|
I’ve mentioned a couple of times on the Paizo boards that I’m embarking on a new pet project, namely, compiling all the spells I intend to allow in my campaigns into one central location. Rather than be just a “copy and paste” job I’ve decided to make two additions. First I’m going to indicate where the source spell originated from (company, book, and page number) for reference in case I seriously mess up a description. Second, and the real reason I’m posting this, is I’ll be implementing an “availability” mechanic. There are a lot of great spells out there, done by some of the best and brightest in the industry. But some spells are clearly more powerful than their core book competition and some clearly don’t fit within a given campaign setting. What I’d like is for people to review my proposed categories of “availability” and the in game effects they have. Constructive feedback is always welcome.
Couple of disclaimers:
2) I am an unabashed epic and multi-setting fan, so I am building in methods for epic casters to have, in theory, every spell available to his or her class in the unlikely event they play that long. No one will start in my games with every spell available to their home setting, let alone the entire game.
3) Settings I intend to support include: Pathfinder (1st in my heart now!), Forgotten Realms (pre-Spellplague), Dragonlance, Scarred Lands, Eberron, and any others I grow enamored with.
Here are my categories as they currently appear in my Introduction:
PC’s may acquire common spells through level advancement according to their class. Once clerics, druids, paladins and rangers become capable of casting spells of a particular level, they automatically learn all common spells on their spell lists for that level. Bards and sorcerers may freely select common spells for their new spells known and may switch out old spells for new common ones according to their class. Wizards are allowed to choose any common spells they desire for their two new spells per level.
Example common spells include any spells found in Paizo’s Pathfinder RPG core rule book as well as custom created spells I deem to be widespread. Common spells are acceptable in any campaign I run unless I inform you otherwise.
Uncommon: Uncommon spells have also crossed planetary and planar at some point but for one reason or another are not as widespread as common spells. Because they are not as well known, Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft DC’s involving uncommon spells are increased by 2. Researching uncommon spells costs an extra 20% in time and money. A non-scroll written copy of an uncommon spell sells for an additional 10%. Scrolls of uncommon spells cost the same amount of time and money to create, but can be bought with a 20% markup and sold for an additional 10% of the base market price. Otherwise, if a magic item involves an uncommon spell, it does not change the market or sell price.
The acquisition of uncommon spells through level advancement is restricted in the following ways. Divine spellcasters do not automatically learn uncommon spells. Instead they must either research the spell themselves or study a written copy they have acquired through adventuring or purchase. Bards and sorcerers may choose an uncommon spell as a new spell known or in replacement of an old spell only if they have personally researched the spell or have a written copy to study. A wizard may also acquire an uncommon spell through research or by studying a captured spell. Once a wizard has learned all the common spells in the Spell Codex, he may begin selecting uncommon spells as his two free new spells per level.
Examples of uncommon spells include sanctified and vile spells from WoTC’s Book of Exalted Deeds and Book of Vile Darkness, respectively. Other uncommon spells can be found in various WoTC splatbooks that are not tied to specific campaign settings like the Complete Mage, Complete Champion and Spell Compendium.
Rare: Rare spells are spells that, while known in their place of origin, have not spread to other planes and worlds. Spells that have been labeled as rare are assigned to a specific campaign setting. For characters from that campaign setting or who have spent a significant amount of time studying that setting’s magical traditions (my call, but over a year in game would not be unreasonable), rare spells generally follow the rules for uncommon spells such as increased skill DC, market price and research time.
For all other characters, identifying and acquiring a rare spell is a bit of a problem. Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft DC’s involving rare spells are increased by 5. Successful checks for purposes such as identifying the spell as it is being cast or while it is still in effect will only result in a general description of the spell. I will describe the spell as being “an altered form of the ‘xxx’ spell” or “it seems to have ‘y’ effect upon your companion.” Rare spells may not be independently researched by someone unfamiliar with the designated settings magical traditions. Instead, they must either be purchased in some written form at an additional 50% market price or must be discovered as treasure. Copies of rare spells may be sold for an additional 25% of the base market price.
The acquisition of rare spells through level advancement is restricted in the following ways. Divine spellcasters do not automatically learn rare spells. Instead they must study a written copy they have acquired through adventuring or purchase. Bards and sorcerers may choose a rare spell as a new spell known or in replacement of an old spell only if they have a written copy to study. A wizard may acquire a rare spell only by studying a captured spell. A wizard may never select a rare spell as one of his two free new spells per level.
