I get what DxJxC is saying, but what I am saying is: nowhere in the rules do you find any reference to a spell becoming a "Cleric spell" or a "Druid spell" by virtue of you knowing it because you're a member of that class. There are two possibilitis.
1) "Cleric spells" are any spells that you know by virtue of being a Cleric. Or, by extension, taking a Feat by the name of "Magic Initiate (Cleric)" or something.
2) "Cleric spells" are spells that appear on the Cleric spell list (Chapter 11 of PHB).
#1 is incorrect, #2 is correct. We know this because of the November 28, 2017 Crawford tweet, and also because Chapter 11 of the PHB has sections titled "Bard Spells," "Cleric Spells," etc. That list shows that Detect Magic is both a "Bard Spell", and a "Cleric Spell," and a "Druid Spell," etc etc. Spellcasting class subclasses often have features that provide a handful of additional spells that are "a sorcerer spell for you;" these features are the specific exception to the general rule that sorcerer spells are the spells that appear on the Sorcerer Spells list in Chapter 11.
If you are a Sorcerer, then you can cast any Sorcerer Spells that you know using your spell slots. It doesn't matter how you learned those Sorcerer Spells, the class feature makes no mention of where you came across them; maybe you picked them up using Magic Initiate (Something that isn't sorcerer). Maybe you know a spell because of a racial ability. Doesn't matter. You either know a spell, or you don't, and it's either on the Sorcerer Spell List, or it isn't.
Want to cast Burning Hands as a charisma-based Sorcerer spell with a 1st level spell slot?
1) Do you "know" Burning Hands? If yes, go to 2.
2) Do you have the Sorcerer's spellcasting feature, which allows you to cast charisma-based Sorcerer Spells using spell slots? If yes, go to 3.
3) Have you satisfied the conditions specified in the Sorcerer's spellcasting feature (have a spell slot of spell's level or higher open to cast, know spell, spell appears on Sorcerer spell list in Chapter 11 or within a sorcerer subclass feature you'e unlocked)? If yes, spend it and cast it.
The temptation to insert an additional step 1.5 (of the spells you "know," track down how you know them) is not asked for in any of the rules, and there's no room on a character sheet to even track that info, its unmanageable.
Just wanted to point out the if a sorcerer takes magic initiate (cleric) and chooses detect magic or some other spell that is also a sorcerer spell, they can not cast that spell with their slots because it is learned as a cleric spell.
Can you point to where there is support that there is such a concept as "learned as a cleric spell"? The tweet I quoted supports the premise that "a cleric spell" is a spell that appears on the Cleric class spell list. Is there a reason to think otherwise?
The tweet you quoted said that spells granted by racial features (or anything else) do not count as a class spell unless specifically stated. And does not contribute much to the current conversation.
The magic initiate rules do not clearly say that the spells are class spells (barely implies it by mentioning class spell lists). The official SAC clarifies this saying that if you take magic initiate for your class, then you can use your class's spellcasting feature to cast those spells as well. What the rule is (although not clearly stated) is "any spell learned from a class spell list is a spell of that class."
Basically the only 2 sides of the argument are "magic initiate does not say they are class spells, so you can't use slots," and "SAC says you can use spell slots if you are the same class as the magic initiate chosen." There is no supporting rule for a middle ground argument. In fact the tweet you quoted doesnt apply to the 2 substantiated sides, but it does directly defeat the middle ground argument of "any spell that is on a class's spell list is a spell of that class regardless of source," that is exactly the opposite of the tweet's stance.
You prepare the list of cleric spells that are available for you to cast, choosing from the cleric spell list.
This sentence implies that the "cleric spell list" and the list of spells available for your character to cast are different.
Also, you are coming at this assuming that you can cast a spell in any way that you want to. A Sorc/Wiz/Cleric multiclassed character cannot choose to cast burning hands in any way that he likes. The game (according to sage advice and the modified wording in the PHB) indicates that you learn a particular version of that spell and can cast it using only the spellcasting ability associated with the version you have learned. This is a balancing issue: You cannot select to cast any spell with any spellcasting ability modifier that you like.
I get what DxJxC is saying, but what I am saying is: nowhere in the rules do you find any reference to a spell becoming a "Cleric spell" or a "Druid spell" by virtue of you knowing it because you're a member of that class.
Each class's Spellcasting feature essentially tells you what it means by a "<insert class here> spell". No other definition is relevant since you're going to have to go through those rules to use spell slots anyways.
More generally, when the rules don't give a blanket definition for something, the meaning is up to idiomatic English and the context it appears in.
Preparing and Casting Spells
The Cleric table shows how many spell slots you have to cast your cleric spells of 1st level and higher. To cast one of these spells, you must expend a slot of the spell’s level or higher. You regain all expended spell slots when you finish a long rest.
