Ritual Caster: Let the buyer beware

[Deathtongue]

A lot of people seem to think that this feat is better than it is. Or rather, they seem to think that it's more reliable without DM cooperation than it is. The thing is, to add to your Ritual Book, you need to either find scrolls or, if you picked Wizard as your option with your feat, spellbooks. Spellbooks are more feasible to find than scrolls and a lot of monster/NPC spellcasters should have spellbooks somewhere. So how good is this feat you don't have explicit DM cooperation? That is, the DM isn't trying to screw you or anything but also isn't going out of their way to help you.

Going by published adventure design: getting zero spell drops is not realistic. Every hardcover has a wizard NPC with a spellbook of 6th+ level spells, to speak nothing of the numerous Mage NPCs you can meet as random encounters. If you get your wizard to level 10 and you don't get the opportunity to copy common spells like Fireball or Fly, unless you're playing a setting like Dark Sun you'd be right to ask what's up with that.

But what IS realistic is not getting any useful rituals from spellbooks or having a convenient Mage's Guild in traveling distance. I've played the hardcovers and while I was able to copy spells as appropriate. To give a quick peek of what to expect:

Spoiler

Show

Out of the Abyss and Elemental Evil gives a couple of opportunities, though there are long stretches where you don't get the ability to copy rituals without DM intervention. Storm King's Thunder gives reliable opportunities. Curse of Strahd, Mad Mage, Tomb of Annihilation, Tales from the Yawning Portal do not give many opportunities.

Now, if you're playing Adventurer's League or your DM is cool with handing out rituals, this feat can be pretty good. But if the DM doesn't explicitly say they'll make rituals common: if books like Elemental Evil are anything to go by, don't expect to get much use from this feat.

[Man_Over_Game]

In summary: don't forget that your DM can be bad at his job.



There are a large number of various invocations that require DM's intervention to use, including a Ritual gathering invocation, reading all forms of language, and Detect Magic at will. If I take one of these features, and my DM doesn't educate me on the risk of taking them, then that was a bad DM.

A player shouldn't ever feel like an investment was wasted when he has no reason to believe it should be.

If a player is an Assassin Rogue, you add stealth elements. If a player is a Horizon Walker Ranger, you add planar travel elements. If a player takes Ritual Caster, you add Rituals.

It's that simple. I think telling players to "be cautious" is the wrong message. We should be telling DM's to throw caution to the wind.

[Yakmala]

This is definitely one of those feats where the DM and the campaign can be a big factor.

In AL, there's rarely an issue. Scrolls can be purchased, rituals can be copied from other players at the table, etc.

Homebrew is another matter. Is the DM running a published campaign or their own personally crafted world? Is it a low magic or high magic setting? Are potions, scrolls and minor magic items readily available for purchase or rarities you only get from dungeon delving?

All of this is easily solved via a short conversation with your DM before you decide if you are going to add Ritual Caster to your character.

[Deathtongue]

In summary: don't forget that your DM can be bad at his job.

Is the GM bad at his job if they never drop Bracers of Armor for the Bladesinger or a Sunblade for the rogue?

There's some grey area. I think that a DM that doesn't at least drop +1 magic weapons by level 6-7 is screwing over the martials. But if the DM never drops a Wand of Fireballs or Wand of Lightning Bolts the slot-starved Cleric or Warlock would love over a 12-level campaign? Meh, I think the player is just being whiny.

So, where does ritual copying sit? Is it a 'while the DM isn't forced to give you one, you should expect a screwjob if you don't get one' item like healing potions or +1 Mauls thing? Or is it just a 'nice to have, don't complain if it doesn't happen' item like a Ring of Spell Storing? Going by the published adventures, if you don't spend a lot of time in major cities I'd have to lean towards the latter.

