Casting Stat Choice

[carrdrivesyou]

So I was thinking about the whole debate on "Should a sorcerer be a CON caster, and I was curious about something else. Would it break 5e design to be able to choose your character's casting ability?

Like, imagine a bard that excelled at bard college, but never developed people skills; and therefore used INT instead of CHA. What about a warlock that relies on their negotiating experience and leaning on their research to bargain for that power via Wisdom? What about an evangelizing priest that focused on preaching in the streets, and casts via a strong personality (Charisma)?

Would these break the game or be thematically interesting and fun to see play out?

What do you think Playgrounders?

[MrCharlie]

So I was thinking about the whole debate on "Should a sorcerer be a CON caster, and I was curious about something else. Would it break 5e design to be able to choose your character's casting ability?

Like, imagine a bard that excelled at bard college, but never developed people skills; and therefore used INT instead of CHA. What about a warlock that relies on their negotiating experience and leaning on their research to bargain for that power via Wisdom? What about an evangelizing priest that focused on preaching in the streets, and casts via a strong personality (Charisma)?

Would these break the game or be thematically interesting and fun to see play out?

What do you think Playgrounders?

I've said it for a while-I think Druids should be able to choose INT as their casting stat.

The distinction between druids and clerics has always been blurred, and with archetypes like stars druid and nature cleric I feel that it's been breached even more. However druids have always had an aspect of lore to their magic-wilderness lore, nature lore, natural secrets, adventuring for knowledge-that could easily lend itself to an intelligence casting stat. It also helps finalize the distinction between what power from a deity and power from nature actually means. Finally, it helps make rangers and druids more intertwined-Rangers are the survival experts, who are generally more knowledge of practical skills. Druids are knowledgeable about the more esoteric aspects of nature and the lore surrounding it. Ironically, I think giving them different casting stats helps define the ranger-druid relationship more via contrast.

Also, it fixes that nature is an INT skill, if the druid is interested in taking it.

In general, changing a casting stat to one of the physical attributes is problematic, but changing it to one of the mental ones is not. This is because most mental stats only matter for roleplaying, skill use, and saving throw, beyond their spellcasting use-and therefore changing the casting stat is at best a sidegrade. Changing it to a physical attribute opens up potential synergy that can be destructive-CON sorcerers are much stronger than CHA sorcerers, and a STR or DEX based Gish would be significantly more efficient.

Hence, if a physical casting stat is allowed, it should be a conscious decision balance wise that is planned for-one example of a de-facto physical casting stat is STR or DEX for battlemasters, as many of their maneuvers are like pseudo-spells. Hexblades provide an example of the power of casting-physical synergy, and they aren't even close to as powerful as a DEX based casting stat would be.

Personally, I've toyed with the idea of giving thieves a DEX based DC for any magic items they use magic device with, and I think I'll implement it the next time a player rolls a thief so I can see the effects. My guess is it won't matter due to the limited scope of their use magic device. The real question is if you could give arcane trickster DEX spellcasting and what it would do to the game.

Anyway, this is a question I've thought a bit about, but I'll leave it at that.

[Ralanr]

IMO, changing any casting stat from CHA to something else is an overall nerf because of how useful Charisma actually is for skills. Now with Wisdom I'd argue it's less of a nerf because wisdom has good skills and it helps your wis saves. But going from Charisma to intelligence? Honestly that's a nerf and if you're doing it for flavor the more power to you.

I'm on the fence when it comes to making Sorcerer's Con based. On one hand, I think it makes sense because they are channeling raw magic with their bodies (but still need components and a focus because of course they do). On the other, it makes them, at base, the beefiest of casters, but I feel like that's almost intended with how they are proficient in con saves, which allow them to be good at concentration spells.

[Ralanr]

I've said it for a while-I think Druids should be able to choose INT as their casting stat.

The distinction between druids and clerics has always been blurred, and with archetypes like stars druid and nature cleric I feel that it's been breached even more. However druids have always had an aspect of lore to their magic-wilderness lore, nature lore, natural secrets, adventuring for knowledge-that could easily lend itself to an intelligence casting stat. It also helps finalize the distinction between what power from a deity and power from nature actually means. Finally, it helps make rangers and druids more intertwined-Rangers are the survival experts, who are generally more knowledge of practical skills. Druids are knowledgeable about the more esoteric aspects of nature and the lore surrounding it. Ironically, I think giving them different casting stats helps define the ranger-druid relationship more via contrast.

