|
and lastly I could care less what you respect. If you think your respect is worth diddly or squat to me, your sadly mistaken. If you can't understand I dislike being made into somebody's play thing...well then we're done.And I gotta say, that's not a play style that I...have much respect for. Again, feel free to correct me if I've misinterpreted something.
Not sure how you got from "not a play style that I have much respect for" to you being personally insulted, but, fair enough. Fortunately, I have players that don't behave like petulant children, so, I'm okay.
Good Luck with your game.
You honestly don't see how either of your comments is a personal attack?!? Or your comments to swordsmasher...wow...just wow.
You honestly don't see how either of your comments is a personal attack?!? Or your comments to swordsmasher...wow...just wow.
I second this motion.
You honestly don't see how either of your comments is a personal attack?!? Or your comments to swordsmasher...wow...just wow.
The only thing I've criticized, much less attacked, is a particular play style. In fact, what I said was, "that's not a play style I have much respect for." Maybe you could explain how that's an attack on you.
I second this motion.
Really? Show me where I insulted or attacked you personally. Quote it, and I'll apologize.
Edited: To get the quote tags correct.
|
Course that does limit the spells you can use until your high enough levels once again. And the usefulness of the scavanged spellbooks is entirely up to DM fiat. And your probably not gonna have access to your most powerful spells via those spellbooks. So either your risking your main book and having those as back up...or your gonna be sub par for most of the adventure...at least until you get powerful enough where secret chest or teleporting on a regular basis becomes a non issue...i.e. high levels. And hiding a spellbook before access to those spells even assumes you have a base of operation to hide the book in.At low levels, I did not have any extra spell books. I got my first extra spell book at 6th level when I defeated another mage and got his rather limited traveling spell book, which allowed me to utilize that and hide my main spell book.
I did not buy any of the other spell books, but got my fourth book at 12th level. I can not remember what level I was when I got the third, but it was either 9th or 10th, and each of those was traveling spell books of the wizards I had killed.
I have not played a wizard in PF, but that will be rectified in Council of Thieves, which I should play in the next year or so.
Glad I could clarify. I had 1 main spell book and 3 traveling spell books.
Your exactly right. Up till 11th level, there was an issue with versatility, and I used scrolls alot to help with that, but in truth, I was always behind the power curve for outright blasting capabilities, but, I always tried to resolve situations without violence, which helped me cut my spell usage alot. It has been one of the most rewarding characters I have played.
I tell my players up front that I'm an equal opportunity PC item destroyer and anything they possess is fair game. Thier items are not sacred. They make a living at stealing other people's stuff after all, and shouldn't complain if it happens to them. The threat of item loss should always be there, just the same as a PC actually dying. In practice, I rarely ever actually excercise such tactics, it really only comes up in rare situations (such as the time one player's PC cleric fell into an elder black pudding... and came out with only his holy symbol, and hooded lantern of all things to show for it). In regards to a wizard and his spell book, he better guard the thing like a lich guards his phylactery (and spellbooks)!
In other words, Spell Mastery is a great feat in certain campaign styles and a poor one in others. Many feats are like this.
The cost isn't so bad in PF...but in 3.5...umm what the hell kind of wealth did your DM give that you could afford to have that many spellbooks? Especially at low levels. Even still in PF, the cost to duplicate a spellbooks is around 35k...give or take depending on the spells in it. Unless you have a bunch of blessed books...but those aren't exactly cheap until high levels either. So unless your ignoring rules, or wealth by level...no that is NOT a viable option for quite a bit of the game.
+1. I play in a low-money campaign, as a wizard, and I barely have enough cash to scribe the spells I get access to, let alone think about copying my book to make a new one. Ironically, I DO have access to several VAST sources of spells (one being a patron archmage and another being the temple of some Mystic Theurges), but if my book goes it'll be hell to replace (easier in PF than 3.5, for sure).
As for thieves, guilds should know how damn dangerous stealing wizard's spellbooks are. They are typically trapped, easily traced (magically) and wizards are absolutely motivated to get them back. On top of that, they're only valuable to other wizards, and they're always going to be hot property - will a local wizard buy it? If he does, he basically makes himself a target. I think most guilds (in particular) would think twice about it (or thrice, even). Independent thieves might be dumb enough (or unwise enough) to do so. Oh, and where there's a thieves guild, there's also probably a wizard's guild. Just saying :-)
You honestly don't see how either of your comments is a personal attack?!? Or your comments to swordsmasher...wow...just wow.I second this motion.
