Modern Nobility hunt foxes!
Ok, even I'll admit there's little risk there.
Some want spellcasters to level while studying safely in their towers, but it is the slowest route to gaining power by the system. It rewards risk, spellcasting in battle, solving puzzles, problems and quests. Studying and then having a cup of tea (as much as I like these things) doesn't make you a 5th level wizard.
A brief story. It was a Sargava game and one player was running an aged gent, who was a wizard. Now because of his back story he wanted more levels, he was a graduate of an esteemed foreign school, and had settled into a life in Sargava. He had done the family thing, made a living by his knowledge but had never taken real risks, and therefore had never grown in magical power until he was past middle age and took up adventuring. It was a hobby for him. He didn't get caught up in adventuring and joining a far younger party until he was in his 50s. Then he started to level up quick.
Now perhaps, because of all the little things he had done in his life (you raise a child, have some xp, but more spells because of home duties?) he should have not been 1st level, but it also made sense. He had missed his opportunity to excel in magic at a young age because he took no risks, he was just another urban 1st level wizard. Confident and cocky, with sound basics but who hadn't risen higher in power because he didn't get into those situations that really push you to your limits. He was basically a family man, but also a wastrel. Actually liked the character.
Dire foxes!
One of my creations is a very loosely held together military state, where the roaming nobility often hunt dire lions on horse with jarids and other cavalry weapons. I'll add in dire foxes and Japanese inspired many tailed foxes.
Princes of the Monarchy of England are required to do military service, especially in times of war. They may not be on the absolute front lines, but they're not outside of rsk.
It would be an interesting dilemma for a king though. Do you send your heir off on adventures and risk losing him or keep him at safe and guarantee he'll be a 1st level incompetent when he inherits?Slightly different concept.
I would expect most medieval/fantasy nobility to be in the countries military, one way or another. Quite probably on the front lines.
I wouldn't expect them to be wandering around the countryside hunting monsters.
For a politics D&D game, I once prepped mountain-range based noble family. They were an old family of ninjas. They pretended to be like other nobles, but often headed off to adventure, returning years later to be the stewards of their lands and use their ki abilities to protect it. Adventuring was a family tradition, the feudal troops were there to guard the mountain passes.
The same can be said of any other class that requires extensive training.
In January proposed a homebrew Fighter fix based on similar reasoning.
Count how many even levels the campaign will include. The Fighter will eventually get that many bonus Combat Feats, right?
Now, consider all those General Feats that grant +2 in two related skills, which at least in my group are never used. (Acrobatic, Alertness, Animal Affinity, Athletic, Deceitful, etc.) Give the Fighter a bunch of those at first level to represent all the things he did as a young adult before his career focusing on martial training. As many as his eventual number of Combat Feats.
Whenever the Fighter gains a bonus Combat Feat it replaces one of those General Feats. Perhaps his hours of study and practice have enabled him to learn Greater Grapple but in past years those hours were spent with his pets and family horse, or practicing witty banter with his smooth-talking friends.
The Fighter would start the campaign as a skill monkey but loose that role as the adventures went on.
Since the Wizard also gets bonus feats at certain levels you could do exactly the same thing.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: 0 level sorcerers (kept in spoilers since it's long, rambling, and all IMC)
As they 'reach' first level, the young sorcerer has learned how to use his innate connection to magic (be it the weave, the elements, fundamental forces or what have you) to generate actual spells. In exchange they 'lose' the ability to do the uncontrolled, self damaging magic. To use a real life example, a baby learns to control their bowels. Now as an adult, try to relax all those muscles so things just flow. You might be able to, but it is a) inefficient b) takes more time, and c) is rather embarrassing. We do it w/o thinking. Likewise, the sorcerer still has his reflexive actions (like the supernatural abilities) but everything else takes concentration.
Now you may wonder how it is all sorcerers/wizards/bards/etc all speak the same 'language'. Answer, they don't.
