|
This is a problem, for the reasons already stated, namely, removing the requirement to find rare spells in play,.... and throwing all private spell research wide open to remote-Magus copyright piracy,
Spell rarity is a house-rule.... Independently Researched spells are, by their nature, not on the Magus spell list, and not eligible for Knowledge Pool.
I was referring to the Greater Spell Pool ability, but maybe wasn't clear.
The topic of this thread has ballooned, to include the ramifications of all 'Pool' effects.There's a belief among a certain type of player, that if it's in print, anywhere, anywhen, by anyone, it's automatically in the game, otherwise they are being cheated via GM Fiat.
Also, like Rule 34, , or Apple software, , arcane spells in D&D have always covered the widest of topics.
.
This means there isn't even a need for a spell to be in any published source. Since most game-worlds have been around for millennia, and every generation contained millions of inhabitants, most of whom had the pre-reqs to learn arcane magic (Int 10, right?), then by definition, there are millions times millions times millions of existing spells already created, stretching to infinity (and beyond!).
That these have not yet been printed in the limited space allowed in the Core rules is irrelevant. The spells exist, on dusty scrolls in long-forgotten tombs, scratched onto shells in the deepest ocean trenches, locked in the memories of antediluvian wizards whose souls were trapped in the gems of a demilich's eyes before humans came down from the trees. They have set a precedent.
If you can think of an effect, a spell that covers that effect will exist. The balancing factor, throughout every edition of the game, was that every wizard had to find those spells.
With the introduction of the MotAO, that balancing factor was gone; all such a caster had to do was think of an effect, and one will come to their mind, at an appropriate power scale for the spell level.
A wizard could hide himself away in a remote tower, in a lead-lined room, protect himself with Mind Blank and Non-Detection, research a new spell, kill all his servants who may have even glanced at his notes, and within a few hours, the Mages of the Arcane Order are blabbing about it down their club, and the Magi on the other side of the planet are selling copies on the street corner.
|
Just a few thoughts:
1. Knowldge Pool does not make the Magus a spontaneous caster. The spells must be prepared. The ability is cool so long as it is not used to add spells to books, etc.
2. Pool Spell throws in some spontaneous casting, though its quite expensive for the limited amount of pool points a Magus gets. Being able to cast a handfull of spontaneous spells each day- I don't see the problem. Its spicey.
3. If we throw in all kinds of rediculous provisions about reproducing only spells the Magus has seen, then theres yet ANOTHER list for a caster to keep track of. Its too much.
4. Greater Pool Spell is a 19th level ability. It is supposed to be powerful. Relax. Besides, it makes up for the crappiness of True Magus.
All in all, lets not be so tense and rigid. This isn't a holy doctrine. Its a game. And games are supposed to be fun.
Good gaming!
. This is the only dataset that is available. In a playtest, the dataset is those people who care enough to contribute. What the general RPG public would feel is irrelevant, as they do not contribute to the playtest feedback. When using a playtest mechanic, the developers can only rely on the feedback they get, not on nebulous 'someone else might not feel that way' assertions.The fact that a faulty dataset "may be the only one available" doesn't change the fact that it is a dataset that's faulty. And what's going on in this thread is not playtest contribution since there hasn't been a single playtest log showing actual results.
Theorycrafting IS not playtesting as the Paizo folks have made abundantly clear.
So your argument is, that despite about an 80% negative response to this, that your position that it's fine is the right one, and the fact that you are in the minority on this is irrelevant because the greater RPG playing public will agree with you, and not the other 80% of the people who responded, therefore we in the majority should basically shut up? And so therefore, any argument against your position stems from a faulty dataset and has to be ignored? Are you a congress critter in real life? :)
But maybe, later printings of the Core Rules could preempt future classes, prestige classes, archetypes, etc. by amending the Core Rules to the following:A prepared caster (such as a wizard) can scribe any spell he already knows, and currently has prepared, directly into a new book at the same cost required to write a spell into a spellbook.
+1 to this. That text was designed to allow replacing a spell book, and so was obviously intended to deal with spells the character already knew. This errata is a good idea.
I was referring to the Greater Spell Pool ability, but maybe wasn't clear.
The topic of this thread has ballooned, to include the ramifications of all 'Pool' effects...
Ah, Greater Pool Spell, still not sure how I feel about that. Certainly it feels more like a capstone than the current capstone. I can certainly see potential for breaking most tables by allowing access to too many sources. Although, things like that are usually better handled by the DM.