You prepare the list of cleric spells that are available for you to cast, choosing from the cleric spell list. When you do so, choose a number of cleric spells equal to your Wisdom modifier + your cleric level (minimum of one spell).
In the context of the cleric's Spellcasting feature, it's the spells the cleric chooses to prepare from the cleric spell list. Going strictly by what the book says, a cleric can't use their spell slots to cast a spell unless they've prepared that spell.
With that bit of rules lawyering out of the way, any DM would be wise to not split hairs over that. It just leads to feel-bad situations and even the most generous but definitely not RAW interpretation of "if you know it, you can cast it with spell slots regardless of class" wouldn't break much.
I don't understand why you guys are finding the tweet so difficult to parse. Crawford was asked whether "spells known by a class include any racial spells they may know," and he answers in no uncertain terms "A class's spells are on that class's spell list." The second half (does a racial ability add spells to a class list?) is answered in the negative, but that's not what I'm advocating for: if a spell is published on X's spell list in Chapter 11, then it is an "X Spell" for the purpose of any ability that refers to X Spells. This is not contradicted by any tweet, sage advice ruling, or text within any of the core rulebooks, and is indeed the only interpretation that has a shred of textual support. Nowhere does it say anywhere that a "Sorcerer Spell" is the spell chosen to be learned by a Sorcerer. You guys are rolling your eyes at me without a shred of textual support for your side, acting as though your read-between-the-lines inference is somehow stronger than explicit language in PHB Chapter 11.
What's funny is that the Unearthed Arcana that just came out further reinforces my point. Throughout, features like "Bard Spells" list spells which are... "Bard Spells." The new "Spell Versatility" features also call the spells you have learned the "spells you learned from this Spellcasting feature", not "Bard Spells" or "your known Bard Spells." The necessary conclusion remains, the concept of "Bard Spell" is larger and independent from "spells you learned while being a Bard."
You know two 1st-level spells of your choice from the sorcerer spell list.
The Spells Known column of the Sorcerer table shows when you learn more sorcerer spells of your choice. Each of these spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots. For instance, when you reach 3rd level in this class, you can learn one new spell of 1st or 2nd level.
Additionally, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the sorcerer spells you know and replace it with another spell from the sorcerer spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Spellcasting Ability
Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your sorcerer spells, since the power of your magic relies on your ability to project your will into the world. You use your Charisma whenever a spell refers to your spellcasting ability. In addition, you use your Charisma modifier when setting the saving throw DC for a sorcerer spell you cast and when making an attack roll with one.
I'm not trying to tell you what is a sorcerer spell and what isn't. I'm saying (for balance reasons above all) that "your sorcerer spells" (which is a different list than "sorcerer spells") must be cast with Charisma. It flat out says that in the rules.
That list of "your sorcerer spells" contains the sorcerer spells you learn from the sorcerer spellcasting trait as well as any other spells that state that they are sorcerer spells for you.
"your sorcerer spells" and "sorcerer spells" are certainly two different lists: "your X spells" are the subset of all of the "X spells" that you know. We are 100% in agreement.
Where everyone is diverging from me, is that I don't see any reason to think that you ever "know" any spell more than once. If you "learn" a spell using Magic Initiate (let's use Detect Magic), then you know it, period. Detect Magic is a Bard Spell, and a Cleric Spell, and a Druid Spell, and a Paladin Spell, and a Ranger Spell, and a Sorcerer Spell, and a Wizard Spell, and an Artificer Spell, regardless of whether you have a class feature that lets you do anything with that tag. Similarly, a quarterstaff is a monk weapon, regardless of whether your character holding a quarterstaff happens to be a monk who can make any use of that tag.
So you took Magic Initiate (Wizard), and you "know" Detect Magic, and the feat provides a way that you can cast it (once per long rest, without using a spell slot, using the feat, using intelligence). But if you were to then take a level in Bard, at 1st level you would pick up the Bard's Spellcasting feature, learning two 1st level Bard Spells of your choice from the Bard Spell List. There is no reason to learn Detect Magic again, you already know it! You don't know "Detect Magic (Wizard Edition)", you know "Detect Magic"! When you go to use your first level spell slots to cast bard spells, your Spellcasting feature asks you to check: do you know a "Bard Spell"? Yes, you know three of them (the two you got at 1st level, and also Detect Magic appears on the Bard spell list as well). Do you have a spell slot available of an appropriate level or higher? If yes, go ahead!