[Segev]

It's actually a point of frustration for the wizard in my ToA game that buying spells is hard to do. Unfortunately, there's only one wizard written up in Port Nyanzaru, and he's not listed as having spells for sale (despite being a Merchant Prince with a monopoly on these things). Perhaps I'm being too restrictive, but the game also doesn't give much in the way of guidance for how much just selling a spell to another wizard would cost. (I figure you can use the same guidelines for rituals.)

[Man_Over_Game]

It's actually a point of frustration for the wizard in my ToA game that buying spells is hard to do. Unfortunately, there's only one wizard written up in Port Nyanzaru, and he's not listed as having spells for sale (despite being a Merchant Prince with a monopoly on these things). Perhaps I'm being too restrictive, but the game also doesn't give much in the way of guidance for how much just selling a spell to another wizard would cost. (I figure you can use the same guidelines for rituals.)

There's a "formula" that is fairly consistent when getting a spell cast on you that's heavily weighted towards material costs that AL seems to use, although it breaks down when calculating higher level spells.

Spell Service Cost = Square of the spell level, then multiplied by 10, add double of the consumed material cost, add 10% of nonconsumed material cost.


For a copy, I'd modify it to:

Spell Copy Cost = Square of the spell level, then multiplied by 40 if it's a Ritual, or 30 if it's not.

[nickl_2000]

Is the GM bad at his job if they never drop Bracers of Armor for the Bladesinger or a Sunblade for the rogue?

There's some grey area. I think that a DM that doesn't at least drop +1 magic weapons by level 6-7 is screwing over the martials. But if the DM never drops a Wand of Fireballs or Wand of Lightning Bolts the slot-starved Cleric or Warlock would love over a 12-level campaign? Meh, I think the player is just being whiny.

So, where does ritual copying sit? Is it a 'while the DM isn't forced to give you one, you should expect a screwjob if you don't get one' item like healing potions or +1 Mauls thing? Or is it just a 'nice to have, don't complain if it doesn't happen' item like a Ring of Spell Storing? Going by the published adventures, if you don't spend a lot of time in major cities I'd have to lean towards the latter.

There is a significant difference between not dropping scrolls for a feat you picked and not dropping bracers of defense/sunblade. The closer analogy is to say that a DM never allows a polearm (not magical, none at all) to be available for a Fighter who took PAM at level 1. I think that it is pretty safe to say that something in wrong if this happens.

[Man_Over_Game]

There is a significant difference between not dropping scrolls for a feat you picked and not dropping bracers of defense/sunblade. The closer analogy is to say that a DM never allows a polearm (not magical, none at all) to be available for a Fighter who took PAM at level 1. I think that it is pretty same to say that something in wrong if this happens.

Exactly.

Every player's investment should always be relevant.

A Bladesinger does not cease to be relevant because he didn't get a Bracers of Armor. Sure, he becomes more relevant with them, but at worst he's a Bladesinger.

Ritual Caster, without gaining additional rituals, is only as relevant as those initial level 1 rituals. Additionally, there is the fact that Ritual Caster doesn't just give you 2 rituals, but also gives you the ability to gain more, which many people consider part of the investment into that feat. That is, that Feat is worth less than it should if it doesn't provide additional Rituals, and likely would be considered weaker than Magic Initiate.

The Book of Ancient Secrets is a better example, providing no immediate benefit and relying solely on your ability to gather rituals. Without DM intervention, that investment is wasted. A punishment on a player without any fault of their own.

What comes first, your world or their game?

[Deathtongue]

Every player's investment should always be relevant.

What comes first, your world or their game?

In your opinion, over a 10 level timeframe what would be the non player-screwing amount of rituals a DM needs to drop? Almost every INT-based NPC spellcaster has Detect Magic and the Archmage in the basic Monster Manual has Identify, so if you picked something like Comprehend Languages and Find Familiar, you'll be all-but-guaranteed to have at least three and likely even four if the game goes on long enough. Is that not enough? If so, how many rituals does the DM need to insert before they're not screwing over the players?

