PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Incantations -- replacing utility spells with 4e-style "rituals"



PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-02, 08:11 PM
Proposal:

The following spells no longer appear on any spell list in the game and cannot be cast using spell slots[0]. Instead, anyone of the appropriate level (as if a full caster), can learn them[1] and cast them at will...with the following costs:
* Every incantation that does not have an expensive component now costs 10*[spell level]^2 gold per use. If it does have an expensive component, double that cost instead.
* The casting time increases as follows, based on the original cast time, and you cannot travel[2] while performing a ritual:
** 1 action --> 1 minute.
** 1 minute --> 1 hour
** 1 hour+ --> 12 hours or the original casting time, whichever is longer.

* Ritual Casting (the class ability) now reads:



You learn two first-level incantations of your choice. When you would learn a new level of spells from <this class>, you can learn a new incantation as well.

In addition, when you perform an incantation, you can neglect any additional costly material components (other than the ones written in the spell itself).


Ritual Caster (the feat) is similar without the second sentence of the first paragraph (automatically learning new incantations as you level).


Note: the order is based on grouping them roughly into categories from my notes, although the categories aren't really relevant.

Animal Messenger
Comprehend Languages
Tongues
Dream
Illusory Script
Magic Mouth
Sending
Telepathic Bond

Animate Dead
Create Undead
Animate Objects
Awaken
Continual Flame
Create Food and Water
Creation
Fabricate
Wall of Stone
Conjure X
Earthquake
Floating Disk
Gate (4, summon function only, transport function remains a spell)
Planar Binding
Planar Ally
Rope Trick
Tiny Hut
Magnificent Mansion
Simulacrum
True Polymorph
Tsunami
Unseen Servant
Wish (safe uses only, other portions discarded entirely)

Alarm
Astral Projection
Agury
Clairvoyance
Commune
Commune with Nature
Contact other plane
Divination
Find the Path
Identify
Legend Lore
Locate X
Magic Aura
Nondetection
Programmed Illusion
Scrying
Speak with X
Zone of Truth

Animal Friendship
Antipathy/Sympathy
Enthrall
Magic Jar
Mind Blank
Modify Memory

Gentle repose
Mending : Note--this has no expensive component since 0*0*10 = 0.
Plant Growth
Purify Food and Drink
Raise Dead / Reincarnate / Resurrection / True Resurrection
Restoration, Lesser / Greater

Arcane Lock
Glyph of warding
Guards and Wards
Knock
Private Sanctum
Protection from Good and Evil


[0] Although specific class features (such as warlock invocations) can allow this; if they do, you don't incur any of the extra costs described here.

[1] Any character can learn a number of incantations equal to their Proficiency bonus + their Intelligence modifier. If you are at your cap, you can chose to trade a known incantation for a new one. Incantations can be bought as if they were spell scrolls, using the same sort of pricing/rarity structure, but wizards cannot scribe them into their spellbook (as they're no longer really spells in more than just format).

[2] closing the wagon loophole. The fiction is that you actually have to lay out a ritual circle and walk around it chanting, etc. AKA a real ritual.

quinron
2021-07-03, 05:57 PM
Seems like a good idea - I really disliked 4e's ritual mechanics when I first heard about them, but the concept has grown on me, especially since a lot of spells this edition basically just let you ignore challenges instead of making you better at dealing with them. If that's how it's going to be, everyone should be able to do it.

2 questions:

1) Would the Ritual Casting feature also increase your "incantations known" cap once spell levels outpace proficiency bonus?

2) For longer casting times, can two characters with the same incantation known take turns performing the ritual?

I think saying "yes" to the latter would help increase the usefulness of incantations in non-combat-heavy games; increasing the casting time for all of these spells seems like a halfway decent balancing mechanic, but it means that some spells with hour-long casting times that might see daily use would suddenly be a lot more difficult to fit in. Being able to take shifts to keep topped up on spells everyone wants to have active would be nice.

I haven't picked too closely over the list of spells; at a glance, it looks fine. May examine it more closely later.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-03, 07:13 PM
Seems like a good idea - I really disliked 4e's ritual mechanics when I first heard about them, but the concept has grown on me, especially since a lot of spells this edition basically just let you ignore challenges instead of making you better at dealing with them. If that's how it's going to be, everyone should be able to do it.

2 questions:

1) Would the Ritual Casting feature also increase your "incantations known" cap once spell levels outpace proficiency bonus?

