I'm aware that prepared casting is usually regarded as the better option, but I find myself having more fun with spontaneous spells.
It's easier to keep up with, and I get tired of tracking individual spell casts rather than just knowing how many of a certain level I can cast in a day.
Would it be fair and balanced to allow a Warpriest to gain spells known and spells per day as a bard or inquisitor would? Or to allow a Cleric to cast spells spontaneously as an Oracle?
Are there any balance issues that can arise from allowing a player to do this?
"Are there any balance issues that can arise from allowing a player to do this?"
None whatsoever. I really wish all prepared casting classes had a spontaneous casting archetype as in most situations I find prepared casting to be too stressful. It would be nice to use the other class features of said classes just without that prepared casting headache.
biggest problem is if you don't limit the spells they know. That is the big different between prepared vs spontaneous spell cast prepare has more option but spontaneous can cast more times per day. If you let a cleric spontaneous cast any spell they will always be prepared for what ever is throw at because they can pick the spell they need right then not have it ready for if they might run into that thing.
I assumed the "cast as spontaneous casting class X" houserule OP was considering included all facets of X, including the spells known limit.
Assuming a spells known list...probably weakens those classes with prepared spellcasting. Look at wizards' school powers vs. sorcerer bloodlines and oracle revelations vs. cleric domains. That said, we're discussing slightly downgrading some of the most powerful classes in the game, so overall, probably not a big deal. So long as someone is prepared to deal with the consequences. I'd be worried about condition removal, the one thing that worried a lot of people when we got the oracle; clerics can prep condition removal the next morning, the oracle won't get it if they don't already have it till next level if then. But there are workarounds for that (e.g. paladin mercies, bards, druids, etc.).
Good points, I didn't think it'd be unfair to allow it.
And yes, when I said casting spontaneously I meant as in having a spells known list. A Cleric that could spontaneously cast every spell on his list would be slightly silly.
I'll probably end up sticking with whats written in the classes for now, I don't like changing rules unless I 100% feel the need to.
It'd be nice to have the option in the books one day though.
The arcanist is a proof of concept here: at the very core, it's a wizard who prepares the list of spells known, and uses that with the sorcerer's spontaneous casting mechanics.
I don't think it would break the prep casters if they were handled this way; but it'd take away from the existing spontaneous casters quite a bit.
(Back in the back-when times, we used this sort of rule in 2e.)
The Arcanist operates very differently from a character with the Wizard's class abilities and the casting of a Sorcerer, which is what we're talking about.
I'm aware; just offering a "third option" to consider. :)
And yes, when I said casting spontaneously I meant as in having a spells known list. A Cleric that could spontaneously cast every spell on his list would be slightly silly.
Back in the days of 1st and 2nd edition, I used to allow all clerics to spontaneously cast any spell from their list. It worked out very nicely, because a) people were then willing to play 'healers' and b) the cleric list wasn't as good or useful as it is now. You used to have to memorise cure light wounds, no converting any 1st level spell.
The balance issue here is whether it would weaken oracles.
|
I wouldn't do this for clerics, because oracles already exist.
I'd allow it for warpriests (using the inquisitor spells known/per day table). It's probably a small downgrade, but now a huge downgrade because warpriests have a tendency to prepare 80% the same spells every day anyway. Fervor-speed buffing is the bread and butter.
Druids are a tricky case. Their spell list has a lot of circumstantial spells on if that would be amazing if you had them prepared on the right day. Also as a nature-themed class it does cry out for less scholastic preparation. I might want to borrow from the Arcanist for druids.
I don't know enough about shamans to have an opinion there.
One thing to consider is that full 9 level spontaneous casters all have delayed access to higher level spells, so I'm not sure how much of a downgrade spontaneous casting actually is. Compare the wizard to both the sorceror and arcanist and the cleric to the oracle. I would be very cautious about changing a druid to spontaneous casting and would use the oracle as a guideline on spells known/spell per day. I wouldn't allow a spontaneous cleric as that steps on the oracles toes a bit too much.
For 2/3 casters they don't seem quite as fussy. Magus/Warpriest and Bard/Inquisitor having identical spell progression. As a GM I'd be prepared to let a player try out a spontaneous warpriest, but with the very firm warning that if it is causing problems then it reverts to prepared caster. It's up to them then if they want to take that risk.
I wouldn't do this for clerics, because oracles already exist.
Clerics and Oracles are so similar that you might as well allow full hybridization. Pick one of each and have your class:
Spontaneous Casting - Prepared Casting
Channel Energy - Curse
Domains - Mystery
|
One thing to consider is that full 9 level spontaneous casters all have delayed access to higher level spells, so I'm not sure how much of a downgrade spontaneous casting actually is. Compare the wizard to both the sorceror and arcanist and the cleric to the oracle. I would be very cautious about changing a druid to spontaneous casting and would use the oracle as a guideline on spells known/spell per day. I wouldn't allow a spontaneous cleric as that steps on the oracles toes a bit too much.
