How powerful (or not) is this?

[Sabeta]

The setting that I'm writing for my upcoming campaign is very high magic. To the point that just about everyone in the world can do a little of magic. In order to make it balanced this would basically come off as an additional Racial Trait. Mages can get the innate casting traits, and martials get a select pool of traits to pick from. (They don't have to go this way, just an example) They're all elementally themed, so these traits could include things like "You get firebolt for free" or "You gain resistance to cold damage". Something like "You gain extra proficiency in this or that" would be off the table (save maybe survival skills for someone under the Earth Element)

[Expected]

It sounds interesting and won't be too overpowered except I'd be cautious about handing out resistances.

[Nidgit]

Seems fairly simple. Another similar idea would be to give the players all Magic Initiate, or a free feat from a limited magic-related list.

[Fable Wright]

I think giving everyone an extra cantrip would be a good way of doing this. Fighters being able to Mending their swords. All Rogues and Clerics being able to use Booming Blade instead of just Arcane Tricksters and Arcana Clerics. Thaumaturgy/Druidcraft/Prestidigitation for flavor. It sells the widespread nature of magic when everyone can do it all the time, without the gonzo smorgasbord of options Magic Initiate for all opens up.

[Lestrange]

If it's innate rather than taught, perhaps you don't get to choose your magical ability.

You could make a table like 1-3 (two cantrips), 4-5 (level 1 spell), 6 (resistance) and have people roll a d6 and then roll again on a more specific table for the spells.
Or whatever dice size and options you prefer, or maybe you use a mutation table or something similar.

Creatures are born with the overflowing power of the world and might take feats to improve the abilities they've had since birth...

[Man_Over_Game]

If it's innate rather than taught, perhaps you don't get to choose your magical ability.

I think basing the spellcasting attribute off of Constitution would work rather well.

Mages would be rewarded for having more magic, which allows multiple means of synergy.

Mundanes would be rewarded, due to the fact that Constitution is a common ability score to invest in for them, and the fact that they generally rely less on tertiary stats.

The most overpowered example I could think of is a Barbarian (highest Con) getting a spell, and that's countered by their inherent Rage.

[Pex]

Maybe borrow from Eberron. Everyone is dragonmarked, in effect if not having a physical birthmark or maybe they do. The dragonmark ability is added to the regular racial abilities instead of being a subrace, unless you want everyone to be a subrace. Aberrants are those who are late bloomers. You can mix and match spells for variety or create your own theme of spells using dragonmarks as a framework.

[Sparky McDibben]

You could also tie this into political factions, a la Ravnica, by adding spells to everyone's spell lists in addition to the free cantrips.

[Fable Wright]

You could also tie this into political factions, a la Ravnica, by adding spells to everyone's spell lists in addition to the free cantrips.

ALL OF THE NO.

Ravnica was a shining example of how this was busted beyond measure. Melee classes get nothing, full casters get more love they don't need, and you can add spells to lists that break design paradigms, like Warlock with Animate Dead or Polymorph, or Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings ending up on any lists, or Druids with Counterspell and/or Fireball.

OP, please do not do this.

[MrStabby]

ALL OF THE NO.

Ravnica was a shining example of how this was busted beyond measure. Melee classes get nothing, full casters get more love they don't need, and you can add spells to lists that break design paradigms, like Warlock with Animate Dead or Polymorph, or Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings ending up on any lists, or Druids with Counterspell and/or Fireball.

OP, please do not do this.

Well... there is a difference between "don't do something" and "if you do do something, do it better". One poor implementation shouldn't damn an idea.




I think a good place to start is the elf magic feats in Xanathars guide. A combination of at will casting of some spells and some limited times per day for others isn't that broken. For non elf just pull together a few further lists for different races or societies. Give everyone one of these for free at 5th level.

You could also add feats to the game that expand casting from magic initiate. Say a second feat that gives you 1/3 spell progression in the spell list you took MI for. 2 feats to get this level of power is a decent enough investment but should still be very tempting. It will raise the power level of your campaign though, but it would kick in more at later levels and would predominantly benefit martial characters if people opted to take it.

