It's one spell from your school. You don't need to know it otherwise, and this won't give you the ability to cast it otherwise. Note that you also cannot change this spell.
This goes for all bonus spells.
I had the same impression initially as KaeYoss (and your player), and ruled the same for my DM PC Wizard. But eventually I kept coming back to it and I just don't see it allowing this.
It's not the spell-like ability it was in the Alpha versions, it's a spell prepared, which indicates to me that you had better *know* the spell. I *do* think that it would be a reasonable compromise to allow it to be prepared without a spellbook (similar to any spell you have taken Spell Mastery for).
Just overall I think it's a very reasonable assumption that the ability doesn't grant sudden knowledge of a new spell, *only* once per day.
If the ability said, "Pick one spell, you can prepare that spell one time per day," things would be rather unclear. If it said, "Pick one spell of that level that you know, ..." it would be clearer. Saying "Pick one spell of that level, in your specialized school, that you know, ..." gets a little unwieldy.
I'm sure this will be clarified in the final version, and perhaps by the Wizard preview.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I also have read this to indicate ANY spell from the school. As for explanation - I view it as effectively another free spell in the wizard's book, like the 2 gained per level, but for this one spell slot, it can never be changed, but the regular spell slots could be used to prepare it also.
But, after reading this thread, I hope the final version of the rules is more explicit on this.
Wow, really? That seems.... powerful.
I don't see how this would seem powerful
And I don't think it's that weird, either. After all, they're not really preparing that spell. It's always the same. You don't get to change it, ever.
To me, it seems that your dedication to your school gives you the insight to use a spell one time. It's always that spell, if you want to use it more than once (or however often you get to cast it), you need to have it in the book, but then again, you don't have to prepare it the way you prepare everything else - or you could change it.
So I'd say that you either get to choose a spell regardless of whether you know it or not (usually, you choose a spell that's good, anyway, and you might want to use it more often, so you learn it), or it's an extra spell slot you have to prepare from your book but can change each day.
I'd let it be any spell in the school. To me, it's like a 3.x cleric domain spell. You get an extra slot with a limited set of spells that can be prepared in it. (In this case, you have your choice of one spell. :-) )
I've never heard anyone argue that the general concept of cleric domain spells was overpowered, as opposed to particular instances of domain spells. Unlike a domain spell, this doesn't even give you access to a spell that your class couldn't access (which was one way cleric domain spells could have balance issues).
As to suddenly knowing a spell that he hasn't researched or seen or studied, I would assume that whatever the wizard is doing to learn his two free spells at each level also leads to learning this new spell.
|
My group always assumed it was the ability to get a extra spell in your school but that you had to know said spell. Since wizards unlike other classes have to learn new spells to be able to cast them. Just seems like a extra spell slot just like the normal ones the class gets but in their school only.
Maybe not but thats how we interupted it.
Heh, the Beta rules are carefully worded so as to be as vague as possible, so that each group will come up with their own interpretation and test it. That means twice the playtesting for the same word count!
Since it is not a spell-like ability such as the school powers, and the rules specificly states that he needs to prepare the said spell, my interpretation is that he has to know the spell in question.
The rules are a bit odd compared to the spell mechanic of the wizard, since it is a bonus spell that need to be prepared, BUT the spell slot can only be used for one specific spell. The most reasonable explanation I can come up with is that he is so trained in certain spells from his school that prepared, so preparing these is so easy that it doesn't interfere with the amount of spells that he otherwise is able to cast. This does, however, assume a certain knowledge of the given spell.
Generally I think it comes down to, how easy it is (and you want it) for a wizard to learn new spells. You could easily demand that the bonus spell have to be the first school spell the chose at the earlier level. But you should be careful not to limit the player too much. Generally I've played with DMs that were quite liberal on the availiability of new spells.
I think if you force those spells to be in the wizard's spellbook, you have only the following logical choices:
Forcing wizards to choose one of the spells they know, without granting it as a bonus "spell known" or letting the wizard change the spell each day just doesn't make sense to me. It smacks of a rule for rules sake. It's so because the rules say so. PF should try really hard to have as few "boardgame rules" as possible. They're not fit for a roleplaying game.