And to bring this ship back around to the original subject, yes you could cast Detect Magic as a (Bard) Ritual in this scenario. "You can cast any bard spell you know as a ritual if that spell has the ritual tag." Do you know Detect Magic? Yes. Is it a Bard Spell? Yes. Then you can cast it as a bard ritual spell, even though you learned it via Magic Initiate (Wizard).
There is no balance concern here. And there is no reason to swim upstream against the text.
Each spell you know and prepare is associated with one of your classes, and you use the spellcasting ability of that class when you cast the spell.
This rule is the general statement of "Charisma is the spellcasting ability of your sorcerer spells." Unfortunately it is buried in the multiclassing spellcasting rules, but it certainly seems to be RAI for single class casters as well (note the text in each classes spellcasting feature).
That certainly is a little chestnut I hadn't noticed before. That could tip the scale ever so slightly towards "only counts as a spell of the class that you learned it from, and not as a spell of any other class" camp... but it also may not say as much as it thinks it does. A drow paladin 2/ranger 2, for example, knows Dancing Lights, no way around that. They're a multiclassed spellcaster and they have spell slots according to the table, so that paragraph clearly applies to them. But Dancing Lights also clearly is not a paladin or ranger spell, so.... where does that leave us?
Regardless, not certain if a spell being associated with "a class" precludes it also being associated with another class as well. Certainly does seem to tip your way though, it sure doesn't say "is associated with one or more of your classes". Hmm.
I fully admit that there are problems with the quote above from multiclassing rule, not the least of which is that it is a general statement that seems like the devs want it to apply to all spellcasting, but it is placed in the multiclassing rules.
I also see the problem with your example. Those racial spells do not have a class associated, only an ability. I would rule that means that you cannot cast these spells with slots at all without picking them up again through a class, and only allow the free castings provided by the racial feature. If you wanted to cast faerie fire or darkness using slots then you'd need to learn these spells from a class. Interestingly, in this particular case the racial feature doesn't say that you know (or learn) the leveled spells, but that you can cast them - further supporting that reading. As for the cantrip - you have a spellcasting ability for it (which it doesn't depend on anyway) and it is an at-will ability, so whatever.
I do think this is a place where RAW and RAI somewhat diverge.
RAI: Each spell that you know or prepare has a class associated with it, and you can only use the ability for that class to cast that spell. Essentially, there are different versions of each spell, and you can cast each spell only one way (i.e. using one ability mod).
RAW: Doesn't quite explicitly say that except for in the multiclass rules. Also, some spells from some sources don't have a class associated.
Each spell you know and prepare is associated with one of your classes, and you use the spellcasting ability of that class when you cast the spell.
This rule is the general statement of "Charisma is the spellcasting ability of your sorcerer spells." Unfortunately it is buried in the multiclassing spellcasting rules, but it certainly seems to be RAI for single class casters as well (note the text in each classes spellcasting feature).
This only applies to spells gained from the spellcasting feature of classes. Spells learned from racial traits and feats are not associated with any class unless specified and can't be cast using spell slots because of this.
Which brings us back to when I said there are only 2 sides of the argument that can be right. Either the spells granted by magic initiate belong to 1 specific class decided by the feat and can be cast using slots only if you are that class (the loose RAW, SAC argument). Or magic initiate does not specify a specific class the spells belong to, so they can't be cast with slots at all (the strict RAW, no SAC argument).
The argument that you can cast any spell you know with slots as long as it is on your spellcasting class's spell list is just not supported by the rules. This argument is the same as saying a multiclass wizard/sorcerer that knows firebolt as a wizard spell could cast it using CHA to hit per sorcerer's spellcasting.
Level 19 Wizard/1 Sorcerer. The class spell lists are nearly identical. Sorcerers normally only get the ability to learn a limited selection of spells over their entire career, but are able to cast anything they know without preparation. Wizards can add anything eligible to their spellbook which can be prepared later. Does the character now get to cast every single spell that they know just because they happen to be on both class lists? Do they get to choose CHA or INT? No.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
“A monk gets to do martial arts damage with monk weapons. A hex blade gets to attack using charisma with their hex weapon. So a hex blade1/monk 19 gets to attack using charisma or dex with all their 1d12 short sword attacks???”
Thats no less of an absurd situation than what you’ve just presented. Multi-classing allows features of both classes to interact, what else is new?
The answer, as it relates to Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition, is a quite definitive "No". Last time I checked, it wasn't a White Wolf product. :P
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
“A monk gets to do martial arts damage with monk weapons. A hex blade gets to attack using charisma with their hex weapon. So a hex blade1/monk 19 gets to attack using charisma or dex with all their 1d12 short sword attacks???”
Thats no less of an absurd situation than what you’ve just presented. Multi-classing allows features of both classes to interact, what else is new?
