Spell Versatility and Class Identity

[HiveStriker]

Sorry to be picky, but with the new UA what is the point of the Sorcerer in this build as compared to taking wizard?

Command can come from Warlock, Augury and Speak with Dead are now wizard spells. They get all the other rituals except Silence and Zone of Truth.

But, you can use the rituals through the wizard's book, meaning you could swap to chainlock and get an invisible familiar that can observe and allow you to read lips of everyone up to... anywhere on the same plane of existence. And, with the familiar you might not need subtle, along with just being hidden or other such things.

And extend was only if you were low on spell slots.


Finally, this isn't a "sorcerer", this is a warlock being supplemented by the Sorcerer. Tongues is far less useful on a pure sorcerer. Not worthless, it allows you to talk back to people (if you just want to understand them, Comprehend Languages is better since it is cheaper) which can be good, but it isn't a great choice.

True, I posted my build without thinking that that particular build was off-mark pertaining the thread.

So let me present a (near) pure Sorcerer adaptation (simply, my build with single dip into Hexblade Warlock).
By the way, just, "Augury and Speak With Dead are now Wizard spells". No, they are not. We are still speaking about Variant rules that have yet to make their way to official.

Half-Elf, starting stats STR 10 / DEX 14 / CON 14 / INT 9 / WIS 13 / CHA 17.
Level 4, pick Observant (+WIS). Level 8, pick Keen Mind (+INT). Level 12, pick Elven Accuracy (+CHA). Level 16, pick Alert. Level 19, max CHA or push CON.

From Warlock, pick Armor of Agathys and Hex.
From Sorcerer, pick Shield and...
- Mage Armor -> Mirror Image -> Blur.
- Misty Step -> Thunder Step -> Far Step.
- Comprehend Languages + Tongues.
- Enhance Ability + Skill Empowerment.
- Suggestion + Mass Suggestion.
- Chromatic Orb, removed later.
- Burning Hands -> Shatter -> Fireball -> Sickening Radiance.
- Sleep -> Hypnotic Pattern.
- Invisibility.
- Disguise Self.
From Divine Soul, pick Aid, Sanctuary, Silence.
Reminder, metamagics are Subtle, Extend, and Quicken.

You have all the tools at your disposal to spend near all day being the one that understands everyone. Just use Comprehend Languages as your basis, Tongues being kept only for when you or another member of party needs to be understood by everyone.

Tongues is in fact one of the most powerful utility spells you could put your hands on. Because it's a multiplier/enabler of everything else (Suggestion / Detect Thoughts spells, lips reading with Observant, Persuasion checks from you or better a Rogue/Bard pal with proper Expertise).

What do you care that you're less good in direct fighting than most other Sorcerers you could have made? There are so many fights that have been completely averted or trivialized thanks to your information and manipulation that party can certainly bear handling itself the brunt of the rest.
(And honestly, I put the Warlock dip there because I'm afraid anyone on this forums would say the character is useless if it doesn't have at least Eldricht Blast, but you can do without imo. I think a much better single level dip would be Grave or Knowledge Cleric).

Information is power because it's from information that every decision is made. Let's never forget that. :)

[Chaosmancer]

RE: class identity, if you're going to give warlocks, sorcerers and bards an automatic built-in spell book bigger than the wizard's, you might as well give the wizard flexible casting better than the sorcerer's: that is, use the DMG Spell Point variant, but restrict it to wizards, warlocks, and bards. Sorcerers still have to cast with spell slots, so they're now worse (less efficient) at converting big spells into small spells and vice-versa, which was previously their shtick.

Doesn't feel so good, right? Classes which are best at a certain thing in a certain game should STAY best at that thing instead of becoming the worst in an optional, late-breaking rules supplement.

(Yes, yes, wizards were never the best at knowing all the spells anyway--clerics and druids were always the best because wizards have to find their spells in the wild. I know.)

And Sorcerers aren't the best at casting a lot of small spells either. They are the best at cannibalizing their own resources in a desperate attempt to keep up, and making everyone else spell points doesn't change that.

So in fact, your point proves nothing.

Wizards weren't the best at having the right spells. Sorcerers aren't the best at casting lots of little spells. And none of this applies to the simple idea of trying to let people pull out bad spells and have a little more freedom in their builds.

Having attempted to use this method in real life as a way to learn languages (refer to an known translation of a specific book written in the other language), I will say that this method is cripplingly slow even *before* you try to express something moderately abstract like the concept "instead."

Yes it is slow, but it still works.

And, since we are talking how powerful it is to wait 24 hours to get tongues, I have to ask, is "Crippling slow" mean 2 days? 36 hours to hold a conversation?

As someone who has also gone this method, I can answer with a resounding no. Sure, a 15 minute conversation might now take 2 hours, but that is still far faster than waiting 24 hours to get the perfect spell.

Because the single one is from a list of more than a hundred and fifty (depending on how it is implemented, the divine soul sorcerer would get to pick from about 250 spells), making it very versatile, while the 25 might be from as small a list as 44, and because the guy who has the smaller list is supposed to have versatility as one of his main selling points.