Funnily enough, this actually makes me think Clerics should be int casters instead of wis. Druids are more about listening to the natural world imo, while clerics are devote and study the words of their gods.

[MrCharlie]

IMO, changing any casting stat from CHA to something else is an overall nerf because of how useful Charisma actually is for skills. Now with Wisdom I'd argue it's less of a nerf because wisdom has good skills and it helps your wis saves. But going from Charisma to intelligence? Honestly that's a nerf and if you're doing it for flavor the more power to you.

After years of experience in 5e, I can say with certainty that wisdom is the most powerful of the mental stats. Charisma is tied with intelligence, with intelligence being better for saves and charisma arguably having slightly better skills.

The main thing is that intelligence and charisma skills do exactly what the DM lets them do and no more, with limited guidance from the text-and most DMs won't let you re-write someone's personality with even a DC 40 persuasion of deception check, it's just not happening.

Wisdom has perception, which has explicit rules text and applies directly to combat, and insight which is arguably just as useful as the charisma skills.

I understand anecdotal evidence for charisma being a god stat exists, and have stories that could be used as such myself, but it's reporting bias. A high wisdom saves parties.

Funnily enough, this actually makes me think Clerics should be int casters instead of wis. Druids are more about listening to the natural world imo, while clerics are devote and study the words of their gods.

I harken back to old "pagen" mystery cults when I think of Druids, and there is certainly an aura of mystery and lore associated with those. Adventuring clerics have always been more about practical knowledge and smashing evil with blunt instruments while leading their flock-lay preachers, basically.

There is absolutely room for INT based clerics though, perhaps as a fundamental class choice-use INT and gain a bunch of skills and expertise in religion, or use WIS and gain heavy armor and martial weapons.

[RogueJK]

After years of experience in 5e, I can say with certainty that wisdom is the most powerful of the mental stats.

Besides just skills, it also seems to me like many of the nasty status effect abilities/spells are based on WIS saves.

INT and CHA each have a few notable examples, with stuff like some Psionic/Psychic effects and Possession, respectively. But they just don't seem to be as common as WIS, from what I can recall.

[MrCharlie]

Besides just skills, it also seems to me like many of the nasty status effect abilities/spells are based on WIS saves.

INT and CHA each have a few notable examples, with stuff like some Psionic/Psychic effects and Possession, respectively. But they just don't seem to be as common as WIS, from what I can recall.

Statistically WIS saves are more common by an order of magnitude and change, if I recall my MM and other published content correctly. Some truly awful saves are gated with other stats, but WIS happens ludicrously more often.

[Man_Over_Game]

So I was thinking about the whole debate on "Should a sorcerer be a CON caster, and I was curious about something else. Would it break 5e design to be able to choose your character's casting ability?

Like, imagine a bard that excelled at bard college, but never developed people skills; and therefore used INT instead of CHA. What about a warlock that relies on their negotiating experience and leaning on their research to bargain for that power via Wisdom? What about an evangelizing priest that focused on preaching in the streets, and casts via a strong personality (Charisma)?

Would these break the game or be thematically interesting and fun to see play out?

What do you think Playgrounders?

I made a pretty extensive homebrew that allows you to pick alternate feature stats while allowing multiclassing, but it comes with requirements to keep those options. Essentially, it allows you to use EITHER your default stat or the alternate stat as long as you maintain the requirements.

All of the options also include details on the balance concerns for each alternate stat, and how the requirements address those. For instance, the Charisma-Cleric requires you to not take Warlock or Sorcerer levels, and doing so will then revert your casting modifier as a Cleric back to Wisdom.

Comes with some wonky stuff, like Strength Monk, Strength Rogue, Intelligence Paladin, Dexterity Barbarian, and a Con-based Sorcerer (that Sorcerer is interesting, it is forced to multiclass and is designed to fit well with any other class). There's about 2 options for every class.

The design goal was all about allowing as much as possible, as long as the default content is still stronger. So you can't make anything of the equivalent power level of a Sorlockadin, but everything else goes (like how Bards should multiclass with Wizard just fine, because they aren't getting anything more than they would from Sorcerer).
a
Link is in the signature, under Prestige Options, if you're interested. It's a bit outdated, as I haven't made updates since before Tasha's, but it still holds up well enough.