That is not absurd. It's something that the game explicitly allows, and explicitly disallows if the character doesn't fulfill all the prerequisites. Martial Arts and Hex Warrior are explicit class features that you earn through leveling up. You might as well be arguing that a 19 Monk/1 Rogue being able to sneak attack with a Shortsword is absurd. These are things that are explicitly allowed because they have non-exclusive, explicit requirements that must be fulfilled to do so.
What is absurd is arguing that a Wizard/Sorcerer can spontaneously cast all spells transcribed into the Wizard's spellbook. You are arguing from a false premise. There is no general rule allowing a spell learned from one class list to be used as one from a different class list. There are rules disallowing this.
Class spells are like brands. You're at the store, you want to buy a bag of chips, and you have a coupon for 50% off Frito-Lay products. The store carries Frito-Lay products, other major brands, and their own store brand. All of these brands are available for you to choose from. You choose a bag of store brand chips. Your 50% off coupon doesn't apply.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Sigred, I'm not deaf to the 'reasonableness' of your position. But the entire discussion is not about what the rules "should be" or are "intended to be" or what "makes sense," it's about what's written and where you can find it. When you say "there are rules disallowing this," what rules? Where?
Recap of the rules that we've discovered so far:
Chapter 11 of the PHB has lists of "Cleric Spells," "Bard Spells," etc.
The Spellcasting class feature of all of the classes doesn't describe under what parameters something is/is not a "Cleric Spell." It does:
Say that you can "cast [X] spells"
Say that you can learn (or "know") cantrips from the "[X] spell list"
There are three types of spellcaster:
Preparation classes (cleric, druid): Say that you can "prepare the list of [X]spells that are available to you to cast" each day, selected from the list of all [X] spells unlocked by your class level
Known classes (sorcerer, warlock, ranger, paladin, bard): don't have any reference to needing to prepare, your spell slots simply allow you "to cast your [known] [X] spells", and you "learn" a certain number of spells based on your level
Hybrid classes (wizard): You learn a certain number of spells based on your level, and can learn more by spending money. From the list of known spells (recorded in your spellbook), you "prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast" each day.
Chapter 10 of the Basic Rules provides general rules of Spellcasting, and makes no mention of any need to generally track the source by which you have learned the spells you know to distinguish between Burning Hands (Wizard) and Burning Hands (Sorcerer). Doesn't mean that a class feature couldn't impose such a requirement (but we didn't find one in the class descriptions), but as far as the general premise that "class spells are like brands".... no such general premise is found in the general rules.
Feats like Magic Initiate, Ritual Caster, and certain racial feats provide that you "learn" cantrips or leveled spells, but don't talk about what (if any) class they are associated with.
Racial abilities like those of Drow, Aasimar, etc. may provide access to spells. As far as I'm aware these all work in a similar way: they may let you "know" a cantrip, but for a leveled spell they will always only say that you can "cast" a leveled spell a certain number of times per day, not that you "know" it or "learn" it. Note how different this is than the feats provided above!
Basic Rules Chapter 6 provides that for multiclassed spellcasters, "Each spell you know and prepare is associated with one of your classes, and you use the spellcasting ability of that class when you cast the spell."
That's literally all "rules" that we've found so far. There's also a handful of Sage Advice rulings and tweets:
There's a ruling that a Druid can't cast a Detect Magic known from Magic Initiate as a ritual, not because it isn't a Druid spell, but because "The spell from Magic Initiate is known but not prepared."
There's a ruling that a Wizard that takes Magic Initiate (Wizard) has indeed learned "another 1st-level wizard spell." (they are not classless spells, as claimed by DxJxC).
There's a ruling that you can use spell slots to cast your Magic Initiate-learned spell "only if the class you picked for the feat is one of your classes." But, the second half of this clarifies that it is not trying to create a new rule, but simply restate the "normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn." If "[X] Spells" are "all spells on the "[X] Spell List" then the first half of this ruling overstates itself.
that "A class's spells are on that class's spell list".
"Sometimes you'll get a feature that adds spells to that list—features like the bard's Magical Secrets."
"Racial traits [spells] aren't added to your class's list unless your trait says otherwise."
Have I missed any rules (not opinions, not arguments) that we think can be quoted to answer this question? If not, then the most plain-language reading of the above is that:
"[X] Spells" are the spells on the "[X] Spell List"
Casters can cast their known [X] Spells with spell slots if they have the Spellcasting feature from [X] class and they know the spell (or know+prepared it, for clerics, druids, and wizards). Casters may also be able to cast their known/prepared [X] spells as rituals, if their Spellcasting feature allows them to.