I know the graph was back a few pages, but let us remember. They do not get to swap for any spell from their entire list.


To reiterate for people who might have been overlooking this. Spell Versatility allows you to swap a spell for a spell of the same level.

So, you want a new 5th level spell, you have to give up a 5th level spell. And, to remind people of this as well, Sorcerers tend to have only 1 or 2 spells of a given level, unless they start following common advice like "get rid of all your 1st level spells and use those slots to make more sorcerery points so you can do metamagic" in which case, they could never swap for a useful 1st level spell, because they will have no 1st level spells to swap.

This is a massive limiter for the sorcerer, and still a big one for warlocks and bards, who also will only have around 3 or 4 spells at most in a given level. This matters in the decision making process, because you have to give up a powerful option you wanted (because you chose it at level up for you build) to even use Spell Versatility in the first place.

By the way, just, "Augury and Speak With Dead are now Wizard spells". No, they are not. We are still speaking about Variant rules that have yet to make their way to official.

I would argue that if we are trying to prove "this UA is overpowered because it hurts the wizard" then allowing the things it does to empower the wizard to show up are completely valid points.

Half-Elf, starting stats STR 10 / DEX 14 / CON 14 / INT 9 / WIS 13 / CHA 17.
Level 4, pick Observant (+WIS). Level 8, pick Keen Mind (+INT). Level 12, pick Elven Accuracy (+CHA). Level 16, pick Alert. Level 19, max CHA or push CON.

From Warlock, pick Armor of Agathys and Hex.
From Sorcerer, pick Shield and...
- Mage Armor -> Mirror Image -> Blur.
- Misty Step -> Thunder Step -> Far Step.
- Comprehend Languages + Tongues.
- Enhance Ability + Skill Empowerment.
- Suggestion + Mass Suggestion.
- Chromatic Orb, removed later.
- Burning Hands -> Shatter -> Fireball -> Sickening Radiance.
- Sleep -> Hypnotic Pattern.
- Invisibility.
- Disguise Self.
From Divine Soul, pick Aid, Sanctuary, Silence.
Reminder, metamagics are Subtle, Extend, and Quicken.

You have all the tools at your disposal to spend near all day being the one that understands everyone. Just use Comprehend Languages as your basis, Tongues being kept only for when you or another member of party needs to be understood by everyone.

Tongues is in fact one of the most powerful utility spells you could put your hands on. Because it's a multiplier/enabler of everything else (Suggestion / Detect Thoughts spells, lips reading with Observant, Persuasion checks from you or better a Rogue/Bard pal with proper Expertise).

A nitpick, because I nitpick, Tongues does not assist in Lip Reading, you only understand languages that you hear.

What do you care that you're less good in direct fighting than most other Sorcerers you could have made? There are so many fights that have been completely averted or trivialized thanks to your information and manipulation that party can certainly bear handling itself the brunt of the rest.
(And honestly, I put the Warlock dip there because I'm afraid anyone on this forums would say the character is useless if it doesn't have at least Eldricht Blast, but you can do without imo. I think a much better single level dip would be Grave or Knowledge Cleric).

Information is power because it's from information that every decision is made. Let's never forget that. :)

I agree, and this looks like a solid build (I also agree that the warlock dip seems extraneous, who cares if you don't have eldritch blast. )

I do wonder how many times Tongues comes up though, (since that was the particular spell talked about.) You picked Half-Elf, and you could take a background like Sage for two more languages (fits with the diplomat style polygot character you seem to be building)

And that means you know Common, Elvish and three other languages. There are 16 languages in the book, so you know about 1/3 of all spoken languages in the world (assuming the DM hasn't expanded that list) and since we are talking about a level 20 build by the end, I think it is fair to point out that you can use the Xanathar rules for training to learn a new language, it only takes 10 weeks and 250 gold, but could also be done by allies who happen to speak a language you don't (in which case I'd say it just takes the 10 weeks and maybe a few "teaching skill" checks). And for every language you learn, Tongues becomes less useful.


Which, is where I think we come back full circle to the point that caused you to post your build in the first place. Even for a character whose specialty is talking to everyone, and who has a clear goal in mind for taking Tongues, there is a lot of pressure to not take it. After all, you dropped spells like Suggestion so you could afford the mass suggestion, but wouldn't it be nice to have both of them? Tongues is taking the slot that Suggestion could go in. You dropped Thunder Step, but it is a nice damage spell, and very good for taking a non-hostile with you. Could have kept it instead if you didn't have Tongues.

You can make the argument that keeping it "just in case" and because it fits the style you want makes it easier, but considering how easy it is to work around it, eventually you may find yourself dropping it just because you are so desperate for some other part of your build to get improved.

[Rowan Wolf]

So far I have observed a lot of displeasure with the Spell Versatility and stepping on what it is to be a wizard for some members of the forum. Think about where future design can go I can only see the developers starting to get closer and closer to existing roles and fantasies as the edition continues. Partial were the wizard class is concerned is the fact they were designed with so many archetype from launch and probably gives them a more limited area to explore new ones.