I think if you force those spells to be in the wizard's spellbook, you have only the following logical choices:
You don't have to stick to the same spell forever - it's a prepared spell like all the others, needs to be prepared like all the others, so you can change what you prepare in that slot, just like with all the others.
You cannot change the spell once you choose it, and you get it as a bonus spell in your spellbook in addition to those you get already - it's something you had specialised training in, which means you are granted knowledge of this spell specially. Forcing wizards to choose one of the spells they know, without granting it as a bonus "spell known" or letting the wizard change the spell each day just doesn't make sense to me. It smacks of a rule for rules sake. It's so because the rules say so. PF should try really hard to have as few "boardgame rules" as possible. They're not fit for a roleplaying game.
I cannot agree that there in anyway is a logical connection between the options you recommend and 'forcing' the wizard to prepare spells from a spellbook. It is simply a different reasoning altogether. That the wizard uses his spellbook when he prepares spells, is quite given in the nature of wizadry in DnD. The only logical step from there, is that spells in a wizards spellbook is known. Whatever you do from there is based on different arguments, mainly the question on how many spells a wizard should know automatically.
Ultimately i agree with you that the best way is to allow as an extra spell known. That is how I would do it, since it fit my type of game. But it might be different for others, if spells isn't something you come by easily, there is a lot of good roleplaying opportunities in looking for the. And that has very little to do with 'boardgame rules'. It is not a rule for the rules sake, it a GM choice to fit his game into a certain style of playing, which doesn't take filled spellbooks for granted.
That the wizard uses his spellbook when he prepares spells, is quite given in the nature of wizadry in DnD. The only logical step from there, is that spells in a wizards spellbook is known.
I'd agree if we were talking about any other spell a wizard casts.
But this is not your regular spell you get from your spells/day progression. It's a special case. It's a school bonus.
I think that you can go two ways: You treat it as a spell like every other - with all the consequences that brings - or you treat it as a special case, apart from the normal wizard spells.
If you want to treat it like everything else, i.e. must be a spell from your spellbook and you prepare it normally each day, you should treat it like everything else, i.e. you prepare it from your spellbook and can change it whenever you prepare it.
If you want it a fixed spell as a school bonus that cannot be changed, it's clearly no longer a normal spell. It rather represents special training in your school of magic, and should get special treatment, i.e. if you can't change it, anyway, you should not be forced to choose a spellbook spell.
I can see a middle ground that would still make sense: The spell is a special case: The spell represents specialised training in your school - specialised training in this very spell. That means you get to add it to your spellbook in addition to the free spells you get every level, and you get to prepare it (at least) once each day in a special slot that cannot be used for everything else.
But it might be different for others, if spells isn't something you come by easily, there is a lot of good roleplaying opportunities in looking for the.
The rules already don't support this the way they are written, since wizards can freely choose any two spells (provided they can cast them) to be added to their spell book each level, and more at level 1.
So if you want to screw wizards and force them to scavenge every spell, you'll have to change the rules, anyway, so I don't see why the rules should spare you the need to change the school bonus spell rule when it forces you to change the general free spells in spellbook rule (note that if you don't give wizards free spells in their spellbooks and force them to choose bonus spells from their spellbooks, they might not be able to use the bonus spells from school at all, since it's not guaranteed that they even have an elegible spellin their book by the time they have to choose the spell that is nailed to that slot)
And that has very little to do with 'boardgame rules'. It is not a rule for the rules sake, it a GM choice to fit his game into a certain style of playing, which doesn't take filled spellbooks for granted.
The standard rules don't really support dozens of GM choices. That's what houserules are for. Spell-less rangers? Houserule it. Dwarves that pay for their +2 Wis and Con with -2 Dex in addition to -2 Cha? Houserule it. Weapon proficiencies being taken by the weapon group rather than single weapon types? Houserule it.
Nothing bad or wrong about houserules. I have a number of them myself, like Weapon Finesse not being a feat but something everyone can do all by himself or rangers and paladins casting their spells as swift actions.
But the rules shouldn't be ambiguous so people can interpret things in whatever way they want. Standard rules need to be as clear as possible.
And the standard rules should make sense. They should be well-thought and thought through. In our case, that means that if you treat it like a regular, prepared spell, you do that all the way, and if you treat it as special (and put limitations on it), you don't add limitations that don't make sense and might only be there as a balancing issue.