Spells Known and Prepared.You determine what spells you know and can prepare for each class individually, as if you were a single-classed member of that class. If you are a ranger 4/wizard 3, for example, you know three 1st-level ranger spells based on your levels in the ranger class. As 3rd-level wizard, you know three wizard cantrips, and your spellbook contains ten wizard spells, two of which (the two you gained when you reached 3rd level as a wizard) can be 2nd-level spells. If your Intelligence is 16, you can prepare six wizard spells from your spellbook.
The method in which you acquire the spell dictates what class the spell belongs to. This is the most basic concept of multiclass spellcasting, and as you can (hopefully) see, it is quite clearly referenced ad nauseum. This is not how it 'should' be; this is how it is.
Here's another visual reference indicating that the spells you learn are explicitly tied to the specific class you learned them with:
Acid Splash (Sorcerer). Acid Splash (Wizard).
This is not a single spell with two different display settings. This is two different versions of the spell from different sources. Acid Splash learned as a Sorcerer (1st on list) is a Sorcerer spell at all times.
The second listing is from learning the exact same spell again from taking a level in Wizard; this version is always a Wizard spell. It didn't show up automatically by taking a level in Wizard; it had to be explicitly learned as a Wizard spell in order to be cast using the Wizard spellcasting rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Dndbeyond is not owned or developed by the creators of D&D 5E. They, like us, simply do their best to interpret the rules as written, and have no special authority to clarify how a rule works. The formatting decision that they have made, to list a single spell multiple times when it is known from multiple sources, is not one which we have found any suggestion for within the text of the rules other than in the multiclass spellcasting section (and as discussed, there are problems with reading it in isolation since it leads to absurd results unless given context).
Everything you have quoted there is answering the question "how do I know spells?" or "how do I prepare spells?" Leveling up as a Ranger allows you to learn Ranger Spells, a Wizard is allowed to copy Wizard Spells into their spellbook... but none of that even remotely touches on the question "what is a [Ranger/Wizard/X] spell?" or "is it possible that the Ranger Spell I know also counts as a Wizard Spell?"
Found a new rule which 100% clinches it, which I'll add to the discussion to finally put this to bed: Spell Scrolls.
"A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher. If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material components. ...A wizard spell on a spell scroll can be copied just as spells in spellbooks can be copied."
There it is. You don't find "Spell Scroll (Burning Hands) (Sorcerer)", you find "Spell Scroll (Burning Hands)". The Scroll refers to an example of a scroll with a spell that appears on the wizard class spell list as a "wizard spell on a spell scroll." Is there really any doubt that if you found Spell Scroll (Burning Hands) that RAW it would be both a wizard spell, and a sorcerer spell, and that if you were a Wizard/Sorcerer you could read it off the scroll using your choice of Intelligence or Charisma?
If a spell is on the Wizard Spell List, it is a Wizard Spell. PHB Chapter 11 says its so, the Spell Scroll rules say its so, Jeremy Crawford says its so, the plain meaning of the words "Wizard Spell" and "Wizard Spell List" say its so, and no written rule or ruling can be found anywhere saying it isn't so. Any further arguments to the contrary based on anything other than actual citation to written rules is irrelevant in the face of this overwhelming evidence.
I get what DxJxC is saying, but what I am saying is: nowhere in the rules do you find any reference to a spell becoming a "Cleric spell" or a "Druid spell" by virtue of you knowing it because you're a member of that class. There are two possibilitis.
1) "Cleric spells" are any spells that you know by virtue of being a Cleric. Or, by extension, taking a Feat by the name of "Magic Initiate (Cleric)" or something.
2) "Cleric spells" are spells that appear on the Cleric spell list (Chapter 11 of PHB).
#1 is incorrect, #2 is correct. We know this because of the November 28, 2017 Crawford tweet, and also because Chapter 11 of the PHB has sections titled "Bard Spells," "Cleric Spells," etc. That list shows that Detect Magic is both a "Bard Spell", and a "Cleric Spell," and a "Druid Spell," etc etc. Spellcasting class subclasses often have features that provide a handful of additional spells that are "a sorcerer spell for you;" these features are the specific exception to the general rule that sorcerer spells are the spells that appear on the Sorcerer Spells list in Chapter 11.
If you are a Sorcerer, then you can cast any Sorcerer Spells that you know using your spell slots. It doesn't matter how you learned those Sorcerer Spells, the class feature makes no mention of where you came across them; maybe you picked them up using Magic Initiate (Something that isn't sorcerer). Maybe you know a spell because of a racial ability. Doesn't matter. You either know a spell, or you don't, and it's either on the Sorcerer Spell List, or it isn't.
Want to cast Burning Hands as a charisma-based Sorcerer spell with a 1st level spell slot?
1) Do you "know" Burning Hands? If yes, go to 2.