[Emongnome777]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up how this impacts multiclassing. Charisma casters are pretty op because of how they can multiclass sometimes. Adding wizard, cleric, etc to that list and it would be even more powerful potentially.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up how this impacts multiclassing. Charisma casters are pretty op because of how they can multiclass sometimes. Adding wizard, cleric, etc to that list and it would be even more powerful potentially.

Not trying to plug, but my Prestige Options cover this pretty thoroughly. Basically, as long as you don't allow Warlocks, Clerics and Sorcerers to multiclass too easily, it doesn't really matter too much what happens. As far as powercreep goes, those are the three classes that can substantially empower most caster builds with little investment.

The bladesinger can get a bit too strong, if you can find a way to deal most of your weapon damage using your casting stat (for instance, with Monks), but otherwise it's pretty hard to overpower the default options too much.

[Gydian]

Excluding multi-classing as long as it’s not DEX I think there isn’t much problem. Switching around which mental stat is used for casting or other features (e.g. unarmored defense) can for make great unique characters that aren’t just made for combat. The CON exception for sorcerer makes sense too.

[Reach Weapon]

If I was starting close to the ground, I'd probably end SAD casting, probably making one stat primarily boost the raw power or sustainability, while another boosts the versatility or precision, or perhaps limits the unfortunate side effects.

In general, changing a casting stat to one of the physical attributes is problematic, but changing it to one of the mental ones is not.

This is spot on. It's not at all the physical stats for casting is bad, just that the class has to specifically worked to limit over-powered synergies.

[MrCharlie]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up how this impacts multiclassing. Charisma casters are pretty op because of how they can multiclass sometimes. Adding wizard, cleric, etc to that list and it would be even more powerful potentially.

Caster multiclassing is pretty mediocre if you're multiclassing full casters-Bard Sorcerer, for instance, is rarely done despite the fact that the multiclass is supremely SAD. Mostly, it's martial half-caster+full-caster that gets used, including warlocks as half-casters due to similarity of their abilities.

That means that combos like paladin/druid, cleric/artificer, etc. are more prevalent, but most of those don't offer much synergy. The one thing to watch out for is Paladin, but the other half-casters aren't that great as dips. Ranger is decent but not terribly synergistic. The best I can think of is Paladin/Moon druid for smites. It's also the only combo that already sees play-and we only make it stronger if we allow Druids to be charisma based, which seems to be a stretch.

The main thing is that if there was a completely OP combo, people would just take a less efficient point buy and do it already. This just means there are a bunch of okay combos, which I'm fine with.

[MoiMagnus]

Would it break 5e design to be able to choose your character's casting ability?

So the Monk is no able to get its ki DC on Strength or Constitution (and dump Wisdom).
Same for the Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster who can drop Intelligence.
The warlock pact of the blade is also happy to be able to spellcast and fight with the same ability score without needing to take Hexblade.

=> I think this is a reasonable step toward rebalancing the classes. Now every character can just focus on a single ability score rather than having SAD and MAD classes.
I don't think this is a good step, as I'd prefer the game to go more toward MAD rather than SAD. But at least now everyone is the same.

If you keep spellcasting to a mental ability score (chosen by the character), then it's much less "degenerate", in the sense that apart from multiclassing, you should not have anything too weird happening. And it's definitely something allowed as homebrew at our table (after discussion with the GM, like every homebrew). We currently have a Charisma Monk at our table, and he's great.

[MrStabby]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up how this impacts multiclassing. Charisma casters are pretty op because of how they can multiclass sometimes. Adding wizard, cleric, etc to that list and it would be even more powerful potentially.

Yeah, I allow changing casting stats (between mental stats anyway) but I do have as a condition that the characrer cannot take levels in a class that has that same stat as a casting stat.

On the physical side, most purposes are pretty interchangeable anyway here I just allow either dex or Str to be a prerequisite for multiclassing.

Statistically WIS saves are more common by an order of magnitude and change, if I recall my MM and other published content correctly. Some truly awful saves are gated with other stats, but WIS happens ludicrously more often.

I thought this was a pretty big problem at the start but as a DM I have no problem making different spell saves equally common. Creating charisma save spells or int save spells or just upping the frequency/severity of the ones that already exist let's this be thematic.

I think this adds a lot to the game - now you can play a Theologian Cleric, a Preacher Cleric, a Wise Mentor Cleric and so on and have them be good at the skills one might associate with such a character.

[Gydian]

It sounds like this is boiling down to a ‘don’t make the character to SAD’ dilemma.

