Multiclassing and Wizard Spellbooks and Gunslinger Pistol


Rules Questions

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

graystone wrote:
I'd call that a failing in your system, not the game at large. If you allow a wizard level at anytime, they needed that spellbook to level up. It makes LESS sense to say they learn spells but that THEY just came from hammerspace and NOT a spellbook. Really how do you justify wizards/gunslingers gaining thier first level without the items needed? THAT is where you should be looking for an answer.

Nowhere does it say multiclassing into gunslinger requires you to have a gun. It doesn't say that multiclassing into wizard requires a spellbook. You have the capability to cast spells, and know knowledge: Arcana, and own a familiar, but the rabbit isn't pulled out of a hat with a spellbook and knowledge of dragons.


Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:
I'd call that a failing in your system, not the game at large. If you allow a wizard level at anytime, they needed that spellbook to level up. It makes LESS sense to say they learn spells but that THEY just came from hammerspace and NOT a spellbook. Really how do you justify wizards/gunslingers gaining thier first level without the items needed? THAT is where you should be looking for an answer.
Nowhere does it say multiclassing into gunslinger requires you to have a gun. It doesn't say that multiclassing into wizard requires a spellbook. You have the capability to cast spells, and know knowledge: Arcana, and own a familiar, but the rabbit isn't pulled out of a hat with a spellbook and knowledge of dragons.

Uh the multiclassing rules say you get the abilities of the class you are multiclassing into, so they kind of do. See my quote earlier in the thread.


Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:
I'd call that a failing in your system, not the game at large. If you allow a wizard level at anytime, they needed that spellbook to level up. It makes LESS sense to say they learn spells but that THEY just came from hammerspace and NOT a spellbook. Really how do you justify wizards/gunslingers gaining thier first level without the items needed? THAT is where you should be looking for an answer.
Nowhere does it say multiclassing into gunslinger requires you to have a gun. It doesn't say that multiclassing into wizard requires a spellbook. You have the capability to cast spells, and know knowledge: Arcana, and own a familiar, but the rabbit isn't pulled out of a hat with a spellbook and knowledge of dragons.

Ok then, by your logic wizards don't learn spells from book... Gatcha... They just had spells pop into there head and can only CAST them when they happen to trip across a book to remind them what they somehow learned by osmosis? So do alchemists learn by randomly tossing stuff into a jar until something happens? A cleric becomes a priest THEN learns who his god is?

If you don't care about HOW they learn a level you shouldn't care about HOW they got thier book/gun. You're fine with the magic fairy giving away spells without any learning, why not have them bring a book along too... it's make more sense.


graystone wrote:

]Ok then, by your logic wizards don't learn spells from book... Gatcha... They just had spells pop into there head and can only CAST them when they happen to trip across a book to remind them what they somehow learned by osmosis? So do alchemists learn by randomly tossing stuff into a jar until something happens? A cleric becomes a priest THEN learns who his god is?

If you don't care about HOW they learn a level you shouldn't care about HOW they got thier book/gun. You're fine with the magic fairy giving away spells without any learning, why not have them bring a book along too... it's make more sense.

What is this argument? I said the character now has the Capability to cast spells (mental facility for his mind to hold and focus spells,) I never said he learned any.

Will you stop bringing up irrelevant things? I am talking about the simple act of the player saying "I take a level in wizard" and his CHARACTER getting a PHYSICAL OBJECT instantly dropped into his lap.


Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:

]Ok then, by your logic wizards don't learn spells from book... Gatcha... They just had spells pop into there head and can only CAST them when they happen to trip across a book to remind them what they somehow learned by osmosis? So do alchemists learn by randomly tossing stuff into a jar until something happens? A cleric becomes a priest THEN learns who his god is?

If you don't care about HOW they learn a level you shouldn't care about HOW they got thier book/gun. You're fine with the magic fairy giving away spells without any learning, why not have them bring a book along too... it's make more sense.

What is this argument? I said the character now has the Capability to cast spells (mental facility for his mind to hold and focus spells,) I never said he learned any.

