|
I was going over the various optional rules that I will be allowing or disallowing for my Pathfinder Games and I got thinking about the Specialist Wizard Variants in the Unearthed Arcana (SRD).
Is it wise to consider the Sin Magic traditions outlined in Burnt Offerings and later in Sins of the Saviors as the main approach for specialist wizards? I was planning on linking each specialist school variant to its relevant sin magic tradition but after researching Sin magic it appears to be an older and evil tradition. I have trouble picturing a Lawful Good Specialist wizard of Greed, Envy or Lust but if the specialist traditions original roots had become blurred or even lost over time perhaps those names would not be known. Either that or Specialist wizards are totally unknown except for a few wizards who have studied the Thassilion Runes?
I would like to think that the runelords magic was a way to add uniqueness to the specialist wizard. any thoughts?
You may want to be careful here. Some of the Thassilonian schools have very painful choices for what they give up. I am currently statting up a Thassilonian illusionist, and it is hard to give up both conjuration and transmutation. A player who does so because he expects that being a sin-mage will be more exciting than being a regular specialist is likely to be disappointed with the AP support--there basically isn't any. He will just have a specialist mage with unusually harsh limits on spell choices.
The Magic of Thassilon article has *one* spell for each school. One new spell will not likely compensate a player for having their forbidden schools chosen for them in this way; and to do anything more will be a lot of extra work for the GM. (Cool if you can do it, though!)
I'm looking forward to my sin-mage for CotCT but that's enthusiasm about his background, not about the magic rules.
It's a general problem with 3rd Ed that specialists basically involve subtracting capabilities, not adding them; this can easily make them feel as though they're just inferior to generalist wizards, even if they aren't. Extra spell slots are useful but they add no flavor.
Mary
Hm, thinking about your other question:
If you did want an LG specialist wizard in the Thassilonian tradition, he or she would presumably be a virtue-wizard rather than a sin-wizard. The Thassilon background article in #1 lists the corresponding Thassilonian virtues (though my group preferred to replace Fertility with Devotion).
Given how long ago Thassilon fell, though, I would not recommend that modern wizards in general use the Thassilonian system. It just puts extra stress on "you mean nothing's changed in 10,000 years?" issues.
Mary
There are the specialist alternate class features from Unearthed Arcana. Some of them are pretty nifty. Maybe sin- and virtue-specific versions could be statted out...
|
|
Yeah the sin magic is rather restrictive in school sacrifice and I dont think alot of players would appreciate this choice being forced upon them.
With this in mind I have decided to change the specialist wizards names into ***** Runeseekers where ***** matches the Varisian Tattoo name linked to the school. So a Variant Specialist Abjurer is actually known as an Avidais Runeseeker.
The way I'm looking to portray specialist wizards is that they study the ancient runes without actually knowing their full potential, if they chose the correct opposing schools then they are on the right track to unlocking the ancient knowledge of sin magic but its unlikely to happen with so many possible combinations.
In a similar way I have also modified the Barbarian Totem Class Features to match the various Shoanti Tribes instead of relating to a specific animal.
Sin magic isn't really for your average, non-evil player character. Indulging in sin and styling your magic practise after one of the Seven Deadly Sins isn't what one would call heroic.
Maybe we'll see some feats or PrCs down the line.