Prepare- that'll work a lot better.


2) Sorcerers definitely aren't wizards, and I wouldn't give them the same "research project" requirement as a wizard. An ice magic sorcerer would get it through an ice-aligned bloodline of some kind, which would most likely be draconic (giving them additional access to spells that relate to a dragon's might, senses, wealth, presence, etc.) or elemental (giving them additional access to related elements such as water, as well as planar magic). In contrast, a wizard studying the elemental nature of winter would have some weather-related spells, as well as possibly some spells relating to death or endings. The closest overlap would be a water elemental sorcerer and a wizard studying the elemental plane of water, which... does seem pretty similar, except that sorcerers get their bloodline features to distinguish them somewhat.
Well yes, but even with that, the bloodline Spells and the wizard Spells would look similar even if the sources are different. After all, there's a million ways to get the fireball spell... red dragon blood or afterlife specialty or elementalist or forge cleric. Here, I want to separate mechanics, not flavor. And you haven't convinced me that this system does that.


3) I do expect that the specifics of the research will change or mutate as new things arise, and I hope that this came through with the Hellfire example. Divine casters having "cure wounds" as practically a required spell is an issue that I'll think about; I'm not aware of other "required spells" that end up everywhere which can't be replaced with a variant (Fireball can be replaced by Iceball, Deathball, etc. as needed, Teleport can become Teleport Through (medium), Fly can become Carry Into Air On A Chariot of X, etc.). Maybe resurrection?
Currently, I'm imagining that all clerics will have their gods' domains, plus the ability to "tend to their flock", in whatever form that takes- unless there are other class staples that I'm not thinking of.
I consider "fire"ball a staple for a wizard, charm person a staple for a bard, vine magic stuff staples for a druid. The Tags as they stand, with some modifications, can insinuate those tropes while still keeping them optional. Again, I don't really see something better here, just different. Also, my personal preference is that the broad details of a character's background should stay the same: if they keep revising their course of study, there's not that baseline of consistency anymore; a shrewd player would choose a course of study that would encompass many things with very little modification ("Dungeoneering Arcana!" "Fine Elemental Manipulations!" "Ancient magic!"), or a wishy-washy player would go back and forth. Another downside is that if a player makes a choice to change their specialization later, that might have meant that they retroactively might have had some option that would have changed their choices in the past ("man, if I had fire spells when we were going against the Ice Jarl we could have saved Jim from the Coldwyrms! RIP, Jim.").

I think that, while imperfect, Tags address these issues better than the specialization system does, a lot of the time because Tags IMO are better defined, codified, and more broad in the places I feel this system needs it. Especially since the players will be able to choose their own Spells, they can make the choice for themselves to specialize or generalize. Though, of course, I'm still interested in hearing your reply. What about Tags doesn't cover or is lacking that this paradigm covers? What weaknesses are you seeing in the way it is? (If it's just shoddy keywords, I'm cleaning those up, tomorrow I should have a better list.)

[aimlessPolymath]

My concerns with Tags:
First, I don't see how they solve the issue that a casting of Fireball, as written, is identical between Sorcerer and Wizard; is it an issue with my system but not yours?

Second, issues with the type of word involved in the tags. Some tags describe specific kinds of spells(Nature, Non-Destructive) while others describe secondary attributes of the magic (Vast, Subtle, Unstable, Crude), making it unclear what would be considered legal for a class. There's no clear tag for the wizard that says what kinds of spells they can cast beyond Manipulate or Sight; the other two tags just say that you manipulate intricately or see flexibly.

Additionally, I feel that tags can't generally adequately describe what a class can't do, just some general statements about things it can do. Healing is an intricate process; can a wizard then do it? Mass-healing is Vast, but that doesn't mean a Sorcerer would be expected to do it. Artificer's tags are practically arbitrary; it's not clear that it can't do essentially anything through the medium of a device. Murder is illegal; can a Arcane Trickster cast a Kill That Guy spell?

As I write this, it seems as though one solution would be to move from single-word tags to phrases describing general types of actions; for example, it might be that a sorcerer can use spells that Unleash Primordial Power rather than simply using the Primordial word without context.

[Breccia]

"Should cantrips be a thing?"

I have played since First Edition.

Yes.

Nothing sucked more than being a 1E 1st level wizard who threw their one spell, then stopped being a useful asset to the party.

[BerzerkerUnit]

Here are a couple of alternate magic systems I wrote:

The Artist is a variable effect caster.
https://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/245039

The Calligrapher mixes and matches magic words to create a variety of effects.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1N0ykElGYUv-Cw6L-_TKol6r-grMfOK-JI4tu3FQcJuI

[SunderedWorldDM]

My concerns with Tags:
First, I don't see how they solve the issue that a casting of Fireball, as written, is identical between Sorcerer and Wizard; is it an issue with my system but not yours?
Well, both systems would let a sorcerer and a wizard both cast fireball, but I don't want, say, a cleric of the sun to be able to cast it, while it would be within their domain of study. Tags are my way of not trying to emulate the individual path of study, but the confines of the whole class- I feel like maybe we have different design goals in this case? Or am I misinterpreting you somehow?


Second, issues with the type of word involved in the tags. Some tags describe specific kinds of spells(Nature, Non-Destructive) while others describe secondary attributes of the magic (Vast, Subtle, Unstable, Crude), making it unclear what would be considered legal for a class. There's no clear tag for the wizard that says what kinds of spells they can cast beyond Manipulate or Sight; the other two tags just say that you manipulate intricately or see flexibly.
The idea is that any one spell should somehow tie back to a Tag thematically, not necessarily linguistically. Let me use a set that's not Wizard for a moment, that one was an ill-chosen set of Tags. How 'bout bard? Music, Enchant, Subtle, Assist.