Examples of rare spells include all the spells found in campaign specific books or which I feel belong in a particular campaign setting and not others, even if the spell was later republished in a splatbook. Thus, the energy transformation field spell that was published in WoTC’s Magic of Faerun and later republished in WoTC’s Spell Compendium is a rare Forgotten Realms spell. Another example includes the repair construct spell series which first appeared in WoTC’s Tome and Blood, were republished in the Eberron Campaign Setting, and were republished in the Spell Compendium. Despite being published twice in splatbooks, the repair construct spell series are designated as rare Eberron spells.
Restricted: Restricted spells are either known only to their creators and a small number of other spellcasters or they are only distributed to members of a particular organization. For characters from that belonging to such an organization or who persuade the spell’s creator to share the spell, restricted spells follow the rules for uncommon spells such as increased skill DC, market price and research time. Thus a member of an organization could identify a restricted spell as if it were merely uncommon (+2 to DC), buy a copy for an additional 20% of market price and sell written forms of the spell to the organization or creator for an additional 10%.
For all other characters, identifying and acquiring a restricted spell is nearly impossible. Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft DC’s involving rare spells are increased by 10. Successful checks for purposes such as identifying the spell as it is being cast or while it is still in effect will only result in a very vague description of the spell. I will describe the spell as being “some kind of fire based spell” or “it seems to have affected your companion, in what way you are not sure.” Restricted spells may not be independently researched by anyone outside of the particular organization or who is not close to the spell’s creator. Restricted spells are generally unavailable to outsiders. Instead, they must either be taken from a spellcaster who has access to them or they must be discovered as treasure. Copies of rare spells may be sold for an additional 100% of the base market price but brings the risk that the organization or creator will backtrack them to the character. Such a development is rarely a happy event.
Examples of restricted spells includes many “named” spells, spells developed by and only available to a particular religion, and spells shared amongst an organization. For example, the Simbul’s synostodweomer spell, was published in WoTC’s magic of Faerun and later was republished as synostodweomer in WoTC’s Spell Compendium, is a restricted Forgotten Realms spell which is usually only available to those the Simbul has deemed worthy. Other examples would include the clergy specific spells found in Paizo’s Pathfinder deity articles. Finally, spells developed by the Orders of High Sorcery in WotC’s and Margaret Weis Productions’ Dragonlance books would be restricted spells typically only available to Wizards of High Sorcery.
The first thing that comes to my mind is will this disadvantage the party if you use published adventures where assumptions about available spells are built into encounters.
In my experiences, magic users always outshine non-magic users so I am generally all for nerfin’ them. Obviously, someone with different experiences may cry foul.
It seems to me this is a lot of work. Will it really add that much value to your game?
|
|
The first thing that comes to my mind is will this disadvantage the party if you use published adventures where assumptions about available spells are built into encounters.
I'm keeping all the core book spells (PHB or PRPG) as common spells, which means no more of a restriction than is currently in place. In otherwords, a "core only" group would never notice the effects. As for published adventures, can you think of an example where they assume a non-core spells was accessible and it wasn't statted out in the adventure? I can't really think of any off the top of my head.
It seems to me this is a lot of work. Will it really add that much value to your game?
I plan on compiling the spells just to have them all in one central location, no more "I didn't bring the book with this spell, can I still use it?" Other than deciding what category a given spell fits in, it doesn't seem like much more work to me.
|
Man, you know your homebrew game needs but this seems like a realy big mistake. Here's what I mean: this is going to take months and months of grueling, tedius work, both writing and revising the list. You're always going to have spells that, when you think about them, fall somewhere between common and uncommon, etc., etc. Meanwhile, as you're playing you and your group are going to see mistakes with already-classified spells; then you have to change the list in the middle of the game. Moreover, 50% of these spells are never going to see game play. One last thing -- the "Only the Creator knows it" list is likely going to have several spells that, after a campaign or two, present problems and demand revisions.
Here's my suggestion -- it's what I did when my group was designing a new gaming system and saw how ENORMOUS (and ultimately Futile) of a job trying to rewrite the comprehensive spell-list is:
When a Player makes a spell-casting PC, classify those spells only. When the DM is doing spell lists for NPCs, classify those spells. The Players should acknowledge that at the end of each campaign the classifications can be altered based on game-play results/ DM bias.