2) Do you have the Sorcerer's spellcasting feature, which allows you to cast charisma-based Sorcerer Spells using spell slots? If yes, go to 3.
3) Have you satisfied the conditions specified in the Sorcerer's spellcasting feature (have a spell slot of spell's level or higher open to cast, know spell, spell appears on Sorcerer spell list in Chapter 11 or within a sorcerer subclass feature you'e unlocked)? If yes, spend it and cast it.
The temptation to insert an additional step 1.5 (of the spells you "know," track down how you know them) is not asked for in any of the rules, and there's no room on a character sheet to even track that info, its unmanageable.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The tweet you quoted said that spells granted by racial features (or anything else) do not count as a class spell unless specifically stated. And does not contribute much to the current conversation.
The magic initiate rules do not clearly say that the spells are class spells (barely implies it by mentioning class spell lists). The official SAC clarifies this saying that if you take magic initiate for your class, then you can use your class's spellcasting feature to cast those spells as well. What the rule is (although not clearly stated) is "any spell learned from a class spell list is a spell of that class."
Basically the only 2 sides of the argument are "magic initiate does not say they are class spells, so you can't use slots," and "SAC says you can use spell slots if you are the same class as the magic initiate chosen." There is no supporting rule for a middle ground argument. In fact the tweet you quoted doesnt apply to the 2 substantiated sides, but it does directly defeat the middle ground argument of "any spell that is on a class's spell list is a spell of that class regardless of source," that is exactly the opposite of the tweet's stance.
This sentence implies that the "cleric spell list" and the list of spells available for your character to cast are different.
Also, you are coming at this assuming that you can cast a spell in any way that you want to. A Sorc/Wiz/Cleric multiclassed character cannot choose to cast burning hands in any way that he likes. The game (according to sage advice and the modified wording in the PHB) indicates that you learn a particular version of that spell and can cast it using only the spellcasting ability associated with the version you have learned. This is a balancing issue: You cannot select to cast any spell with any spellcasting ability modifier that you like.
Each class's Spellcasting feature essentially tells you what it means by a "<insert class here> spell". No other definition is relevant since you're going to have to go through those rules to use spell slots anyways.
More generally, when the rules don't give a blanket definition for something, the meaning is up to idiomatic English and the context it appears in.
In the context of the cleric's Spellcasting feature, it's the spells the cleric chooses to prepare from the cleric spell list. Going strictly by what the book says, a cleric can't use their spell slots to cast a spell unless they've prepared that spell.
With that bit of rules lawyering out of the way, any DM would be wise to not split hairs over that. It just leads to feel-bad situations and even the most generous but definitely not RAW interpretation of "if you know it, you can cast it with spell slots regardless of class" wouldn't break much.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I don't understand why you guys are finding the tweet so difficult to parse. Crawford was asked whether "spells known by a class include any racial spells they may know," and he answers in no uncertain terms "A class's spells are on that class's spell list." The second half (does a racial ability add spells to a class list?) is answered in the negative, but that's not what I'm advocating for: if a spell is published on X's spell list in Chapter 11, then it is an "X Spell" for the purpose of any ability that refers to X Spells. This is not contradicted by any tweet, sage advice ruling, or text within any of the core rulebooks, and is indeed the only interpretation that has a shred of textual support. Nowhere does it say anywhere that a "Sorcerer Spell" is the spell chosen to be learned by a Sorcerer. You guys are rolling your eyes at me without a shred of textual support for your side, acting as though your read-between-the-lines inference is somehow stronger than explicit language in PHB Chapter 11.
What's funny is that the Unearthed Arcana that just came out further reinforces my point. Throughout, features like "Bard Spells" list spells which are... "Bard Spells." The new "Spell Versatility" features also call the spells you have learned the "spells you learned from this Spellcasting feature", not "Bard Spells" or "your known Bard Spells." The necessary conclusion remains, the concept of "Bard Spell" is larger and independent from "spells you learned while being a Bard."
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm not trying to tell you what is a sorcerer spell and what isn't. I'm saying (for balance reasons above all) that "your sorcerer spells" (which is a different list than "sorcerer spells") must be cast with Charisma. It flat out says that in the rules.
That list of "your sorcerer spells" contains the sorcerer spells you learn from the sorcerer spellcasting trait as well as any other spells that state that they are sorcerer spells for you.
"your sorcerer spells" and "sorcerer spells" are certainly two different lists: "your X spells" are the subset of all of the "X spells" that you know. We are 100% in agreement.