Additionally, I feel that tags can't generally adequately describe what a class can't do, just some general statements about things it can do. Healing is an intricate process; can a wizard then do it? Mass-healing is Vast, but that doesn't mean a Sorcerer would be expected to do it. Artificer's tags are practically arbitrary; it's not clear that it can't do essentially anything through the medium of a device. Murder is illegal; can a Arcane Trickster cast a Kill That Guy spell?

As I write this, it seems as though one solution would be to move from single-word tags to phrases describing general types of actions; for example, it might be that a sorcerer can use spells that Unleash Primordial Power rather than simply using the Primordial word without context.[/QUOTE]
Ah, now I see. That's a keen idea, and that was kind of what I was getting at with Tags, so I appreciate you seeing through the bad design choice to the good one. Let me stew on that to see if I can find some way to expand the Tags into short statements without making them any less punchy or memorable! Thanks so much.


"Should cantrips be a thing?"

I have played since First Edition.

Yes.

Nothing sucked more than being a 1E 1st level wizard who threw their one spell, then stopped being a useful asset to the party.
Yes, I agree with you, but I've been thinking of another way to give magey-types combat ability outside of spellcasting to a limited degree. For now, the idea is that instead of cantrips, every (1/2 or greater, Arcane Tricksters and such are fine without it I think) spellcaster who would have cantrips instead has the following feature:
Sundry Lore
Your study of magic has included some rudimentary studies into monstrous physiology. You can spend an action studying a non-humanoid creature you are in combat with. For the rest of that combat, you gain a +2 to damage against that creature (please note; not all creatures of that type, but the individual). The only exception is if the creature is not as it appears in some way: protected by illusion magic or shapeshifted or the like. If that is the case, after you use your action to size up the creature, you will be told that the creature does not behave normally/has some inconsistency, and you will not get the bonus to damage.

What does everyone think on the matter? I like it because it solidifies the idea of mages as lore dispensers, and the fact that they can study a creature and know its weak point resonates with me. It makes combat an option for mages, but not an appealing one, which I think is a very good fit. However, maybe a full action is a bit too much? Maybe?

[SunderedWorldDM]

Artificer- INT, ½, Memorized, Repository (Blueprints)
Tags: Create Unstable Gadgets
Bard- CHA, 1, Memorized, Repository (Fake Book)
Tags: Subtly Enchant and Assist (not as happy with this one)
Cleric- WIS, 1, Prep, Repository (Scripture)
Tags: Pray for Benignance (not as happy with this one)
Druid- WIS, 1, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Invoke Nature’s Wrath
Eldritch Knight- INT, ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Arcane Textbook)
Tags: Hone your Body for War (this one I really like. I want most of them to feel and work like this one)
Paladin- CHA, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Rebuke Enemies of Order (not happy with this one)
Ranger- WIS, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Emulate the Beast
Arcane Trickster- INT (CHA?), ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Stolen Notes)
Tags: Whisper their Epitaph (eh. too poetic?)
Sorcerer- CHA, 1, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Unleash your Vast Power (not happy with this one)
Warlock?- CHA, funky, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Commune with the Occult
Wizard- INT, 1, Memorized (+2 Spells), Repository (Spellbook)
Tags: Manipulate the World (not happy with this one)

So I've consolidated the Tags into a sentence, and I'm not sure if they "work" yet, but I think this is a start. My ideal is to get most of them to work like the Eldritch Knight's: that's a clear, flavorful statement encompassing the types of magic that they use. It doesn't make sense for an EK to cast, say, Summon Wild Boar, but it DOES make sense for them to cast Boar's Form, and that fine distinction is labeled. I'm just concerned for the full casters: am I being too restrictive with their tags? And does this system still hold up?

Please, if you're going to be critiquing these, use a set of Tags that I haven't labeled as needing changing: I would prefer you find flaws in the system at its best while I'm still hammering out the kinks in the weak points on my end.

[aimlessPolymath]

Two thoughts.
First, eldritch knights in core have access to abjurations and evocations from the wizard list, and the blasty spells don't seem contained in the current phrasing, even though a player might want to be throwing fireballs like they did before the change.

Second, I think you can use more than one phrase for a class! The artificer Constructs Tools of War, but also Mixes Alchemical Concoctions, for example.

Edit:
Third, reduce the adjectives and adverbs in favor of defining the subjects of magic that they can cover! Vast for the sorcerer is absolutely useless and you can remove it without effectively changing their spell list.

For the wizard, Manipulate Unnatural Forces may be the phrase you are looking for.


I don't want, say, a cleric of the sun to be able to cast it, while it would be within their domain of study.
In a twist you may not have noticed, in core 5e, the Light Domain provides fireball as a spell known at 5th level.

Bards: Change Assist to Inspire and Enchant to Entrance. Subtly is a bit iffy, and I can see it going or staying.
Sorcerer: Primordial was the strongest word from the original tags, and I think it should come back.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Two thoughts.
First, eldritch knights in core have access to abjurations and evocations from the wizard list, and the blasty spells don't seem contained in the current phrasing, even though a player might want to be throwing fireballs like they did before the change.
Do you have an idea for a Tag that would encompass that theme and fit the established tone? I agree that that's an area yet to be covered, but I struggle to come up with something that's cohesive and accomplishes that.


Second, I think you can use more than one phrase for a class! The artificer Constructs Tools of War, but also Mixes Alchemical Concoctions, for example.
Second draft incoming with two Tags per class, though that's the highest I'll go: if I can't describe it in two memorable Tags, it's either too complex and needs better Tags/explanation and needs to become less bloated.


Edit:
Third, reduce the adjectives and adverbs in favor of defining the subjects of magic that they can cover! Vast for the sorcerer is absolutely useless and you can remove it without effectively changing their spell list.
A good idea. Let me go through and figure that one out.