This way you make your spell-list spell by spell during play and it isn't a hassle.
Hope this helps!
-W. E. Ray
|
|
Molech,
That's not a bad idea and I may end up implementing it. But the current plan is to use PDF copies of the books I've decided to allow, which I have purchased for srchival purposes, and copy/past the spell text into the central file. It should not take all that much time to get the text in there. Additionally, this isn't something I'm implementing ASAP, its a pet project for future home games.
As for the break down I figured:
Common: Core spells (using PRPG pdf once its final, thanks VW for confirming!).
Uncommon: Most setting neutral splatbook spells fit into this category.
Rare: Most setting specific splatbook spells, plus some from the above fall into this category.
Restricted: Small subset of the last group will fall into this category.
If I had to eyeball it, I'd guess the uncommons might be bigger than the commons, but at least the rares and restricteds would be the right size. The biggest time consumer will be looking up whether the spell should be uncommon, rare, or restricted. That requires me to search my game library.
I say go for it as long as you don't mind the work and you think your players will appreciate it. Such a system also gives PC spellcasters little milestones to cherish as they gather precious "rare" spells into their personal libraries during adventures.
My only suggestion is the way you're thinking of handling divine spells. Since it is the province of the character's deity alone to impart spell knowledge to mortals, might it not seem more fitting that any spell except common be awarded when a divine spellcaster achieves a deity-specific task? Example: The PC sun cleric single-handedly defeats a darkness-worshipping/themed creature/NPC/trap of equivalent level. As a reward, his deity might grant him knowledge of a previously "unknown" rare spell he can now pray for.\
Just a suggestion but the idea of a cleric reading up on new spells seems a bit off.
I'm keeping all the core book spells (PHB or PRPG) as common spells...
I missed that part. I withdraw the concern.
I plan on compiling the spells just to have them all in one central location, no more "I didn't bring the book with this spell, can I still use it?" Other than deciding what category a given spell fits in, it doesn't seem like much more work to me.
Then more power to you. I am one of those people that lets themselves get bogged down in useless details which can waste time that would be better spent elsewhere. If you feel the effort would be worth the reward, then go for it.
|
|
I say go for it as long as you don't mind the work and you think your players will appreciate it. Such a system also gives PC spellcasters little milestones to cherish as they gather precious "rare" spells into their personal libraries during adventures.
My only suggestion is the way you're thinking of handling divine spells. Since it is the province of the character's deity alone to impart spell knowledge to mortals, might it not seem more fitting that any spell except common be awarded when a divine spellcaster achieves a deity-specific task? Example: The PC sun cleric single-handedly defeats a darkness-worshipping/themed creature/NPC/trap of equivalent level. As a reward, his deity might grant him knowledge of a previously "unknown" rare spell he can now pray for.\
Just a suggestion but the idea of a cleric reading up on new spells seems a bit off.
The feel of accomplishment when you acquire a "rare" or "restricted" spell is one of my goals. Another is limiting access to the spells that many people feel are broken (see complaints about Conjuration spells not subject to SR in the Spell Compendium) with an in game mechanic other than "that's broken and I won't allow it." That's still a valid way to deal with it, but this feels like a more "flavorful" answer.
Divine spellcasters researching spells is something people suggested for "fixing the broken clerics." Not sure I agree they're broken, but IIRC, then in 2E clerics wanting unusual spells had to research them too. I'm thinking the "Prayers of the Faithful" TSR FR product mentioned this.
As for the deity granting spell, I may need to reword my language above, but I'd treat a reward as treasure. Thus, pious (or not) cleric acheiving deity favored mission results in brand new spell for cleric.
|
|
Then more power to you. I am one of those people that lets themselves get bogged down in useless details which can waste time that would be better spent elsewhere. If you feel the effort would be worth the reward, then go for it.
Since I'll be going book-by-book, I'm hoping to be able to snag a few minutes here and there to work on it. If I get 1 spell copied from PDF to the file in a night, then I have made progress.
I don't expect to have it finished within a short time, that's for sure.