Back onto the subject, in one of the dndbeyond interviews Crawford discuss the Psionic Wizard tradition and in that detailed that the spellbook is part of what make a wizard a wizard from their design decision. So I can't really see them changing how the book works after this long.

Some of this dislike for this new feature seems to be rooted in how individual poster's tables have (or perhaps do) played the game, so maybe it is not for their groups, but would be welcome in other groups.

I know that most of the discuss has centered around Sorcerer and wizard, but I find the idea added to the ranger to be quite appealing as the limited number of spell known kind of clashes with the fantasy of the Ranger for me.

[Segev]

"You whiny wizards shoudl stop being upset that others get nice things!" is a trite argument, but it's very ad hominem and misses the point.

The point isn't, "I want my wizard to be cooler than your sorcerer or bard." The point is, "Why should I play a wizard if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

The answer is: you shouldn't. The Bard (especially) and the Sorcerer now do it better, because they don't spend money to add things to spellbooks, because they're not limited BY spellbooks.

[Rowan Wolf]

"You whiny wizards shoudl stop being upset that others get nice things!" is a trite argument, but it's very ad hominem and misses the point.

The point isn't, "I want my wizard to be cooler than your sorcerer or bard." The point is, "Why should I play a wizard if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

The answer is: you shouldn't. The Bard (especially) and the Sorcerer now do it better, because they don't spend money to add things to spellbooks, because they're not limited BY spellbooks.

You seem awfully defense on this "whiny" point. I do not think I have made that statement, but are you arguing for the sake of argument or are your groups that hard on wizard's additional spell acquisition. Though to argue the point until Wish enters play wizards are probably the guy with the "perfect arcane spell" just not tomorrow as they have much larger list to potentially draw from many of which are unavailable to other arcane casters. Do you have as much issue with the Cleric and druid who have access to their whole list and possess many of the same problem solving spells?

[Chaosmancer]

"You whiny wizards shoudl stop being upset that others get nice things!" is a trite argument, but it's very ad hominem and misses the point.

The point isn't, "I want my wizard to be cooler than your sorcerer or bard." The point is, "Why should I play a wizard if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

The answer is: you shouldn't. The Bard (especially) and the Sorcerer now do it better, because they don't spend money to add things to spellbooks, because they're not limited BY spellbooks.

I'll counter your point.

If you want to be the guy you has the perfect arcane spell today, you should play the wizard.

Wizards are the most powerful ritual casters in the game, and they do not need to prepare those rituals. A wizard is far more likely to have the perfect spell "just give me 10 minutes to cast it" compared to the bard "just give me 24 hours to get it"

[HiveStriker]

A nitpick, because I nitpick, Tongues does not assist in Lip Reading, you only understand languages that you hear.

Well, you are right, if you can hear you probably don't need lip reading. I guess it depends on DM taste whether you could lip when noise is not enough to really understand but that would feel cheesy.

You're right, I'm so used to use Tongues for close spying and self-learning (and teaching, strange as may be XD) languages during downtime (allowed by my DM at least) that I totally mixed up Observant and Keen Mind uses... XD

Thanks for stressing that out. :)

You're also right in the fact that, provided enough downtime, you could completely ditch the spell.
I did it myself at high high level because I finally learned all languages and I was really the people's person.

Thing is...
- You may not always have the chance to learn it (like, Draconic you *may* find some people with draconic origins to teach you. But more exotic languages? DM dependent of course).
- You may simply not have the time to learn it (like, you expected to find goblins and you find yourself with a faction of Orcs. In a desolate region, so nobody can translate for you).
- You may not be the one needing the ability to speak: you can simply keep it for when your Rogue goes spying on a "foreign" faction, where your Wizard goes to another Plane to negotiate, because he's the one with most reputation to manage something, or simply when your party crafts a strategy around mind tricks against uncommon foes.

IMO the main thing that makes it worth or not is the degree of "societality" of the campaign and/or the rules DM enforces regarding creature's knowledge.
In classic dungeoneering campaigns, or if there is no check involved ever to know about a creature, or simply encounters are generally baked into pure tactical and there is no information gathering involved...
Tongues would probably rate in the top 10 most situational spells.

If you happen to have in your party both a heavy social/spy expert that learned 2/3 of languages, AND another one that has a high rate in all "knowledge" skills, it would equally be situational.

From what I've read on this forum, rarely do people care about languages and knowledge checks.
In the games I play, those get a great importance because many of my friends like this aspect of strategy (and one group of them play characters that would die in any head-on fight anyways XD).

[MrStabby]

"You whiny wizards shoudl stop being upset that others get nice things!" is a trite argument, but it's very ad hominem and misses the point.

The point isn't, "I want my wizard to be cooler than your sorcerer or bard." The point is, "Why should I play a wizard if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

The answer is: you shouldn't. The Bard (especially) and the Sorcerer now do it better, because they don't spend money to add things to spellbooks, because they're not limited BY spellbooks.

The point is, "Why should the wizard be the class to play if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

Why shouldn't this be supported in other classes? Just because before a rules fix a class had a huge advantage in one area should not mean that it should continue to have that advantage after re-balancing. Precedent is an argument for never changing anything, no matter how much better it make things.