Will you stop bringing up irrelevant things? I am talking about the simple act of the player saying "I take a level in wizard" and his CHARACTER getting a PHYSICAL OBJECT instantly dropped into his lap.

By multiclassing they gain SPELLS KNOWN. It's one of the abilities they gain under SPELLS. EVERY wizard may cast read magic without a spellbook. Read magic is a spell. How did the wizard learn it?

This ISN'T irrelevant. You are allowing people to learn spells without giving them the book with the spells in it. That's YOUR logic and it makes no sense to me. To state it the way I'm seeing it: "I'm somehow letting my players take levels in classes without their required items and then complaining when they ask for them."


Allowing people to learn things... without giving the thing that has the knowledge in it.

I am not restricting a player, by not just flat out saying no to something. But It is wrong for me to force them to have to go find the thing that they will need to learn things...

I am baffled... That is like saying to me in modern world, You have the ability to learn science, but I'm not going give you a science book created out of the Aether. I am a cruel god.

No, Now I have the ability to learn things from a physical object... but not the object that is required.


graystone wrote:
Death_Keeper wrote:
graystone wrote:

]Ok then, by your logic wizards don't learn spells from book... Gatcha... They just had spells pop into there head and can only CAST them when they happen to trip across a book to remind them what they somehow learned by osmosis? So do alchemists learn by randomly tossing stuff into a jar until something happens? A cleric becomes a priest THEN learns who his god is?

If you don't care about HOW they learn a level you shouldn't care about HOW they got thier book/gun. You're fine with the magic fairy giving away spells without any learning, why not have them bring a book along too... it's make more sense.

What is this argument? I said the character now has the Capability to cast spells (mental facility for his mind to hold and focus spells,) I never said he learned any.

Will you stop bringing up irrelevant things? I am talking about the simple act of the player saying "I take a level in wizard" and his CHARACTER getting a PHYSICAL OBJECT instantly dropped into his lap.

By multiclassing they gain SPELLS KNOWN. It's one of the abilities they gain under SPELLS. EVERY wizard may cast read magic without a spellbook. Read magic is a spell. How did the wizard learn it?

This ISN'T irrelevant. You are allowing people to learn spells without giving them the book with the spells in it. That's YOUR logic and it makes no sense to me. To state it the way I'm seeing it: "I'm somehow letting my players take levels in classes without their required items and then complaining when they ask for them."

While there's some logic there, I think the same people complaining about the books not being there would scream even louder about not being allowed to take the levels.


Death_Keeper wrote:

Allowing people to learn things... without giving the thing that has the knowledge in it.

I am not restricting a player, by not just flat out saying no to something. But It is wrong for me to force them to have to go find the thing that they will need to learn things...

I am baffled... That is like saying to me in modern world, You have the ability to learn science, but I'm not going give you a science book created out of the Aether. I am a cruel god.

No, Now I have the ability to learn things from a physical object... but not the object that is required.

The CLASS tell you that you learn spells from a spellbook. The magic section says the same. Taking a level of spellcaster teaches you how to cast spells.

In the modern world, it's wanting to learn about science but having no books, teachers or anything else to TEACH you about them. Somehow you're going with knowledge osmosis.

thejeff wrote:
While there's some logic there, I think the same people complaining about the books not being there would scream even louder about not being allowed to take the levels.

Not really. If you let it be know that you have to have them to take levels in them then you just write them down on your sheet with a note about the background and you're planning to multiclass. It sits there doing nothing until you take your level. You can say you've been practicing in downtime and the item doesn't just show up. Same with the gun.

The people that would scream are the ones that have this sprung on them last minute. They are the ones that are going along with the idea that you've been training in offtime and didn't NEED to spell it out. Most time when someone tells you that you can level up in a class, you think that actually means you get the full class features. Even the 'item pops up out of nowhere' crowd explain it as the fact that they have been practicing. Look at Anzyr's post "And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all along." he's thinking of it as it always being there, not just showing up. he just didn't think it was something he'd need to make a note of as it would just happen.

Silver Crusade Contributor

graystone wrote:
Death_Keeper wrote:

Allowing people to learn things... without giving the thing that has the knowledge in it.