For the wizard, Manipulate Unnatural Forces may be the phrase you are looking for.
Great suggestion! Implemented.


In a twist you may not have noticed, in core 5e, the Light Domain provides fireball as a spell known at 5th level.
But that would be covered not by the core cleric, but by an additional Tag from the subclass: Light the World (or something), which would have Fireball well in its purview.


Bards: Change Assist to Inspire and Enchant to Entrance. Subtly is a bit iffy, and I can see it going or staying.
Sorcerer: Primordial was the strongest word from the original tags, and I think it should come back.
Good plan. Let me try that on for size.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Okay, so here are my new and improved Tags:

Artificer- INT, ½, Memorized, Repository (Blueprints)
Tags: Create Unstable Masterworks, Concoct Alchemical Aids

Bard- CHA, 1, Memorized, Repository (Fake Book)
Tags: Weave Magic into Music, Subtly Inspire and Enchant

Cleric- WIS, 1, Prep, Repository (Scripture)
Tags: Pray for Benignance, Dispense Exaltation and Damnation

Druid- WIS, 1, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Invoke Nature’s Wrath, Honor the Ancient Ways

Eldritch Knight- INT, ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Arcane Textbook)
Tags: Hone your Body for War, Weaponize your Surroundings

Paladin- CHA, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Rebuke Enemies of Order, Stay Stalwart

Ranger- WIS, ½, Prep, No Repository
Tags: Emulate the Beast, Exemplify the Hunter

Arcane Trickster- INT (CHA?), ⅓, Memorized, Repository (Stolen Notes)
Tags: Whisper their Epitaph, SOMETHING

Sorcerer- CHA, 1, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Unleash Primordial Power, Tap Into your Bloodline

Warlock?- CHA, funky, Memorized, No Repository
Tags: Commune with the Occult, Gaze Into the Darkness

Wizard- INT, 1, Memorized (+2 Spells), Repository (Spellbook)
Tags: Manipulate Preternatural Forces, Study the Beyond

A subclass will provide an extra Tag, at the DM’s discretion. Not gonna write those all down because they’re intuitive.

Tags I'm still not happy with and why: Druid: Maybe? Feels a little hollow. EK: still not happy with how it's phrased. Some other way to include abjuration? Paladin: I don't know, like Druid, feels a bit hollow. AT: Need to come up with a second Tag. Warlock: too redundant? Wizard: Happy with the ring of the Tags, but they don't really encompass a lot of things I envision wizards doing, particularly in terms of "dungeoneering spells" (knock's what's standing out to me now).
Comments on changes/not changes: Kept "enchant" in the bard because I want a bard to be able to sing a song about a sword and have it be magical, and entrance doesn't do that. The double meaning serves a purpose!

I think that I'm satisfied enough with Tags as they are to move on to some of the gritty mechanical details. Here are some of the things that I still need help working out:
-I wasn't in the loop about Artificers being 2/3 casters and I don't know how to fit that into the paradigm. Just give them Sundry Lore and a couple extra MP occasionally? That's what I'm leaning towards now, any other ideas on how to handle it?
-Sorcerers: I want to break down the distinction between MP and Sorcery Points, making Metamagic just other ways to Boost a spell in some way. How many extra MP should I give? Are there any pitfalls to just making the simplest possible conversion?
-Warlocks: still struggling with them. I'm almost considering just converting their spells to Spells and keeping the slot mechanics for them, but then Mystic Arcanum gets messy quickly... I'm thinking that Warlock will need some really significant adaptation to work, which is a shame, because I really love the Warlock.
-Wizard: I think just giving them 2 extra Spells from the get go is enough to set them apart from other arcane casters but not making them full Prepared. I think that quick and dirty patch is good as is, but of course, I want to make the process transparent!
-I want to make Repositories more significant without creating messy granular rules or hinging too much on them. Are they significant enough now?
-Is Sundry Lore enough to make up for cantrips?
-Multiclassing rules: I think what I have now is relatively sound, but who knows?
-MP table still in the works, shifting some numbers about to see what looks and feels good.

Some current details I have recorded, sorry for the poor presentation, I'm not good at making rulesets pretty and easy to read:
Spell (Capital S): Name. Sentence, description of effect. Boost: Effect upon boost.
Spell List: A number of spells equal to your SB (Spell Bonus) that you have available to cast at a given time.
Spell Bonus: Proficiency plus casting stat. (Called Spell Attack Bonus in DnD.) Add 8 to it to get your Spell DC.
Spell DC: As PHB! 8 plus Spell Bonus. Just here for posterity. They still exist, folks.
MP: Mana Points. Spend 1 (or more) to cast a Spell. Regain all upon a long rest.
Boost: When you use more than 1 MP to cast a spell to get a greater effect.
Memorized: You can’t change your Spell list once you have it- only learn more spells.
Prepared: After every rest, you may choose one Spell off your list and change it.
Repository: If you keep physical copies of your Spells, you need them to regain MP/prep Spells. (The DM can attack you by the spellbook! Muahaha.)
Tags: Suggestions for spell effects for each class. If a spell falls too far outside of the Tags, you can’t learn it.
Cantrips: If you had cantrips, you now instead have the class ability Sundry Lore.
Non-spellcaster spells: If you get spells per day from a race or class ability, use the PHB spells for those. For example, a High Elf would still choose a wizard cantrip and use it as normal, and a warlock with Mask of Many Faces can use that as normal. Essentially, the text of the PHB spell is assumed to be copied into the ability, if that makes sense

Sundry Lore
Your study of magic has included some rudimentary studies into monstrous physiology. You can spend an action studying a non-humanoid creature you are in combat with. For the rest of that combat, you gain a +2 to damage against that creature (please note; not all creatures of that type, but the individual). The only exception is if the creature is not as it appears in some way: protected by illusion magic or shapeshifted or the like. If that is the case, after you use your action to size up the creature, you will be told that the creature does not behave normally/has some inconsistency, and you will not get the bonus to damage.

