Consider the number of smites that a Sorcadin would get with each version. Say a paladin 6/Sorcerer 14. Converting anything below a 5th level slot down is at best damage neutral with the more conservative reading (3 SP for a 3rd level slot). Giving the table value on conversions is giving an extra 1st level slot for every slot converted. It would also render anything above a 5th level slot worthless from a conversion standpoint, since the table stops at 5th level.
Really? And the 1 SP generated per spell slot is supposed to limit the functionality? Why even mention the SP to spell slot conversion separately at all when you could simply say, "Refer to the chart when converting to or from SP"?
It isn’t that they didn’t print the table twice. It’s that they explicitly told you what to do (convert to a number of points equal to slot level), but you’re doing something completely different. Of course they didn’t print a rule that says “do the thing we just told you to do, and don’t do anything we didn’t tell you to do,” because... I mean come on man, it says what it says and it’s very very clear?
Consider the number of smites that a Sorcadin would get with each version (1). Say a paladin 6/Sorcerer 14. Converting anything below a 5th level slot down is at best damage neutral with the more conservative reading (3 SP for a 3rd level slot). Giving the table value on conversions is giving an extra 1st level slot for every slot converted (2). It would also render anything above a 5th level slot worthless from a conversion standpoint, since the table stops at 5th level (3).
Really? And the 1 SP generated per spell slot is supposed to limit the functionality? (4) Why even mention the SP to spell slot conversion separately at all when you could simply say, "Refer to the chart when converting to or from SP"?
Entirely irrelevant Red Herring. What you can do with Paladin features has absolutely nothing to do with Sorcerer features.
No, it doesn't? You would get 5 points for converting a 3rd level slot, and those 5 points could be used to recover one 1st level slot and one 2nd level slot. How is that not one of the points of flexible casting? Trading higher level slots for the ability to potentially cast more lower level spells throughout an adventuring day?
Yes, and? I was very clear that my view of the rule does not allow for conversion of slots over 5th level in either direction.
Functionality is already limited by the fact that you only have one bonus action per turn. Converting a singleslot, in either direction, requires the use of a bonus action. It's not like you can rearrange your entire set of available spell slots on a whim during combat.
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.
Ok. But what's the slot's level? Are you going to call a 3rd level spell slot a level 5?
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
It doesn't even reference the table, it references the spell slot. A 3rd level spell slot has a level of 3 and therefore generates a number of SP equal to it's level (3). 5=/=3.
Let me ask you this. Which fallacy would you say I was arguing from if our positions were reversed? You are saying that the lack of a table for the conversion proves the more conservative reading as being argumentum ex silentio. What would that make yours?
And there's a nifty little table directly above it which equates a number of sorcery points with a slot's level.
I am not saying that your argument is invalid. I have explicitly said, from the very moment that a different reading was brought to my attention, that it is valid. You are trying to tell me that my interpretation is not valid, and the only evidence presented to back up that assertion is your own view. That is the fallacy of appealing to unqualified authority.
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.
For me the reading is clear that you use the table when converting sorcery points into spell slots and use the spell slot level when converting spell slots to sorcery points. To me this is evident because they deliberately separated the features of "Creating Spell Slots" and "Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points". They would have combined the two effects into the same heading if the intention was to use the table when going either way.
Also the table is explicitly called "The Creating Spell Slots table" - not "The Sorcery Point Conversion table".
“You are trying to tell me that my interpretation is not valid, and the only evidence presented to back up that assertion is your own view. That is the fallacy of appealing to unqualified authority.”
No, the plain meaning of “equal to” (instead of “based on,” “dependent on,” or anything else like that) is what shows you’re wrong.
No, the plain meaning of “equal to” (instead of “based on,” “dependent on,” or anything else like that) is what shows you’re wrong.
This is not an ambiguous rule.
Again, there is literally a table directly above that equates a discrete number of Sorcery Points with a discrete level of spell slot. None of what has been said definitively disproves my interpretation. Absent official ruling, they are both valid interpretations. That's all I'm saying.
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.
Consider the number of smites that a Sorcadin would get with each version (1). Say a paladin 6/Sorcerer 14. Converting anything below a 5th level slot down is at best damage neutral with the more conservative reading (3 SP for a 3rd level slot). Giving the table value on conversions is giving an extra 1st level slot for every slot converted (2). It would also render anything above a 5th level slot worthless from a conversion standpoint, since the table stops at 5th level (3).