MyNameIsJake has been known to make personal attacks without even realizing it in the past. It's just his posting style I guess.
MyNameIsJake has been known to make personal attacks without even realizing it in the past. It's just his posting style I guess.
Ah, yes, a cheap shot without any evidence from the 'dork. Now I know I'm on the side of the angels.
MyNameIsJake has been known to make personal attacks without even realizing it in the past. It's just his posting style I guess.Ah, yes, a cheap shot without any evidence from the 'dork. Now I know I'm on the side of the angels.
I very much doubt either one of us is on the side of the angels at this point.
Please, gentlemen, we're all gamers here. if someone is saying something that annoys you, whether or not said poster is being aggressive or even aggressively baiting, please just let it go, or ignore the poster.
this is an interesting thread, full of good debate and many examples of play styles, there is no reason to destroy that based on the posts of a select few individuals.
At this point, I believe that a majority of posters here believe that Spell Mastery is mostly useless as written.
So, what, if any, are some ways it can be fixed?
Whether by changing the feat, or adding it into the class.
and as always, please, keep it civil.
RANT
it's bad enough we have to fight against the many anti-gaming groups out there, if we start attacking each other we either prove them right, or we weaken ourselves enough for them to destroy us.
As a teenager i had the Chict tracks thrust into my face by a very overbearing family member which resulted in a lot of pain and anguish, and ultimate ostracization of me by many family members because i refused to quit gaming (not too mention all the gaming books burned in front of me, as a way to cleanse my soul). And then every time anything went wrong my parents blamed D&D, and not normal teenage issues.
/Rant
At this point, I believe that a majority of posters here believe that Spell Mastery is mostly useless as written.So, what, if any, are some ways it can be fixed?
Whether by changing the feat, or adding it into the class.
If you have mastered a spell, what else could that mean? You could give free eschew materials for the spells picked, or even go as far as non-costly foci. +1 (or more) on concentration checks when casting might not be bad. +1 caster level? +1 DC for saves? We want to make it worth taking, but not overpowered. Hard to find a balance.
As for theft: Spellbooks are unique and traceable. They WILL be missed. The people you are stealing them from can bend reality to their will, and probably know some divinations. It's a question of risk vs. reward. Your average small-time thief is going to look at a wizard's book and think "I don't need that kind of trouble" And the big time thieves are probably members of the local guild, who probably has some sort of understanding with the mages guild.
For most campaigns, the reason you take this feat is for the "Captured!" scenario. Where you need enough magic to help get your stuff back. It's never going to replace your book(s). The price for scribing spells the the balance for potentially knowing every spell in existence. The fighter has a much higher chance of his sword being sundered then you have of loosing your spellbook. It is a risk, and the permanent loss of a spellbook is far more devastating then the loss of a sword. But how often do you break out your book in risky situations? It should be safely tucked away in a backpack most of the time.
Kind of a silly feat early on. Later on it's not a horrible choice. I think (greater) teleport and plane shift are game-changing spells that you should never lose access to in the later game. I'd definitely consider it around level 13-15. . .
MyNameIsJake has been known to make personal attacks without even realizing it in the past. It's just his posting style I guess.Ah, yes, a cheap shot without any evidence from the 'dork. Now I know I'm on the side of the angels.
As a neutral party, I'll observe Mynameisjake's comment could very easily be construed as insulting and inflammatory.
To any offended parties, I suggest you just FLAG them and move on.
Earlier on in the post I suggested allowing the wizard to spontaneously cast a number of selected spells equal to his Intelligence modifier by giving up 2 prepared spells of that spell level.
But what if instead of spontaneously casting, the feat works this way:
the core spell mastery feat stays like it is, with this addendum: at any time during the day the wizard can lose two prepared spells to instead prepare the spells selected by spell mastery.
Normal preparation time i think is one hour for all spells? So, maybe this method would allow the wizard to re-prepare the mastered spell as a full round action.
It would only seem to be the same as spontaneous casting if the wizard re-prepared, and then cast the spell as soon as it was re-prepared.
As far as working it into the class, I would think it should work after you get a new spell level, and had some time to 'mastery-ize' you lower level ones.
Something like this:
at level 1st level you'd get Spell Mastery I: select a number of 0 level spells equal to your Intelligence modifier. You can now prepare these spells without the aid of your spellbook (Except for Read Magic, which is the black sheep and should not be selected buy this ability because it already thinks it is better than every other cantrip because of its intrinsic preparation status).