Multiclassing
When you multiclass, add your new Tags to your list. Track your MP in a pool, but you advance as if you were in each class separately (i.e. a Wizard 2 Cleric 3 would have 6 MP: 2 from Wizard 2, 4 from Cleic 3). Everything else is the same: you get no extra spells from multiclassing except from features that would give you extra spells (see above).

(WOW this is getting complicated. Well, lot of words. Complicated it is not!)

[aimlessPolymath]

Artificer: Looks good all around- I like "alchemical aids" to clarify that it's meant to be buffs, and "unstable masterworks" is very evocative.

Bard: Tag 2 is great, tag 1 needs work; "magic" is too generic and it doesn't clearly do anything that tag 2 doesn't already cover. Sound blasts?

Cleric: Looks fairly solid; you could probably twiddle the first tag somewhat to "Tend to the Flock" to encompass emotional effects (ex. granting hope to people, priests of evil gods manipulating the faithful through fear), plus some divination to solve people's problems for them (calling back to the original Oracle of Delhi). Don't forget they get a bonus tag relating to their god's domain. Edit: Saw that subclasses grant an appropriate tag.

Druid: The first tag is pretty good, the second less so due to vagueness (what sorts of spells have the function of honoring ancient ways? Some kind of ceremony-spell?). I'd switch from "wrath" to "spirits", losing some blasty power for a much broader set of effects such as shapechanging, communing with plants, summoning animals and fey, etc. For the second tag, something that mentions the elements might be appropriate, encompassing weather, natural disasters, etc. Embrace Natural Spirits and Invoke Elemental Wrath?

Eldritch Knight: Weaponizing Surroundings basically boils down to animating objects, telekinesis, and some landscape-shaping. I'd go for "Smith Destruction Into A Weapon", letting the user throw around flaming swords, launch arrows that freeze their targets, etc. Maybe "Empower tools elementally"? It would be nice to be able to make winged boots to fly.

Paladin: Looks good to me, though possibly lacking in utility- it breaks enemies and protects itself. Perhaps something that lets you seek out your foes? That might fall into the subclass requirement.

Ranger: 10/10, perfect.

Arcane Trickster: "Conceal with shadow", maybe. Something relating to shadow would let you animate your shadow for pseudo-telekinesis, as well as cover most stealth-related magics.

Sorcerer: Tap Into Your Bloodline is great.

Warlock: These are both information-gathering tags; I suggest something like Unleash Granted Powers. Maybe that goes in the subclass. Bargain for Power, which would cover basically any kind of spell but attach a price tag?

Wizard: Looks good; there's an argument that Study the Beyond would let a player learn new spells from things they study. Frankly, Knock is sort of a bizarre spell, in that it demands some sort of magical definition of a "lock". What happens behind-the-scenes when a lock is unlocked? Perhaps the lock is possessed by a bound poltergeist, which unlocks the door?

[SunderedWorldDM]

Artificer: Looks good all around- I like "alchemical aids" to clarify that it's meant to be buffs, and "unstable masterworks" is very evocative.
Thanks so much! Heavily inspired by your sample tags. :smalltongue:


Bard: Tag 2 is great, tag 1 needs work; "magic" is too generic and it doesn't clearly do anything that tag 2 doesn't already cover. Sound blasts?
Yeah, that one is kind of weak. I wanted to make sure it was clear that all sorts of sonar/musical effects were on the table. Maybe a modifier would help. Let me think on that one.
EDIT: Weave Power into Music also works, gives that offensive edge while allowing for other effects as well.


Cleric: Looks fairly solid; you could probably twiddle the first tag somewhat to "Tend to the Flock" to encompass emotional effects (ex. granting hope to people, priests of evil gods manipulating the faithful through fear), plus some divination to solve people's problems for them (calling back to the original Oracle of Delhi). Don't forget they get a bonus tag relating to their god's domain. Edit: Saw that subclasses grant an appropriate tag.
I think the first Tag covers the first point, and the Damnation part the second. Divination currently doesn't fit too well, maybe if I just made the first tag "Beseech the Gods" it would work? Still covers healing but now also includes divination.
EDIT: Beseech the Gods it is.


Druid: The first tag is pretty good, the second less so due to vagueness (what sorts of spells have the function of honoring ancient ways? Some kind of ceremony-spell?). I'd switch from "wrath" to "spirits", losing some blasty power for a much broader set of effects such as shapechanging, communing with plants, summoning animals and fey, etc. For the second tag, something that mentions the elements might be appropriate, encompassing weather, natural disasters, etc. Embrace Natural Spirits and Invoke Elemental Wrath?
I like the idea of nature as wrathful, so I think I'll keep that as is. I like the idea of spirits, so maybe we could do Honor the Spirits as the second tag? Or Embrace the Spirits? I like the sound of those, let me play with them.
EDIT: Currently my plan is "Venerate the Spirits". Nature can stay wrathful.


Eldritch Knight: Weaponizing Surroundings basically boils down to animating objects, telekinesis, and some landscape-shaping. I'd go for "Smith Destruction Into A Weapon", letting the user throw around flaming swords, launch arrows that freeze their targets, etc. Maybe "Empower tools elementally"? It would be nice to be able to make winged boots to fly.
"Smith Destruction..." is a bit long for my tastes, the first Tag is already a bit long. Empower sounds good, but you lose me after that. Tools sounds artifier-y and elements aren't what I think of when I think EK. Maybe "Arcane Offense"? That seems pretty good to me, pretty simply covers the blasty spells and keeps with the theme. Let me think about that some more, I think I'm getting close.
EDIT: War Arcana is even better. Let me add that. EK Tags: Hone your Body for Battle, War Arcana.