[Corran]

The point is, "Why should the wizard be the class to play if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

Why shouldn't this be supported in other classes?

Because the more overlap the classes have in the way they function, the less meaningful picking one becomes. Don't get me wrong, I don't say that classes shouldn't overlap at all (even if that was possible). But how much they should overlap is a matter of personal preference. Or in other words, if you take a class's unique toys that significantly characterize this class, and hand them around to a few other classes, then that initial class is less unique now.

[MrStabby]

Because the more overlap the classes have in the way they function, the less meaningful picking one becomes. Don't get me wrong, I don't say that classes shouldn't overlap at all (even if that was possible). But how much they should overlap is a matter of personal preference. Or in other words, if you take a class's unique toys that significantly characterize this class, and hand them around to a few other classes, then that initial class is less unique now.

So... kind of like taking every sorcerer spell and adding it to the wizard spell list? Or are you more talking about taking spontaneous casting and adding it to every class?

If these things should not overlap, or should not in this case, then there is still the missing argument that they should be taken from the sorcerer rather than the wizard. I am not saying they should in my personal view, but any argument to that effect is conspicuously missing.

[Chaosmancer]

Well, you are right, if you can hear you probably don't need lip reading. I guess it depends on DM taste whether you could lip when noise is not enough to really understand but that would feel cheesy.

You're right, I'm so used to use Tongues for close spying and self-learning (and teaching, strange as may be XD) languages during downtime (allowed by my DM at least) that I totally mixed up Observant and Keen Mind uses... XD

Thanks for stressing that out. :)

Shrug

Like I said, nitpicking.

You're also right in the fact that, provided enough downtime, you could completely ditch the spell.
I did it myself at high high level because I finally learned all languages and I was really the people's person.

Thing is...
- You may not always have the chance to learn it (like, Draconic you *may* find some people with draconic origins to teach you. But more exotic languages? DM dependent of course).
- You may simply not have the time to learn it (like, you expected to find goblins and you find yourself with a faction of Orcs. In a desolate region, so nobody can translate for you).
- You may not be the one needing the ability to speak: you can simply keep it for when your Rogue goes spying on a "foreign" faction, where your Wizard goes to another Plane to negotiate, because he's the one with most reputation to manage something, or simply when your party crafts a strategy around mind tricks against uncommon foes.

IMO the main thing that makes it worth or not is the degree of "societality" of the campaign and/or the rules DM enforces regarding creature's knowledge.

All true, and like I said, there are reasons to keep the spell.

It is just in an odd position that the better you get in filling the role it helps you fill, the more likely the pressure to drop the spell for something else will increase.

[Corran]

If these things should not overlap, or should not in this case, then there is still the missing argument that they should be taken from the sorcerer rather than the wizard. I am not saying they should in my personal view, but any argument to that effect is conspicuously missing.

The argument, or at least my argument, is that I don't like how spell versatility acts like a pseudo spontaneous casting, because it makes classes less distinct and more interchangeable than I would like. Mind you, I don't think the game was perfect and here comes spell versatility and messes everything up, but I think it's a big step towards the wrong direction. Why would I want [bards, sorcerers, warlocks] and [clerics, druids, wizards] to start functioning that similarly? I enjoy the mechanical distinction that some classes can work with more spells while other classes have to work with fewer spells (as long as the latter is compensated somehow). It makes picking a class to be more of a consequential decision.

[Aimeryan]

The argument, or at least my argument, is that I don't like how spell versatility acts like a pseudo spontaneous casting, because it makes classes less distinct and more interchangeable than I would like.

I agree that people probably don't want homogenisation, however, I would not want one (or more) class(es) to be weaker than another just to stop homogenisation, either. Spell Versatility is a step towards homogenisation, but a leap towards fixing some of the biggest issues Sorcerers have; being able to make bad choices that may last for a significant gameplay experience.