Now this makes Spellcraft, like Use Magic Device, a metagame skill. Since it can only be used trained the exact hows of its working don't matter, but for my world it is picking up on cues as the caster is gathering power. The scent of ozone as the lightning bolt forms, the hairs rising on the back of the neck as a dominate spell is tossed, etc.. Anyone might be able to sense these occurences, but only someone trained can put them together into a spell. A wizard might speak powerful words of ancient Azlanti to invoke the lightning, the bard might sing a Golarion version of “Ride the Lightning.” The witch might invoke her patron's name to call in a favour from the lightning and the draconic sorcerer might call on his ancestors. In the end, the mechanic doesn't matter it's all the same thing.
So, you might ask, why can't sorcerers throw silent, still spells. Why can't I play a sorcerer who learned to harness his power by thinking it?
Some want spellcasters to level while studying safely in their towers, but it is the slowest route to gaining power by the system. It rewards risk, spellcasting in battle, solving puzzles, problems and quests. Studying and then having a cup of tea (as much as I like these things) doesn't make you a 5th level wizard.
A brief story. It was a Sargava game and one player was running an aged gent, who was a wizard. Now because of his back story he wanted more levels, he was a graduate of an esteemed foreign school, and had settled into a life in Sargava. He had done the family thing, made a living by his knowledge but had never taken real risks, and therefore had never grown in magical power until he was past middle age and took up adventuring. It was a hobby for him. He didn't get caught up in adventuring and joining a far younger party until he was in his 50s. Then he started to level up quick.
Now perhaps, because of all the little things he had done in his life (you raise a child, have some xp, but more spells because of home duties?) he should have not been 1st level, but it also made sense. He had missed his opportunity to excel in magic at a young age because he took no risks, he was just another urban 1st level wizard. Confident and cocky, with sound basics but who hadn't risen higher in power because he didn't get into those situations that really push you to your limits. He was basically a family man, but also a wastrel. Actually liked the character.
That's certainly a cool character background. I just don't like to apply it as a general rule. I don't want every significant NPC in the world to have to be a (possibly retired) adventurer. It doesn't fit the real world, where people learn all sorts of things without risking their lives. And it doesn't fit much fantasy literature, where there are plenty of dangerous trained people around. There would also have to be an ton of adventurers around to produce the number of high level characters in a average city.
The rules...
Well, he never actually took up adventuring, that is why he was still level 1 at 50.
As for the city producing high levels, I'd be more worried about truly dangerous border regions. That situation will create people not to mess with.
E.g. an elite palace guard is nice, his kit is shiny, but he would probably be weak compared to a hard old monster hunting ranger of the baddest of badlands. So at times, the cities are where the high levels are at model, falls down. What if a cities elites are mostly decadent lay-abouts? They aren't a garrison of hellknights in a war-torn area. Or a guild of undead hunters deep in vamp lands.
Assign a CR to "surviving an average year of X" and you get some pretty reasonable results. A CR around 1 means average humans will die of old age before reaching level 7 (IIRC). Ivory tower study may be more or less taxing depending on how you view magic. Border city life will almost certainly be higher CR. Etc.
Now you may wonder how it is all sorcerers/wizards/bards/etc all speak the same 'language'. Answer, they don't.
Except they do: The sorcerer or bard can scribe a scroll (assuming they've taken the feat) and a wizard can use that scroll to learn the spell. Also you can recognize with Spellcraft, from the words, gestures and components, what spell is being cast, while it is being cast before seeing the effects.
It's pretty clear, from that, that whoever is casting a spell, the mechanics are pretty much the same. Whatever words and gestures the sorcerer uses to cast the spell are the same as (or at least very close to) the ones a wizard would use.
There's a couple things here. That it requires a feat to scribe scrolls implies you need to learn the intricacies of magical writing (or however you want to flavor it) before you can write it down. Also, it takes a significant skill check (or a spell) to read someone else's scrolls even if you know that spell. That implies that scrolls aren't all that uniform.
Second, you can still identify a still, silent, material-free spell as its being cast. As the devs pointed out, this implies there's more to a spell going off than just those. Also, you have to spellcraft the same spell cast three times in a row. So the words/gestures/etc don't always have to be exactly the same.