As a player I feel as long as I’m not dependent on more than 2.5 stats it’s a good character. As a DM I try to urge my players to be as SAD as possible. I like them to be powerful enough to survive more monsters.

I love the idea of exploring the reason why the character might use a non-traditional stat. Like a monk who trained at a monastery that taught focusing thoughts instead of clearing the mind. (Int instead of wis) or a warlock that was smart enough to find an extra-planar being to make a deal. Or the cleric who is a fantasy version of a televangelist so uses charisma.

[RogueJK]

Or the cleric who is a fantasy version of a televangelist so uses charisma.

I've played two such characters (including one currently), neither of which were actual CHA-based Clerics. One was a Life Cleric 1/Lore Bard X, and the other one is a Celestial Warlock. Both were great fun.

A Divine Soul Sorcerer could even fill the same concept.

So that's entirely doable without swapping casting stats around for the Cleric class.


Same for a number of other "alternate stat" concepts. Want to be a spellcaster who uses their Wisdom and experience to channel arcane power? Play an Arcana Cleric or Land Druid, with the Ritual Caster Wizard feat. Want to be a genuis-level IQ melee fighter who uses his Intelligence to deduce the most optimal ways to hit someone? Battle Master Artificer. Want to be a Intelligent healer who relies on their knowledge gained from studying medicine and anatomy at Magic College? Jorasco Halfling Transmuter Wizard.

[Greywander]

I've said something like this before, but this is how I see the different casting stats:

Intelligence. Magic learned through study. Pretty straightforward. You learned magic at a school of some kind, which involved reading a lot of books and gaining a lot of academic knowledge, which is what INT is supposed to represent anyway. Definitely makes sense for some bards.

Wisdom. Magic bestowed upon you by an outside source. Your Wisdom represents how in tune you are with that source, making the magic stronger as you learn to work with your source instead of in spite of them. I think this suits divine casters especially well, as their WIS represents how well they understand their god's will. A high WIS cleric can look at a situation and see it as their god would see it, and naturally decides to take the same action their god would take, and this is because they've so thoroughly attuned to the teachings of their god on the deepest level. Not just a surface, academic level, but on a deep, spiritual level. High-WIS clerics understand their god like a married couple understands each other.

Charisma. Magic produced from within. Charisma represents, among other things, your confidence. It is your ability to project your will into the world. In your case, that will sometimes takes the form of giant fireballs. If you doubt yourself, your magic becomes weak and impotent, but when you are full of conviction then your magic flares up in righteous power.

I could see paladins being either WIS or CHA based, honestly. Clerics, eh, I still think WIS makes the most sense, but I could see a god of knowledge having INT-based clerics. CHA wizards could actually make sense if you imagine that they're actually sorcerers, and their wizard study was just a method of tapping into that power within them. The biggest offender, though, is probably warlocks. Warlocks gain their power from an outside source, so they're WIS-based, right? But this power can take the form of occult knowledge that unlock dark secrets, so they're INT-based, right? Or maybe, their pact actually grants them supernatural powers that flow from within... which brings them back to being CHA-based. It just isn't clear what kind of caster a warlock should be. Can they be anything? Should they be some kind of mix?

If I was starting close to the ground, I'd probably end SAD casting, probably making one stat primarily boost the raw power or sustainability, while another boosts the versatility or precision, or perhaps limits the unfortunate side effects.

Actually, what I'd like to see is each mental stat giving some kind of benefit, making them useful to any caster but specific stats being more useful to specific kinds of casters. Similar to how each physical stat is useful to martial characters, but they're useful in different ways. In order to keep things balanced, we could give every caster a few slight nerfs which would be balanced out by having a modest score in each mental stat.

For example, we could reduce the number of spells known/prepared by all casters, and instead give them a bonus to their spells known/prepared according to their INT mod. Here, INT represents their ability to plan ahead and prepare for any eventuality (which is pretty much the MO for wizards).

For WIS, perhaps when you cast a leveled spell on a friendly creature, they would gain temp HP equal to your WIS modifier. This represents the calming and reassuring effect you have on your allies.

For CHA, you might get one extra spell slot whose level is equal to your CHA mod. This represents your stronger will and your power to exert your will on the world.

Or something like that. And then you can just use the highest of INT, WIS, or CHA for your spell attacks and save DCs.

Alternatively, maybe each school of magic uses its own stat for spell attacks and save DCs. Enchantment and Illusion use CHA. Transmutation and Conjuration use INT. Divination and Abjuration use WIS. And Necromancy and Evocation use CON. This is probably a horrible idea, but it probably could have worked if the game had been designed for it from the start.