Feel free to come up with something else that accomplishes the task without any homogenisation.

~~~

On the topic of changes to SV, the idea of a cool-down period after making the swap does not really stop the Sorcerer from being able to switch out for the perfect spell with a long rest that a Wizard could not do - it only stops this happening repeatedly within a short period of time. Given that the whole situation is likely to be exceedingly rare in the first place (see my previous post), stopping it from happening frequently hardly seems a worthy goal to aspire to.

Perhaps instead we should play on the chaotic/untrained side of the Sorcerer; instead of getting to choose what spell they get of the same level, make it random (barring those they already have). Now you can replace a bad choice, but don't get automatically get the perfect spell for the next day. If they don't like the spell they get, next long rest they can try again for something else.

[TheUser]

On the topic of changes to SV, the idea of a cool-down period after making the swap does not really stop the Sorcerer from being able to switch out for the perfect spell with a long rest that a Wizard could not do - it only stops this happening repeatedly within a short period of time. Given that the whole situation is likely to be exceedingly rare in the first place (see my previous post), stopping it from happening frequently hardly seems a worthy goal to aspire to.

Perhaps instead we should play on the chaotic/untrained side of the Sorcerer; instead of getting to choose what spell they get of the same level, make it random (barring those they already have). Now you can replace a bad choice, but don't get automatically get the perfect spell for the next day. If they don't like the spell they get, next long rest they can try again for something else.

Eww god no. A random spell? We're trying to improve player satisfaction remember?


Current limitations spell versatility has:

1. It has to be the same level you swap from
Compared to other prepared casters this is actually very significant.

2. Switching to a new spell means switching out an old one remember?

3. Warlocks and Sorcerers in particular still have exceedingly small spells known.


This isn't some catch all 100% always prepared fix. Sorcerers and Warlocks will still have roughly 33-45% less spells than a wizard and neither can ritual cast baseline. And they still only get there small retinue of spells to help prepare for unknown obstacles. This means that in the circumstance where you encounter an unforeseeable problem without any preparation, the wizard is far more likely to be able to say "I have something for that."

Wizards will also still have a superior pool of spells to draw from.

This is a mountain out of molehill; if you didn't have a problem with Druids, Clerics and Paladins drawing from their entire spell list before, I don't see how this all of a sudden is an upheaval of the Wizard's niche.

[Chaosmancer]

On the topic of changes to SV, the idea of a cool-down period after making the swap does not really stop the Sorcerer from being able to switch out for the perfect spell with a long rest that a Wizard could not do - it only stops this happening repeatedly within a short period of time. Given that the whole situation is likely to be exceedingly rare in the first place (see my previous post), stopping it from happening frequently hardly seems a worthy goal to aspire to.

Perhaps instead we should play on the chaotic/untrained side of the Sorcerer; instead of getting to choose what spell they get of the same level, make it random (barring those they already have). Now you can replace a bad choice, but don't get automatically get the perfect spell for the next day. If they don't like the spell they get, next long rest they can try again for something else.

How do you imagine that conversation going, honestly?

Player: "I shouldn't have taken witch bolt, I'm never close enough to use it, can I switch it for Chromatic Orb"

DM: "Sure, take this d25, roll it, and if you get a 3 you get Chromatic Orb"

Player: "I rolled a 19"

DM: "Congratulations, you got Thunderwave, an even closer range spell. But, good news, you can roll again tomorrow"


This is just going to end up with the players that use it having to use their spell swap at level up (because that is still a thing they can do) to fix the mistakes of the random results.

[Hytheter]

How do you imagine that conversation going, honestly?

Player: "I shouldn't have taken witch bolt, I'm never close enough to use it, can I switch it for Chromatic Orb"

DM: "Sure, take this d25, roll it, and if you get a 3 you get Chromatic Orb"

Player: "I rolled a 19"

DM: "Congratulations, you got Thunderwave, an even closer range spell. But, good news, you can roll again tomorrow"


This is just going to end up with the players that use it having to use their spell swap at level up (because that is still a thing they can do) to fix the mistakes of the random results.

I would've thought someone called "Chaosmancer" would be more receptive to the idea :P

Jokes aside, I think the idea is that you could use the daily re-roll repeatedly until you end up with a spell you actually want, or at least one you can work with. The result is that sorcerers can't reliably just take a nap to get a spell they know they'll need tomorrow, but with luck and patience they can get any spell eventually.

Personally though I think it'd be simpler and less annoying to just extend the duration required to swap spells, like say a week of downtime instead of a single long rest.

[Chaosmancer]

I would've thought someone called "Chaosmancer" would be more receptive to the idea :P

Jokes aside, I think the idea is that you could use the daily re-roll repeatedly until you end up with a spell you actually want, or at least one you can work with. The result is that sorcerers can't reliably just take a nap to get a spell they know they'll need tomorrow, but with luck and patience they can get any spell eventually.

Personally though I think it'd be simpler and less annoying to just extend the duration required to swap spells, like say a week of downtime instead of a single long rest.

LOL, I've been wondering if anyone would joke about the name. It was the title of the first book I ever tried to write, so I keep it around.

And yeah, I get the idea is to just keep rolling. But, I've actually done that before. Just kept rolling a large die until I got the result I wanted. It can take hundreds of rolls for that to happen. I mean, 1/25 is 4%. There is no way that is going to get it.