Paladin: Looks good to me, though possibly lacking in utility- it breaks enemies and protects itself. Perhaps something that lets you seek out your foes? That might fall into the subclass requirement.
I was including the idea of seeking within the retribution, I would let a player take seeking spells under that Tag. Though I see what you mean. I'm going to go through a bunch of synonym generators and see what I can come up with.
EDIT: We're going with a nice "Hunt enemies of Order". Also, Stay Stalwart can be ally buffs and heals too, so that's not very limited, those two together actually cover a lot of the core Pally spells.


Ranger: 10/10, perfect.
Thanks, I try.


Arcane Trickster: "Conceal with shadow", maybe. Something relating to shadow would let you animate your shadow for pseudo-telekinesis, as well as cover most stealth-related magics.
Maybe even just "Mold Shadow"? That widens their options further. I could totally imagine an AT unloading a lot of their MP to make a shadow clone or something.
EDIT: Yeah, Mold Shadow works great.


Sorcerer: Tap Into Your Bloodline is great.
Thanks!


Warlock: These are both information-gathering tags; I suggest something like Unleash Granted Powers. Maybe that goes in the subclass. Bargain for Power, which would cover basically any kind of spell but attach a price tag?
Yeah, the subclass tag might be Unleash (Infernal, Fey, Eldritch, Necrotic, what have ye) Power. I think the themes of darkness and madness generate a lot of useful Spells, and they relate to the Tags sufficiently. Let me think on that one, but I think that if these don't change too much, I won't be devastated.
EDIT: Trying "Extort Secrets" out for a spin. Opens some social spell angles as well as maybe some summoning. Probably fruitless, but maybe it'll lead to a better idea.
EDIT EDIT: Even a few minutes and I know it sucks. Oh well. I do like "Extort" as a verb, though, so let me find a keen noun.
EDIT EDIT EDIT: Doesn't even need a noun. "Manipulate and Extort", here we come.


Wizard: Looks good; there's an argument that Study the Beyond would let a player learn new spells from things they study. Frankly, Knock is sort of a bizarre spell, in that it demands some sort of magical definition of a "lock". What happens behind-the-scenes when a lock is unlocked? Perhaps the lock is possessed by a bound poltergeist, which unlocks the door?
I always thought it was more asking the pins to vibrate and unlock, but that's just me. Who knows, maybe the Wizard should have never had Knock in the first place- find a damn key elsewhere in the dungeon!

New Tags post when I get the Warlock figured out. Also, if you don't mind checking out the other mechanics and giving them a look over?

[SunderedWorldDM]

Tags and a few other things.

Artificer- Tags: Create Unstable Masterworks, Concoct Alchemical Aids
Special Rules: +2 MP at Level 1
Bard- Tags: Weave Power into Music, Subtly Inspire and Enchant
Cleric- Tags: Beseech the Gods, Dispense Exaltation and Damnation
Druid- Tags: Invoke Nature’s Wrath, Honor the Spirits
Eldritch Knight- Tags: Hone your Body for Battle, War Arcana
Paladin- Tags: Hunt Enemies of Order, Stay Stalwart
Special Rules: Use MP for Smite
Ranger- Tags: Emulate the Beast, Exemplify the Hunter
Arcane Trickster- Tags: Whisper their Epitaph, Mold Shadow
Sorcerer- Tags: Unleash Primordial Power, Tap Into your Bloodline
Special Rules: No Sorcery Points. Instead, Extra MP equal to half SP, and use Metamagic as additional Boost options for Spells (you can stack Boosts!)
Warlock- Tags: Commune with the Occult, Manipulate and Extort
Special Rules: Something really crazy (also, no SL, make EB a class feature)
Wizard- Tags: Manipulate Preternatural Forces, Study the Beyond
Special Rules: +2 Spells at Level 1 (even in multiclassing)

A subclass will provide an extra Tag, at the DM’s discretion. Not gonna write those all down because they’re intuitive.

[aimlessPolymath]

For other mechanics
-Multiclassing is poorly defined when a class that is Memorized crosses a class that is Prepared. Additionally, two Memorized classes crossing gives no opportunity to gain a new spell unless you're at a level where your proficiency bonus changes. I suggest letting Memorized classes swap out one spell at each level-up.
-Sundry Lore fills one action, but then... +2 to damage with what? Are we back to the days of crossbow wizards again? This doesn't scale, either.

[SunderedWorldDM]

For other mechanics
-Multiclassing is poorly defined when a class that is Memorized crosses a class that is Prepared. Additionally, two Memorized classes crossing gives no opportunity to gain a new spell unless you're at a level where your proficiency bonus changes. I suggest letting Memorized classes swap out one spell at each level-up.
You're right about Mem/Prep. I should think about that. I don't like the idea of Memorized casters ever being able to "unlearn" a spell and replace it with a new one, but let me think about how to allow someone to multiclass Mem/Mem.


-Sundry Lore fills one action, but then... +2 to damage with what? Are we back to the days of crossbow wizards again? This doesn't scale, either.
Let me revise that so it's clearer and scales better (though the higher level you are, the less you have to worry about not having MP to burn). +Proficiency to damage with weapons.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Here are the beginnings of me explaining and calcifying the system in a way that other people can make sense of it...

Okay, so you make up spells, and now they’re capital S Spells. And you use Mana Points, or MP, to cast those spells. Each Spell has a name, an effect, and a boost, which is what happens when you spend more than 1 MP to cast it. You know a number of Spells at 1st level equal to your Casting Stat plus your Proficiency Bonus (CS plus PB). They’re in one of two modes, depending on your class: Memorized, which means you can’t change them, and Prepared, which means that after a rest you can choose to switch one Spell out for another. (The distinction between these modes becomes important in multiclassing, we’ll get there.)

