Bonus Spells

[Malaclypse]

I have a rule question and would be happy if someone could clarify this for me. The question is:

If I have sorcerer bonus spells per day of a certain level from high charisma, can I use these spells even if I don't know any spells of that level?

E.g sorcerer 8, cha 20 -> 1 bonus spell of level 5, but no spells known of level 5. Can I use this spell slot for e.g. an empowered 3rd-level spell?

[cthulhu_waits]

No, you don't get bonus spells until you can actually cast that level of spell. Some classes, like the bard, get 0 spells per day at certain levels. That means they get only bonus spells, but your sorcerer won't have that.

[Sean Mahoney]

cthulhu_waits wrote:

No, you don't get bonus spells until you can actually cast that level of spell. Some classes, like the bard, get 0 spells per day at certain levels. That means they get only bonus spells, but your sorcerer won't have that.

While Cthulhu_waits is correct in what he says, I think the answer to the question that you actually asked is yes, though the answer to the example would be no.

Let me clarify a little.

You do not get access to the bonus spells for a level until you have the ability to cast spells of that level. So a 3rd level Sorcerer who has a bonus 1st and 2nd level spell would still only have 6 1st level spells per day and no second level spells. Upon reaching 4th level the sorcerer would then gain access to that spell.

That said, if there was some reason that a sorcerer capable of casting 5th level spells did not know any of them, they could indeed cast spells adjusted by metamagic to use a 5th level slot. Perhaps the chose lower level spells instead of 5th level ones when levelling up? But at any rate, the bonus 5th level slot would not be available until 10th level in sorcerer was reached.

Sean Mahoney

[Rezdave]

+1 to what Sean said.

More likely an issue is Wizards, rather than Sorcerers. Since sorcerers have innate magic, they pretty much are assured of getting spells once they can cast that level.

Not every DM gives free spells to Wizards when they level. In my world, Wizards must find, buy, trade or otherwise acquire spell texts in-game, and there is no assumed, off-stage research as in RAW. Granted, I generally try to keep PCs a level or two ahead of their casting ability in terms of having something in their spellbook (usually by defeating a BBEG wizard who exceeds the party-level by 2 or more, and thus has spells in his book that no PC is yet able to cast).

However, in the event that a PC Wizard leveled a couple times without acquiring any new spell texts, it is quite possible he could have available spell slots (regular or bonus) of his higher level(s) and nothing to cast. In such a case he could, as Sean suggests, use meta-magicked or lower-level spells in those slots.

FWIW,

Rez

[Malaclypse]

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

[Seldriss]

And this is another reason why i prefer spell points to vancian magic.
With spell points you don't have to worry about the level of your bonus spells, as you just have bonus spell points.

[Steven Tindall]

Rezdave wrote:

+1 to what Sean said.

More likely an issue is Wizards, rather than Sorcerers. Since sorcerers have innate magic, they pretty much are assured of getting spells once they can cast that level.

Not every DM gives free spells to Wizards when they level. In my world, Wizards must find, buy, trade or otherwise acquire spell texts in-game, and there is no assumed, off-stage research as in RAW. Granted, I generally try to keep PCs a level or two ahead of their casting ability in terms of having something in their spellbook (usually by defeating a BBEG wizard who exceeds the party-level by 2 or more, and thus has spells in his book that no PC is yet able to cast).

However, in the event that a PC Wizard leveled a couple times without acquiring any new spell texts, it is quite possible he could have available spell slots (regular or bonus) of his higher level(s) and nothing to cast. In such a case he could, as Sean suggests, use meta-magicked or lower-level spells in those slots.

FWIW,

Rez

Not trying to thread jack but as I read Rezdave's post I wanted to ask you as a DM do you allow the Collegiate wizard feat from the Complete arcane so that the mage can start with double spells known. Second why no off-stage research? not being critical I am simly curious as I have never heard of such a restrictive style for mages.

In every 3.0+ game I have played the DM's loved not having to make spellbooks for players anymore and the players could try any uber cool spell they could cast. Again no critisizm is intended I am just curious as to your play style and what the rule attempts to or actually does accomplish.

[Rezdave]

Steve ... I'm using Spoiler Tags to keep the thread uncluttered with this tangent ...

Spoiler:

Steven Tindall wrote:

Rezdave wrote:

In my world, Wizards must find, buy, trade or otherwise acquire spell texts in-game, and there is no assumed, off-stage research as in RAW. Granted, I generally try to keep PCs a level or two ahead of their casting ability in terms of having something in their spellbook (usually by defeating a BBEG wizard who exceeds the party-level by 2 or more, and thus has spells in his book that no PC is yet able to cast).

[A]s a DM do you allow the Collegiate wizard feat from the Complete arcane so that the mage can start with double spells known.

My game is Core 3.5 House Rules. Everything else is by-approval on a case-by-case basis. I'd have to review the feat, but I suppose I might increase the size of a wizard's initial spell book if the Player burned the feat and had a good backstory.