Plus, I actually think it is worse that the player will just get fed up and stick with "well, this is good enough" because spells are the core component of spellcasting classes. And so, when they level up and can swap any spell for any other spell (without level requirements) in the case of the sorcerer who usually has to do this to keep their list relevant and drop options that aren't going to be useful at the new level, they are going to want to use it to fix this. It is just BS, no one would ever take that risk of rolling for a new spell randomly, unless they were playing a chaos sorcerer or similar concept and that was the fun for them. And in that case, they probably rolled randomly for all their spells to begin with.

And, in terms of extending, if you need a slow down on the swap, I'm still more of a fan of the idea of it being half the spell level rounded up in days for recovery.

So, 1st and 2nd take one day. 3rd and 4th two days, ect. It puts a small brake on it, especially for big spells, and if that solves the problem people have with it then I think it is the best solution.

[Terebin]

"You whiny wizards shoudl stop being upset that others get nice things!" is a trite argument, but it's very ad hominem and misses the point.

The point isn't, "I want my wizard to be cooler than your sorcerer or bard." The point is, "Why should I play a wizard if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

The answer is: you shouldn't. The Bard (especially) and the Sorcerer now do it better, because they don't spend money to add things to spellbooks, because they're not limited BY spellbooks.

I actually think I finally understand your point.

However, I think I disagree with your premise that the Wizard was ever the "I can have it tomorrow" guy. I would say the Wizard is actually the "I probably already have it prepared" guy.

It's rare that what is needed is a single, specific spell (that is on the wizard spell list and also at least one other arcane caster list). In D&D, most problems can be solved a variety of ways - one of several similar spells, skill checks, minions, bribes, creativity. See the earlier discussions of Tongues vs Comprehend Languages vs taking language proficiencies in chargen or through training. The problem isn't "I need Tongues," it's "I need to communicate with someone I don't share a language with." Because D&D is a game you play with other people and your imagination (not a computer), there are infinite solutions to any problem or goal.

The Wizard, by virtue of a spell book and their Ritual Casting feature, has more spells known or immediately accessible than any other arcane caster - even if they have SV and the Wizard doesn't. The Wizard probably already has a solution to the problem right now, today, already. A 20th level Wizard has 25+ spells prepared. PLUS has immediate access to any of their ritual spells. 20th level Warlock and Sorcerer have 15. Only the Bard comes close, with 22 spells known (+ Magical Secrets), but their ritual casting is much worse. Warlock can potentially have good ritual casting, but it costs a fair amount of investment and opportunity cost.

Who cares what the Bard can do tomorrow? The Wizard can solve your problem today.

[malachi]

My DM has a houserule that wizards can swap out a spell prepared with another in the spellbook by spending 10 minutes / spell level. (It specifically doesn't apply to clerics / druids / paladins)
Would that rule go any length toward mitigating the class identity problem, or would it be too strong?

[Theaitetos]

A 20th level Wizard has 25+ spells prepared. PLUS has immediate access to any of their ritual spells. 20th level Warlock and Sorcerer have 15.

Yes, that adds up to 45 spells available all the time to a 20th level wizard, 3 times as many as a 20th level sorcerer. Wizards can change 25 of these spells every night, but cry foul when a sorcerer can change 1 of his 15 spells. Oy vey!

[Chaosmancer]

My DM has a houserule that wizards can swap out a spell prepared with another in the spellbook by spending 10 minutes / spell level. (It specifically doesn't apply to clerics / druids / paladins)
Would that rule go any length toward mitigating the class identity problem, or would it be too strong?

For many people, it seems the issue is when the spell is not in the spellbook in the first place (because obviously there is no problem if the sorcerer can get a spell tomorrow if the wizard can get the exact same spell tomorrow). Through that lens, allowing players to access their spellbook more readily would not solve the issue they are pointing towards.

[malachi]

For many people, it seems the issue is when the spell is not in the spellbook in the first place (because obviously there is no problem if the sorcerer can get a spell tomorrow if the wizard can get the exact same spell tomorrow). Through that lens, allowing players to access their spellbook more readily would not solve the issue they are pointing towards.

It does give a different identity to wizards and spontaneous casters, which was the original concern.

[Segev]

I'll counter your point.

If you want to be the guy you has the perfect arcane spell today, you should play the wizard.

Wizards are the most powerful ritual casters in the game, and they do not need to prepare those rituals. A wizard is far more likely to have the perfect spell "just give me 10 minutes to cast it" compared to the bard "just give me 24 hours to get it"

Yes and no. Yes, if the wizard has it in his spellbook, of course he's already caught up with the SV-user.

Yes, the wizard has more spells in his spellbook than the SV-user knows, and more prepared than the SV-user knows. However, your argument about ritual casting could equally be made as: "Well, obviously the wizard is more likely to have the perfect spell already prepared, since he has more spells prepared than a bard, let alone a sorcerer."

But that point isn't in dispute. The point is that, if you want all-list access, you can play anything BUT a Wizard, now, and have literally any spell on your class list tomorrow (if you don't already have it today). This is a huge turnover from what used to be a major reason to play a wizard over a sorcerer or bard or warlock.

The point is, "Why should the wizard be the class to play if I want to be the guy who can have the perfect arcane spell tomorrow?"

Why shouldn't this be supported in other classes? Just because before a rules fix a class had a huge advantage in one area should not mean that it should continue to have that advantage after re-balancing. Precedent is an argument for never changing anything, no matter how much better it make things.

Why should it be supported BETTER in other classes?

