I suspect my question below is answered somewhere, but not where I expected to see it, in MotM's "Using this Book" Section.
The old statblocks would say what level the caster cast spells, how many slots per level, and what spells were prepared. The new simplified statblocks don't give this information. With the old blocks, I might look at the spell list and decide to use a higher level to upcast a lower level spell. Is there no upcasting for monsters anymore; do they just cast all spells at the base level?
If not specified, spells are cast at their base (lowest) level. This is a general rule for spellcasting from things like the innate spellcasting trait or magic items.
And you're correct, without spell slots a spell cannot be upcast.
The new design philosophy seems to be that everything should be as simple as possible to run during combat, and in many cases you may not use the monster's Spellcasting feature at all, as many of the spells that a monster might use during combat are now actions, bonus actions, or reactions in their own right.
I mostly like this trend personally, as it makes stat-blocks a bit more streamlined for quick use, which is good if you don't have a lot of time to plan every encounter. As always the DM remains free to make fights more challenging by bringing in additional enemies, or letting a creature cast at a higher level without worrying about the slots (or lack of). Likewise for out of combat, it doesn't matter if a block doesn't have many utility spells, as you can always just describe what the monster is doing, a formal spell isn't required.
And this is how monsters can often end up being run in practice anyway; a lot of DMs don't want the book-keeping of a full spellcasting feature, as it can just end up limiting you anyway, when a DM is the crucial component that ultimately balances an encounter, keeps it challenging etc.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I suspect my question below is answered somewhere, but not where I expected to see it, in MotM's "Using this Book" Section.
The old statblocks would say what level the caster cast spells, how many slots per level, and what spells were prepared. The new simplified statblocks don't give this information. With the old blocks, I might look at the spell list and decide to use a higher level to upcast a lower level spell. Is there no upcasting for monsters anymore; do they just cast all spells at the base level?
If not specified, spells are cast at their base (lowest) level. This is a general rule for spellcasting from things like the innate spellcasting trait or magic items.
And you're correct, without spell slots a spell cannot be upcast.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
The new design philosophy seems to be that everything should be as simple as possible to run during combat, and in many cases you may not use the monster's Spellcasting feature at all, as many of the spells that a monster might use during combat are now actions, bonus actions, or reactions in their own right.
I mostly like this trend personally, as it makes stat-blocks a bit more streamlined for quick use, which is good if you don't have a lot of time to plan every encounter. As always the DM remains free to make fights more challenging by bringing in additional enemies, or letting a creature cast at a higher level without worrying about the slots (or lack of). Likewise for out of combat, it doesn't matter if a block doesn't have many utility spells, as you can always just describe what the monster is doing, a formal spell isn't required.
And this is how monsters can often end up being run in practice anyway; a lot of DMs don't want the book-keeping of a full spellcasting feature, as it can just end up limiting you anyway, when a DM is the crucial component that ultimately balances an encounter, keeps it challenging etc.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.