Is this proposed change to the Transmutation Wizard’s Master Transmuter class feature balanced for a setting without resurrection? [Version 2]

In my previous iteration of this question, I proposed a replacement for the Master Transmuter option Restore Life. the feedback I received identified that it was too powerful, so I have a new, much simpler proposal. The brief description below outlines the problem; see my other question for a more detailed explanation.


The School of Transmutation wizard archetype has a feature at level 14 called Master Transmuter. It can allow such a wizard to, once per long rest, destroy their transmuter’s stone and do one of a handful of options, one of which is:

Restore Life. You cast the raise dead spell on a creature you touch with the transmuter’s stone, without expending a spell slot or needing to have the spell in your spellbook.

Unfortunately, in my homebrew universe, there is no resurrection magic, so I’m looking into replacing this option with something homebrew that is not related to resurrection, but still at least broadly fits the theme of “Restore Life“.


Still considering greater restoration, I wonder if it would be balanced to simply allow Restore Life to cast it instead of raise dead, a direct trade with no other additions (i.e. not a “super charged” version like I proposed before)?

Restore Life. You cast the greater restoration spell on a creature you touch with the transmuter’s stone, without expending a spell slot or needing to have the spell in your spellbook.

My reasoning behind believing that this might be balanced, in light of the feedback, is a) it’s a 5th level cleric spell like raise dead, and b) it is not usually available to wizards, same as raise dead.

One the other hand, I’m concerned that this might be a bit weaker than the RAW raise dead version of Restore Life (after all, once you’re dead, greater restoration can’t help at all), so if that is true, I’m also considering waiving the costly material component of the greater restoration spell if cast in this way, since it seems you do need it for the raise dead version. If this is not weaker (or waiving the material component would make this vastly more powerful), then I won’t do that.


So my question is, in a setting where there is no resurrection magic, does my new proposed replacement of the Restore Life option of the Master Transmuter class feature seem balanced?
Ideally contrasting with and without my “waive the material costs” suggestion.

Is this proposed tweak to the Transmutation Wizard’s Master Transmuter class feature balanced for a setting without resurrection?

The School of Transmutation wizard archetype has a feature at level 14 called Master Transmuter. It can allow such a wizard to, once per long rest, destroy their transmuter’s stone and do the following:

Restore Life. You cast the raise dead spell on a creature you touch with the transmuter’s stone, without expending a spell slot or needing to have the spell in your spellbook.

Unfortunately, in my homebrew universe, there is no resurrection magic, so I’m looking into replacing this option with something homebrew that is not related to resurrection, but still at least broadly fits the theme of “Restore Life“.

Unlike in my similar question about replacing resurrection related class features, I do actually have a player who has a transmutation wizard (they are currently “retired”, but the player is strongly considering “unretiring” them in the near future, so this character will almost definitely come back at some point and isn’t far off level 14); this player is also strongly in the camp of “resurrection magic cheapens death”, so they are definitely up for replacing this option of the class feature.


Given that it is called “Restore Life“, I considered replacing it with some kind of healing (say, the heal spell), but then noticed another option that the Master Transmuter feature offers:

Panacea. You remove all curses, diseases, and poisons affecting a creature that you touch with the transmuter’s stone. The creature also regains all its hit points.

So healing would look a bit redundant and underwhelming compared to that option.


Finally, I looked towards greater restoration, since a) it’s a 5th level cleric spell like raise dead, and b) Panacea is kind of like a super charged lesser restoration, plus healing. So I have come up with the following (a “super charged greater restoration“):

Restore Life. You end all reductions to all of the target’s ability scores and hit point maximum, and end one effect that imposes the petrified condition on the target.

I’ve not included the greater restoration spell’s removing curses (since I didn’t want overlap with Panacea) or ending charmed effects (because it doesn’t really fit the theme of restoring life). I also haven’t included regaining any hit points because I thought that might be too powerful compared with Panacea if it also healed the target (although I could have it at least restore hit points equal to the reduction of their hit point maximum, if it was reduced at all).


So my question is, in a setting where there is no resurrection magic, does my proposed replacement of the Restore Life option of the Master Transmuter class feature seem balanced, primarily comparing it to the raise dead spell and the Panacea option?

Would the Life Cleric’s Disciple of Life feature work with the Necromancer Wizard’s Grim Harvest feature?