[Segev]

There's a "formula" that is fairly consistent when getting a spell cast on you that's heavily weighted towards material costs that AL seems to use, although it breaks down when calculating higher level spells.

Spell Service Cost = Square of the spell level, then multiplied by 10, add double of the consumed material cost, add 10% of nonconsumed material cost.


For a copy, I'd modify it to:

Spell Copy Cost = Square of the spell level, then multiplied by 40 if it's a Ritual, or 30 if it's not.

Thanks! I might just use that, at least for up to 5th level spells.

[Man_Over_Game]

In your opinion, over a 10 level timeframe what would be the non player-screwing amount of rituals a DM needs to drop? Almost every INT-based NPC spellcaster has Detect Magic and the Archmage in the basic Monster Manual has Identify, so if you picked something like Comprehend Languages and Find Familiar, you'll be all-but-guaranteed to have at least three and likely even four if the game goes on long enough. Is that not enough? If so, how many rituals does the DM need to insert before they're not screwing over the players?

I'd say at least 1/3 of the rituals. If I could get about 1/3 of the maximum capability of a feature I think I'd be content.

For example, a Wizard collecting 1/3 of all 270 Wizard spells, 90 total spells when he naturally learns about half that by leveling up, so he can find about 50 over the course of his adventures.

Ritual Caster is most often chosen for Wizard rituals, which has 18 spells. However, Wizard has the most of all the rituals, so it'd be better to estimate closer to 15 to account for the other classes.

So I'd estimate about 1 ritual for every level past level 5, although you could make them 'available' for purchase and just too expensive to reasonably acquire at lower levels. That way, it gives your players more interest in your world without adding much more work for you.

You could halve that rate, so that they aren't getting every ritual possible, or just make them harder to find. Maybe there is ~1 ritual per level, but they're so difficult to acquire (through purchase or finding secrets) that you'd expect your players to only acquire about half of the ones you pre-planned.


Or, something like this:

Level 1-4: 1 Ritual
Level 5-10: 2 Rituals
Level 10-15: 4 Rituals
Level 16-20: 8 Rituals

[Teaguethebean]

In your opinion, over a 10 level timeframe what would be the non player-screwing amount of rituals a DM needs to drop? Almost every INT-based NPC spellcaster has Detect Magic and the Archmage in the basic Monster Manual has Identify, so if you picked something like Comprehend Languages and Find Familiar, you'll be all-but-guaranteed to have at least three and likely even four if the game goes on long enough. Is that not enough? If so, how many rituals does the DM need to insert before they're not screwing over the players?

Four more rituals would be enough to make the feat worth it if you got a good ritual like leomands tiny hut, or phantom steed out of the deal

[JeffreyGator]

I found that this was mostly problematic during the second tier of play. And in that working out with the GMs it can be a significant reason behind the character adventuring and filling up their book. Note that the second tier of play is the center of most campaigns.

First tier there isn't much down time or money and low expectations of needs.

By third tier, there has been enough money and visits to places that most spells had been acquired both for a ritual caster (wizard) and a TomeLock

[Deathtongue]

Teaguethebean / Man_Over_Game: Can you help me understand why you picked those numbers? I certainly don't see a game balance reason, since certain rituals (Detect Magic, Tiny Hut, Find Familiar) are way stronger than others (Instant Summons, Skywrite, Guiding Hand). I don't even really see a reason for your wizard spellbook numbers. I've played plenty of wizards, don't get me wrong, but I've never felt mechanically deprived when I wasn't able to copy spells for several levels. I of course took the opportunity to copy spells, but just the default spells you get on level up would've wet my whistle.

[MaxWilson]

In summary: don't forget that your DM can be bad at his job.

Also, don't forget that players can make bad assumptions about what the DM's job is. That is the point of the OP: it's not the DM's job to make sure you find rituals, unless you've talked to the DM and they say it is.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Eh, everything in the game can be weak depending on what your DM wants to run. Under most normal circumstances Ritual Caster is pretty strong. If you're worried, ask your DM if they think you'll have opportunities to gain new rituals.