Is there some reason "survivable melee combatant" shouldn't be supported by monk? Clearly, we should let monks full-heal their hp 2x per short rest as a reaction to being knocked to 0 hp. The fact that this makes them tankier than barbarians is irrelevant; those barbarians aren't losing anything, and why should barbariancs continue to have that advantage now that we're rebalancing monks?

My DM has a houserule that wizards can swap out a spell prepared with another in the spellbook by spending 10 minutes / spell level. (It specifically doesn't apply to clerics / druids / paladins)
Would that rule go any length toward mitigating the class identity problem, or would it be too strong?

This would be too powerful.

[Corran]

I agree that people probably don't want homogenisation, however, I would not want one (or more) class(es) to be weaker than another just to stop homogenisation, either.

I don't think we should consider this dilemma to be a valid one. We shouldn't have to choose between homogeneous and imbalanced classes. If a class cannot be distinct or balanced, then it shouldn't exist imo, simple as that. At least until a better way is found to represent it mechanically.

Spell Versatility is a step towards homogenisation,

Yep.

but a leap towards fixing some of the biggest issues Sorcerers have; being able to make bad choices that may last for a significant gameplay experience.

That's debatable. I have a different idea about what the issue of a sorcerer is. For example, I hate it that the spells available don't support all that well a green draconic sorcerer (not to mention how poor of a choice picking poison as the main type of your damage output can be). But this is not supposed to be a sorcerer issue, otherwise spell versatility would be something exclusive to sorcerers. So lets not dwell on one class.

For the sake of discussion though, let me agree momentarily that players making bad choices when playing a caster creates an issue worth of solving. Does spell versatility seem to you like a solution intended to solve this problem? The designers might very well have misjudged the amount of time a player spends at a given level, probably because there must be lots of tables not following the adventuring day's typical encounter layout. Spell versatility in its current implementation suggests that the designers must have initially thought a pc will level up every adventuring day. Does that seem logical. Even if we agree that this is a problem worth solving, and we agree that it's so important to solve it that we might as well do it at the cost of homogenization, you have to admit that the solution does not even fit the perceived problem as you describe it.

All of this is unnecessary though. Making a class more viable for a subset of players is a poor excuse for trying to make classes redundant for all players from a mechanical point of view.

Feel free to come up with something else that accomplishes the task without any homogenisation.

If you consider players making bad choices at character building to be such a big issue that warrants a drastic solution, I imagine that eliminating choice as much as possible is your best answer. You basically want the champion fighter version for spellcasters. This is something that can be easily done. If not by you or me, then certainly be someone over at WotC. All you need is some premade (to the degree you think it's needed) spell lists. At your discretion disallow at your table whatever else you feel overcomplicates the game (be it multiclassing, extra sourcebooks, etc).

[ZZTRaider]

My DM has a houserule that wizards can swap out a spell prepared with another in the spellbook by spending 10 minutes / spell level. (It specifically doesn't apply to clerics / druids / paladins)
Would that rule go any length toward mitigating the class identity problem, or would it be too strong?

I agree with Segev that this is likely too powerful. But I think it could be tweaked to something usable...

At least in Pathfinder (I have no idea if it's a carryover from 3e or 3.5e), Wizards were not required to prepare all of their spell slots at the same time. If you wanted to, you could leave some slots unfilled (and thus unusable) until later in the day when you had a specific spell you wanted to prepare there. At that point, you could take the normal amount of time to prepare that spell slot with whatever applicable spell you want.

This could be used to great effect to prepare whichever specific utility spell you needed -- as long as you have time to burn on the preparation -- and then cast it. Since back then you needed to prepare a spell the number of times you wanted to cast in, it could also be handy to add more castings of AOE, single target, or buff/debuff spells depending on what you ended up needing in prior encounters, so make sure you remain flexible for the rest of the day.

So, perhaps it'd work to just let a wizard decide to leave a portion of their prepared spell allowance undecided at the end of a long rest, then fill that later. Of course, once the spell is prepared, you keep it until your next long rest, but it still makes some of those situational but non-ritual spells more accessible in the same situations that ritual spellcasting is an option, at the cost of other spell options that you might have prepared instead.

[Chaosmancer]

Yes and no. Yes, if the wizard has it in his spellbook, of course he's already caught up with the SV-user.

Yes, the wizard has more spells in his spellbook than the SV-user knows, and more prepared than the SV-user knows. However, your argument about ritual casting could equally be made as: "Well, obviously the wizard is more likely to have the perfect spell already prepared, since he has more spells prepared than a bard, let alone a sorcerer."

But that point isn't in dispute. The point is that, if you want all-list access, you can play anything BUT a Wizard, now, and have literally any spell on your class list tomorrow (if you don't already have it today). This is a huge turnover from what used to be a major reason to play a wizard over a sorcerer or bard or warlock.

But I think the point of "You can have any spell you want tomorrow" is getting a little overblown.

Firstly, it is a level for a level spell. You cannot give up a first level spell and gain a third level spell. You give up a first, and you get a first.

Secondly, these classes don't have nearly the number of spells per level to make this an easy decision to make. Sorcerer is the most extreme, but let us say that you choose to never replace a spell on level up and just gain your spells as normal.

You will have 3 first level, 2 second, 2 third, 2 fourth, 2 fifth, 1 sixth, 1 seventh, 1 eighth, 1 ninth