This would be the breakdown (this is a thought process being posted, so no final homebrew/playtesting has been made)
At 4th level you'd get to add a number of 1st level spells equal to your int. modifier
and then basically you just get spell mastery every 2 levels for the next spell level up.
at 6th level you'd gain level 2 spells.
8th would be level 3
10th would be level 4
12th would b level 5
14th would be level 6
16th eould be level 7
18th would be level 8
At 20th level as a capstone, you could add 9th level spells and maybe allow the wizard to spontaneously cast any spell he has spell mastery for by giving up another prepared spell of the same level (or even 2 prepared spells if that is more balancing).
any thoughts, or does anyone else think anything different?
another question, to, is how would you work Spell mastery into the class if the wizard is a specialist?
|
I've never had a player take this feat in any of my games.
I was just wondering if anyone out there has taken it, and if so, what kind of benefits can it really give you?
Apart from the rare occasion when the GM might deny the wizard of his spellbook, I can find no other application for this feat.
In fact, I am thinking about homebrewing the darn thing to just allow the Wizard to select a number of spells equal to his int modifier that he can spontaneously cast by expending already prepared spells.
anyone?
Personally, I think the feat as written is too circumstantial, important in campaigns where GMs are likely to single out the wizard, otherwise, not important enough and not powerful enough to compare it to, say, Silent Spell or one of the really good crafting feats.
Although I think the Vancian system needs a complete overhaul, here are my recommendations for Spell Mastery compatible with PF/3.5e gaming:
Spell Mastery
Your significant intellect allows you to master spells you have studied for a period of time. You can prepare most spells without referencing your spellbooks.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Intelligence 15+
Benefit: Every spell you know with a spell level less than the highest spell level you can cast are now mastered. From this point on, you can prepare these spells without referring to a spellbook.
Normal: Without this feat, you must use a spellbook to prepare all your spells except for read magic.
I would recommend another feat to make it a tree:
Spell Savant
You have an eidetic memory when it comes to spells you have learned. You can prepare spells by picturing your spellbooks in your mind.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Spell Mastery, Intelligence 17+
Benefit: You can prepare any spell that you know without referring to a spellbook.
I think you need to stay away from spontaneous casting. That's the sorcerer's thing. With spell mastery as written, you can take 15 minutes and fill spell slots left empty without breaking out your book. 15 min will let you fill up to a quarter of your spells, odds are you don't have that many empty slots, but it is the minimum time. This is nice for when you have enough quiet time to re-memorize spells, but don't want to drag the book out. Like when you are at the bottom of the sea and need to memorize a teleport before your water breathing spell wears off.
Swapping spells should be an out of combat event. I could see mastered spells as an exception to the 15 minute minimum for memorizing spells, but would not make it faster then 1 minute each.
If you want to get more spells mastered for the cost of one feat, I'd suggest INT+1 spell per 4 levels. Replacing mastered spells should also be fine, one every 3-4 levels seems fine. It should never replace your spellbook, so I think the number need to be kept small. Upping the number does not change the fact that having the ability is marginal at best.
|
|
I think you need to stay away from spontaneous casting. That's the sorcerer's thing...<clipped>
If this were a 3.5 discussion, and especially 3.0, I would agree with you. However, in PF, I think that the Sorceror and Wizard are much further apart than just spontaneous casting versus prepared casting.
Furthermore, if I had two players, a 10th level evocation sorceror and a 10th level diviner wizard, and the diviner purposely left a quarter of his spell slots open to prepare for a big fight once the party learned more about their enemies, I do not believe that feats allowing the wizard to prepare in 15 minutes without a spellbook makes a material difference in game balance, but would certainly reduce the mental stress (and perhaps physical burden) on the wizard. The price mechanics of maintaining separate spell catalogs in multiple places out of paranoia is unfairly singling out the wizard IMHO in a game where total cash seriously contributes to character power.
Personally, I think the feat as written is too circumstantial, important in campaigns where GMs are likely to single out the wizard, otherwise, not important enough and not powerful enough to compare it to, say, Silent Spell or one of the really good crafting feats.Although I think the Vancian system needs a complete overhaul, here are my recommendations for Spell Mastery compatible with PF/3.5e gaming:
Spell Mastery
Your significant intellect allows you to master spells you have studied for a period of time. You can prepare most spells without referencing your spellbooks.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Intelligence 15+
Benefit: Every spell you know with a spell level less than the highest spell level you can cast are now mastered. From this point on, you can prepare these spells without referring to a spellbook.