It's a good idea to clear ideas by your DM in general. They can/should help give you a few pointers about what they will and won't do, and how applicable something might be.

[Deathtongue]

Also, don't forget that players can make bad assumptions about what the DM's job is. That is the point of the OP: it's not the DM's job to make sure you find rituals, unless you've talked to the DM and they say it is.

That's what I'm trying to get at. When it comes to getting your 8th-level barbarian a +1 weapon, I don't think you need to ask the DM ahead of time whether they're going to get a magic weapon. In fact, if the DM doesn't expect to make such opportunities probable then the DM should be upfront about it. Because going by the published adventures, enough low-grade magical weapons pop up that you should just expect them as part of adventuring.

Rituals are dicier. If the DM is largely just running, say, Curse of Strahd by the book then you shouldn't expect to get many or even any rituals unless you ask the DM to make them more available. And this isn't just a quirk specific to CoS, most published hardcovers make it hard to have either a mechanical or roleplaying justification for ritual copying availability.

Under most normal circumstances Ritual Caster is pretty strong. If you're worried, ask your DM if they think you'll have opportunities to gain new rituals.

Well, what counts as a normal circumstance? Does running Tomb of Annihilation by the book count as a normal circumstance? If not, why not? And if so, what responsibility does a player have to ask the DM to make enough rituals available for copying?

[Waterdeep Merch]

Well, what counts as a normal circumstance? Does running Tomb of Annihilation by the book count as a normal circumstance? If not, why not? And if so, what responsibility does a player have to ask the DM to make enough rituals available for copying?

There's no responsibility, it's more about the cost of not asking. If you don't ask, you run the risk of taking it and it not being all that useful. If you do, you have a reasonable barometer unless your DM lies to your face.

Speaking of, I played ToA and had Ritual Caster. It wasn't a problem because we got downtime and the DM let me spend it on learning new rituals- I find this to be the most common method of learning them in every game I've ever played. I've done the same for players in CoS and Dragon Heist, and have only disallowed learning rituals via time and money in a low-magic campaign where I explicitly told them it was going to be that way. No one took RC there.

Of course, that's just my experience. But AL allows you to do this, too, so I'd think that's a close precedent for normal.

[Deathtongue]

Speaking of, I played ToA and had Ritual Caster. It wasn't a problem because we got downtime and the DM let me spend it on learning new rituals.

About that: I don't think that's the way the book is intended to be played. You get a pretty strict time limit when the adventure starts, especially if you or a friend screws up, and Chult is big enough that you can't go back to Nyanzaru and meet the time limit. That said, while I do think the time limit is way too strict for non-OP parties I think a DM would be well in their rights to declare that asking for time out to search for spellcasting rituals is going against the spirit of the adventure. And that would definitely be an instance where a player should ask the DM to alter the plot a little bit. For example, make the [SPOILER] less adversarial and have a compatriot willing to trade spells even if they're not going to explicitly help you.

[Waterdeep Merch]

About that: I don't think that's the way the book is intended to be played. You get a pretty strict time limit when the adventure starts, especially if you or a friend screws up, and Chult is big enough that you can't go back to Nyanzaru and meet the time limit. That said, while I do think the time limit is way too strict for non-OP parties I think a DM would be well in their rights to declare that asking for time out to search for spellcasting rituals is going against the spirit of the adventure. And that would definitely be an instance where a player should ask the DM to alter the plot a little bit. For example, make the [SPOILER] less adversarial and have a compatriot willing to trade spells even if they're not going to explicitly help you.

No arguments there, but my DM on that one hated how the time crunch worked and happens to love the DT mechanic. The time crunch was essentially removed on the understanding that we would still pursue the objective with proper narrative haste. For downtime days, he treated it as more of a game mechanic than a part of the narrative, to avoid obvious problems. I do much the same when I run them, though I understand why this would annoy other gaming groups. It's not narratively cohesive.