If you say you have to choose the spell once and cannot change it, but it is prepared like every other spell out of the spellbook, I say that this makes no sense. Why do I have to limit myself to this spell if it is a spell just like every other? Or if it is a special case, why does it come out of my normal allowance of spells? I cannot think of any answer instead of "this is a class bonus, and it would be unbalanced to make it free" or something like that.
f you say you have to choose the spell once and cannot change it, but it is prepared like every other spell out of the spellbook, I say that this makes no sense. Why do I have to limit myself to this spell if it is a spell just like every other? Or if it is a special case, why does it come out of my normal allowance of spells? I cannot think of any answer instead of "this is a class bonus, and it would be unbalanced to make it free" or something like that.
My answer to that question is that is is a spell from your school that you are well trained in, thus making it easier for you to cast and not requiring a normal spell slot. This is why you can't use the slot for other spells (and the rules are quite clear on that one).
As stated earlier, I would properly grant an additional school spell known for this purpose. But that is a matter of my preference.I really don't know about your special case, where the spell doesn't have to be prepared from a spellbook. I think this messes with the fundamentals of the wizard, which is 'spells are prepared from the spellbook'. If not, where does this power come from?
On the spell availiability, I did not propose that the wizard got none or even less than the two per level, the rules give tnem. But this is actually the only part of the school bonus spell that isn't clear. Is it an additional spell known?
I'd say yes, but I why someone would choose to keep the spells known at two per level. I agree that it would be preferable if the rules was clear on the subject, but they aren't, so I'd rather give the OP a varied answer, so he might find the solution that fits his game.
As stated earlier, I would properly grant an additional school spell known for this purpose. But that is a matter of my preference.
As I said, that would be a workable solution.
I really don't know about your special case, where the spell doesn't have to be prepared from a spellbook. I think this messes with the fundamentals of the wizard, which is 'spells are prepared from the spellbook'. If not, where does this power come from?
The fundamentals of the wizard also include "a lot of freedom of choice for the spells you prepare", which a fixed spell slot messes with.
Okay... so 1 vote for spontaneous wizard spell inspiration, 1 vote for learned spells only, and no definitive answer in any official source. Yikes, a dead heat.
Anyone else want to weigh in?
Ill weigh in.
The wording of the text is fairly vague so until we have an offical ruling on this, I plan to run it this way.
I think it's a valid rationalization that the text says "choose any spell" which means just what it says - any spell - and the text does not say "that you already know" so I will take the text at face value and assume the wizard can learn this spell as a freebie like the other spells he automatically learns as freebies.
In 3.x a wizard learns 2 spells every time he gains a level. That means that, assuming he always learns his highest level of spell possible, a 20th level wizard learns 40 free spells, 4 of each level up to eighth level and 8 ninth level spells. All free. No teachers, no scrolls, no copying spellbooks.
If he wants more spells than that, he needs to find people to teach him, or find scrolls or spellbooks to learn from.
I see this wizard school power as the ability to learn one more spell every even level (ecept 8th level). In addition, this special spell that he learns can also be cast once/day as an added bonus (more than once/day for the first level spell).
So basically, by the time the wizard is 20th level, he will learn 48 spells automatically rather than 40.
For example, a level 1 wizard starts with a number of spells equal to his INT modifier +3. So if he has an 18 INT, he starts with 7 1st level spells in his spellbook.
At level 2, he learns (adds to his spellbook) an automatic two spells from any school. He can choose spells from any school, even his opposition school.
In addition, at level 2, he learns (adds to his spellbook) one extra spell because of his specialization school. This extra spell must be from his specialist school. This spell, and only this spell, can be prepare an extra number of times per day as described in the book.
At 3rd level he now has access to 2nd level spells and can learn (add to his spellbook) any two spells he wants, from his school, or any school, or even his opposition school. These spells can be either level 1 or level 2 spells.
At 4th level, he can learn (add to his spellbook) two more spells, any school, either level 1 or level 2.
In addition, at 4th level, he learns (adds to his spellbook) one extra spell because of his specialization school. This extra spell must be from his specialist school, either level 1 or level 2. This spell, and only this spell, can be preapared one extra time per day (if he chooses level 1 he can prepare this spell twice per day).
And so on.