2) For longer casting times, can two characters with the same incantation known take turns performing the ritual?

I think saying "yes" to the latter would help increase the usefulness of incantations in non-combat-heavy games; increasing the casting time for all of these spells seems like a halfway decent balancing mechanic, but it means that some spells with hour-long casting times that might see daily use would suddenly be a lot more difficult to fit in. Being able to take shifts to keep topped up on spells everyone wants to have active would be nice.

I haven't picked too closely over the list of spells; at a glance, it looks fine. May examine it more closely later.

1) I'm not firmly tied to the exact number here. Just that there is a limit, and that that limit is low enough that you can't just have "all the incancations". I specifically want to avoid letting one character be able to have a calibrated "solution to every problem." A team might, by carefully planning their incantations, but not a single individual. So I guess the answer is...maybe.

2) I could see a "cooperation" mechanic so that two people cooperating could do it faster. But only to a point. And the resulting effects would still require concentration (if the original spell did), and that would limit things.

Kane0
2021-07-03, 08:54 PM
I do like the idea of multiple incanters working together, as the label 'ritual' implies

Anymage
2021-07-03, 10:44 PM
Are incantation scrolls destroyed upon being learned? If so, you create a weird incentive for incanters to produce a bunch of backup copies while they know the incantation. If not, you don't explain why someone wouldn't want to keep a backup ritual book so they could learn whatever they saw the need for. (Keeping in mind the time it would take to relearn, but if you're casting a ritual time isn't usually a big concern.) I'd be half tempted to say that you need a written form of the incantation, with most incanters having ritual books and wizards being able to combine those with spellbooks. If someone wants to spend the money to have all the incantations, let them.

Having the "anyone can use one, but someone with the class feature or the feat gets to skip some of the cost" line seems kind of out of place. I'd be tempted to say that you need ritual caster from either your class or a feat to cast rituals, and let that be that.

Some of the spells on your list, especially looking at the first communication batch, I'd be okay with making double duty as both rituals and normal slot based spells. Being able to spend a slot on Tongues if you expect you might have to communicate with something but don't know when to plan around it doesn't sound too bad. And some of those rituals should absolutely need to cost a spell slot lest they throw balance all out of whack. (I'm looking right at Mind Blank here, although Wish also strikes me as something that's better off spell slot limited than casting time limited.) At a quick pass enough of them look plot device enough that I would want them to take time to cast, though. And of course you should be able to have a lot of those plot device effects (raising the dead being a biggie here) without mandating someone of a particular class. Being able to let someone snag those options with a feat if need be sounds just right.

Edit to add: Multiple concurrent casters does sound like another cost for some of the higher level rituals. Make them require more effort, even if a party can likely scrounge up enough ritualists without too much hassle.

Being able to have one ritualist tag in if another is tired or otherwise will need to excuse themselves sounds like the sort of thing there's no reason not to add. Not as a cast time shortener, but as something that lets you include rituals with multi day cast times without requiring ritualists to find ways to go without sleep.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-03, 11:50 PM
1) Are incantation scrolls destroyed upon being learned? If so, you create a weird incentive for incanters to produce a bunch of backup copies while they know the incantation. If not, you don't explain why someone wouldn't want to keep a backup ritual book so they could learn whatever they saw the need for. (Keeping in mind the time it would take to relearn, but if you're casting a ritual time isn't usually a big concern.) I'd be half tempted to say that you need a written form of the incantation, with most incanters having ritual books and wizards being able to combine those with spellbooks. If someone wants to spend the money to have all the incantations, let them.

2) Having the "anyone can use one, but someone with the class feature or the feat gets to skip some of the cost" line seems kind of out of place. I'd be tempted to say that you need ritual caster from either your class or a feat to cast rituals, and let that be that.

3) Some of the spells on your list, especially looking at the first communication batch, I'd be okay with making double duty as both rituals and normal slot based spells. Being able to spend a slot on Tongues if you expect you might have to communicate with something but don't know when to plan around it doesn't sound too bad. And some of those rituals should absolutely need to cost a spell slot lest they throw balance all out of whack. (I'm looking right at Mind Blank here, although Wish also strikes me as something that's better off spell slot limited than casting time limited.) 4) At a quick pass enough of them look plot device enough that I would want them to take time to cast, though. And of course you should be able to have a lot of those plot device effects (raising the dead being a biggie here) without mandating someone of a particular class. Being able to let someone snag those options with a feat if need be sounds just right.