The Life Domain cleric’s Disciple of Life feature (PHB, p. 60) says:

Also starting at 1st level, your healing spells are more effective. Whenever you use a spell of 1st level or higher to restore hit points to a creature, the creature regains additional hit points equal to 2 + the spell’s level.

The School of Necromancy wizard’s Grim Harvest feature (PHB, p. 118) says:

At 2nd level, you gain the ability to reap life energy from creatures you kill with your spells. Once per turn when you kill one or more creatures with a spell of 1st level or higher, you regain hit points equal to twice the spell’s level, or three times its level if the spell belongs to the School of Necromancy. You don’t gain this benefit for killing constructs or undead.

Would the Life Cleric’s Disciple of Life feature work with the Necromancer Wizard’s Grim Harvest feature?

For instance, if I’m due to get 8 HP from Grim Harvest for killing a mob with a level 4 Spirit Guardians spell, do I get an extra 6 HP thanks to Disciple of Life?

How does the UA Lore Mastery Wizard’s Alchemical Casting feature interact with the Spell Sniper feat and the Sorcerer’s Distant Spell Metamagic?

This question comes from recent discussion in the question “What is the maximum distance you can cause damage from?”


The Unearthed Arcana Lore Mastery Wizard gets the Alchemical Casting feature which states:

[…] When you cast a spell with a spell slot, you can expend one additional spell slot to augment its effects for this casting […]

An additional 2nd-level spell slot can increase the spell’s range. If the spell’s range is at least 30 feet, it becomes 1 mile […]

I’m wondering how (if at all) this feature works with both the Spell Sniper feat and the Sorcerer’s Distans Spell Metamagic:

When you cast a spell that requires you to make an attack roll, the spell’s range is doubled.

When you cast a spell that has a range of 5 feet or greater, you can spend 1 sorcery point to double the range of the spell.

Do these allow you to make spell have a range of 4 miles, 2 miles, or still only 1 mile total?


Note that I am already aware that ordinarily the Spell Sniper feat and Distant Spell Metamagic work together, this is supported in the question “Does Spell Sniper and Distant Spell quadruple your range on attack spells?”

What was the source of this Magic Items PDF found on Wizards’ website?

This “New Magic Items” PDF, found in the files section of the Wizards of the Coast website, has been shared around on various forums and linked in handbooks over the years. It has several fairly useful items, such as the mantle of rage, but when going through the WotC website, it’s nowhere to be found. What’s the source on it?

(This question came to mind because of a comment by @HeyICanChan wondering about the source of this obscure article, and I ended up wondering as well.)

In DnD 5e’s lower magic approach, how would the Red Wizards of Thay’s magic item business work out?

DnD 5e makes magic items much less common than previous editions. Also, the Forgotten Realms are the assumed background even in the Core Rules.

One of the most interesting groups in Faerun are the Red Wizards of Thay, trying to gain money and influence by building enclaves all across Faerun where they produce and sell magic items.

Now these two concepts do not go together well. Still, as Faerun is the assumed background, magic items there are also supposed to be rare (i.e. Faerun is not a particularly high-magic setting).

I want to include the Red Wizards in my upcoming DnD 5e campaign, but I’m unsure how their strategies might work out. Would they rather demand favors and support than money for their magic items? Or are they an exception to the rule that magic items are not for sale, where the flip side of the coin is that every magic item bought supports a magocracy with overt slavery and oppression?

How does an Evocation Wizard’s Overchannel ability interact with Chaos Bolt?

With the release of Guildmaster’s Guide to Ravnica, characters were given new background options. Some of these options add spells to a character’s spellcasting classes. One of these is the Izzet Engineer, which allows for any spellcaster to learn and cast chaos bolt, among other spells.

Izzet Engineer relevant snippet:

Spell List
For you, the spells on the Izzet Guild Spells table are added to the spell list of your spellcasting class. (If you are a multiclass character with multiple spell lists, these spells are added to all of them.)
Spell Level: Spells
Cantrip: produce flame, shocking grasp
1st: chaos bolt, create or destroy water, unseen servant

Chaos bolt follows:

You hurl an undulating, warbling mass of chaotic energy at one creature in range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, the target takes 2d8 + 1d6 damage. Choose one of the d8s. The number rolled on that die determines the attack’s damage type, as shown below.

d8 Damage Type
1 Acid
2 Cold
3 Fire
4 Force
5 Lightning
6 Poison
7 Psychic
8 Thunder

If you roll the same number on both d8s, the chaotic energy leaps from the target to a different creature of your choice within 30 feet of it. Make a new attack roll against the new target, and make a new damage roll, which could cause the chaotic energy to leap again.