[Man_Over_Game]

Teaguethebean / Man_Over_Game: Can you help me understand why you picked those numbers? I certainly don't see a game balance reason, since certain rituals (Detect Magic, Tiny Hut, Find Familiar) are way stronger than others (Instant Summons, Skywrite, Guiding Hand). I don't even really see a reason for your wizard spellbook numbers. I've played plenty of wizards, don't get me wrong, but I've never felt mechanically deprived when I wasn't able to copy spells for several levels. I of course took the opportunity to copy spells, but just the default spells you get on level up would've wet my whistle.

Honestly? Because missing 2/3 felt right. It leaves enough of a gap to allow someone else to occasionally be better at something than you, while also being enough to have the party make the expectation that you have a specialty.

That's what a feat should feel like: A specialty.

[Yakmala]

What comes first, your world or their game?

I've always treated D&D as shared storytelling. Sure, as a DM, I'm creating a world, a history, villains, NPC's, setting frequencies for things like magic use, divine intervention and a a hundred other things.

But it's nothing without the main protagonists (or antagonists for an evil party) and that's where they player's characters come in.

So I always make room for the player's aspirations. That doesn't always have to mean each of them has a greater destiny or some centuries-old prophecy about their future deeds. But if they are playing a Ritual Caster, either via Feat or Tomelock, they are going to find more rituals. If they are an Assassin, there are going to be opportunities to make surprise attacks. If they make a monk and I didn't flesh out a monastic order for my game, I'll make some time to do so. If they make a Barbarian, we're going to work together to figure out where their tribe is on the map and who their allies and enemies are. And so on.

Any well crafted world should be flexible enough that player aspirations don't shatter it.

[Dork_Forge]

In regards to ritual caster and the book of ancient secrets, both of those features give you instant access to two rituals of your choice at 1st level. In my opinion a player should be satisfied with that at the very least unless they have spoken to the DM explicitly about wanting to gain more rituals. This isn't the job of the DM to cater to your choice, it's something the character should be seeking out in downtime and let's be honest, doesn't impact the viability or functionality of the character like not gaining a magical weapon would when enemies start to commonly have non magical resistance.

The DM is a player too, I don't really like how this thread is kind of coming off in making the DM the only one responsible for validating player choice.

[Pex]

In your opinion, over a 10 level timeframe what would be the non player-screwing amount of rituals a DM needs to drop? Almost every INT-based NPC spellcaster has Detect Magic and the Archmage in the basic Monster Manual has Identify, so if you picked something like Comprehend Languages and Find Familiar, you'll be all-but-guaranteed to have at least three and likely even four if the game goes on long enough. Is that not enough? If so, how many rituals does the DM need to insert before they're not screwing over the players?

Not directed at me, but I'll answer. It's an amount of rituals equal to the player not complaining he's not getting enough rituals feeling like taking the feat was a waste of time. The DM can get ahead by providing for a few more than player satisfaction making the player feel like he hit the jackpot, but it's fine to provide enough and wait until the player expresses the desire that he's searching for more rituals. The DM then determines the appropriate time and place to get one by however means he likes from "Sure, here you go" to character must complete an epic quest where learning the ritual is part of the reward.

Nothing exists in the game without the DM's permission. If a published module lacks of something needed or wanted the DM adds it into the game anyway. It's not a problem of nor criticism towards the module. A module couldn't possibly account for every campaign everywhere. The DM does his job and adapts what's published to suit the game he is running.

If for some reason a DM wants to allow for a PC to have a Sunblade he doesn't need to run Curse of Strahd to do it.

[greenstone]

What gets me about the feat is how small the list of spells is. If you take Ritual Caster (Wizard) then the most you can have is 18 spells, only 3 of which are above 3rd level. Ritual Caster (Warlock) has no spells above 3rd level.