Where everyone is diverging from me, is that I don't see any reason to think that you ever "know" any spell more than once. If you "learn" a spell using Magic Initiate (let's use Detect Magic), then you know it, period. Detect Magic is a Bard Spell, and a Cleric Spell, and a Druid Spell, and a Paladin Spell, and a Ranger Spell, and a Sorcerer Spell, and a Wizard Spell, and an Artificer Spell, regardless of whether you have a class feature that lets you do anything with that tag. Similarly, a quarterstaff is a monk weapon, regardless of whether your character holding a quarterstaff happens to be a monk who can make any use of that tag.
So you took Magic Initiate (Wizard), and you "know" Detect Magic, and the feat provides a way that you can cast it (once per long rest, without using a spell slot, using the feat, using intelligence). But if you were to then take a level in Bard, at 1st level you would pick up the Bard's Spellcasting feature, learning two 1st level Bard Spells of your choice from the Bard Spell List. There is no reason to learn Detect Magic again, you already know it! You don't know "Detect Magic (Wizard Edition)", you know "Detect Magic"! When you go to use your first level spell slots to cast bard spells, your Spellcasting feature asks you to check: do you know a "Bard Spell"? Yes, you know three of them (the two you got at 1st level, and also Detect Magic appears on the Bard spell list as well). Do you have a spell slot available of an appropriate level or higher? If yes, go ahead!
And to bring this ship back around to the original subject, yes you could cast Detect Magic as a (Bard) Ritual in this scenario. "You can cast any bard spell you know as a ritual if that spell has the ritual tag." Do you know Detect Magic? Yes. Is it a Bard Spell? Yes. Then you can cast it as a bard ritual spell, even though you learned it via Magic Initiate (Wizard).
There is no balance concern here. And there is no reason to swim upstream against the text.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
This rule is the general statement of "Charisma is the spellcasting ability of your sorcerer spells." Unfortunately it is buried in the multiclassing spellcasting rules, but it certainly seems to be RAI for single class casters as well (note the text in each classes spellcasting feature).
That certainly is a little chestnut I hadn't noticed before. That could tip the scale ever so slightly towards "only counts as a spell of the class that you learned it from, and not as a spell of any other class" camp... but it also may not say as much as it thinks it does. A drow paladin 2/ranger 2, for example, knows Dancing Lights, no way around that. They're a multiclassed spellcaster and they have spell slots according to the table, so that paragraph clearly applies to them. But Dancing Lights also clearly is not a paladin or ranger spell, so.... where does that leave us?
Regardless, not certain if a spell being associated with "a class" precludes it also being associated with another class as well. Certainly does seem to tip your way though, it sure doesn't say "is associated with one or more of your classes". Hmm.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I fully admit that there are problems with the quote above from multiclassing rule, not the least of which is that it is a general statement that seems like the devs want it to apply to all spellcasting, but it is placed in the multiclassing rules.
I also see the problem with your example. Those racial spells do not have a class associated, only an ability. I would rule that means that you cannot cast these spells with slots at all without picking them up again through a class, and only allow the free castings provided by the racial feature. If you wanted to cast faerie fire or darkness using slots then you'd need to learn these spells from a class. Interestingly, in this particular case the racial feature doesn't say that you know (or learn) the leveled spells, but that you can cast them - further supporting that reading. As for the cantrip - you have a spellcasting ability for it (which it doesn't depend on anyway) and it is an at-will ability, so whatever.
I do think this is a place where RAW and RAI somewhat diverge.
RAI: Each spell that you know or prepare has a class associated with it, and you can only use the ability for that class to cast that spell. Essentially, there are different versions of each spell, and you can cast each spell only one way (i.e. using one ability mod).
RAW: Doesn't quite explicitly say that except for in the multiclass rules. Also, some spells from some sources don't have a class associated.
This only applies to spells gained from the spellcasting feature of classes. Spells learned from racial traits and feats are not associated with any class unless specified and can't be cast using spell slots because of this.
Which brings us back to when I said there are only 2 sides of the argument that can be right. Either the spells granted by magic initiate belong to 1 specific class decided by the feat and can be cast using slots only if you are that class (the loose RAW, SAC argument). Or magic initiate does not specify a specific class the spells belong to, so they can't be cast with slots at all (the strict RAW, no SAC argument).
The argument that you can cast any spell you know with slots as long as it is on your spellcasting class's spell list is just not supported by the rules. This argument is the same as saying a multiclass wizard/sorcerer that knows firebolt as a wizard spell could cast it using CHA to hit per sorcerer's spellcasting.
Level 19 Wizard/1 Sorcerer. The class spell lists are nearly identical. Sorcerers normally only get the ability to learn a limited selection of spells over their entire career, but are able to cast anything they know without preparation. Wizards can add anything eligible to their spellbook which can be prepared later. Does the character now get to cast every single spell that they know just because they happen to be on both class lists? Do they get to choose CHA or INT? No.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Or, yes! :)
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
“A monk gets to do martial arts damage with monk weapons. A hex blade gets to attack using charisma with their hex weapon. So a hex blade1/monk 19 gets to attack using charisma or dex with all their 1d12 short sword attacks???”