But you can’t just choose your Spells willy-nilly. Your class (and possibly subclass) will give you Tags: these are short sentences that vaguely describe what your Spells should do. Use common sense here, but feel free to stretch the definitions a bit for something cool, and be sure to check your Spells with the DM before play.

So at Level 1 you have a pool of MP and a list of Spells you’ve made, which are either Prepared or Memorized. Again, to cast a Spell, you use an action to spend 1 or more MP. The DM will then adjudicate what effect the Spell has- perhaps it’s damage, or a door unlocking, or a creature being summoned. Spells will have effects more or less similar to spells you’ve seen in the PHB and other DnD books.

There are some other special things that some casters have access to. One of these are Repositories. A spellcaster that uses a Repository must have it on hand whenever they take a rest, else they cannot prepare spells or regain MP. If your Repository is ever destroyed or lost, well, good luck- you’ll probably have to spend a bunch of time and gold to get it back, or go on some quest to find a suitable replacement. In addition, since cantrips aren’t a thing anymore, any full/half caster who would have cantrips instead have the following feature:

Sundry Lore
You can examine a non-humanoid creature and ascertain its weak points from your studies in magizoological anatomy. If you use an action inspecting an individual creature, you gain a bonus to weapon damage against it equal to your Proficiency Bonus for the rest of the combat. However, if the creature’s nature/species identity is being masked by an illusion spell or shapeshifted in some way, you will not gain the bonus, but you will learn of the creature’s disguise.

Incoming explanation of multiclassing rules, adjudicating Spells, a master list of every caster class and some of the necessary stats, and MP/level tables.

EDIT: Classes!
Class- STAT, full/half/third, Mem/Prep (Rep, SunLor)
Tags: “Tag 1”, “Tag 2”, “Subclass Tag formula”
Special Rules: if they exist, they’re here

Artificer- INT, half, Memorized (Repository: blueprints)
Tags: “Create Unstable Masterworks”, “Concoct Alchemical Aids”
Special Rules: +2 MP at Level 1

Bard- CHA, full, Memorized (Sundry Lore)
Tags: “Weave Power into Music”, “Subtly Inspire and Enchant”

Cleric- WIS, full, Prepared (Repository: scripture)
Tags: “Beseech the Gods”, “Dispense Exaltation and Damnation”, “Pray for (Domain)”

Druid- WIS, full, Prepared (Sundry Lore)
Tags: “Invoke Nature’s Wrath”, “Honor the Spirits”

Eldritch Knight- INT, third, Memorized
Tags: “Hone your Body for Battle”, “War Arcana”

Paladin- CHA, half, Prepared
Tags: “Hunt Enemies of Order”, “Stay Stalwart”, “Foster (Oath)”
Special Rules: Use MP for Smite (max 5 MP or half level, whichever is lower)

Ranger- WIS, half, Prepared
Tags: “Emulate the Beast”, “Exemplify the Hunter”

Arcane Trickster- INT, third, Memorized
Tags: “Mold Shadow”, “Whisper their Epitaph”

Sorcerer- CHA, full, Memorized (Sundry Lore)
Tags: “Unleash Primordial Power”, “Tap Into your Bloodline”
Special Rules: No Sorcery Points. Instead, gain extra MP equal to half the number of SP you would have, and use Metamagic as additional Boost options for Spells (you can stack Boosts!)

Warlock- CHA, full/half/third, Memorized (Sundry Lore)
Tags: “Commune with the Occult”, “Manipulate and Extort”, “Channel (Patron) Power”
Special Rules: strange system, TBA

Wizard- INT, full, Memorized (Repository: spellbook, Sundry Lore)
Tags: “Manipulate Preternatural Forces”, “Study the Beyond”
Special Rules: +2 Spells at Level 1

[aimlessPolymath]

Spoke with my brother, who had several concerns:
-First, nonlinear scaling. Teleport transports someone wildly further than Dimension Door, which transports someone wildly further than Misty Step. Fireball is equivalent to a 3 MP expenditure as a 3rd level spell, but deals significantly more than 4d8 damage on average, which means that the 1 MP = 1 spell level equivalence breaks down.

-Second, abilities that are difficult to scale down to a 1 MP equivalent. Fly maintains nearly all its utility (if not combat use) when scaled down to a 10 ft fly speed. Polymorph is a 4th level spell for which even 1 minute of activity is enough to end a combat.

-Third, nondamaging combat spells scale much less clearly than damaging spells; how does Silence work at 1 MP vs. 5 MP? What about 10 MP- is there a measurable difference?

-Fourth, sticking memorized casters with their initial spells known means that spellcasters will have to take spells with the expectation of being stuck with them for multiple levels; a poor initial choice of spells will lead to a heavily restricted spell list for the rest of the character's career (for example, your example wizard took two different flame spells- he'd better hope that they're not redundant, or that he doesn't find himself in the Plane of Fire!). Alternatively, if a campaign ends earlier than expected, a player that planned for later levels might find that their payoff never materialized. Switching out a spell every level alleviates this.

-Fifth, with a very small number of spells known, niche utility and quality-of-life spells such as Comprehend Languages and Create Food and Water become much less justifiable to take early on; it seems unlikely that these spells can compete for spells known.