Really? And the 1 SP generated per spell slot is supposed to limit the functionality? (4) Why even mention the SP to spell slot conversion separately at all when you could simply say, "Refer to the chart when converting to or from SP"?
Entirely irrelevant Red Herring. What you can do with Paladin features has absolutely nothing to do with Sorcerer features.
No, it doesn't? You would get 5 points for converting a 3rd level slot, and those 5 points could be used to recover one 1st level slot and one 2nd level slot. How is that not one of the points of flexible casting? Trading higher level slots for the ability to potentially cast more lower level spells throughout an adventuring day?
Yes, and? I was very clear that my view of the rule does not allow for conversion of slots over 5th level in either direction.
Functionality is already limited by the fact that you only have one bonus action per turn. Converting a singleslot, in either direction, requires the use of a bonus action. It's not like you can rearrange your entire set of available spell slots on a whim during combat.
1. It's not just a red herring, it's also border line slippery slope. That doesn't mean that it's not also a hasty generalization awaiting further evidence (granted this seems to be an unlikely probability given the lack of concern for rules interactions with multiclass and feats). On the other hand, it's not a red herring for the DM that worries about balance with multiclass, and therefore merits mention.
2. From your standpoint it doesn't, it does quite the opposite and loses a 1st level spell per conversion going with my reading. That doesn't change the fact that my statement was correct when considering it from a 1 SP per slot level view.
I've always read the flexible casting to include the ability to cast a different number of spells from what you normally would have in addition to being able to change those castings with metamagic. Your reading may prove correct (though no more likely than ours since this hasn't come up in an errata yet), as the flexibility is certainly higher with your reading from a spell slot perspective. Well, at least with 5th level and lower slots. As for those higher (3.), my reading avails more potential for low level casting when 6th and higher slots are available to be scrapped for lower slots giving a whopping 41 potential points vs the 21 potential points that you are losing with the 5th level restriction.
4). Which is only a limit during combat, that's like saying that ritual casting is pointless because it's impractical to use it during combat. Out of combat, you can still make those changes as you see fit. Is the timing more critical in combat, certainly. But having access to more points for conversion should you want the lower level spell slots isn't any more of a limitation than limiting the confusion from spell slots to fifth or below.
I'm not trying to say that you're simply wrong and change your mind or else. We've seen that there are plenty of circumstances within the rules where one interpretation can be just as valid as another when seen from a certain perspective. I can see why you would consider your interpretation to be correct. Hopefully the back and forth gives people something to consider when weighing one option versus the other.
No, the plain meaning of “equal to” (instead of “based on,” “dependent on,” or anything else like that) is what shows you’re wrong.
This is not an ambiguous rule.
Again, there is literally a table directly above that equates a discrete number of Sorcery Points with a discrete level of spell slot. None of what has been said definitively disproves my interpretation. Absent official ruling, they are both valid interpretations. That's all I'm saying.
At 2nd level, you tap into a deep wellspring of magic within yourself. This wellspring is represented by sorcery points, which allow you to create a variety of magical effects.
Sorcery Points
You have 2 sorcery points, and you gain more as you reach higher levels, as shown in the Sorcery Points column of the Sorcerer table. You can never have more sorcery points than shown on the table for your level. You regain all spent sorcery points when you finish a long rest.
Flexible Casting
You can use your sorcery points to gain additional spell slots, or sacrifice spell slots to gain additional sorcery points. You learn other ways to use your sorcery points as you reach higher levels.
Creating Spell Slots. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of a given level. You can create spell slots no higher in level than 5th.
Any spell slot you create with this feature vanishes when you finish a long rest.
Creating Spell Slots
SPELL SLOT LEVEL
SORCERY POINT COST
1st
2
2nd
3
3rd
5
4th
6
5th
7
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
Metamagic
At 3rd level, you gain the ability to twist your spells to suit your needs. You gain two of the following Metamagic options of your choice. You gain another one at 10th and 17th level.
You can use only one Metamagic option on a spell when you cast it, unless otherwise noted.
Do you see how the two headers, Font of Magic, and Metamagic have the same sized header? That’s how you know they are subpoints of equal merit, but not directly influencing each other. They are only tangentially related as they both apply under the same main header of Sorcerer.