Thats no less of an absurd situation than what you’ve just presented. Multi-classing allows features of both classes to interact, what else is new?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The answer, as it relates to Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition, is a quite definitive "No". Last time I checked, it wasn't a White Wolf product. :P
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
That is not absurd. It's something that the game explicitly allows, and explicitly disallows if the character doesn't fulfill all the prerequisites. Martial Arts and Hex Warrior are explicit class features that you earn through leveling up. You might as well be arguing that a 19 Monk/1 Rogue being able to sneak attack with a Shortsword is absurd. These are things that are explicitly allowed because they have non-exclusive, explicit requirements that must be fulfilled to do so.
What is absurd is arguing that a Wizard/Sorcerer can spontaneously cast all spells transcribed into the Wizard's spellbook. You are arguing from a false premise. There is no general rule allowing a spell learned from one class list to be used as one from a different class list. There are rules disallowing this.
Class spells are like brands. You're at the store, you want to buy a bag of chips, and you have a coupon for 50% off Frito-Lay products. The store carries Frito-Lay products, other major brands, and their own store brand. All of these brands are available for you to choose from. You choose a bag of store brand chips. Your 50% off coupon doesn't apply.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Sigred, I'm not deaf to the 'reasonableness' of your position. But the entire discussion is not about what the rules "should be" or are "intended to be" or what "makes sense," it's about what's written and where you can find it. When you say "there are rules disallowing this," what rules? Where?
Recap of the rules that we've discovered so far:
That's literally all "rules" that we've found so far. There's also a handful of Sage Advice rulings and tweets:
Have I missed any rules (not opinions, not arguments) that we think can be quoted to answer this question? If not, then the most plain-language reading of the above is that:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The method in which you acquire the spell dictates what class the spell belongs to. This is the most basic concept of multiclass spellcasting, and as you can (hopefully) see, it is quite clearly referenced ad nauseum. This is not how it 'should' be; this is how it is.
Here's another visual reference indicating that the spells you learn are explicitly tied to the specific class you learned them with:
Acid Splash (Sorcerer). Acid Splash (Wizard).
This is not a single spell with two different display settings. This is two different versions of the spell from different sources. Acid Splash learned as a Sorcerer (1st on list) is a Sorcerer spell at all times.
The second listing is from learning the exact same spell again from taking a level in Wizard; this version is always a Wizard spell. It didn't show up automatically by taking a level in Wizard; it had to be explicitly learned as a Wizard spell in order to be cast using the Wizard spellcasting rules.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Dndbeyond is not owned or developed by the creators of D&D 5E. They, like us, simply do their best to interpret the rules as written, and have no special authority to clarify how a rule works. The formatting decision that they have made, to list a single spell multiple times when it is known from multiple sources, is not one which we have found any suggestion for within the text of the rules other than in the multiclass spellcasting section (and as discussed, there are problems with reading it in isolation since it leads to absurd results unless given context).
Everything you have quoted there is answering the question "how do I know spells?" or "how do I prepare spells?" Leveling up as a Ranger allows you to learn Ranger Spells, a Wizard is allowed to copy Wizard Spells into their spellbook... but none of that even remotely touches on the question "what is a [Ranger/Wizard/X] spell?" or "is it possible that the Ranger Spell I know also counts as a Wizard Spell?"
Found a new rule which 100% clinches it, which I'll add to the discussion to finally put this to bed: Spell Scrolls.
"A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher. If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material components. ...A wizard spell on a spell scroll can be copied just as spells in spellbooks can be copied."
There it is. You don't find "Spell Scroll (Burning Hands) (Sorcerer)", you find "Spell Scroll (Burning Hands)". The Scroll refers to an example of a scroll with a spell that appears on the wizard class spell list as a "wizard spell on a spell scroll." Is there really any doubt that if you found Spell Scroll (Burning Hands) that RAW it would be both a wizard spell, and a sorcerer spell, and that if you were a Wizard/Sorcerer you could read it off the scroll using your choice of Intelligence or Charisma?
If a spell is on the Wizard Spell List, it is a Wizard Spell. PHB Chapter 11 says its so, the Spell Scroll rules say its so, Jeremy Crawford says its so, the plain meaning of the words "Wizard Spell" and "Wizard Spell List" say its so, and no written rule or ruling can be found anywhere saying it isn't so. Any further arguments to the contrary based on anything other than actual citation to written rules is irrelevant in the face of this overwhelming evidence.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.