This may be a simple question, but please help.
Wizard spells: PH says you start with a spell book that has six first level spells.
But in the chart on p 113, it says a 1st level wiz has two 1st level spell slots.
On p 114, it says ( I am paraphrasing a bit) " prepare the list of wiz spells available for you to cast . . . Choose # of wiz spells from your spell book equal to int mod + wiz level. Spells must be of levels that you have slots.
Ex: 3rd level: four first and two second level slots. With an int of 16 gives six spells of 1st or 2nd in ANY combo chosen from spell book."
So, if I have 1st level wiz with 16 int, I can cast four spells a day ( not including cantrips), right? If that is true, what is the difference between having 6 spells from spellbook and 2 spells on the spell slot chart on p 113 and being able to cast 1 spell+int mod before long rest?
I know the answer is simple, but I just can't see it. Help, please. Thanks.
spellbook: how many spells you have to choose from when you prepare them
prepared spells: how many spells you can can actually prepare (memorize)
Spell slots: how many spells you can actually cast
So...using your example:
You have a total of 6 spells in your spellbook. You can memorize 4 of them (+3 INT modifier + level). You can actually cast two of them.
Unlike earlier Vancian D&D, memorizing a spell doesn't mean it's taking up a slot. So if you memorize sleep, burning hands, magic missile, and charm person, you can use any of those four spells when you cast your 2 spells per day. You can do 2ea magic missiles, or 1 sleep and 1 charm, etc. It offers extra flexibility over older D&D. Speaking of extra flexibility, you can cast a lower level spell in a higher slot to increase it's effect. And spells that are rituals don't use up one of your valuable slots; they just take longer to cast.
The Spellbook is the pool of spells that you can memorize for the day (or cast as rituals as appropriate).
Spells known is the pool of spells you have memorized for the day to choose from when casting, and is affected by Int.
Slots are how many spells you can cast of each level, and is not affected by Int.
Elegant description guys. Thanks.
Gaming with this system for the second time tonight and wanted to have it straight.
Yeah, it's definitely a bit confusing to read, but in practice, it's great.
What about a 1st level cleric? Do they have all the first level spells to prepare from ( instead of a 6 spell limit)?
Quote from: Vic99;816495What about a 1st level cleric? Do they have all the first level spells to prepare from ( instead of a 6 spell limit)?
A Cleric can prepare WIS modifier + Cleric Level in spells.
They actually cast spells based on their spell slots defined in the spell slot table for Clerics.
After a long rest you can change your spells again that are prepared, which takes 1 minute per spell level.
... and yes, clerics have the entire 1st lvl spell list to choose from. You may limit it by using 5e Basic .pdf instead of PHB, or shorten it to something more manageable for your table, as per GM prerogative. (It really is a lot to choose from for players new to 5e, as most spell casting classes are.)
Thanks again. Hey, look, closure to a thread. . . . Unless . . .
It's funny. On the one hand, I don't think this spell system is 'properly' Vancian for 'proper' D&D, on an esthetic level.
On a practical level, I don't give a shit about whether it's properly D&D, and it looks fantastic.
Another cool thing is that since spell slots are now standardized, it's MUCH easier to permit multiclassing across spellcasters, and doesn't face the massive problems that come up in 3e.
Mind you, I think it's best to avoid multiclassing, but, still.
Quote from: Opaopajr;816508... and yes, clerics have the entire 1st lvl spell list to choose from. You may limit it by using 5e Basic .pdf instead of PHB, or shorten it to something more manageable for your table, as per GM prerogative. (It really is a lot to choose from for players new to 5e, as most spell casting classes are.)
Also remember that clerics have two domain spells 1st-5th that are always prepared beyond the Wis bonus + level. Also for Wizards do not forget arcane recovery in your example 1st level wizard they could recover 1 spell slot with a short rest once per day.
Quote from: snooggums;816469The Spellbook is the pool of spells that you can memorize for the day (or cast as rituals as appropriate).
Spells known is the pool of spells you have memorized for the day to choose from when casting, and is affected by Int.
Slots are how many spells you can cast of each level, and is not affected by Int.
That's... actually really well done. I'll never be a fan of Vancian magic, but so long as WotC continues to refuse to just slaughter the goddamn cow I don't really see how it could be done better.
I dunno, they pretty much did slaughter that ol' cow.
"Cast up to N spells from this short list you've settled on" is more like an MMO (GuildWars 1 comes to mind, where you swap abilities around before leaving town) than anything else.
It's basically a spell point system, with some hedges to avoid the 'novaburst' issue that can sometimes be a problem with spell points.
Another feature, woodsmoke, you might not have known... spells have a base spell level, but you can use higher level 'slots.' Which then makes them more powerful.
So, for example, magic missile does 1d4+1 as a Spell Level 1 spell. If you cast it more powerfully (spell level 2), you toss an extra missile (1d4+1, 1d4+1). And so on.
Effectively? It's like 'I'm going to overcast this spell with more spell points.'
Quote from: Will;816710spells have a base spell level, but you can use higher level 'slots.' Which then makes them more powerful.