I had one very strict DM who had a house-rule: "If you don't know how a spell or ability works, you don't have it." By the 3rd or 4th session, [u]everyone[/b] had a small notebook and some notecards with crib sheets for their class. Speed and flow of play increased dramatically, still not sure this was a bad rule, though it was unpopular.On the subject, I'm not sure how I feel about regular flavor Pool Spell. Mostly because I find myself using it in play quite a lot. Mostly to spam Shocking Grasps and Scorching Rays, but nearly as often to pull out some spell I hadn't counted on needing, or needing more than once. The Magus list is very short on utility spells. I will admit that in v1 I found my Magus running out of spells quite a lot, so perhaps a way to get some extra slots was needed. It will take some more play to know if this ability is a win button for the Magus.
|
|
How about this as a way of handling the magus' ability to cast a spell that he doesn't already know. [from the magus 2.0 playtest document]
Change Pool Spell's description to the following:
At 4th level, the magus learns to use
his arcane pool to cast additional spells. He can cast
any magus spell that he knows by expending a number
of points from his arcane pool equal to the spell’s level
(minimum 1). He can cast spells with metamagic feats in
this way, but he must spend additional points from his
arcane pool to do so, equal to the level increase from the
metamagic feats. The spell’s overall adjusted level must
still be one that he can cast.
[beginning of new stuff]
Beginning at 7th level, he may cast any magus spell, even if he does not know it. A magus may only choose to do this a number of times per day equal to his Intelligence modifier. Spells cast in this way may not be used in item creation. However, a magus attempting to research the spell within 24 hours of casting this way gain a bonus to the research attempt equal to 1/2 of the highest spell level they can cast.
This strikes me as a way to show the magus getting inspiration for a spell on the fly. Keep in mind I haven't had a chance to see how this would actually work in play, but it seems to me that it offers something to both sides of the camp of whether this is a feature or a problem.
I can think of one situation where using Knowledge Pool to write into a spell book would be a huge advantage to a party. In the World's Largest Dungeon, the characters go in and can not get out until they complete the whole dungeon. No easy access to spells outside the dungeon. A party containing a wizard and magus would have a small but meaningful addition to the spells gained at each level.
I realize I have given an edge example but it is a real one. So put me down as it is a feature.
Doug
PS I play test in WLD due to its very generic nature.
It is my observation that people who are satisfied with a mechanic are far less likely to post about it than those who have an axe to grind.What I'm taking issue with is your claim to speak for the "majority" your opinions are just like mine, not more or less authoritative.
If you have an opinion about a mechanic your post is equally as valid as mine. But you have no more validity to represent a class of users than I do.
Actually,
I never claimed to speak for the majority. I gave my personal opinions on the mechanic. I then commented on your comment to someone else stating that their claim that the consensus on the posting was that it was overpowered.The problem is, you slapped someone else down for posting an observation of the responses so far, and did so by claiming your opinion was that the dataset was invalid because it didn't end up the way you thought it would. Your opinion is equally as valid as mine, or theirs, when it comes to the mechanic itself. Nobody ever claimed it was.
Your opinion as to whether the whole world agrees with you is no more valid than if I post that all blue eyed GMs agree with me. You have no proof to back you up. Please reread my posts, you are putting words in my mouth when you say I tried to represent a class of users. You are the one purporting to hold an opinion for the 'silent majority'. All my comments have been are either my views on the mechanic, or my views of why your comments concerning whose opinion was valid had no validity.
The original poster said he felt a consensus had been reached in the thread. Your protesting that some silent majority secretly agrees with you has no more validity than anyone elses. The person you tried to invalidate at least was commenting on his observations of the trend of the thread so far. If you don't like the way the thread is going, that's fine, but trying to logic someones observations of posting trend out by using data that has no basis other than your own post is not the way to fix it. Nor is putting words in my mouth and trying to make out as if I were some self appointed spokesman for the unwashed masses. I have never posted in here that I spoke for anyone else but myself, and I find it highly insulting when people claim I'm trying to do so.
For me the Greater Spell Pool ability is handled quite simply. Any spell from the sorcerer/wizard list is okay unless it falls under these two categories.
1. Barred from the game entirely. I maintain a list of these spells
2. Not commonly known by the magic commmunity "at large". This includes ALL noncore spells save those that I have added to the core list, or spells that were cast "only in the times of long-lost Netheril" or some such. Or individual spell creations that are researched privately.
Right. As far as I'm concerned, Greater Spell Pool works on the same set of spells that a wizard could automatically learn as one of his two free spells at level-up. Which means this doesn't even require me to have any rules I don't already have.
The original poster said he felt a consensus had been reached in the thread.
No, he didn't. That was you speaking for him.
...something you claim you don't do...I'll go out on a limb and say that LazarX's original response to the "consensus" comment was appropriate and your responses to LazarX have been less so.
The original poster said he felt a consensus had been reached in the thread.No, he didn't. That was you speaking for him.
...something you claim you don't do...
I'll go out on a limb and say that LazarX's original response to the "consensus" comment was appropriate and your responses to LazarX have been less so.
You should be careful what limbs you go out on. Please do go back and actually read my comments, rather than just guessing? It's much more appropriate.
LazarX originally responded to this post.
It`s clear the consensus is that allowing scribing into spellbook via this ability is bad. If that outcome is desired, one might as well just say ´The Magus spell list now includes all arcane spells´.