Do you see how “Creating Spell Slots” and “Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points” both have the same sized header font? That’s how you know they are sub-subpoints of equal merit, but not directly influencing each other. They are only tangentially related as they both independently apply to the same subpoint.
That’s how you know that what is under each header is self contained in and of itself, and only grouped together when referring to the main point, in this case Font of Magic.
I wouldn’t get too caught up in equating stylistic decisions about headers on dndbeyond or even the PHB as sufficient evidence to prove a claim, though at times it may support an argument. The PHB is full of rules being found in the wrong or misleading places.
Creating Spell Slots. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of a given level. You can create spell slots no higher in level than 5th.
when referencing the table it says nothing about converting slots to SP. ONLY creating a spell slot.
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
the following section ONLY tells you how to convert a spell slot to SP
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
I do not see how this sentence can be interpreted in any other way than: Expended Spell Slot Level = Sorcery Points gained.
The conversion table is specifically referenced for creating spell slots in the rules text, not the expending spell slots rules text.
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
I do not see how this sentence can be interpreted in any other way than: Expended Spell Slot Level = Sorcery Points gained.
The conversion table is specifically referenced for creating spell slots in the rules text, not the expending spell slots rules text.
Absolutely no ambiguity here.
Bolded is correct. The table is for creating spell slots only. The part of my post you quoted is for creating Sorcery Points only.
Sorcery points => Spell Slots use the table. Spell Slots => Sorcery Points use the text for 1:1 conversion. Edit: had spell points instead of sorcery points. Fixed it
Also, that’s why the table says Sorcery Point Cost because it’s only for creating spell slots, at the cost of using SP.
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
I do not see how this sentence can be interpreted in any other way than: Expended Spell Slot Level = Sorcery Points gained.
The conversion table is specifically referenced for creating spell slots in the rules text, not the expending spell slots rules text.
Absolutely no ambiguity here.
Bolded is correct. The table is for creating spell slots only. The part of my post you quoted is for creating Spell Points only.
Spell points => Spell Slots use the table. Spell Slots => Spell Points use the text for 1:1 conversion.
Consider the number of smites that a Sorcadin would get with each version. Say a paladin 6/Sorcerer 14. Converting anything below a 5th level slot down is at best damage neutral with the more conservative reading (3 SP for a 3rd level slot). Giving the table value on conversions is giving an extra 1st level slot for every slot converted. It would also render anything above a 5th level slot worthless from a conversion standpoint, since the table stops at 5th level.
Really? And the 1 SP generated per spell slot is supposed to limit the functionality? Why even mention the SP to spell slot conversion separately at all when you could simply say, "Refer to the chart when converting to or from SP"?
It isn’t that they didn’t print the table twice. It’s that they explicitly told you what to do (convert to a number of points equal to slot level), but you’re doing something completely different. Of course they didn’t print a rule that says “do the thing we just told you to do, and don’t do anything we didn’t tell you to do,” because... I mean come on man, it says what it says and it’s very very clear?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
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.
Ok. But what's the slot's level? Are you going to call a 3rd level spell slot a level 5?
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
It doesn't even reference the table, it references the spell slot. A 3rd level spell slot has a level of 3 and therefore generates a number of SP equal to it's level (3). 5=/=3.
Let me ask you this. Which fallacy would you say I was arguing from if our positions were reversed? You are saying that the lack of a table for the conversion proves the more conservative reading as being argumentum ex silentio. What would that make yours?
And there's a nifty little table directly above it which equates a number of sorcery points with a slot's level.
I am not saying that your argument is invalid. I have explicitly said, from the very moment that a different reading was brought to my attention, that it is valid. You are trying to tell me that my interpretation is not valid, and the only evidence presented to back up that assertion is your own view. That is the fallacy of appealing to unqualified authority.
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.
For me the reading is clear that you use the table when converting sorcery points into spell slots and use the spell slot level when converting spell slots to sorcery points. To me this is evident because they deliberately separated the features of "Creating Spell Slots" and "Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points". They would have combined the two effects into the same heading if the intention was to use the table when going either way.
Also the table is explicitly called "The Creating Spell Slots table" - not "The Sorcery Point Conversion table".