So, if you want to take Tongues today, you have to give up 50% of your 3rd level spells until you take a long rest. That is not insignificant opportunity cost, especially since the Sorcerer generally takes the most omni-utility spells they can. Or dream of building up a thematic list.

And even if you swap both spells to make a more perfect list, that takes 2 days, and you have none of the spells you chose to begin with.

[king_steve]

The point is that, if you want all-list access, you can play anything BUT a Wizard, now, and have literally any spell on your class list tomorrow (if you don't already have it today). This is a huge turnover from what used to be a major reason to play a wizard over a sorcerer or bard or warlock.

So, my understanding is your criticism is centered around the fact that wizards do not have full access to their spell list.

What if they added a wizard specific enhancement that allowed a wizard to research a new spell during their long rests?

What if they had something like:

Arcane Research
1st-level wizard feature (enhances Spellcasting)
Each time you take a long rest you can spend your down time researching a new spell of your choice to add to your spellbook for free. The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots, as shown on the Wizard table.

[ezekielraiden]

So, my understanding is your criticism is centered around the fact that wizards do not have full access to their spell list.

What if they added a wizard specific enhancement that allowed a wizard to research a new spell during their long rests?

What if they had something like:

Arcane Research
1st-level wizard feature (enhances Spellcasting)
Each time you take a long rest you can spend your down time researching a new spell of your choice to add to your spellbook for free. The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots, as shown on the Wizard table.

As written that sounds more than a little too powerful, since it completely obviates the need for copying spells from any other source; now every Wizard who takes a month off of adventuring can pick up basically every spell they've ever wanted, for free. Sure would be nice if someone had suggested a downtime-based research thing that wasn't instant-use though. That person would be so clever and handsome and brave!

Of course I am facetiously saying I proposed such a thing. Twice in this very thread, actually. Guess the third time's the charm.

1. SV gains a cooldown--you must wait a number of days equal to the spell level you just changed before you can use it again.
2. Wizards get a "Research Pool" feature, representing their extra ancillary research. They gain +1 research point for every day of downtime, and half as much on adventuring days. At any time, they can spend Research Pool points equal to twice a spell's level to instantly learn a new spell. Scribing the spell into the wizard's spellbook has a cost equal to what they would pay if they were copying one of their own spells into a new book.

With the two of those, every complaint I've seen is fixed. Spell Versatility slows down dramatically. You can still change out lame spells when you realize they're lame. But switching to a niche utility spell like sending or tongues would have a real cost, putting you through multiple days of "wasted" spells known. Still useful when you really need them, but constrained. And the Wizard regains their position of "always having the right spell for the job,"* by being able to whip up a spell solution to any problem they might have, instantly, if they've had enough preparation time.

*Personally, I think this is an insanely selfish "role" or "class fantasy" to have. "I am always able to solve the problem!" is not a role, it's halfway to being a Mary Sue, a naked power fantasy. But I suppose nobody accuses D&D Wizards of being humble team players.

[MaxWilson]

As written that sounds more than a little too powerful, since it completely obviates the need for copying spells from any other source; now every Wizard who takes a month off of adventuring can pick up basically every spell they've ever wanted, for free. Sure would be nice if someone had suggested a downtime-based research thing that wasn't instant-use though. That person would be so clever and handsome and brave!

The authors of posts #5, #15, #16, and #62 thank you for the compliment.

[Aimeryan]

Eww god no. A random spell? We're trying to improve player satisfaction remember?

...

This is a mountain out of molehill; if you didn't have a problem with Druids, Clerics and Paladins drawing from their entire spell list before, I don't see how this all of a sudden is an upheaval of the Wizard's niche.

I'm actually in the camp that feels that the whole stepping on the Wizard's toes is nothing more than a minor issue of quite some rarity - hence, I am happy with Spell Versatility as it is. However, if feedback from other users steers the writers away from Spell Versatility as is I would rather guide them to the alternative.

Lorewise, the choatic/untrained swapping of spells feels more thematic. It doesn't step on Wizards toes in any reliable way. It still solves the issue of having poor performing/disliked spells on a class that is very lean in spell choice - albeit, it might take a few goes to get something you really want, but the random part can be fun in its own way (or so people who like dice rolling keep telling me!). I would not be displeased with this.

~~~

LOL, I've been wondering if anyone would joke about the name. It was the title of the first book I ever tried to write, so I keep it around.

And yeah, I get the idea is to just keep rolling. But, I've actually done that before. Just kept rolling a large die until I got the result I wanted. It can take hundreds of rolls for that to happen. I mean, 1/25 is 4%. There is no way that is going to get it.

First, nice!

Second, the intent, as I understand it, is to solve the problem of being stuck with spells for a significant amount of time that the player wishes they could change to something else. I do not believe the intent is for players to pick the perfect spell each day.

If you have Witchbolt and instead want another spell, well there are a lot of spells that are likely to be an improvement for you - it doesn't matter if the chance for specific spell XYZ is 4% because the idea is not to get XYZ but to not have Witchbolt. Furthermore, yeah, you can eventually get XYZ for sure at level up (one way or the other) - so you aren't reliant on randomness to get the spell.

Could also be paired with the option of taking a longer downtime to switch out for a specific spell. The problem with this option alone is that it relies on you having that downtime, which is sort of the same problem of relying on leveling up - it may not occur for some significant amount of game time in which the player is frustrated.