Assign a CR to "surviving an average year of X" and you get some pretty reasonable results. A CR around 1 means average humans will die of old age before reaching level 7 (IIRC). Ivory tower study may be more or less taxing depending on how you view magic. Border city life will almost certainly be higher CR. Etc.
This is pretty much what I do. NPCs level up over time with more dangerous areas tending to yield higher level characters. I have a chart on yearly events I use for special NPCs. If you've ever played old school Traveller (PC creation) you get the idea.
There's a couple things here. That it requires a feat to scribe scrolls implies you need to learn the intricacies of magical writing (or however you want to flavor it) before you can write it down. Also, it takes a significant skill check (or a spell) to read someone else's scrolls even if you know that spell. That implies that scrolls aren't all that uniform.Second, you can still identify a still, silent, material-free spell as its being cast. As the devs pointed out, this implies there's more to a spell going off than just those. Also, you have to spellcraft the same spell cast three times in a row. So the words/gestures/etc don't always have to be exactly the same.
I'd say the language is the same, the style / accent / dialect may differ. Hence the need for a skill check / spell to read another's scroll. While not uniform, they are close enough to recognize and use.
So there is an extra component to the spell that is identifiable, perhaps because of the elements that are being suppressed / replaced via metamagic. As for needing to use Spellcraft on the same spell three times in a row, the checklist for identifying it is the same each time. If you don't pay attention or mistake an element you are probably expecting a different spell or are simply confused / ignorant of the upcoming spell. I'd argue that they, coming from the same caster, are identicle but are in the style of that specific caster (hence the Spellcraft check to identify it).
I have always seen 1st lvl as an epiphany from an action.
It is usually something elaborate like having to choose to defend your city, to studying in secret to learn that 0 lvl spell..
It just hits you like a lightning bolt, or finally grows on you through time.
.. I dont know guys.. lol
On how good someone is by virtue of training and experience, a friend was making a combat system, where your training and gear determined what dice you were rolling, up to d12, but your experience in actual combat determined how many dice of that type you got to roll. Fascinating idea I think.
On this though:
"Practice, training, study, why can't that work? Slower, but surer."
Because it is the easy way to get the levels you want, without risk. It is cheesy for just training to take a char to intermediate levels without real risk and challenge.
Much praise to training for the basics, but where is the hands-on learning of how to really fight and kill a target? Not just drill, and some practiced moves, but to actually use those moves in a war, battle or raid. Deal with fatigue, spells, ambush, traps, monsters, that is what exciting high level chars are made by.
That only applies to melee and combat rogues--hone that sneak attack on many living targets. For spellcasters it might make more sense for study/contemplation/experimentation to level them, but there is no demonstration of heroism here. Work at a desk should not make a char powerful. I spent years in some rooms after 1st level, tucked away safely in retreat, and because of funding I can level up to powerful spells, it'll just take some time is all. What an adventurous spirit.
If spellcasters summon monsters to kill each other as a part of training, now we are talking. This is dangerous training, and since it is high risk it should have high reward. If they can get eaten, they deserve xp, lol.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a year of regular life is CR 1, most humans will not see level 7. If a year of training is CR 2, most trained humans will not see level 8 (or if they keep training into old age, maybe level 9), but they'll hit level 2 or 3 faster.
The idea that XP can only be gained in life-threatening experiences undermines a huge variety of possible games (political games, for example). Obviously the system is set up so that such experiences are worth more, but they should not be the only way to gain XP.
Also, if a wizard school has summoning battles, they probably also have the clerics come by to practice their cure spells afterwards.
Political games most certainly can be life and death experiences.
Run what we called the lord's game for years. Lot of death, battles, assassinations, treason, etc.
|
Princes of the Monarchy of England are required to do military service, especially in times of war. They may not be on the absolute front lines, but they're not outside of rsk.
It would be an interesting dilemma for a king though. Do you send your heir off on adventures and risk losing him or keep him at safe and guarantee he'll be a 1st level incompetent when he inherits?