[Sparky McDibben]

ALL OF THE NO.

Ravnica was a shining example of how this was busted beyond measure. Melee classes get nothing, full casters get more love they don't need, and you can add spells to lists that break design paradigms, like Warlock with Animate Dead or Polymorph, or Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings ending up on any lists, or Druids with Counterspell and/or Fireball.

OP, please do not do this.

...Wow. Just wow. Personally, I thought Ravnica was amazing, and I just straight up gave non-casters the cantrips (including the half-casters). I have no problem with tweaking class identity, because I trust my players to justify how their druid wound up with counterspell, including just having the druid cast it from an "alternate power source," like innate casting. See, a lot of people get so wrapped up in class identity, they can't see beyond it. Don't think about the alternate spell list as expanding the class, think about it as adding to the world (because why wouldn't a tree-loving elven fighter be able to summon some woodland friends?). We had an absolute blast. Was it high-magic? Yes. Was it a lot of fun? Yes. We're about to run our third campaign there.

It may not be to your taste, Fable Wright, but don't crap on ideas as "busted beyond measure" because you don't like them.

OP, do what you like, man. Ravnica is a polarizing option, same as Eberron, because it violates some of the precepts of a typical D&D world. It sounds like what you're trying to do is a similar vein, so you should know you have resources here.

[Fable Wright]

(because why wouldn't a tree-loving elven fighter be able to summon some woodland friends?).

This right here is my problem with Ravnica's mechanics:

Because he can't.

Guild backgrounds adding spells to lists adds power to a class directly based on the number of spell levels a class has. Full casters get the benefits at twice the speed of half-casters. Half-casters get benefits, unlike Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, and Rogues. When four of the classes in the game get no benefit, two classes half benefits, five classes incredible benefits, and one class gets a disproportionately huge benefit*, something is wrong.

Not only that, you begin to feel punished for playing to type. Why would you ever play a Selesnya Druid, from a mechanical perspective at least? Nothing of relevance is added to your list, and some people might want to have some reward for playing to type, rather than exclusively incentives to play against type.

I enjoy Ravnica as a setting. I enjoy Eberron (and enjoyed it more with Wayfinder's Guide). But the mechanics are god-awful from a game design perspective. If your group naturally plays full-casters and plays against type anyways, there's no problem whatsoever, actually, and it'd be a blast to be empowered by the setting that way. But from a game balance perspective, the incentives are weighted in such a way that only this playstyle gets the benefit, and other players... don't. And that's not fun for them.

*Warlocks disproportionately benefit. Golgari Warlock can maintain at least 40 undead at level 5. Polymorph twice per short rest at level 7 for Simic. These are all things that break class balance.

Well... there is a difference between "don't do something" and "if you do do something, do it better". One poor implementation shouldn't damn an idea.

It's not the implementation that's the problem, it's the idea of "expand spell lists", because that inherently only boosts a specific subset of playstyles and punishes others.

Your idea of basing it off Wood Elf Magic? That's a great starting point! It's several hard-to-get spells packaged together for classes that might normally struggle with it, and supports concepts that just want to be stealthy in the woods, and anyone can benefit from it equally. I'd support packages like that. Packaging Find Familiar and Rope Trick is good. Likewise Bless and Healing Spirit for a healer dip. Stuff like that is quite workable.

[Sparky McDibben]

This right here is my problem with Ravnica's mechanics:

Because he can't.

Guild backgrounds adding spells to lists adds power to a class directly based on the number of spell levels a class has. Full casters get the benefits at twice the speed of half-casters. Half-casters get benefits, unlike Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, and Rogues. When four of the classes in the game get no benefit, two classes half benefits, five classes incredible benefits, and one class gets a disproportionately huge benefit*, something is wrong.

Not only that, you begin to feel punished for playing to type. Why would you ever play a Selesnya Druid, from a mechanical perspective at least? Nothing of relevance is added to your list, and some people might want to have some reward for playing to type, rather than exclusively incentives to play against type.