[GeneralVryth]

To answer the question directly, I think mental for mental will usually be balanced until multi-classing comes into play. Even then it just makes certain combinations viable. The main risk is someone taking something already kind of degenerate and making it worse. Which is where a DM veto kind of comes up.

Personally, I have always thought certain classes/sub-classes should have specific options where you can change the primary caster stat. Lore Bards being Int based. Knowledge Clerics Int based. Enhancement Wizards cha based (though that feels like it could lead to some badness).

I've said something like this before, but this is how I see the different casting stats:

Intelligence. Magic learned through study. Pretty straightforward. You learned magic at a school of some kind, which involved reading a lot of books and gaining a lot of academic knowledge, which is what INT is supposed to represent anyway. Definitely makes sense for some bards.

Wisdom. Magic bestowed upon you by an outside source. Your Wisdom represents how in tune you are with that source, making the magic stronger as you learn to work with your source instead of in spite of them. I think this suits divine casters especially well, as their WIS represents how well they understand their god's will. A high WIS cleric can look at a situation and see it as their god would see it, and naturally decides to take the same action their god would take, and this is because they've so thoroughly attuned to the teachings of their god on the deepest level. Not just a surface, academic level, but on a deep, spiritual level. High-WIS clerics understand their god like a married couple understands each other.

Charisma. Magic produced from within. Charisma represents, among other things, your confidence. It is your ability to project your will into the world. In your case, that will sometimes takes the form of giant fireballs. If you doubt yourself, your magic becomes weak and impotent, but when you are full of conviction then your magic flares up in righteous power.

Int Bards are a common thought of mine. Get rid of the minstrel bits, and focus on int and Bards make a nice kind of "Tactician" class.

Actually, what I'd like to see is each mental stat giving some kind of benefit, making them useful to any caster but specific stats being more useful to specific kinds of casters. Similar to how each physical stat is useful to martial characters, but they're useful in different ways. In order to keep things balanced, we could give every caster a few slight nerfs which would be balanced out by having a modest score in each mental stat.

For example, we could reduce the number of spells known/prepared by all casters, and instead give them a bonus to their spells known/prepared according to their INT mod. Here, INT represents their ability to plan ahead and prepare for any eventuality (which is pretty much the MO for wizards).

For WIS, perhaps when you cast a leveled spell on a friendly creature, they would gain temp HP equal to your WIS modifier. This represents the calming and reassuring effect you have on your allies.

For CHA, you might get one extra spell slot whose level is equal to your CHA mod. This represents your stronger will and your power to exert your will on the world.

Or something like that. And then you can just use the highest of INT, WIS, or CHA for your spell attacks and save DCs.

Alternatively, maybe each school of magic uses its own stat for spell attacks and save DCs. Enchantment and Illusion use CHA. Transmutation and Conjuration use INT. Divination and Abjuration use WIS. And Necromancy and Evocation use CON. This is probably a horrible idea, but it probably could have worked if the game had been designed for it from the start.

I kind of like this. You need a different bonus for WIS, but the other two work quite well (and could shine in a system designed for them). Ideally you would also like to see martial benefits for those scores as well. Really every stat should ideally have some kind of combat bonus.

[Kane0]

I have an established houserule allowing:

Int Clerics
Int Warlocks
Wis Paladins
Wis Sorcerers
Cha AT Rogues
Int or Wis Bards (this one hasnt been tested as thoroughly, largely comes down to choice of subclass)

And one of my next character concepts if I ever get out of the DM chair is a Str Sorcerer which has me really excited.

Not sure if I would go for a Con full caster just in case my eyeball for balance fails me, but something like a Con 1/3rd caster (say for example an AT/EK analogue for the barbarian) or maybe even Ranger sounds fine IMO.

Basically, as long as you don't allow Warlocks, Clerics and Sorcerers to multiclass too easily, it doesn't really matter too much what happens.

I can totally see Sorcs and Locks, but why Clerics? Because their spells are so dope and their Domain starts at 1st?

[MoiMagnus]

I can totally see Sorcs and Locks, but why Clerics? Because their spells are so dope and their Domain starts at 1st?