There's also the fact that combat/adventuring is NOT the only way to gain experience. How else to explain the old archmage who's been shut up in his tower for the past 60 years?
Political games most certainly can be life and death experiences.
Run what we called the lord's game for years. Lot of death, battles, assassinations, treason, etc.
My point is there are other ways to gain XP.
stuff about codifying magic and metamagic.
The first wizards then traveled the world cataloging all the magic they could find by observing spontaneous spellcasters, divine spellcasters, spell-like abilities of monsters; essentially building up the wizard's spell list. In such a world, the two branches of magic would probably not be called arcane and divine, but scientific and ineffable receptively since the distinction would be that divine spells obviously would not work when this primordial wizard tried to write them into his spellbook.
Essentially, the spells started out not as wizard spells, but as things that some sorcerers and monsters could do. The idea of a "spell list" only came about after centuries of wizards attempting to formulate and cast every magical ability that they ran across.
I thought the exact same thing as Matthew Morris when I was reading the Dresden Files, and from what I know of the author he was probably thinking the same thing too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I allow class level retraining in my campaign. When you level up, you can choose to advance your level in your current class or a new class, or you can choose to not level and change one level of class of your character.
It's how I make sense of how to classify a person before getting their 1st level in a PC class. Everyone is essentially a 1st-level commoner before finishing their training in a PC class, whereupon they switch the commoner level for a PC class level.
Alternatively, I remember reading some rules for 0-level classes in some magazine or other. You can use that concept for pre-1st-level existence of character.
I have been considering trying those rules out again. Thieves levelled fast because of the gp=xp rule.
I played a rogue like an old 2nd ed thief recently and hit a wall. Tried to pick pockets and engage in small crimes, didn't get much, dm was incredibly stingy with gp and xp. Pushed into a combat rogue role even though the char wasn't built for that. Sigh.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have been considering trying those rules out again. Thieves levelled fast because of the gp=xp rule.
I played a rogue like an old 2nd ed thief recently and hit a wall. Tried to pick pockets and engage in small crimes, didn't get much, dm was incredibly stingy with gp and xp. Pushed into a combat rogue role even though the char wasn't built for that. Sigh.
Yeah, the thief rules were a bit insane. 10 or 100 gp value to 1 XP would be a lot more sane.
|
Some people just get things naturally, with no training at all. My wife is unbelievably good at understanding complex topics in chemistry without studying at all, while I have spent hours upon hours of studying the same topics to start to get close to the same level as her.
I view sorcs and wizards in a similar fashion.
Oh, oh, that's me in relation to Quantum Mechanics!! *raises hand* I inherently understand Quantum Mechanics and the laws that govern them. Took me a couple of minutes to finally understand the Law of Attraction and how it actually works!
A 1st level character is trained to handle a situation with extraordinary abilities and skills. A commoner can usually put the pointed end of a stick into something with hardly any training. But it takes training to master a sword and a shield. A Fighter is a martial artist.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
stuff about codifying magic and metamagic.** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
more spoilerage.
Prepared casters and the memory palace.You start with the rooms in the basement. Small, cramped but durable. When a caster memorizes cantrips, think of it as arranging furniture in the room to allow the energy to go through. This room is acid splash and that room is prestidigitation The flow of energy through those rooms are weak enough to not move the furniture, instead it is able to withstand flow after flow, casting after casting.
Starting the 'next floor up' are the real spells. Here again, memorizing a spell is a matter of filling up the 'room' with furniture that will channel the energy into the spell. The difference here is that, barring special training, the wash of energy through the room does disturb the furniture enough that trying to spend more energy in that 'room' won't do anything, or at least nothing controllable. For a wizard or magus, it's their spell book is like a room layout plan, a witch's familiar tells her where to put the couch, the love seat etc to get the spell they want.
From first level spells we continue to move 'upwards' to second, third, etc etc. The furniture required for a second level spell won't (again normally) fit in the rooms on the 'first floor'. The furniture from a lower floor (a lower level spell) will fit into a bigger room (higher level spell slot) but it can't withstand the flow of energy any better. In essence, the spell uses all the 'juice' of that room, but doesn't do anything extra.