A creature can be targeted only once by each casting of this spell.

At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, each target takes 1d6 extra damage of the type rolled for each slot level above 1st.

Combine this spell with the Wizard Evocation tradition ability of Overchannel:

Overchannel
Starting at 14th level, you can increase the power of your simpler spells. When you cast a wizard spell of 1st through 5th level that deals damage, you can deal maximum damage with that spell.

I found another question referencing wish-ing to chaos bolt. The answer references the fact that chaos bolt is not a Wizard spell, and therefore the asker’s desired outcome does not work. However, a key point of text from the Izzet Engineer (emphasis mine):

For you, the spells… are added to the spell list of your spellcasting class.

This means it is now possible for a 14th-level Izzet Engineer Evocation Wizard to choose to maximize the damage of a casting of chaos bolt.

What happens?

Does the spell continually leap to new targets until the caster chooses no target? Since the damage is maximized, is it dealing Thunder damage each time?

Am I simply too excited about this possibility? Should the 2d8 should be rolled as normal to determine damage type and leap potential, but then the spell deals 22 damage (8+8+6) regardless of the roll result?

What counts as “one object” for the Illusion wizard’s Illusory Reality and Malleable Illusions features?

I DM for a player who is considering creating a School of Illusion Wizard. They have correctly noted that many things about illusions in the game are open to interpretation, and have asked me to let me know how I would rule on several interactions, in the interest of managing their own expectations. The following question asks about one of these interactions, with the intent of finding out if there is a definitive answer, and gathering information about what would be a reasonable/practical ruling that others have made at their tables if there isn’t.

The 14th-level School of Illusion wizard feature, Illusory Reality, can make one object in an illusion spell real for one minute (PHB, p. 118):

When you cast an illusion spell of 1st level or higher, you can choose one inanimate, nonmagical object that is part of the illusion and make that object real. You can do this on your turn as a bonus action while the spell is ongoing. The object remains real for 1 minute. For example, you can create an illusion of a bridge over a chasm and then make it real long enough for your allies to cross.

The object can’t deal damage or otherwise directly harm anyone.

Although the intent is that you can only use this feature on one object per illusion spell, this answer suggests you can use it multiple times on the same object while the spell persists.

But what exactly does “one object” mean, in the context of the 6th-level School of Illusion wizard feature, Malleable Illusions (PHB, p.118)?

Starting at 6th level, when you cast an illusion spell that has a duration of 1 minute or longer, you can use your action to change the nature of that illusion (using the spell’s normal parameters for the illusion), provided that you can see the illusion.

With Malleable Illusions, you can change an object in an illusion into another object, into a creature, or into something else (like graffiti on a wall).

This answer suggests that if you did so to an object made real with Illusory Reality, the changed object would remain real.

So: it seems like you might be able to make your “one object” real multiple times, while using Malleable Illusions to change it to a different object each time (if you can’t alter objects made real with Illusory Reality using Malleable Illusions, just wait until they are illusions again before using MI).

Is this actually possible?

(Obviously you would still only ever be able to have one real object per illusion spell at any particular time.)

As an example, consider this sequence of events:

  1. Create an illusory sword (with a spell such as Major Image)
  2. Make the sword real with Illusory Reality
  3. Wait a minute for the sword to become illusory again (whether you can apply Malleable Illusions to an object made real by Illusory Reality, and thus skip this step, is the subject of this question)
  4. Alter the nature of the illusory sword to be an illusory lump of coal instead
  5. Try to apply Illusory Reality to make the coal real. Can this be done?

What do the Red Wizards of Thay, and particularly Rath Modar, want? [on hold]

I’m currently re-working a small Adventurers League module to insert into my campaign. It involves a Wizard of Thay secretly raising a decent-sized army of undead in the city’s catacombs without anyone noticing.

The original plot hook from the module is that they are trying to help Tiamat to break into the real world using said army of undead (in a convoluted, non-direct way, but still). But I have enough world-ending threats in my current campaign, so I want to change it to something more grounded, but something that still could be investigated by players for further play.

But… it’s hard to guess what Wizards of the Thay want? Especially their outcast — Rath Mogar, who the local zombie-raising wizard works for. Any good ideas for what they would possibly want in Neverwinter? Or at all?

Because I’m getting ideas with only something too generic, like “they are evil and want tons of zombies, duuuuh” and such.