I am not restricting a player, by not just flat out saying no to something. But It is wrong for me to force them to have to go find the thing that they will need to learn things...

I am baffled... That is like saying to me in modern world, You have the ability to learn science, but I'm not going give you a science book created out of the Aether. I am a cruel god.

No, Now I have the ability to learn things from a physical object... but not the object that is required.

The CLASS tell you that you learn spells from a spellbook. The magic section says the same. Taking a level of spellcaster teaches you how to cast spells.

In the modern world, it's wanting to learn about science but having no books, teachers or anything else to TEACH you about them. Somehow you're going with knowledge osmosis.

thejeff wrote:
While there's some logic there, I think the same people complaining about the books not being there would scream even louder about not being allowed to take the levels.

Not really. If you let it be know that you have to have them to take levels in them then you just write them down on your sheet with a note about the background and you're planning to multiclass. It sits there doing nothing until you take your level. You can say you've been practicing in downtime and the item doesn't just show up. Same with the gun.

The people that would scream are the ones that have this sprung on them last minute. They are the ones that are going along with the idea that you've been training in offtime and didn't NEED to spell it out. Most time when someone tells you that you can level up in a class, you think that actually means you get the full class features. Even the 'item pops up out of nowhere' crowd explain it as the fact that they have been practicing. Look at Anzyr's post "And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has been training with it all...

This is another one that was dismissed early on. I'm super supportive of planned multi classing. Even if it's as late as the last town before the level up... or the player indicating he wants to study a looted spellbook... or trying to gather arcane lore from certain dungeon environments. All my statements thus far were meant to address out-of-nowhere multiclassing specifically.


as was this entire discussion....


Kalindlara wrote:
graystone wrote:

thejeff wrote:
While there's some logic there, I think the same people complaining about the books not being there would scream even louder about not being allowed to take the levels.

Not really. If you let it be know that you have to have them to take levels in them then you just write them down on your sheet with a note about the background and you're planning to multiclass. It sits there doing nothing until you take your level. You can say you've been practicing in downtime and the item doesn't just show up. Same with the gun.

The people that would scream are the ones that have this sprung on them last minute. They are the ones that are going along with the idea that you've been training in offtime and didn't NEED to spell it out. Most time when someone tells you that you can level up in a class, you think that actually means you get the full class features. Even the 'item pops up out of nowhere' crowd explain it as the fact that they have been practicing. Look at Anzyr's post "And as per the multiclassing rules you should assume the character has

This is another one that was dismissed early on. I'm super supportive of planned multi classing. Even if it's as late as the last town before the level up... or the player indicating he wants to study a looted spellbook... or trying to gather arcane lore from certain dungeon environments. All my statements thus far were meant to address out-of-nowhere multiclassing specifically.

Yeah, this whole thing spun out of an argument that no roleplaying, preparation or any other explanation was needed for multiclassing. Which led to where does the gun and/or spellbook come from, if the player refuses to specify and the GM has no opportunity to work something out.


tl;dr

I read this thread as a gripe twixt player/GM-

I love multiclassing. I love unplanned multiclassing. It works best when the player can justify the multiclass within the scope of his character's backstory.

Multiclassing weakens the core concept of a character, you can't glean supreme X if you choose a level or 3 of Y etc etc.

When you take a level 1 of another class, you gain all that class's stuff, this should be canon stuff by now and Desna guide the GM who cannot connect dots.

A barbarian wizard? Well, in PF barbarians aren't illiterate, first, and second, if Uncle Elrond's spellbook is Barbarian's possession, who's to say he can't follow in Uncle Elrond's steps?

Multiclassing wizard in this case draws levels from Barbarian, and whoa, magic missile, burning hands. Plus smash, you go Barb-Wiz.

Games are more awesome when we GMs let players touch the third rail, let them explore their character's potential rather than harangue their creative efforts.

If it makes sense, or at least passes a logical test, why not? (Same goes for Uncle Elrond's pistol.)

Webstore Gninja Minion

Locking thread.

51 to 63 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Multiclassing and Wizard Spellbooks and Gunslinger Pistol All Messageboards