I'd enjoy this as a player. One of the things that makes me reluctant to play in splatbook-heavy campaigns is the feeling that in order to play a high-level caster capably I really ought to know about all those spells--both to use them, and worse, to make plans to deal with the NPCs using them. I find this overwhelming and demoralizing. If the GM says to me, "Here are the common spells your character ought to reckon on; focus on learning about those; the others are rare and unusual, and it's understandable she doesn't know them all" I'd feel a lot happier.
Monte Cook's _Arcanus Unearthed_ has a three-tier system for spell commonness tied into its game mechanics. As I recall, everyone has access to the common spell list; you need a class ability or feat to have one category of spells from the uncommon list; you need a feat to have one spell from the rare list. My player really liked this in the UA campaign I ran. I wasn't as crazy about it myself, mainly because the rare spells did not seem to justify burning a feat, and the re-use of the common spells for *all* spellcaster classes made all the casters seem too much alike. I didn't see any basic flaws in the idea, though. If I had that kind of time, I'd certainly think about a custom list. (I did this for 1st edition and got great games about it, but I shudder now at the amount of time I spent.)
Mary
One of my current DMs, hallowed be his name, came up with a great house rule for spells:
With his approval, you can bring in spells from non-core sources PROVIDED you subtract one spell from your spell list that you CAN cast. So, if you want a first level spell from Spell Compendium, the player has to decide which PHB spell he will subtract from his class list, e.g. choosing whether to drop hold portal or endure elements to add this new spell.
Note: by dropping it from your class list, you can't use scrolls or wands of the dropped spell.
It saves time through simplification, while still promoting player choice and individualizing casters.
|
|
I'd enjoy this as a player. One of the things that makes me reluctant to play in splatbook-heavy campaigns is the feeling that in order to play a high-level caster capably I really ought to know about all those spells--both to use them, and worse, to make plans to deal with the NPCs using them. I find this overwhelming and demoralizing. If the GM says to me, "Here are the common spells your character ought to reckon on; focus on learning about those; the others are rare and unusual, and it's understandable she doesn't know them all" I'd feel a lot happier.
That's the feel I'm hoping for. In the games I've run I've noticed that some peope avoid playing spellcasters because they're afraid of having too learn the non-core spells. As a big fan of nearly every class, especially the wizard, I'm rather disappointed in that people feel discouraged from ant of them. Hopefully this will encourage them as they can easily get by with the corebook spells in my games. It will also slow down my min-maxer players who send a steady barrage of "can I have this spell to start?"
As for Monte's stuff, I'll have to check it out but I share your reluctance to require feats to use even the rare spells in my system. It migh make sense for picking up another setting's spellcasting system or for restricted spells though, so I'll take a look. Thanks!
FP
|
|
One of my current DMs, hallowed be his name, came up with a great house rule for spells:
With his approval, you can bring in spells from non-core sources PROVIDED you subtract one spell from your spell list that you CAN cast. So, if you want a first level spell from Spell Compendium, the player has to decide which PHB spell he will subtract from his class list, e.g. choosing whether to drop hold portal or endure elements to add this new spell.
Note: by dropping it from your class list, you can't use scrolls or wands of the dropped spell.
It saves time through simplification, while still promoting player choice and individualizing casters.
That's another option Ill give some thought to. The only downside I can see off the top of my head is I'll have to keep track of each character's altered spell list. Then I can't assume they could have access to spell X or they could use scroll of spell Y.
FP
|
|
Does anybody have any cirticism about the mechanics for treating uncommon/rare/restricted spells differently from the common spells? I'm wondering about the increase in Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft DC's. Is it too much? Is it not enough?
And in case I did not make it clear above, I'm planning on using this for my PRPG games in the future.
FP
|
|
If you know it you know it.
There shouldn't be a higher DC (penalty) for casting a spell that's rare just because it's rare. The "penalty" has already been taken since the PC could only gain access (learn it) through a certain in-game way. That's sufficient.
GOOD LUCK
-W. E. Ray
Agreed. However, should that character have not actually researched that specific spell, then there should be a higher DC for performing certain actions related to it(figuring out what the other caster is doing, for instance).
|
|
Sorry it's taken me a while to reply, studying for the bar causes some weird hours sometimes.
I see where you're comign from Molech and I'll make a change to my introduction. My intention was to place the Spellcraft/Knowledge (arcana) modifier for identifying and learning uncommon, rare, and restricted spells. Once a particular spellcaster learns such a spell, they would not have a harder time making a concentration check or identifying the spell effect when used by others later.
Good catch.