If you choose Ritual Caster (Wizard) then you can copy spells from a fellow PC (assuming there is a wizard in your party), with no chance of failure.

For all the other classes, your only source of spells is spell scrolls, and you might still fail to copy them, wasting time and money.

[Man_Over_Game]

The DM is a player too, I don't really like how this thread is kind of coming off in making the DM the only one responsible for validating player choice.

Unfortunately, DnD players are awkward. We aren't always forward with what's bothering us. DMs kinda has to use foresight to prevent problems preemptively. We already do it all the time by not rewarding too many magic items, allowing too many homebrew classes from outside sources, or by not allowing the Bard to seduce the Dragon.

Additionally, there's a big difference between an experienced player and new DM vs. a new player and an experienced DM. A player doesn't always have the tools fix a problem for another player, but a DM does.

The DM has more capability and power than any other player. And there's a Spiderman quote that's quite relevant...

[Teioh]

Just a question; could an EK with RC choose a ritual spell, scribe it directly into Ritual boom or indirectly through first scribing onto a scroll, then trade the ritual in for a new one on level up be anyway possible under RAW?

[Man_Over_Game]

Just a question; could an EK with RC choose a ritual spell, scribe it directly into Ritual boom or indirectly through first scribing onto a scroll, then trade the ritual in for a new one on level up be anyway possible under RAW?

Yes. As long as their DM allows the optional Magic Item Creation rules.

Scribing a scroll requires you to have that spell prepared, it requires resources, and it requires the Arcana skill. Technically, it also requires downtime.

Beyond that, anyone fulfilling those requirements can technically write a scroll.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Unfortunately, DnD players are awkward. We aren't always forward with what's bothering us.

Additionally, there's a big difference between an experienced player and new DM vs. a new player and an experienced DM. A player doesn't always have the tools fix a problem for another player, but a DM does.

The DM has more capability and power than any other player. And there's a Spiderman quote that's quite relevant...

I find DM's aren't any more immune to being awkward than their players are. We all come from similar stock.

Not every DM actually wants to be sitting where they are, either. A lot do it because it's the only way anyone gets to play a game at all, and not every DM has the time or energy to consider every detail of every player on top of all the other demanding things a DM has to do, nevermind all the things they should do. Only a very dedicated and experienced DM can be counted on to simply know to check over your abilities and think through how you will best enjoy them, especially when there's other abilities you have that they might think you prefer, and other entire players they have to keep in mind at the same time. Some might outright refuse given their own lack of time outside of preparing for an entire session's worth of fun for everyone else.

Good communication and foresight is the foundation of superior gaming, no doubt. But if I had to choose, I'd be more willing to cut some slack to the person that spends hours preparing my sessions than to a player that couldn't spare five minutes to help themselves.

[Dork_Forge]

Unfortunately, DnD players are awkward. We aren't always forward with what's bothering us. DMs kinda has to use foresight to prevent problems preemptively. We already do it all the time by not rewarding too many magic items, allowing too many homebrew classes from outside sources, or by not allowing the Bard to seduce the Dragon.

Additionally, there's a big difference between an experienced player and new DM vs. a new player and an experienced DM. A player doesn't always have the tools fix a problem for another player, but a DM does.

The DM has more capability and power than any other player. And there's a Spiderman quote that's quite relevant...

Every player has the power to have a conversation, whether for themselves or another player. If they are dissatisfied with a choice they made (again, both ritual options give you instant benefits that aren't DM dependent) then that's unfortunate but that's down to them not the DM. It's the kind of thing that goes away with experience but in no way is it indicative of a bad DM, nor are DMs obligated to provide rituals as loot or for purchase if no one has asked for it or if it clashes with their game.

I think it was you (apologies if not) that said what comes first, the players fun or the DMs world. Being a DM is a hell if a lot more work and investment than being a normal player, and things like world building is where they draw their fun from too.