Of course, the wizard also has the ability to pick a spell he already knows to be his specialist bonus, in which case, he still gets the additional daily preparation of the spell, but he doesn't get the added bonus of learning it automatically because he already knows it.
Which makes for an interesting decision. For example, an evoker at level 5 can learn 2 free spells. He might choose Fireball and Lightning Bolt, since he is an evoker. Or, he might want his bonus spell at level 6 to be Fireball, so at level 5 he chooses Lightning Bolt and Haste instead, which means at level 6 he might choose Slow and Deep Slumber for his two freebies and then choose Fireball as his bonus spell so he can prepare it one extra time per day. It would seem weird, for an evoker, to not be able to cast Fireball at level 5, but in the end, by delaying one level, he gains an extra daily use of Fireball so it might be worth it.
Anyway, that's my take.
Whenever a wizard attains the listed
level, he can choose one spell from his school to prepare every
day as a bonus spell. Instead of gaining a spell of the listed
level, the wizard can instead choose a spell of a lower level,
which he can then prepare twice per day (except for 2nd level).
A universalist can choose spells from any school. Once chosen,
these spells cannot be changed.2nd Level: The wizard can cast any first level spell from his
chosen school. This spell is prepared once per day for every
two caster levels he possesses.
4th Level: The wizard can cast any second level spell from
his chosen school once per day....
Seems clear to me that the bonus is prepared as a normal spell.
I would rule that it must come from the spells he already knows or one of the two he learns at level-up, and once chosen, he's stuck with it in perpetuity.
I see that this thread has entered into the question of whether the wizard needs to prepare his school bonus spells from a spellbook.
Now that is an interesting question.
On the one hand, all wizard spells are prepared from a spellbook. Further, the description of the school bonus spell says the bonus spells must be prepared, implying that they are prepared each morning just like all the other spells a wizard prepares.
On the other hand, we have logic. The wizard has these special spells that cannot be changed. These bonus spells must be prepared in the special bonus slots - those bonus slots cannot prepare any other spells. This seems to imply that the wizard knows his bonus spells in great detail, such that he gets extra uses of just those spells. So if he knows them so well, it makes little sense that he must read them out of a spellbook to prepare them, or that he cannot simply read something else out of the spellbook to prepare in those bonus slots.
Both arguments are reasonable.
A DM could rule this either way and not be "wrong".
However, I think this rule needs a little dose of occam's razor.
What we know is that wizards must prepare all their spells from a spellbook. It says so in the wizard class description.
Further, the school power grants some bonus spells that also get bonus preparations.
But nowhere in the rules does it specifically say that the wizard can prepare these bonus school spells without his spellbook.
So, since he needs a spellbook for all spells, and since there is no rule for the bonus spells that overrides the spellbook rule, ergo, the bonus spells must be prepared from a spellbook.
By way of comparison, note the Spell Mastery feat that specifically lets a wizard learn a few spells so well that he can prepare them without a spellbook.
This feat has clear and specific text about how such "bookless" preparation is possible, yet no such text exists within the description of specialist bonus spells.
QED - at least until some official ruling says otherwise.
I know, it defies logic. But in a game system where nearly every page of the rulebook has some rule that defies logic (OK, that's a bit of hyperbole), I can hardly justify the arugument that "it defies logic" as a valid argument to override RAW - I need something a little more concrete.
But in this case there is nothing more concrete, so RAW stands.
Obviously, any DM can interpret it differently (which would likely be a misinterpretation) or can interpret it this way and then houserule it some other way - both of which are fine.
I'm only discussig the RAW here.
Wow, really? That seems.... powerful.I don't see how this would seem powerful
And I don't think it's that weird, either. After all, they're not really preparing that spell. It's always the same. You don't get to change it, ever.
To me, it seems that your dedication to your school gives you the insight to use a spell one time. It's always that spell, if you want to use it more than once (or however often you get to cast it), you need to have it in the book, but then again, you don't have to prepare it the way you prepare everything else - or you could change it.
So I'd say that you either get to choose a spell regardless of whether you know it or not (usually, you choose a spell that's good, anyway, and you might want to use it more often, so you learn it), or it's an extra spell slot you have to prepare from your book but can change each day.