And half of their domains grant heavy armor proficiency at level 1. (You don't always get the proficiency from the classes you multiclass with, so multiclassing into fighter does NOT grant you heavy armour proficiency, but you always get the proficiency of the subclasses, so multiclassing into life cleric does grant you this proficiency)

[Man_Over_Game]

I can totally see Sorcs and Locks, but why Clerics? Because their spells are so dope and their Domain starts at 1st?

To go into depth, it's important to explain the two different forms of power creep:

The first is by improving the thing you do really well. Leveling into your main caster level, for instance, gives you access to bigger and badder spells.
The second is by picking up benefits that passively help you while doing your main thing (like increasing your AC), or they give you options for when you're not doing your main thing (like getting a good use for level 1 spell slots).

Warlocks and Sorcerers help with number 2 through improving spells. Clerics do the same thing by improving armor without delaying spell slot levels, as well as providing a number of spell effects that you otherwise wouldn't have much access to. Many of their best spells also use a Bonus Action, giving you a way of spending those level 1-2 spell slots you might not otherwise have much use for.

Clerics help rub out those weaknesses in casters. Clerics are almost OP, they just happen to be balanced by being terrible at being selfish (and being an OP team player is a good thing). Their damage is pretty subpar without some very specific spells and risking using Concentration on the front lines, and most of their best spells (like Guiding Bolt) require your allies to capitalize on. By allowing Clerics to easily multiclass with something like a Wizard, you'd end up with a caster that was capable of doing almost anything.

Besides those three, no other casters get tools that could really synergize with other class's features. For instance, Wild Shape is a great tool, but it doesn't actually synergize with much, meaning that it basically can function on anyone at the same power level as it would for a Druid. And so Druids don't really have the same power creep problems Clerics do when multiclassing.

[Greywander]

I kind of like this. You need a different bonus for WIS, but the other two work quite well (and could shine in a system designed for them). Ideally you would also like to see martial benefits for those scores as well. Really every stat should ideally have some kind of combat bonus.

Yeah, I was kind of grasping when I wrote out that WIS bonus. Ideally we'd want something that was like the other two, interacting directly with the spellcasting system. The thing is, aside from spells known/prepared and spell slots, I can't think of much else that could be influenced. Maybe cantrips known, but that seems too strong, and not all caster classes get cantrips.

[quindraco]

I have an established houserule allowing:

Int Clerics
Int Warlocks
Wis Paladins
Wis Sorcerers
Cha AT Rogues
Int or Wis Bards (this one hasnt been tested as thoroughly, largely comes down to choice of subclass)

And one of my next character concepts if I ever get out of the DM chair is a Str Sorcerer which has me really excited.

Not sure if I would go for a Con full caster just in case my eyeball for balance fails me, but something like a Con 1/3rd caster (say for example an AT/EK analogue for the barbarian) or maybe even Ranger sounds fine IMO.


I can totally see Sorcs and Locks, but why Clerics? Because their spells are so dope and their Domain starts at 1st?

Anything -> Int is inherently balanced because Int is such a bad ability score. Since the utility of the abilities is roughly Wis > Cha > Int, that means the only options you listed that might be too powerful are AT Rogues (since Int -> Cha is an upgrade) and Wis Paladins/Sorcerers/Bards (since Cha -> Wis is an upgrade). Assuming monoclassing, of course. As soon as you start letting casters multiclass with their new spellcasting abilities, brand new combos the community hasn't explored might crop up.

[GeneralVryth]

Yeah, I was kind of grasping when I wrote out that WIS bonus. Ideally we'd want something that was like the other two, interacting directly with the spellcasting system. The thing is, aside from spells known/prepared and spell slots, I can't think of much else that could be influenced. Maybe cantrips known, but that seems too strong, and not all caster classes get cantrips.

Paladins and Rangers now have Fighting Styles that grant cantrips with Tasha's so cantrips could work. As for balanced you're talking about what's probably the 4th or 5th pick so it's really adding power instead of options.

Thinking though all the pieces in the spellcasting system you have:
Spell Slots/Points
Spells Known/Prepared
Cantrips Known
Spell Atk. Mod/Save DC
Concentration Mod
Concentration Amount
Up-casting

If generally available you have:
Metamagics Known
Sorcery Points


There are a few options there especially if the system is overhauled a little. Cantrips are likely one good option, but just to offer up a different one what if you WIS mod up-cast levels you could apply to your spells per long rest (or a weaker version you can up-cast WIS mod spells 1 level for per long rest).

You would get CHA giving you raw power, WIS letting you make the most of your power, and INT giving you other ways to use it.