Goth Guru |
I just found out Pathfinder society gaming rules tells GMs to not let Wizards 'bank' spells in scrolls. If item crafting rules are that messed up, change them. Otherwise, Wizards will only memorize combat and amping spells because keeping their character alive is more important.
As a GM, do you want the whole party to go home whenever the module requires someone to comprehend languages or something? If you let wizards memorize every spell in their spellbook, game balance just went out the window.
How about I make a table with the time and GP costs of scribing scrolls, broken down by level, so setting scrolls scribed is as easy as setting spells memorised. Then the GM just has to decide, 1, 2, or 3 scrolls per level allowed. Most non-com spells have no expensive components anyways.
Paulicus |
I don't know what rules you're referring to, but PFS wizards are allowed to buy scrolls between scenarios and keep them, just like any character. Crafting isn't allowed, though, so they have to pay full price. They get Spell Focus in place of the Scribe Scroll feat.
I've also flagged this to be moved to the PFS forums.
LizardMage |
In what way is this topic forbidden? Seems PFS gave a reasonable recompense for not allowing Scribe Scroll.
As I do not partake in PFS, I can't fully speak on the subject. Though, your thread hasn't been locked and your account isn't banned, so I'm unsure what you mean by forbidden discussion.
QuidEst |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I may never visit the PFS forums again. I'm going to avoid the advice areas too, now that I know this topic is forbidden.
It's not a forbidden topic- it's just a topic that is best suited to the PFS forums.
In any case, Pathfinder Society removed crafting to improve balance. Otherwise wizards would get all their gear at half the cost of fighters. While it removes half-price scrolls as well, there are a few options.
- Home games (Pathfinder instead of Pathfinder Society) are just the same, so stash all the scrolls you want there.
- Full-price scrolls are still available. Pricier, sure, but wizards tend to have a bit of spare change.
- Bonded item for emergencies.
- You can leave slots open. They'll take a while to prepare, but there's a discovery that speeds it up to a minute. Very good for the situation you described!
- The exploiter wizard archetype can actually change out a prepared spell a handful of times per day.
- If you like wizards, but want more flexibility, the arcanist is very good at swapping out spells as needed.
Also, Pathfinder Society scenarios tend to be flexible enough that the party isn't going to wind up sent home over not knowing a language.
Kaisoku |
The basic premise I think is coming through though: Limit wizard's ability to make scrolls of everything, and he goes back to being the utility guy with a little bit of combat ability... instead of "toolbox of utility" (scrolls) + total combat domination in memorized spells.
But, as QuidEst said there are plenty of other ways that the Wizard can still be flexible and dominate the situation.
If your intent is to "fix" the situation, then just removing scrolls isn't going to be enough.
Cyrad RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16 |
PFS doesn't allow crafting and magic item creation because the campaign keeps tight restrictions on wealth and the availability of magic items. It has nothing to do with wizards "banking" spells. Nearly all classes lose item creation feats in exchange for something else. The wizard actually gets the best deal since PFS gives them Spell Focus, which is better than Scribe Scroll because Spell Focus is feat tax for a lot of great spellcasting feats.
ErisAcolyte-Chaos jester |
I personally think pathfinder society can occasionally disrupt the balance they are trying so desperately to maintain. While having spells handy as scrolls can make the wizard insanely powerful(due to having a large amount of money for spell components and their monopoly on the market of powerful spells). while they are the more squishy and have limited armour and weapons, they still can grow into campaign stomping threats if left unchecked. Hence why i think that putting restrictions and real world limitations on scrolls is a good way to keep the wizard in check, rather than outright banning a lot of crafting talents.
Goth Guru |
I am having trouble following your logic, Goth Guru. First you justify houseruling magic item creation with the fact that PFS does it, which I don't really get. Then you seem to be bailing out when someone disagrees with you?
This is why I was afraid to come back to this topic. Yeah, banning part of the game for a reason that never made any sense is a house rule, in your mind. And it makes sense to buy a scroll in the middle of an ocean voyage, in your mind.
I'm being forced to hide a topic I started. Don't direct any more comments here to me or DM me on this subject. I found someone saying a topic about a possible houserule should be moved out of houserules highly suspicious and threatening. That's the real me. Not the double talking politician you made up.