[SunderedWorldDM]

Spoke with my brother, who had several concerns:
-First, nonlinear scaling. Teleport transports someone wildly further than Dimension Door, which transports someone wildly further than Misty Step. Fireball is equivalent to a 3 MP expenditure as a 3rd level spell, but deals significantly more than 4d8 damage on average, which means that the 1 MP = 1 spell level equivalence breaks down.
In this system, Misty Step, Dimension Door, and Teleport are all probably just different versions of one teleportation Spell, call it whatever you'd like but the effects all align and scale that way. Also, have I shown my system for calculating spell damage/healing yet? Fireball would fall under that jurisdiction. These concerns come from the mindset that all 5e spells need to have a 1 to 1 Spell equivalent of equal power, and that's simply not true. A lot of the problem with the 5e system arises from these imbalances within level and spell redundancy (Reincarnate and Resurrection and Revivify, oh my)! Under this system, again, all or most of those would fall under one Spell name (Return to Life, perhaps) and scale. Maybe 1 MP only restores Tiny creatures recently dead, but at every level it would have some effect.


-Second, abilities that are difficult to scale down to a 1 MP equivalent. Fly maintains nearly all its utility (if not combat use) when scaled down to a 10 ft fly speed. Polymorph is a 4th level spell for which even 1 minute of activity is enough to end a combat.
In cases like Fly, you would parse down duration instead. You can certainly fly for one round, but better hope you get to where you need to be, and you don't have the flyby trait, so attacks of opportunity are still a thing! In the case of Polymorph, perhaps the save DC starts at -5, and you use MP to boost the save? So a low level wizard can still take Forcible Shapechange or something, but the utility only occurs by the time they have enough to make their save mean anything, especially if you put a hard cap on the duration.

This spell system is an exercise in DM creativity and how to make powerful effects balanced for all levels of play, and that's a feature, not a bug!


-Third, nondamaging combat spells scale much less clearly than damaging spells; how does Silence work at 1 MP vs. 5 MP? What about 10 MP- is there a measurable difference?
Range and duration. 1 MP silences a 10-ft bubble for 1d6 rounds (or something), but a 10 MP Silence spell would be epic- making a city silent for a day, or permanently removing a creature's voice, or enchanting a set of armor to have a +10 on Stealth checks, depending on how the player wants to use it. Even if the difference level-by-level isn't as big, over time, a player will (hopefully) see that they have the agency to create powerful magic effects inside of a flexible system.


-Fourth, sticking memorized casters with their initial spells known means that spellcasters will have to take spells with the expectation of being stuck with them for multiple levels; a poor initial choice of spells will lead to a heavily restricted spell list for the rest of the character's career (for example, your example wizard took two different flame spells- he'd better hope that they're not redundant, or that he doesn't find himself in the Plane of Fire!). Alternatively, if a campaign ends earlier than expected, a player that planned for later levels might find that their payoff never materialized. Switching out a spell every level alleviates this.
Brief note: I've written a new example with the new Tags which alleviates the two fire spell problem. In addition, I would say that this is a great motivator for players to seek out new Spells in other mage's Repositories or in dungeons. Being stuck with a list and not liking it can lead to an epic adventure or a really cool encounter of breaking into a wizards tower to nab that ice Spell you really want. Having the ability to easily gain Spells through adventure and offer them as rewards like magic weapons and armor to martial characters a) makes the DM's job handling treasure a lot easier and b) makes playing a Memorized caster more fun, as you always have the option to seek something new.


-Fifth, with a very small number of spells known, niche utility and quality-of-life spells such as Comprehend Languages and Create Food and Water become much less justifiable to take early on; it seems unlikely that these spells can compete for spells known.
So you broaden the terms. Create Food and Water could just be a low-MP version of Hero's Feast- take that at first level! Comprehend Languages is an idiosyncrasy, but if you widened it to include arcane script and dead languages, perhaps the utility improves, especially if your DM knows you have that spell: more MP spent, the more strange/advanced the text or speech you understand, and the more advanced/longer dead language known. Change the name to Universal Comprehension and you'll be good to go!

[aimlessPolymath]

In this system, Misty Step, Dimension Door, and Teleport are all probably just different versions of one teleportation Spell, call it whatever you'd like but the effects all align and scale that way. Also, have I shown my system for calculating spell damage/healing yet? Fireball would fall under that jurisdiction. These concerns come from the mindset that all 5e spells need to have a 1 to 1 Spell equivalent of equal power, and that's simply not true. A lot of the problem with the 5e system arises from these imbalances within level and spell redundancy (Reincarnate and Resurrection and Revivify, oh my)! Under this system, again, all or most of those would fall under one Spell name (Return to Life, perhaps) and scale. Maybe 1 MP only restores Tiny creatures recently dead, but at every level it would have some effect.
I'm not sure that you've shown me the system- is it the (MP+1)*1d8/1d4 one? I think that doesn't match up with the system goal that a spell of level X is roughly equivalent to an expenditure of X MP, given that Disintegrate (for example) is a 5th level spell that deals 10d6+40 damage; blasting spells do not generally deal 1dX per spell level unless you're only upcasting level 1 spells.


In cases like Fly, you would parse down duration instead. You can certainly fly for one round, but better hope you get to where you need to be, and you don't have the flyby trait, so attacks of opportunity are still a thing!
This generates another concern about nonlinear scaling; if 1 MP is one round, what do 2 and 3 MP represent? One minute? Two minutes?

In the case of Polymorph, perhaps the save DC starts at -5, and you use MP to boost the save? So a low level wizard can still take Forcible Shapechange or something, but the utility only occurs by the time they have enough to make their save mean anything, especially if you put a hard cap on the duration.

I have a concern about a DM's ability to adjudicate these effects fairly, particularly if effects scale nonlinearly (ex. every additional MP spent on Teleport is roughly a factor of 10 increase in distance, going from core-equivalencies). You've described individual cases for the level of an effect at 1 MP or 5 MP, but it's not clear to me how a DM will generally convert a nondamaging spell from a sentence to a mechanical effect. (1 MP silence has a duration of 1d6 rounds, 1 MP fly lasts 1 round, 1 MP Aura Vision lasts 1 minute- what's the pattern, if I'm a DM deciding on the spot?).