Normal: Without this feat, you must use a spellbook to prepare all your spells except for read magic.I would recommend another feat to make it a tree:
Spell Savant
You have an eidetic memory when it comes to spells you have learned. You can prepare spells by picturing your spellbooks in your mind.
Prerequisite: 1st-level wizard, Spell Mastery, Intelligence 17+
Benefit: You can prepare any spell that you know without referring to a spellbook.
I really like this method.
I used to feel that the vancian system needed an overhaul.
But then I played 4e for a year.
The main reason I switched back was because I absolutely HATED the wizard class, and the 4e idea of spellcasting.
"You mean to tell me that Merlin or Zedd can do this in a few seconds, but its gonna take my character an hour to do? right."
|
|
I used to feel that the vancian system needed an overhaul.
But then I played 4e for a year.
The main reason I switched back was because I absolutely HATED the wizard class, and the 4e idea of spellcasting.
"You mean to tell me that Merlin or Zedd can do this in a few seconds, but its gonna take my character an hour to do? right."
I actually LIKE vancian magic system. Yeah I know, I'm wierd.
I actually LIKE vancian magic system. Yeah I know, I'm wierd.I used to feel that the vancian system needed an overhaul.
But then I played 4e for a year.
The main reason I switched back was because I absolutely HATED the wizard class, and the 4e idea of spellcasting.
"You mean to tell me that Merlin or Zedd can do this in a few seconds, but its gonna take my character an hour to do? right."
i didn't appreciate it until i played 4e, then i too loved it.
my only beef with it is low level wizards only get a select few spells to prepare, but i usually make up for that by crafting some scrolls with my starting cash.
As for thieves, guilds should know how damn dangerous stealing wizard's spellbooks are. They are typically trapped, easily traced (magically) and wizards are absolutely motivated to get them back.
I have never had a wizard player lay a trap on his spellbook. In fact, I doubt very many wizard players do in general. Perhaps NPC wizards do this a lot, but none of my players even prepare alarm on a regular basis :)
So, the risk involved would seem to be pretty low for a thief in trying to steal a spellbook, unless you assume your players do things they don't tell you they do.
As for thieves, guilds should know how damn dangerous stealing wizard's spellbooks are. They are typically trapped, easily traced (magically) and wizards are absolutely motivated to get them back.I have never had a wizard player lay a trap on his spellbook. In fact, I doubt very many wizard players do in general. Perhaps NPC wizards do this a lot, but none of my players even prepare alarm on a regular basis :)
So, the risk involved would seem to be pretty low for a thief in trying to steal a spellbook, unless you assume your players do things they don't tell you they do.
The risk is less of "click -BOOM" (although that is there) but you just stole a valuable, unique item that someone is going to want back. Starting with locate object, the people who own books have the tools to find you. They have the motivation. And when they find you, you will be lucky if you just end up spending the rest of your life as a toad.
Odds are the "local" (non adventering) wizards will either have an understanding with the local thieves guild, or extensive contacts with merchants and guards. And he probably knows everyone who you are going to try to sell it to in town. Plus you just pissed off someone you might need to work with later.
Adventuring wizards tend to have friends to help them. Someone steals the wizard's book, the whole team is going to help him get it back. These are the people who go into dragon lairs, topple evil governments, and seek out other trouble for fun and profit. And now they are looking for YOU, petty thief.
If you are going to try your hand at spell book theft, there are a couple of things to keep in mind. You need to sell it FAST. Set up a buyer before you steal the book if you can. You don't want to be holding it when they come looking. If you don't have a fence set up, you are probably not going to a good price with a fast sell. Protective magics will help give you time, but will cut into your profit (as you can't cast them yourself for most thieves) Distance might help, depending on how powerful a wizard you are robbing. Heading to the next town over might save you, but does take time.
Locate object, discern location, greater teleport. All good candidates for spell mastery. If you don't want to blow the feat, it might be worth keeping a few "find & get there" spells on a scroll or a spare book. You don't need to have a full copy of your book, just the spells needed to get it back.
As for thieves, guilds should know how damn dangerous stealing wizard's spellbooks are. They are typically trapped, easily traced (magically) and wizards are absolutely motivated to get them back.I have never had a wizard player lay a trap on his spellbook. In fact, I doubt very many wizard players do in general. Perhaps NPC wizards do this a lot, but none of my players even prepare alarm on a regular basis :)
So, the risk involved would seem to be pretty low for a thief in trying to steal a spellbook, unless you assume your players do things they don't tell you they do.
Time for a Tip from Abe about wizards.
See this post people? This is why you always tell your DM about your spell book. What its made out of, what you've done to it to protect it, how you keep it, heck even the order of the spells in it.