In this concept, metamagic is extra accessories put into a room to take advantage of that extra energy to augment the spell.
How prepared casters see spontaneous casters' 'memory palace'
Spontaneous casters on the other hand can think it's all bunk.
Just wondering with your world building Saint Caleth. Do you think the first wizards were low cha/high int sorcerers, or, with the introduction of the sage blood line it went Cha Sorcerers, Int Sorcerers, Int Wizards?
Just because the Sorcerer has innate magical abilities doesn't mean they had no training. The sorcerer would spend just as much time figuring out their bloodline as wizard does learning to cast spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
dire lions on horse with jarids
A DIRE LION on a HORSE WITH JARIDS? Now THAT is worthy prey!
Just because the Sorcerer has innate magical abilities doesn't mean they had no training. The sorcerer would spend just as much time figuring out their bloodline as wizard does learning to cast spells.
The random staring age table seems to indicate that sorcerers get to "master" their 1st level much sooner than wizards, but your point is still valid; wizards aren't the only one requiring years of training, whether that training is institutionalized or self-mentored.
stuff about codifying magic and metamagic.** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
more spoilerage.
Prepared casters and the memory palace.
** spoiler omitted **How prepared casters see spontaneous casters' 'memory palace'
** spoiler omitted **...Just wondering with your world building Saint Caleth. Do you think the first wizards were low cha/high int sorcerers, or, with the introduction of the sage blood line it went Cha Sorcerers, Int Sorcerers, Int Wizards?
Basically I looked at where arcane power would have evolved (ie Sorcerers and monsters with spell-like abilities) and thought of how those powers would have been written down and codified into spells.
It might be a problem in a strict sandbox game, where nothing happens if the PCs don't act. Then the whole group could decide to spend years of game-time training and not adventure until they were higher level.
Meh.
In a sandbox game things happen, the world is living. Things happen with or without PCs. It's not a "path" that is motivated solely by PC actions or the lack there of. PCs could decide to hang out and study in my game, but the advancement is much slower than adventuring. And pretty boring :)
In my setting, wizards came first. They invented magic, thereby allowing the possibility for sorcerers to exist. Also, sorcerers train as much as wizards. They just do it differently.
|
History of Magic in the Old World
Loving this whole digression going on here!
Since way back, 1st or 2nd edition-ish, my gaming group had the notion, perhaps inspired by something introduced in Al-Qadim, that 'magic' was the leftover tools of creation itself, having been developed by the gods to create the universe, and everything in it (and, when necessary, to alter, transform, move around or destroy stuff that wasn't created perfectly on the first go). Every 'spell' represented a specific 'tool,' used by the gods, to create fire here, or shape stone there, or cause trees to grow, or to make the earth shake to tumble down a mountain. The words and gestures were the activation sequences for each 'tool,' and the first spell users were genies and outsiders who had been granted access to this toolset or that, for their own duties, followed by the occasional magical beast that ended up with one trick of their own (like a blink dog) or figuring out / acquiring access to an assortment of related tricks (like dryads).
Once the concept of the sorcerer was added to the mix, with the dawn of 3rd edition, I felt that the sorcerers would have started first, springing up mostly by accident (like magical beasts), and starting out with A Spell for Chameleon-like limitation of casting one spell, ever. Through great effort, young sorcerers who happened to have crappy or overspecialized spells began to study the more useful spells of rivals or peers, and learned to master them as well, becoming the first real sorcerers (and not just one-spell 'magical mutants').
Not everyone was born with the gift of sorcery, however, and just as some of the first sorcerers had enviously studied the gifts of those who 'got better spells,' some of the 'un-gifted' also were studying sorcerers as a whole, and codifying what they were doing and what they were saying, and what sorts of results they were getting. In some cases, material components were needed to be expended to unlock the flow of energies that the sorcerers could invoke through the power of the blood, and in some cases, studiously mastering the 'spell' was sufficient.