I enjoy Ravnica as a setting. I enjoy Eberron (and enjoyed it more with Wayfinder's Guide). But the mechanics are god-awful from a game design perspective. If your group naturally plays full-casters and plays against type anyways, there's no problem whatsoever, actually, and it'd be a blast to be empowered by the setting that way. But from a game balance perspective, the incentives are weighted in such a way that only this playstyle gets the benefit, and other players... don't. And that's not fun for them.

*Warlocks disproportionately benefit. Golgari Warlock can maintain at least 40 undead at level 5. Polymorph twice per short rest at level 7 for Simic. These are all things that break class balance.

OK, I'm seeing a couple concerns you're raising here: 1) that expanded spell lists reward casters over non casters, and 2) that these expanded spell lists screw with class identity. If I'm wrong about your concerns, just let me know; don't bother countering my next points, since they will be based on flawed assumptions and I don't want to waste your time.

Your first point is completely valid from a RAW standpoint. Here's how I addressed it from a house-rule perspective: I just gave everyone but full casters the cantrips. Full casters didn't get them for free, but everyone else just got them at 1st level, which I think helped add versatility (guidance certainly got spammed a lot by the rogue). Second, I think I would add a feat to allow non-casters to get access to the faction's spell list 1/day per spell as innate casting (Wisdom, Intelligence, or Charisma-based, depending on the faction), but at a half-caster progression. So your Azorius Senate battlemaster could cast dominate person once per day at 17th level. You could also flavor these as not coming from a class spell list, but rather as deriving from the faction themselves ("THE SENATE COMPELS YOUR OBEDIENCE, LAWBREAKER!") which I think could be pretty cool.

Your second point I personally don't have much of an issue with. That doesn't mean it's invalid, just not a big deal to me. If you're playing a Selesnyan druid, I would assume you're doing it to garner the social benefits of doing so. We don't often get to see druids or rangers take on social leadership roles, but Selesnyans probably don't care about your Charisma; they care about your connection to the World Soul. Ergo, you want the druid doing the speaking if you head to the vernadi, even if they have a -1 Charisma modifier, because their DC is going to be so much lower when trying to convince their kin (assuming they are members in good standing). Better Renown access, easier time getting aid and supplies, and a wider net of influence across Ravnica, depending on how you play the character. Now, if you're playing someone more like a renegade Selesnyan (someone trying to buck the system, man!), there's another option - see if the DM will let you use the Golgari spell list instead! You could still flavor it as coming from the Conclave, but you're discovering there's a dark hypocrisy underneath all that lovey-dovey crap. You could also flavor it as the Golgari Swarm offering you advanced training in their secrets in return for favors. :) Intrigue! As far as warlocks getting animate dead, I'm perfectly OK with that, and it would seem the devs are too, given this latest UA.

If you'd like to talk about how to handle minionmancy in D&D, though, that would be a cool thread I would love to participate in!

[ravenkith]

The setting that I'm writing for my upcoming campaign is very high magic. To the point that just about everyone in the world can do a little of magic. In order to make it balanced this would basically come off as an additional Racial Trait. Mages can get the innate casting traits, and martials get a select pool of traits to pick from. (They don't have to go this way, just an example) They're all elementally themed, so these traits could include things like "You get firebolt for free" or "You gain resistance to cold damage". Something like "You gain extra proficiency in this or that" would be off the table (save maybe survival skills for someone under the Earth Element)

Hey, so I'm looking at this and I'm thinking it's not a bad idea at all, but in my head I'm thinking of taking it further and mixing it with the ideas of like, powerful families, and arranged marriages, with like selective breeding programs to try and enhance the family abilities and things like that from Eberron.

So, you would add the different Houses as a character creation option; you pick your race, you pick your class, your background, and you pick your house, right?

So, some houses have specific variants of the magic initiate feat, some have different feats, like alert, or whatever. Your players can opt to either take the house background AND the accompanying ties to the House in question (giving you a hook to use on the player in question) or they can pick up something like the skilled feat (maybe) WITHOUT the house ties.