For example, you've adequately described how 1 MP Polymorph scales down, but it's still an extremely strong buff. Is this intentional? Would you revise spell descriptions once they've already been written down (generating inconsistency)? Given that prepared casters can generate a totally new spell every day, how does a DM define a roughly appropriate effect for some expenditure of MP, or determine a MP cost for some MP expenditure?

[SunderedWorldDM]

I'm not sure that you've shown me the system- is it the (MP+1)*1d8/1d4 one? I think that doesn't match up with the system goal that a spell of level X is roughly equivalent to an expenditure of X MP, given that Disintegrate (for example) is a 5th level spell that deals 10d6+40 damage; blasting spells do not generally deal 1dX per spell level unless you're only upcasting level 1 spells.
Again, it's meant to not align with the existing 5e spells, but be more in line with the damage output of a martial class. One of the goals of this system is to cut down LFQW, and spells like Disintegrate are, in my mind, pitfalls to be avoided. The designers of 5e have repeatedly and plainly stated that some spells, like Fireball and (presumably) Disintegrate, are not balanced for the level they can be taken at. Allowing a caster to drop a bunch of MP on a spell to produce a similarly "disbalanced", powerful effect means more of a penalty later in this system then in 5e, and I think that's a good thing. (Also, I've been using this damage house rule for my "non-funky slots" 5e games, and I think it's worked swimmingly thusfar, so despite the fact that the spells in the book suggest otherwise, I really like the levels of damage output this creates.)


This generates another concern about nonlinear scaling; if 1 MP is one round, what do 2 and 3 MP represent? One minute? Two minutes?
Depends on the spell. For Fly, perhaps it's round-by-round: spend 3 MP to be airborne for three rounds. For Arcane Sight, perhaps it's a minute scale. Generally, in the freeform MP system, it would be wiser for the DM to rule linear scales than nonlinear ones, and that creates inconsistencies with how 5e handles spells, but the point of this system isn't to scale with 5e's casters, it's to scale with 5e's martials, in a way. But you're right, I should and will add notes on how to judge things like duration, divination, save-or-sucks, and those sorts of things in a manner that will give DMs enough confidence to make these sorts of rulings.


I have a concern about a DM's ability to adjudicate these effects fairly, particularly if effects scale nonlinearly (ex. every additional MP spent on Teleport is roughly a factor of 10 increase in distance, going from core-equivalencies). You've described individual cases for the level of an effect at 1 MP or 5 MP, but it's not clear to me how a DM will generally convert a nondamaging spell from a sentence to a mechanical effect. (1 MP silence has a duration of 1d6 rounds, 1 MP fly lasts 1 round, 1 MP Aura Vision lasts 1 minute- what's the pattern, if I'm a DM deciding on the spot?).
And that's part of the magic of the system, the DM and the player get to decide that together when they make the Spell. Perhaps there should be some guidelines (for out-of-combat passive Spells, 1 MP = 1 min, for in-combat long-term Spells, 1 MP= 1 round/a d6 timer dice, for save-or-bads 1 MP= +1 to Save DC), and I should (and will!) codify them, but the ambiguity of what a Spell should do at a given level or MP expenditure is something that is desired, because it gets players asking things like "how many MP will it take for me to do X?" (i.e. "How many MP to use my Thorn Restraint to crush this magic obelisk that's charmed our buddy Bob?"), and the DM should reply with a vague idea of what "level" of spell you would need in DnD ("You would have to at least use Fireball on this thing, so 3 MP and you can crush it enough that the effect wears off"). If you delineate and restrain things too much, and provide too many hard guidelines, magic isn't magic anymore, it's swinging a different type of sword at a different type of goblin, which is the trap that I feel 5e fell into and what I'm trying to correct with all of this (intentional) ambiguity and mercuriality.

Let me rephrase for brevity and clarity: one of the reasons I'm creating this system is so that the utility of Spells are not defined by mechanics, but by theme, and I also assume that a DM worth their salt should be trained in identifying player intent and making it happen within the intended rules of a game. Levels and slots put too many boxes around (more advanced) players and DMs who want to use magic creatively, and this system is a way to port in that "balanced ambiguity", if that makes sense.


For example, you've adequately described how 1 MP Polymorph scales down, but it's still an extremely strong buff. Is this intentional? Would you revise spell descriptions once they've already been written down (generating inconsistency)? Given that prepared casters can generate a totally new spell every day, how does a DM define a roughly appropriate effect for some expenditure of MP, or determine a MP cost for some MP expenditure?
(One thing to note is that it's no longer Polymorph, it's Forcible Shapechange. That limits the spell to being offensive: you can't use it on allies, as they would be willing. In that way, it's not too different from a sort of stun spell, which when you consider it that way, isn't too terribly unbalanced. If you wanted to get a spell that would change your ally's form, you would have to Prepare a new one or learn a new one. Part of the DM's job while helping the player generate Spells is to make sure that they make these subtle changes in order to avoid the pitfalls of a catch-all spell.) I would think that a DM would have no problem revising a homebrew spell or subclass mid-game and that wouldn't cause a fuss about inconsistency, and so I feel the same way about revising Spells. And to answer your question about Prepared spells, one of the things that is specified is that a Spell's sentence description can't mention mechanics, so you have enough time between the Spell being Prepared and it being used to think about ways to approximately scale it. With guidelines about duration/damage/effect in place and the reference point of 5e spells at one's disposal, a DM shouldn't have a hard time coming up with effects. (See the above about thematicism vs. mechanics and the intents of this system.)

[SunderedWorldDM]

Just a note, I thought it would be wisest just to make a new thread for the completed system instead of having to make people shuffle through the formative notes to get to a presentable product, so here's the link to the new thread! Hope to see everyone's input there. https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?611246-PEACH-my-new-freeform-spell-system-for-5e-(SWDM-System)