Edit to add: 5) Multiple concurrent casters does sound like another cost for some of the higher level rituals. Make them require more effort, even if a party can likely scrounge up enough ritualists without too much hassle.

Being able to have one ritualist tag in if another is tired or otherwise will need to excuse themselves sounds like the sort of thing there's no reason not to add. 6)Not as a cast time shortener, but as something that lets you include rituals with multi day cast times without requiring ritualists to find ways to go without sleep.

1) Yes, the scrolls are destroyed on learning and you can't actually make them like spell scrolls just by knowing the incantation. Forgot to mention that.
2) I explicitly don't want any build-time cost to being able to use them. I want a team of all barbarians to be able to use them without any build-time investment. I want "traditional" ritual casters to be better/cheaper/faster at using them.
3) I'd be mostly ok with some of them--there needs to be tweaking before deployment.
4) Yeah.
5) I like that.
6) Same.

noob
2021-07-04, 05:30 AM
Guards and wards takes 10 minutes to cast so does it turns in a 10 hours casting time?(with the rule : 1 minute turns in one hour)
And does guards and wards cost a mere 20 gp(the 10 gp component cost doubled) or does it costs 360 gold?
(I ask those questions to get a better understanding of your rules because it is not always trivial to guess what rules means)

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-04, 09:36 AM
Guards and wards takes 10 minutes to cast so does it turns in a 10 hours casting time?(with the rule : 1 minute turns in one hour)
And does guards and wards cost a mere 20 gp(the 10 gp component cost doubled) or does it costs 360 gold?
(I ask those questions to get a better understanding of your rules because it is not always trivial to guess what rules means)

Hmm. I'd probably say that anything in range "minutes" becomes 1 hour, but I'd have to think about it. And it likely needs to be the greater of the two costs. And the cost scaling isn't right, because 810 gp for a 9th is too cheap.

Thanks for the questions, I can see there are more edge cases that I anticipated. Which is why I posted it--so people could point out the unclear bits.

noob
2021-07-04, 11:41 AM
So it costs 131400 gp to make guards and wards permanent.
I guess not every evil guy have a permanent guards and wards.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-04, 12:04 PM
So it costs 131400 gp to make guards and wards permanent.
I guess not every evil guy have a permanent guards and wards.

Very much a feature in my eyes.

quinron
2021-07-04, 02:41 PM
Hmm. I'd probably say that anything in range "minutes" becomes 1 hour, but I'd have to think about it. And it likely needs to be the greater of the two costs. And the cost scaling isn't right, because 810 gp for a 9th is too cheap.

Thanks for the questions, I can see there are more edge cases that I anticipated. Which is why I posted it--so people could point out the unclear bits.

Almost all spellcasting times and durations fall along the lines of 1 action, 1 minute, 10 minutes, 1 hour, 8 hours, 24 hours. I'd say bumping up along those lines would be a good metric - so a single-action spell would take 1 minute, a 1-minute spell would take 10 minutes, a 10-minute spell would take an hour, and so on.

Past the 24-hour mark you'd have to make your own calls, but it's a good starting framework to consider.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-04, 05:02 PM
Almost all spellcasting times and durations fall along the lines of 1 action, 1 minute, 10 minutes, 1 hour, 8 hours, 24 hours. I'd say bumping up along those lines would be a good metric - so a single-action spell would take 1 minute, a 1-minute spell would take 10 minutes, a 10-minute spell would take an hour, and so on.

Past the 24-hour mark you'd have to make your own calls, but it's a good starting framework to consider.

I'll admit that when I wrote this up, I had completely forgotten about 10 minute spells. And 8 hour spells. That's what I was going for.

So revision:

1 action -> 1 minute (with some exceptions)
1 minute -> 10 minutes
10 minutes -> 1 hour
1 hour -> 8 hours, [1]
8 hours -> 24 hours. [1]
24 hours -> 1 week [1]


[1] requires multiple casters trading off or a rank of exhaustion per 4 hours of casting, with the clock resetting if you take spend at least 8 hours doing something else that can't involve casting spells. So anything over 8 hours takes minimum 3 people (On/off/off) to cast unless people want to pay exhaustion costs. Whoever finishes it pays the concentration price if there is one.

Sharur
2021-07-06, 06:18 AM
I like many things about this...starting with the fact that you started your numbering from zero...(yes I am a programmer, why do you ask?)