For 2/3 casters they don't seem quite as fussy. Magus/Warpriest and Bard/Inquisitor having identical spell progression. As a GM I'd be prepared to let a player try out a spontaneous warpriest, but with the very firm warning that if it is causing problems then it reverts to prepared caster. It's up to them then if they want to take that risk.
Check out the shaman class from Kobold Press. It is available as a stand-alone PDF ad as one of many all-new classes in the New Paths Compendium book.
The shaman was designed very much to be the spontaneous analog to the druid.
As for a spontaneous version of a warpriest, I think that sounds like a very interesting idea!
It can gimp some classes depending on their class features and spell list. For example, the oracle's spellcasting is considerably weaker than the cleric's because the cleric spell list is full of situational non-combat spells that are terrible if you have a spells known limit.
That being said, I think it would be fine to allow players to have their prepared class use spontaneous casting as a preference thing.
My group hates prep casters, so we houserule every caster is spontaneous. We also limit the amount of spells known, because being able to cast every spell at every level slows the game to a crawl while casters flip through pages of spells to choose from.
Generally, the spontaneous version of a prepared caster gets additional abilities to make up for the weaker casting-method, so you'd need to make a few new abilities.
Of those two, the far larger one is the "staggered spell access", and that does not exist for 2/3rds casters. Both spontaneous and prepared 2/3rds casters get the spells at the same time.
In any event, I would say that the real culprit is the reduction in versatility that spontaneous casting imposes, not getting the spell 1 level later. That certainly plays into it, but it's fairly minor in the grand scheme of things.
This is not something I'd be comfortable doing.
Using chaoseffects' example above, he mentions that you can easily swap out the abilities of a cleric for the abilities of the oracle (channel for curse, etc.).
But we shouldn't do that.
If you take the cleric, give it a curse and a mystery, along with spontaneous casting, you have an oracle with two less skill points, and a free weapon prodiency (maybe).
If any of my players asked if they could have a spontaneous cleric, I'd tell them to play an oracle.
Both fit distinct niches in the game, and both are separate classes.
Giving the cleric the biggest advantage of the oracle almost invalidates the oracle.
If you want a cleric that has the exact same spells known/per day chart as the oracle, that's an oracle, and you should play an actual oracle.
Note that 6-level spontaneous spellcasters typically have powerful class features where spells are mostly used as a way to round out the class and provide some customization. Compare the bard, the summoner, and inquisitor with the magus and warpriest. The first three have class features that have almost nothing to do with their spellcasting whereas the main features of the magus and warpriest involve casting spells. If the magus and warpriest became spontaneous spellcasters, they'd become significantly less powerful.
In any event, I would say that the real culprit is the reduction in versatility that spontaneous casting imposes, not getting the spell 1 level later. That certainly plays into it, but it's fairly minor in the grand scheme of things.
This. Players with prepared spellcasters can essentially rebuild their characters on a daily basis. The power of this versatility was grossly underestimated when balancing martials and spontaneous spellcasters in 3.5 and early Pathfinder. This was also something considered when base classes were added to the game.
This is not something I'd be comfortable doing.
Using chaoseffects' example above, he mentions that you can easily swap out the abilities of a cleric for the abilities of the oracle (channel for curse, etc.).
But we shouldn't do that.If you take the cleric, give it a curse and a mystery, along with spontaneous casting, you have an oracle with two less skill points, and a free weapon prodiency (maybe).
If any of my players asked if they could have a spontaneous cleric, I'd tell them to play an oracle.
Both fit distinct niches in the game, and both are separate classes.
Giving the cleric the biggest advantage of the oracle almost invalidates the oracle.If you want a cleric that has the exact same spells known/per day chart as the oracle, that's an oracle, and you should play an actual oracle.
Spontaneous casting isn't an advantage, it's a drawback.
Spontaneous casting isn't an advantage, it's a drawback.This is not something I'd be comfortable doing.
Using chaoseffects' example above, he mentions that you can easily swap out the abilities of a cleric for the abilities of the oracle (channel for curse, etc.).
But we shouldn't do that.If you take the cleric, give it a curse and a mystery, along with spontaneous casting, you have an oracle with two less skill points, and a free weapon prodiency (maybe).
If any of my players asked if they could have a spontaneous cleric, I'd tell them to play an oracle.
Both fit distinct niches in the game, and both are separate classes.
Giving the cleric the biggest advantage of the oracle almost invalidates the oracle.If you want a cleric that has the exact same spells known/per day chart as the oracle, that's an oracle, and you should play an actual oracle.
It's an advantage AND a drawback, depending on the situation you are in.
==Aelryinth
See Spell Points Unearthed arcana
|
|
Check out the shaman class from Kobold Press. It is available as a stand-alone PDF ad as one of many all-new classes in the New Paths Compendium book.
The shaman was designed very much to be the spontaneous analog to the druid.
Had a couple PMs asking for more info on the shaman class and the New Paths Compendium in general, so I thought I'd drop the actual link here:
New Paths CompendiumHere's a bit of background on the creation of the shaman class
Designing the Shaman