This also has the benefit of not choking up the spell lists with repetitious spells of slightly different power; cure light wounds, cure serious wounds, etc. (And it compares favorably with the old method of upping spell effects with caster level.)
(But the base for magic missile at 1st level is three such darts, with one extra dart per spell level higher.)
Quote from: Will;816710I dunno, they pretty much did slaughter that ol' cow.
"Cast up to N spells from this short list you've settled on" is more like an MMO (GuildWars 1 comes to mind, where you swap abilities around before leaving town) than anything else.
It's basically a spell point system, with some hedges to avoid the 'novaburst' issue that can sometimes be a problem with spell points.
It's certainly much better than it was, but as I understand it there's still no way to swap out prepared spells without a long rest. Drawing from a pool of prepared spells rather than each one being assigned to a particular slot mitigates that somewhat, but it's still entirely possible for a caster to find her/himself up Shit Creek without a paddle because s/he flubbed her/his Be Psychic check when putting together her/his list in the morning (ye gods but English really needs a gender-neutral pronoun).
Compare this to Earthdawn, f'rex, in which a caster can reattune a spell matrix (or several) on the fly by essentially taking a full round action and eating some strain damage. And this is on top of the fact the standard method for (re)attuning a spell matrix only takes 10 minutes. That still leaves the novaburst issue, of course, but that's why I also don't particularly like spell points, or magic-as-resource-management systems in general.
Quote from: Will;816710Another feature, woodsmoke, you might not have known... spells have a base spell level, but you can use higher level 'slots.' Which then makes them more powerful.
I was aware of that, and it's a welcome change. Reminds me of the Unearthed Arcana (I think) S&S supplement for 3.5 that tried to pare down the spell lists a bit by just having Elemental Bolt/Ball/X and the caster simply chose which element to use when casting the spell.
On the whole I really like most of what I've read about 5e, and what little I don't is generally stuff I already disliked about D&D in general. It's not [strike]Earthdawn[/strike] :p perfect, but it's about as close as I think D&D will ever get for me, and if I'm not able to sell my group on ED4 when it finally releases I've every intention of lobbying hard for 5e.
Is Earthdawn anywhere near as light as 5e?
(And before people who rejoice in finding a connotation and running for the end zone, I'm not in any way suggesting 5e is a rules light game)
Official answer: Almost certainly not. ED1 came out during the early '90s, IIRC, and was more or less comparable to AD&D 2e; basically FASA filing off the serial numbers, cleaning up some of the clunkier mechanics and axing Vancian magic altogether in favor of Thread Weaving, which essentially used target numbers instead of limited casting slots (it also split magic users up into distinct disciplines, which I vastly prefer to the generic wizard + school specialization approach of D&D). I don't imagine anyone would call AD&D rules-lite, and given the broad similarities between the two I can't see the adjective being applied to Earthdawn either. ED2 (released by Living Room Games) tried to clean out some of the cruft while upping the general power level of the game a bit; I thought it worked fairly well, but as LRG wasn't trying to simplify things 2e wasn't really any better on that front. 3rd Edition/Revised/Classic were all published by Redbrick, Ltd. and were thus a chaotic mess of towering fuck ups. I washed my hands of the whole line years ago.
Unofficial answer: Maybe. The folks at FASA Games have said one of their main goals in designing ED4 is streamlining and simplifying things, but as I missed the KickStarter I don't have any info beyond that what's been released to the general public. I'm hopeful they can make good on their intention, and the way they've changed how armor-defeating hits work, at least, seems a step in the right direction, but it remains to be seen how successful they are overall. My gut tells me it'll probably have a fair bit more mechanical heft to it than 5e, and I doubt it will be nearly as modular (if at all), but for me, at least, it has the benefit of being my favorite TTRPG backed by the fact my group has spent the past few years playing Pathfinder, so fairly crunchy mechanics isn't really a detriment in my circumstances.
The 5e method worked really well when my group's wizard lost his spellbook. In the past, I have often been a little hesitant to go after spellbooks due to the crippling nature on wizards. Now, fuck you wizard, you still have some juice, and it totally makes sense to lose your book here.
Quote from: Old One Eye;816834The 5e method worked really well when my group's wizard lost his spellbook. In the past, I have often been a little hesitant to go after spellbooks due to the crippling nature on wizards. Now, fuck you wizard, you still have some juice, and it totally makes sense to lose your book here.
Do you make fighters lose their armor, or clerics lose their ability to pray for new spells as often as a wizard loses their spellbook?
If not, why do you pick on wizards?
A spell book is easier to lose than armor you are wearing?
I always figured that was a balancing element. (Not one I like, mind you)
Quote from: snooggums;816895Do you make fighters lose their armor, or clerics lose their ability to pray for new spells as often as a wizard loses their spellbook?
If not, why do you pick on wizards?
The whole party was captured and sold into slavery. Everyone lost everything.
In which case, the Wizard actually has the most "boom" left in the group, compared to the naked Fighter (but not Monk)...
Quote from: snooggums;816895If not, why do you pick on wizards?
Because they're nerds.
Wizard spellbooks SHOULD be a vulnerability. Of course, just trying to intentionally punish wizards for being wizards is a shitty extreme to take that concept.