Love the idea (yes! anyone can do a ritual!) and some of the broad mechanical ideas. (Also, two more spells for consideration of adding to your list, Meteor Swarm and Storm of Vengeance, chosen because their range is in miles, and their area of effect totals in thousands of square feet).

My suggestions:

Terminology: Base spell level(BSL) = minimum level of spell/incantation; Effective spell level(ESL) = actual level of spell/incantation (e.g. if upcast).

Scaling: I think the costs and times should go up based on spell level, both base and effective (also I think this should be a guide, that incantations can deviate from easily this on a per-case basis, as noted in their description; for example, Teleportation Circle should require a full "ignition" cost every time...you are effectively building a Stargate, after all).

Time Scaling:
1 action -> 1 minute
1 minute -> (BSL+ESL) minutes
10 minutes -> 10+ (BSL*ESL) minutes [2]
1 hour -> (BSL*ESL) checks. [1]
8 hours -> 4*(BSL*ESL) checks. [1]
24 hours -> (BSL+ESL)^2 checks. [1]
[1]: These rituals take a variable amount of time. Every hour of incanting, the incanter must make a DC (8+BSL+ESL) Arcana check, until the required number of successes are obtained. If no check is passed within an hour (e.g. if a solo ritualist fails a check), the ritual fails and must be restarted. This can protected against against with multiple incanters and helpers. There may be incanters involved in a single ritual equal to (BSL+ESL), however only BSL successes are counted per hour. (only one incanter must succeed per hour to avoid failure). There can be any number of helpers, who make a DC 8 Arcana check to aid, granting up to (BSL+ESL) + 1 bonuses that can be spread around incanters. Mass rituals for the win.
[2]: If this gets into hours, requires 1 succeeded check per hour, rounding down, as above.

Cost Scaling: There should be two costs for each incantation, a runic ignition cost and and added material cost. Added material should be as standard spell description and can be either consumed or non-consumed. Basic cost I would say is 10+(ESL)^(BSL-1) gp. This makes a basic first level incantation cost 10 gold, so usuable by first level adventures and well-to-do NPCs, while an 8th level Tsunami or Earthquake is a hefty 2million+, making it essentially a small nation-state level expenditure (its a mini nuke's cost, essentially). So you can't just go dropping them willy-nilly unless you have some serious cash lying around...incidentally great gold sinks for PCs...and true resurrection is pretty much a kings' ransom, at 43mil gp.

Effect Scaling/Upcasting: Effort should be made to add "upcast" values to incantations, such as range, damage, additional targets, additional duration, reduced failure change for divinations, etc. Something like true resurrection might relax its 100 year limit by a decade per upcast, etc. There should also be no limit on the number of upcasts...or maybe somthing like max ESL = 10+BSL. Let people build up

Ignition vs Reactivation costs: Generally the runic cost is for the first time. If the circles/ritual is undisturbed (such as when a ritual fails), it can be repeated without paying the full cost runic "ignition", but a much lower 5+(ESL/2)^(BSL/2).

Space: I think this requirement should scale as well; I'd say you need a square 5*X across, where X is the ESP. So you can, say, Identify in the back of a cart or potentially in a launch rowboat...but for something like create food in water, you would need at least a large ship and at least partially cleared deck. (which also helps with "when is it a moving vehicle or static terrain" questions).

Places of Power: Some places are attuned to rituals, either in general or , naturally or because of blessings of beings of power, or because of repeated rituals there. These places might be attuned to all incantations, certain types, or those performed by special people. Oracles might stake out hermitages in places where divinations are easier, while a deity's temple may be the easiest place to commune with them. A place of power might grant lower DCs, faster incantations, lower runic costs, "free upcasts" or other benefit, or combinations of above.

These rules also allow for NPCs/the plot to equally benefit. E.g. You slew the Champion of Hextor...now, quick the priests are ressurecting him so stop them (or loot the place an skedaddle).