Incidentally, I recently added a House Rule making some feats into "Half-Feats" - mostly the Skill-based stuff - and another that gave each PC a starting "Background Feat" that was of half-feat value. Increasing the size of the spell book would be a good use of such a thing.

I do try to keep everything in balance. My world is low-economy (i.e. silver-standard) and mid-magic. I call the style "Grunge Fantasy". Comparing it to traditional High-Fantasy D&D would perhaps be like comparing Bladerunner to Star Trek. My world is like Conan the Barbarian with more magic, or perhaps a polytheistic Braveheart with wizards thrown in.

Steven Tindall wrote:

Second why no off-stage research? not being critical I am simly curious as I have never heard of such a restrictive style for mages.

I assume nothing. Fighters do not automatically train new feats off-stage and wizards do not automatically research new spells off-stage. If a Player wants to develop their character a certain way, they need to address it in-world. Granted, these will probably be down-time activities, but they need to be addressed. Nothing is assumed.

My world has very few professional adventurers. There simply isn't enough hoards lying around to support the lifestyle. Most "adventurers" are local farmers or blacksmiths or town-scribes or whatever that have day-jobs and take off every couple months to go explore some ruins and come back empty-handed. Even PCs tend to have non-adventuring careers, and during periods of Extended Downtime they gain a pool of bonus XP that they can only spend on levels in the Expert class.

If a PC Wizard wants to do spell research in their downtime that's fine. They will need a laboratory that costs 100gp for 1st-level spells, an additional 200gp for 2nd and so forth. Such money does not come easy in my world. They will need the expertise, probably an assistant they will need to pay or support and so forth. Once they have this, they can research new spells.

Just because you can cook by following a recipe doesn't mean you have the skill, talent or interest to create new and original, much less tasty and nutritious, dishes. Just because you can read sheet music and play the piano doesn't mean you can or want to compose a concerto. So too with spells. Nothing is automatic, nothing is assumed.

Point is, not all wizards automatically do research between adventures. Actually, most don't. I assume that most wizards simply cast spells that are already established formulae. Sure, some will tweak the details the way chef's might customize a recipe or the way a musician or conductor might interpret a musical piece, but few actually create something entirely new.

Using the recipe analogy, even if you've tasted something before, it's not necessarily easy to just go out and re-create it from scratch. So just knowing about or witnessing a spell doesn't mean you can just go home and tinker and get it right.

Of course, I did have a Player with a Conjuror who wanted a Feat to improve his summoned creatures. We couldn't find what we were looking for, so using the existing feats as a guideline we wrote up a new one. He spent about 5 years of extended downtime in a little cottage a day or so outside of a major city researching his Feat, burning time and money getting it right. However, when he was done he not only had a custom Feat in-world but the PC had become famous in Conjuring circles and a much sought-after master for apprentices, lecturer at magic colleges and so forth.

My girlfriend's current PC Evoker was about 4th level when the first story-arc ended and they hit about 2 years of Extended Downtime (granted, the PCs don't know this, be we as DM and Players figured out that's how long we needed to accomplish the desired goals). She wanted to craft magic items, but couldn't afford the workshop costs, the materials, didn't have mercantile contacts to make a business of it and so forth. She was also interested in jewelry making, but again, couldn't make a living at it. Instead, she apprenticed herself to a more powerful Evoker who she convinced to open/expand his own shop. They found a good journeyman jeweler who was ready to move up and became partners with him. She served as assistant jewelry-crafter and item-enchanter to both the jeweler and the wizard, was primarily responsible for handling the bookkeeping (she didn't have the Charisma for Sales), overseeing the junior apprentices (arcane and craft) and also lived above the shop to provide full-time security (a live-in wizard with magic missiles tends to deter most burglars).

After 2 years she had a little money in her pocket, good in-world backstory for some new feats, the gift of several mid-level Evocation spells from her master, and some excellent contacts and resources for additional levels. Granted, now she's almost the same level as her "master", but that's fine. He kind of thought she'd make it there anyway, and he was retired. She still comes back and helps out around the shop from time to time.

In both cases, the Player chose to devote the DT time and effort of their character into research or crafting or whatever, rather than being forced into it by rules to assumptions or pre-conceptions written by Gygax or Cooke or whomever.

Steven Tindall wrote:

In every 3.0+ game I have played the DM's loved not having to make spellbooks for players anymore and the players could try any uber cool spell they could cast. Again no critisizm is intended I am just curious as to your play style and what the rule attempts to or actually does accomplish.

I fail to see how this is a 3.x trait. In 1st or 2nd Edition the Player was free to define their spell book if the DM would let them. They researched spells between levels and the book automatically grew. I and the other DMs I played with chose to give PC Wizards pre-defined spell books in order to control the feel, flavor and tone of the world.

However, it worked the same in earlier or current editions. The DM is the ultimate selector of spells, perhaps defining an entire book, redacting specific spells, or giving the Player carte blanche. That hasn't changed based on the Edition, IMHO.