So, the player can get a more powerful ability, but then they have to tie their character to a house that has its own agenda and hierarchy that they in turn have to answer to, or they can get something for nothing, but it just isn't as powerful - it'd be a way to balance the more powerful feats against the less powerful.

You can always create additional feats to fit into this concept.

Just a thought.

[Petrocorus]

You could use something like the Aberrant Dragonmark feat from Eberron (first WGE version, with the upcast option), without the drawback and with the option of picking in any spell list.
Maybe with

Using the elven magic feat as model is good as some pointed out, but forces you to create a lot of variant or set up some rules on what the players may pick as spells. It depends on how motivated you are to work on it.

[Wildarm]

A non-combat cantrip and a non-combat 1st level spell 1/day would be my recommendation for balance. Have the two spells be related if possible to give the feel of an innate knack each person has for magic. Non-combat to keep the power gaming to a minimum but keep the magic utility and flavor.

If the character is a spell caster you could also add a spell known at each level(DMs choice) to show the magical growth of the ability without affecting spells/day balance.

[MrStabby]

This right here is my problem with Ravnica's mechanics:

Because he can't.

Guild backgrounds adding spells to lists adds power to a class directly based on the number of spell levels a class has. Full casters get the benefits at twice the speed of half-casters. Half-casters get benefits, unlike Barbarians, Fighters, Monks, and Rogues. When four of the classes in the game get no benefit, two classes half benefits, five classes incredible benefits, and one class gets a disproportionately huge benefit*, something is wrong.

Not only that, you begin to feel punished for playing to type. Why would you ever play a Selesnya Druid, from a mechanical perspective at least? Nothing of relevance is added to your list, and some people might want to have some reward for playing to type, rather than exclusively incentives to play against type.

I enjoy Ravnica as a setting. I enjoy Eberron (and enjoyed it more with Wayfinder's Guide). But the mechanics are god-awful from a game design perspective. If your group naturally plays full-casters and plays against type anyways, there's no problem whatsoever, actually, and it'd be a blast to be empowered by the setting that way. But from a game balance perspective, the incentives are weighted in such a way that only this playstyle gets the benefit, and other players... don't. And that's not fun for them.

*Warlocks disproportionately benefit. Golgari Warlock can maintain at least 40 undead at level 5. Polymorph twice per short rest at level 7 for Simic. These are all things that break class balance.



It's not the implementation that's the problem, it's the idea of "expand spell lists", because that inherently only boosts a specific subset of playstyles and punishes others.

Your idea of basing it off Wood Elf Magic? That's a great starting point! It's several hard-to-get spells packaged together for classes that might normally struggle with it, and supports concepts that just want to be stealthy in the woods, and anyone can benefit from it equally. I'd support packages like that. Packaging Find Familiar and Rope Trick is good. Likewise Bless and Healing Spirit for a healer dip. Stuff like that is quite workable.

I think the problem isn't with what they have, it is with what is missing.

What if you had other guild features? A guild fighting style? Some guild combat feats? Guild magic items that just tend to fall into the weapons and armour category?

I think granting guild spells is pretty cool, but the problem with the rules is not what they did do but the things they didn't.

Edit:
With regards to playing to type, I think this issue could be solved by preserving the original casting stat of a spell. Say Azorious represents the cities lawyers then their guild spells will be cast with intelligence. You want to be an Azorious bounty hunter you can play a ranger with Azorious spells but unless you are willing to drop your ranger base spells you will be very MAD. If Selesnia is representative of druidic influences then wisdom would be their casting stat - play to type as a druid or cleric or ranger and there is no problem adding these spells. If you want access as a wizard, then it's a tougher time.

Personally, if it were my world I would write the guild/house spells myself to avoid conflicts or abuse or stepping on another classes toes or redundancy with the "on type" class. Write a Selesnia spell that does something that druids don't do already but in a druidy way.