noob
2021-07-06, 06:50 AM
Cost Scaling: There should be two costs for each incantation, a runic ignition cost and and added material cost. Added material should be as standard spell description and can be either consumed or non-consumed. Basic cost I would say is 10+(ESL)^(BSL-1) gp. This makes a basic first level incantation cost 10 gold, so usuable by first level adventures and well-to-do NPCs, while an 8th level Tsunami or Earthquake is a hefty 2million+, making it essentially a small nation-state level expenditure (its a mini nuke's cost, essentially). So you can't just go dropping them willy-nilly unless you have some serious cash lying around...incidentally great gold sinks for PCs...and true resurrection is pretty much a kings' ransom, at 43mil gp.
At that cost the entire economy of the country stops making sense entirely(too much gold relatively to its value and too much relatively to the number of people) and for the same cost you could literally send thousands and thousands of flying snakes.
Also flying snakes are too cheap to send: 12 gp per flying snake.
So making an entire industry of raising thousands of flying snakes and training hundreds to be able to cast the animal messenger incantation and doing flying snake swarms of thousands is cheaper than casting a single 8th level spell while the former is considerably stronger.
So do not do an exponential formulae: I think a quadratic one is much better since an exponential formulae will undercost low level spells and overcost high level ones.

For the same cost as casting a single tsunami I can literally recruit an army of 19152 soldiers for a full year and the latter will do way more devastation than a tsunami: with that many soldiers you can kill any dragon (if you outfit the soldiers with long range weapons) in fact you could even kill a 20 dragon army.

People would never ever cast a level 8 offence ritual because it is always worse than any other alternative at the same cost.

It is fine however to have true resurrect cost so much that no country can ever cast it without an economic collapse. (either from inflation caused by adventurers plundering too many dungeons prior to having the gold to cast the spell or from just not having any money anymore)

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-06, 09:50 AM
I like many things about this...starting with the fact that you started your numbering from zero...(yes I am a programmer, why do you ask?)


I'll respond to the rest of this later[0], but a quick comment about the footnote numbering--I usually start at 1...but sometimes I have multiple footnote markers in place and then realize I need one before the rest. So 0 it is.

[0] Short answer: I'm a big believer in simplicity. And this is quite a bit more complex than I'd like. I have, however, in my internal draft replaced the MAX(10*L^2, 2*expensive component) cost with MAX(10*L^2, 2*expensive component) + expensive focus (not consumed). It'll need tweaking, however. I've also noted a couple of spells that need cast time adjustments to be meaningful--they're not worth casting if they take more than an action due to their nature.

noob
2021-07-06, 10:07 AM
I'll respond to the rest of this later[0], but a quick comment about the footnote numbering--I usually start at 1...but sometimes I have multiple footnote markers in place and then realize I need one before the rest. So 0 it is.

[0] Short answer: I'm a big believer in simplicity. And this is quite a bit more complex than I'd like. I have, however, in my internal draft replaced the MAX(10*L^2, 2*expensive component) cost with MAX(10*L^2, 2*expensive component) + expensive focus (not consumed). It'll need tweaking, however. I've also noted a couple of spells that need cast time adjustments to be meaningful--they're not worth casting if they take more than an action due to their nature.

Can you tell me which spell from your list stops being valuable if they take more than 1 action?
I did not find any.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-06, 07:53 PM
Can you tell me which spell from your list stops being valuable if they take more than 1 action?
I did not find any.

Lesser restoration is the only one I can find in my notes. Because most of the things it ends either have "repeat the save at the end of each turn" or just flat out last less than 1 minute. Which makes a cast time of 1 minute rather pointless in the main.

quinron
2021-07-07, 10:23 PM
Lesser restoration is the only one I can find in my notes. Because most of the things it ends either have "repeat the save at the end of each turn" or just flat out last less than 1 minute. Which makes a cast time of 1 minute rather pointless in the main.

For the spells that are most (or only) useful as single actions, you could keep them on the class spell lists as they exist now and make the incantation option separate. So if you know it as an incantation, you have to do the longer casting and don't spend slots, but if you have it prepared/known as a class spell, you have to spend a slot but cast it faster. A single character could, if necessary, have both.

PhoenixPhyre
2021-07-08, 01:38 PM
For the spells that are most (or only) useful as single actions, you could keep them on the class spell lists as they exist now and make the incantation option separate. So if you know it as an incantation, you have to do the longer casting and don't spend slots, but if you have it prepared/known as a class spell, you have to spend a slot but cast it faster. A single character could, if necessary, have both.

I'd probably actually just have it as a class/subclass feature "You know <list of incantations> and can perform them as an action[0] by spending <appropriate spell slot>". That way, a cleric of a Death god could have different "favored incantations" than a cleric of a god of Healing. Etc.

Or less generously "Here's a list of incantations, if you know them you can prepare them/cast them with slots instead of the normal cast time" (ie not granting them as known "spells").

I'm strongly not fond of "spell list is my biggest class feature" design.

[0] Or whatever the original cast time was, if necessary.