"But Abe -- he might use that information against me!" You say.
My reply, "He's the freaking DM! If he's not using what he knows against you he's doing it wrong -- but if the NPC's know everything he knows get a new DM!"
The DM will only know about your protections and placements if you tell him -- and if he doesn't know they didn't happen!
Honestly spend some time and money protecting that book!
My suggestion to make it a more useful feat :
it will gradually allow the wizard to add more spells as he levels up, at lower levels the caster level boost is more significant.
Spellmastery : The wizard can select one spell for each spell level the wizard has access to, the wizard gets +1 Caster Level with these spells, also he needs no spellbook to commit these spells to memory. Every time the wizard attains a new spell level he can select a new spell.
The wizard can master a number of cantrips equal to his intelligence modifier.
The wizard can choose to select a lower level spell for a particular level instead.
This feat can be taken multiple times, but a single spell can be selected only once.
A specialist wizard can not choose to master a spell of an opposition school.
At this point, I believe that a majority of posters here believe that Spell Mastery is mostly useless as written.So, what, if any, are some ways it can be fixed?
This here is what I have trouble with.
For example, I personally think gnomes are redundant. If you want a small magic using type of character, play a halfling. If you want to be grumpy and live underground, play a dwarf.
In over 20 years, I've never played a gnome character. I probably never will. Yet, I don't need them fixed, or upgraded, or anything. I just accept that they are not a good choice for me, and move on.
And I think spell mastery is the same way.
And for the record, the other time it's really good is in an environment with a lot of espionage. If the entire party is disguised as visiting pilgrims, then a spellbook is going to raise alarms when you are searched.
If this sounds good, check out The Silver Key, one of my all time favorite adventures.
Yeah I got to say that spell mastery is fine as is. Now you might not take it all the time, but then the same can be said of the following feats:
Run
Diehard
Endurance
Lightning Reflexes
Agile Maneuvers
Elemental channel
Fleet
and many others -- that doesn't mean that you have to rewrite them.
Players must protect their equipment, this is true, but as a GM/DM I generally won't inflict theft on the players outright unless they are being incredibly cocky.
Low-to-Mid level? Players might suffer the pick-pockets and the second-storey thieves, and learn to place traps around and in their stuff to prevent such thefts. Once they start to get nice gear and then realise they've become targets for other, lower-level creeps to do to them what they've been doing to the Dragons for the past few levels, they had better wise up quick smart, 'cause I'm not going to hold back overlong as stories of the 'incredible magic sword' or the 'book containing a thousand spells' gets around.
Wizards must, must, must, must always ensure they have a backup for their spells, even if it's just a collection of scrolls of every spell they know stashed away in a Portable Bag made solely to hold such delicate cargo safe from divinations, water hazards and red dragon breath.
Alternatively, Wizards could pay to have a smith make them a book out of metal, using 'pages' of steel with their arcane formulae stamped into the metal, effectively making the book invulnerable to a quick immersion in water or a short-term contact with fire. Make that their Grimoire, their 'Original' Spellbook in which they keep all their spells, while they lug around the old-fashioned paper one as a sort of 'cliff notes' of their spells. Wizards have the potential to dominate a game like no other class, and as such must be aware that that power comes with a ruddy great achilies heel called the Spellbook.
In regards to Spell Mastery feat, I've always house-ruled it that the Feat 'scales' with level, but you can only memorize one spell of your highest level, two spells of your second highest and three spells of your third lowest and all other spell levels, and the save DCs of all spells are lowered by 2, and they cannot be enhanced by metamagic feats. This prevents the Wizard from going "I'm a SORCERER derp!" and also hammers home just how vital your damn Spellbook is as a Wizard.
Sure, you can cast spells without the book ... but they will be weaker, they cannot be tweaked and the variety of spells you could cast has been severely curtailed. This shows that the Wizard knows his magic but also that the devil is in the details, litterally, as the Wizard needs to look up his Spellbook to get every verbal nuance and arcane guesture correct to get the maximum out of his spells.
Players must protect their equipment, ...
...In regards to Spell Mastery feat, I've always house-ruled it that the Feat 'scales' with level, but you can only memorize one spell of your highest level, two spells of your second highest and three spells of your third lowest and all other spell levels, and the save DCs of all spells are lowered by 2, and they cannot be enhanced by metamagic feats. This prevents the Wizard from going "I'm a SORCERER derp!" and also hammers home...
Love it! gotta steal huge chunks for my game before a current player takes the feat...he, he.