In any case, what started out as a pet theory explaining where a Shair's gen got those spells he was sent out to fetch ended up serving as our default explanation for 'where the magic came from.'
I could see a sausage-maker becoming a very interesting alchemist. Making potions? No! Making bratwurst of bear's endurance! Instead of bandoliers of vials, he wears strings of sausages.Mmm. That sounds even tastier than the Cayden-worshipping beer-alchemist!
After careful consideration, I don't want to know how the sausage-making alchemists bombs work. Does he have to eat a sausage and then drop trou to make a bomb?
I could see a sausage-maker becoming a very interesting alchemist. Making potions? No! Making bratwurst of bear's endurance! Instead of bandoliers of vials, he wears strings of sausages.Mmm. That sounds even tastier than the Cayden-worshipping beer-alchemist!After careful consideration, I don't want to know how the sausage-making alchemists bombs work. Does he have to eat a sausage and then drop trou to make a bomb?
I just imagined a sausage making alchemist wearing a kilt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
History of Magic in the Old WorldLoving this whole digression going on here!
It was only when wizards began observing the casting of sorcerers that they realized that the little slapping hands, or a boreal sorcerer's spectral icicles or whatever were essentially the same thing. They then gave that magical effect the name magic missile. They also would have found out that there were certain things that they could not get to work no matter how they tried, thus discovering divine magic, and as I pointed out, in at least some languages in my setting, divine magic is called ineffable magic since it was the magic that the wizards could not make work into their theories. They would have also noticed, however, that a cleric's prayer for strength was the same thing as an arcane Bull's Strength. The they would have discovered that they could ultimately do just about the same range of things as sorcerers could collectively, thus discovering the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list.
Most of my worldbuilding on this topic focuses on the first generations of wizards who dedicated their lives to finding all the magic they could and codifying it so that it could be shared with other wizards, basically building up their spell list from scratch. The only downside being that since it was the bronze age, their spellbooks were huge boxes of cuneiform tablets. I even made an archetype of this early wizardly librarian which I can try to dig up if you want.
This is the in-character justification for why your character knows the names of spells with a spellcraft check, and also how you know what is on your spell list when it comes time to level up. I always find it unnecessary and tedious when a DM insists that your wizard, presumably highly educated in an established magical tradition, needs to make spellcraft checks to know that they can take something as one of their free spells.
Ok, I'm confused.
Why do people keep harping on Sorcerers using 'the same words, gestures, and components' as wizards? You all have read the class right? Eschew Materials means a sorcerer doesn't need a spell component pouch.
Anyway, my $0.02 on underage sorcerers manifesting powers before they hit level 1 fully.
It's not like a light switch, even though the game treats it that way. SKR put out a nice little document on how to level up more organically (at 25%/50%/75%/100% of the way between levels, you pick BAB, Saves, HD, or Powers) that works much better to simulate natural leveling, but I haven't had a group that wants to use it before.
Honestly, I'd have no issues with a 'child sorcerer' manifesting cantrips by accident. They're very minor spells, and are at-will for a full time sorcerer. I'd be perfectly fine with some 12yo sorcerer to be spontaneously manifesting disrupt undead when he's cornered by skelingtons...
Why do people keep harping on Sorcerers using 'the same words, gestures, and components' as wizards? You all have read the class right? Eschew Materials means a sorcerer doesn't need a spell component pouch.
Well, because "Eschew Materials" only means avoiding material components. The verbal and somatic components of a spell remain.
(Just as an aside, our group works with the idea that "Eschew Components" is stock-standard for all spellcasters. Pug/Milamber didn't mess about with bat crap and rose petals at the Imperial Games, dammit!! :) :) )
In my setting, wizards came first. They invented magic, thereby allowing the possibility for sorcerers to exist. Also, sorcerers train as much as wizards. They just do it differently.
Wouldn't the spawn of the union between a humanoid and something else have created the first sorcerer? Bloodlines and connections to magical beasts/undead/outsiders and all that?
So grand pappy could do that normally, it seems you can cause effects like that as well even though you aren't a giant infernal ooze.