Casual Viking |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
TOZ wrote:I am having trouble following your logic, Goth Guru. First you justify houseruling magic item creation with the fact that PFS does it, which I don't really get. Then you seem to be bailing out when someone disagrees with you?This is why I was afraid to come back to this topic. Yeah, banning part of the game for a reason that never made any sense is a house rule, in your mind. And it makes sense to buy a scroll in the middle of an ocean voyage, in your mind.
I'm being forced to hide a topic I started. Don't direct any more comments here to me or DM me on this subject. I found someone saying a topic about a possible houserule should be moved out of houserules highly suspicious and threatening. That's the real me. Not the double talking politician you made up.
Your drama is tiresome.
Your initial post indicated that you wanted to talk about PFS-specific scroll rules - and that discussion obviously belongs in the PFS forums. If you want to talk about house rules for scrolls, that's fine. But how about giving people the benefit of the doubt on that misunderstading before putting on the victim shirt?
MichaelCullen |
I'm being forced to hide a topic I started. Don't direct any more comments here to me or DM me on this subject. I found someone saying a topic about a possible houserule should be moved out of houserules highly suspicious and threatening. That's the real me. Not the double talking politician you made up.
I feel like the world has passed me by and I don't understand people anymore. What does this threaten? How is this a threat? This is a real question, help me understand.
Athaleon |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Goth Guru wrote:I'm being forced to hide a topic I started. Don't direct any more comments here to me or DM me on this subject. I found someone saying a topic about a possible houserule should be moved out of houserules highly suspicious and threatening. That's the real me. Not the double talking politician you made up.I feel like the world has passed me by and I don't understand people anymore. What does this threaten? How is this a threat? This is a real question, help me understand.
"Threatened" is the new "offended".
Kaisoku |
I find that Goth Guru's initial posts on a subject feel like they are taken out of a context where some additional discussion has been going on and we are expected to be in-the-know.
I tend to have to infer a lot based on where his post is being made, who else spoke before him in a thread and on what subject, etc.
It's a recurring thing I've noticed in his posting style (in previous threads).
I suspect this has caused poor interactions in the past (checking that other post I read before, I see there was a recent poor interaction there as well).
Coupling that with current day key words to escalate the situation doesn't help the situation (I suspect he's just immersed in that kind of language and discussion, rather than purposely trying to goad anyone).
I think I understand his original intent on this thread, but at this point I don't know if any proper discussion can be made.
Claxon |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So a few thoughts:
1) PFS is organized play, and does not whatsoever allow house rules. Suggest house rules for PFS doesn't make sense.
2) The rule against crafting in PFS doesn't mean wizards aren't allowed to stock up on scrolls, they just can't craft them at half price.
3) This isn't the PFS forum, it's the house rules homebrew sub-forum. This is why Paulicus marked it to be moved, because it's a PFS question sort of. But you also appear to have a severe misunderstanding of the rules.
4) You seem to be over reacting by saying your going to avoid parts of the forum when Paulicus was trying to help you and didn't say anything inflammatory in any way. No one said this was a forbidden topic, merely that you put it in the wrong place.
5) No one is forcing you to hide from a topic you started, but we're all having trouble following your train of logic. None of us understand the problem your trying to present or what your trying to change exactly or why you want to change it.
PFS cannot be changed by house rules, there is no point in discussing it. For home games, PFS is not the standard and item creation is fine (unless your GM rules otherwise). Thus what is the house rule you are trying to suggest? Your not making sense to most of us but we are trying to understand your question/problem and provide serious responses.
Kaisoku |
From my understanding, he wanted to suggest a house rule that was effectively like PFS, or something similar.
How about I make a table with the time and GP costs of scribing scrolls, broken down by level, so setting scrolls scribed is as easy as setting spells memorised. Then the GM just has to decide, 1, 2, or 3 scrolls per level allowed. Most non-com spells have no expensive components anyways.
So I guess a limitation on number of scrolls that can be scribed, so it can't go overboard (wizard basically having access to all spells in his spellbook), but not get stuck without Comprehend Languages at a critical point, etc.
Though, for bottle necks like that, I refer to the three clue rule (link) and node-based design (link) for campaign design that prevents that situation in the first place.