Well okay, to play devil's advocate then, does that spell have to be a Wizard/Sorcerer spell? If I'm a Conjuration specialist can I choose healing spells?
Well okay, to play devil's advocate then, does that spell have to be a Wizard/Sorcerer spell? If I'm a Conjuration specialist can I choose healing spells?
I would definately say no.
Although be wording could be interpreted differently, I think it will be stretching it.
After all, the wizard learns spells from the wizard spell list as a general rule. If anything should deviate from this rule it should be stated clearly.
Also I think that "from his school" should be interpreted rather strictly. What is from his school? I my opinion it is the spells on the wizard spell list under the appropriate school.
Even though the clerics healing spells is Conjuration-magic, it isn't necessarily a part of the Conjuration School.
Well okay, to play devil's advocate then, does that spell have to be a Wizard/Sorcerer spell? If I'm a Conjuration specialist can I choose healing spells?I would definately say no.
Although be wording could be interpreted differently, I think it will be stretching it.
After all, the wizard learns spells from the wizard spell list as a general rule. If anything should deviate from this rule it should be stated clearly.
Also I think that "from his school" should be interpreted rather strictly. What is from his school? I my opinion it is the spells on the wizard spell list under the appropriate school.
Even though the clerics healing spells is Conjuration-magic, it isn't necessarily a part of the Conjuration School.
I completely agree with you good sir. However I also feel that the bonus spell should just be a spell slot that has to be taken up by a spell of your specialty, just like in 3.5. Clearly they will have to clarify this rule before the PF release though since it seems open to wide interpretation.
Well okay, to play devil's advocate then, does that spell have to be a Wizard/Sorcerer spell? If I'm a Conjuration specialist can I choose healing spells?
Oh, I misunderstood another proverb. I didn't know playing devil's advocate means repeating what the previous poster says and selling it as one's own ;-P
Clearly they will have to clarify this rule before the PF release though since it seems open to wide interpretation.
Actually, I am quite certain that they won't clarify this or anything else that are unclear at the moments.
The best way to gain new users to the forums is forcing the GMs (who is being bugged with stupid questions by obnoxious players) to come looking for answers ;-)
Clearly they will have to clarify this rule before the PF release though since it seems open to wide interpretation.Actually, I am quite certain that they won't clarify this or anything else that are unclear at the moments.
The best way to gain new users to the forums is forcing the GMs (who is being bugged with stupid questions by obnoxious players) to come looking for answers ;-)
While you are right, I think you're putting the cause before the effect.
The effect is that new users come to the forums for answers, the cause is the lack of clarity in the rules.
I surely hope no game designer deliberately writes vague rules in the products we pay for just to drive users to the boards; I'm quite certain that most game designers, if not all, across all companies world-wide, are too professional to stoop so low.
And yes, I see your winky face there, and recognize your bid for sarcasm.
I just felt that, while sarcastic, your post may potentially give the wrong impression about game designers, and as an author who recently had a similar talk with his editor, I felt compelled to steer the comment in the right direction.
Clearly they will have to clarify this rule before the PF release though since it seems open to wide interpretation.Actually, I am quite certain that they won't clarify this or anything else that are unclear at the moments.
The best way to gain new users to the forums is forcing the GMs (who is being bugged with stupid questions by obnoxious players) to come looking for answers ;-)
While you are right, I think you're putting the cause before the effect.
The effect is that new users come to the forums for answers, the cause is the lack of clarity in the rules.
I surely hope no game designer deliberately writes vague rules in the products we pay for just to drive users to the boards; I'm quite certain that most game designers, if not all, across all companies world-wide, are too professional to stoop so low.
And yes, I see your winky face there, and recognize your bid for sarcasm.
I just felt that, while sarcastic, your post may potentially give the wrong impression about game designers, and as an author who recently had a similar talk with his editor, I felt compelled to steer the comment in the right direction.
I do not entirely agree that the comment was taking a wrong direction. I feel somewhat confident that others are capable of noticing the sarcasm and wink in my post, like you were.
But to avoid misunderstandings, I will be sure to add a disclaimer to sarcastic comments in the future.*
-------------------------------------------
*Sarcasm Disclaimer Paradox:
If the comment is understood as being sarcastic, a disclaimer should be added. If there is a disclaimer, however, the comment is not sarcastic.