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
“You are trying to tell me that my interpretation is not valid, and the only evidence presented to back up that assertion is your own view. That is the fallacy of appealing to unqualified authority.”
No, the plain meaning of “equal to” (instead of “based on,” “dependent on,” or anything else like that) is what shows you’re wrong.
This is not an ambiguous rule.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Again, there is literally a table directly above that equates a discrete number of Sorcery Points with a discrete level of spell slot. None of what has been said definitively disproves my interpretation. Absent official ruling, they are both valid interpretations. That's all I'm saying.
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.
1. It's not just a red herring, it's also border line slippery slope. That doesn't mean that it's not also a hasty generalization awaiting further evidence (granted this seems to be an unlikely probability given the lack of concern for rules interactions with multiclass and feats). On the other hand, it's not a red herring for the DM that worries about balance with multiclass, and therefore merits mention.
2. From your standpoint it doesn't, it does quite the opposite and loses a 1st level spell per conversion going with my reading. That doesn't change the fact that my statement was correct when considering it from a 1 SP per slot level view.
I've always read the flexible casting to include the ability to cast a different number of spells from what you normally would have in addition to being able to change those castings with metamagic. Your reading may prove correct (though no more likely than ours since this hasn't come up in an errata yet), as the flexibility is certainly higher with your reading from a spell slot perspective. Well, at least with 5th level and lower slots. As for those higher (3.), my reading avails more potential for low level casting when 6th and higher slots are available to be scrapped for lower slots giving a whopping 41 potential points vs the 21 potential points that you are losing with the 5th level restriction.
4). Which is only a limit during combat, that's like saying that ritual casting is pointless because it's impractical to use it during combat. Out of combat, you can still make those changes as you see fit. Is the timing more critical in combat, certainly. But having access to more points for conversion should you want the lower level spell slots isn't any more of a limitation than limiting the confusion from spell slots to fifth or below.
I'm not trying to say that you're simply wrong and change your mind or else. We've seen that there are plenty of circumstances within the rules where one interpretation can be just as valid as another when seen from a certain perspective. I can see why you would consider your interpretation to be correct. Hopefully the back and forth gives people something to consider when weighing one option versus the other.
What is the Title of the table?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Do you see how the two headers, Font of Magic, and Metamagic have the same sized header? That’s how you know they are subpoints of equal merit, but not directly influencing each other. They are only tangentially related as they both apply under the same main header of Sorcerer.
Do you see how “Creating Spell Slots” and “Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points” both have the same sized header font? That’s how you know they are sub-subpoints of equal merit, but not directly influencing each other. They are only tangentially related as they both independently apply to the same subpoint.
That’s how you know that what is under each header is self contained in and of itself, and only grouped together when referring to the main point, in this case Font of Magic.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I wouldn’t get too caught up in equating stylistic decisions about headers on dndbeyond or even the PHB as sufficient evidence to prove a claim, though at times it may support an argument. The PHB is full of rules being found in the wrong or misleading places.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Creating Spell Slots. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of a given level. You can create spell slots no higher in level than 5th.
when referencing the table it says nothing about converting slots to SP. ONLY creating a spell slot.
Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number of sorcery points equal to the slot’s level.
the following section ONLY tells you how to convert a spell slot to SP
the table is only for SP to spell slots
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I do not see how this sentence can be interpreted in any other way than: Expended Spell Slot Level = Sorcery Points gained.
The conversion table is specifically referenced for creating spell slots in the rules text, not the expending spell slots rules text.
Absolutely no ambiguity here.
Isn't there an obvious problem with Sigred's interpretation?
How many sorcery points do you convert a 6th level slot into?
Bolded is correct. The table is for creating spell slots only. The part of my post you quoted is for creating Sorcery Points only.
Sorcery points => Spell Slots use the table.
Spell Slots => Sorcery Points use the text for 1:1 conversion.
Edit: had spell points instead of sorcery points. Fixed it
Also, that’s why the table says Sorcery Point Cost because it’s only for creating spell slots, at the cost of using SP.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yes, we do agree.
Sigred has said that his interpretation doesn't allow for converting 6th-9th level slots.
Nothing in the text of converting slots to points indicates that at all. They can assert all they want, but there is no text implying that.
They're running off the table 100%. Since converting to a slot caps at 5th, they're running on the same basis, which is at least consistent.