Personally, I give Players a pretty free rein to pitch me a spell-book if they've played in the campaign a while and are making new characters. Once they get the feel of the world they know what I will approve, and it makes my life easier. Also, the Players stay with me because they love the character-driven, story-focused nature of the campaigns, and so are often building spell-lists that are themed or have both strengths and weaknesses appropriate to the character and their backstory.

All that said, if you really want to talk about work for the DM on spells, then you should see the effort I go through to develop custom spell-lists for Divine Casters using a set of Spheres of Influence inspired by 2nd Edition, but also balancing the size of the list to the power of the deity, the size of their church, having some spells subsume others and so forth. THAT is complicated ... but incredibly flavorful.

Ultimately, the people who choose to play with me like the style and are happy with things. Here's the ad I post in the local gaming stores ... you can see the kind of person it attracts, and more importantly for me, the kind it turns away:

If Adventure calls …

If fighting monsters and bandits simply to earn enough copper for your next meal beats life back on the farm …

If at the end of the day you can be content with more scars and stories than you have silver …

If all you need are Faithful Companions and a Trusty Boradsword …

… then THIS is the campaign for you …

Set in the Grunge Fantasy realm of Edheldor, this is a continuing Role-Playing Campaign in 3.5 Edition D&D. Anyone interested in developing characters and role-playing stories as much as slaying monsters is invited to join.

This is a Player-driven campaign, going where the party wills and influenced by the actions of the Player Characters. There is no DM-forced plot, save only the need to survive another day.

Of course Edheldor is not without its share of Archmages, High Magic, Politics and Intrigue. This campaign is set against the backdrop of the political machinations of kingdoms and warlords. Perhaps one day you will even become part of it … a Famous Hero whose name is sung in ballads and whose exploits have become legend …

… perhaps one day. But for tonight there is no inn on the road and it has begun to rain as you pull your faded cloak tighter around your shoulders.

FWIW,

Rez

[Asherick "Ashe" Whiteplume]

Ok. I have a question on this subject. Say your Paladin ups his Charisma to 20... does he just loose that bonus 5th level spell slot since Paladin spell list caps out at 4th level?

In third edition one could place lower level spells in higher level slots if you so choose... but that might have been a 'house rule', I don't have my vintage 3rd Ed books in front of me to look at right now.

It would make since that the paladin could prepare a spell with a metamagic feat that ups its spell level... to be a 5th... but can they even do that with the bonus slot?

[Steven Tindall]

Rezdave wrote:

Steve ... I'm using Spoiler Tags to keep the thread uncluttered with this tangent ...

** spoiler omitted **...

Thank you for the explanation. I now have a much better understanding of what the flavor of your world is and why you limit the way you do.

the Collegiate wizard feat is in the Complete arcane in the back of the book. It just doubles the spells you have access to per level for free. that way the mage can spend his money on items and weapons and such.

[Steven Tindall]

Asherick "Ashe" Whiteplume wrote:

Ok. I have a question on this subject. Say your Paladin ups his Charisma to 20... does he just loose that bonus 5th level spell slot since Paladin spell list caps out at 4th level?

In third edition one could place lower level spells in higher level slots if you so choose... but that might have been a 'house rule', I don't have my vintage 3rd Ed books in front of me to look at right now.

It would make since that the paladin could prepare a spell with a metamagic feat that ups its spell level... to be a 5th... but can they even do that with the bonus slot?

From my understanding of the 3.5 rules under no circumstances can a paladin cast 5th level spells. They just like a ranger are limited to 4th and lower from their respective spell lists. The pallys primary spell casting attribute is wisdom not charisma( with a 20 he'd be great at turning but that's it)

Half casters like rangers,paladins and others shouldn't waste their time on meta feats because of the 4th level cap. There are no 5th level pally spells nor do pallys get bonus spells above 4th for having higher than average stats. An 18 wisdom is all the spells a pally can cast and all the bonuses he's allowed. Naturally house rules apply.

I have to caviate this by saying I am not 100% sure because we do not allow paladins in our games but as far as spellcasting that I am sure of and the half casters don't gain access to bonus spells above their normal limits 4th for pallys,rangers,assassins etc. 6th for bards and 9th for true casters.

[Asherick "Ashe" Whiteplume]

Ok. I'm referring to Pathfinder Paladins... their spells ARE based upon their Charisma and Not the Wisdom scores.

Quote [p. 62 PF Core Rules]:
"To prepare a spell, a paladin must have a Charisma score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Diffuculty Class for a saving throw against a paladin's spell is 10 + the spell level + the paladin's Charisma Modifier."

"Like other spellcasters, a paladin can cast only a certain number of spells of each level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table 3-11. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Charisma score (see Table 1-3)."

In either case I got my answer... raising charisma higher than 18 has no benefit for a paladin... other than increasing lower level bonus spell slots.

Thx.