Quandary was posting that he felt a consensus had been reached. He posted it in this thread, based on posts in this thread. Therefore, he was posting about a consensus in this thread. You can disagree about the power, feel free. But by deffinition, if 51% or more people posted 'problem' in their posts, then the consensus in the thread would be that it's a problem. That doesn't mean it actually is a problem, per se, it just means that 51% of the people that posted said it was. Actually, the percentage was higher than that, I didn't count it out, but I feel comfortable saying 3/4 at that point in the thread.
After reading the class over a bit more, I could see how some could see the ability as one that doesn't fit with the overall class, but to me, it could really go either way. Tighten up the language to close the obvious loopholes, and it fits quite well with the class in my opinion. The biggest problem seems to be that most people are approaching the class as a wizard variant rather than a distinct class with its own little twists and quirks. The arcane pool and its various uses all fit the magus well, but only if you approach the magus after discarding any preconceptions of how any other classes work, especially wizards.
After reading the class over a bit more, I could see how some could see the ability as one that doesn't fit with the overall class, but to me, it could really go either way. Tighten up the language to close the obvious loopholes, and it fits quite well with the class in my opinion. The biggest problem seems to be that most people are approaching the class as a wizard variant rather than a distinct class with its own little twists and quirks. The arcane pool and its various uses all fit the magus well, but only if you approach the magus after discarding any preconceptions of how any other classes work, especially wizards.
Yeah, I don't really have a problem with the concept of the idea. To me, it's just a sort of class equivalent of hybrid vigor (a hybrid of two species usually has a bit more vigor than either species, at least if it's a viable hybrid). The combination of fighter mindset with wizard training ends up having to have such a nimble mind to skirt the two, that he can think in ways no stratified wizard could.
I just think the loopholes need to be sewn shut is all.
You should be careful what limbs you go out on. Please do go back and actually read my comments, rather than just guessing?
I did exactly that.
Quandary was posting that he felt a consensus had been reached. He posted it in this thread, based on posts in this thread. Therefore, he was posting about a consensus in this thread.
That's not what he said; that's you speaking for him.
But by deffinition, if 51% or more people posted 'problem' in their posts, then the consensus in the thread would be that it's a problem.
No. "Consensus" does not mean "majority opinion by vote". A consensus is a general agreement in a group. If more than one position has significant support, then there is no consensus. Acheiving consensus is generally a process of establishing a position that virtually everyone will support. That hasn't happened here.
And your continuing attempts to nitpick LazarX's statements, which were in fact very reasonable, are getting increasingly rules-lawyery and meta-argumentish. Please stop.
After reading the class over a bit more, I could see how some could see the ability as one that doesn't fit with the overall class, but to me, it could really go either way. Tighten up the language to close the obvious loopholes, and it fits quite well with the class in my opinion. The biggest problem seems to be that most people are approaching the class as a wizard variant rather than a distinct class with its own little twists and quirks. The arcane pool and its various uses all fit the magus well, but only if you approach the magus after discarding any preconceptions of how any other classes work, especially wizards.Yeah, I don't really have a problem with the concept of the idea. To me, it's just a sort of class equivalent of hybrid vigor (a hybrid of two species usually has a bit more vigor than either species, at least if it's a viable hybrid). The combination of fighter mindset with wizard training ends up having to have such a nimble mind to skirt the two, that he can think in ways no stratified wizard could.
I just think the loopholes need to be sewn shut is all.
I completely agree.
And I especially like the idea that the loophole can be sewn shut in the Replacing Spellbooks rule as well.
Since we don't know (and never will) the exact breakdown of those non-posters into those groups, any claims as to the actual position of those who do not respond is at best guess and speculation. This is why a margin of error is applied to those who do respond.
If there is a reason to believe that something in your sampling procedure is skewing your sample, the sample ceases to be a good proxy for the population, margin of error or not.
A person who thinks the issue is a problem is more likely to read this thread and reply to it then a person who doesn't.A lot of people see a real problem with this loophole -- me included. But I agree with LazarX's original statement that claiming any consensus on the issue is going too far with what we currently know.
LazarX also attempted to deflect counter arguments by bringing up the "playtest" vs "theory craft" argument. Jason has stated (I do not recall where exactly, I believe it was in a podcast interview) that he finds both forms of feedback useful.
Yes, but in the forward to the very playtest document we're talking about, it says explicitly that playtest feedback is more useful than theorycraft.
Reminding the thread of that, and suggesting that we look for accounts of people actually using the Knowledge Pool (of which we have now seen some), is a reasonable response.
Asking rules questoins can be important for actual play. I thought this would be too good to be true but raw seemed to allow it so I asked if I was intended to do this. I have not had a chance to playtest a magus yet but hopefully I will soon. Playtesting using the wrong rules is bad and unproductive.
I thought it might have been a problem and that is why I started this thread. I could also see a magus in character selling the spells to a wizard after he got them and splitting the difference so they both pay 3/4 of the cost of the normal cost to scribe the spell.
Using the preparing spells does take a day and wastes your arcane pool so you are nerfed for a day. Heck I have thought if I was gming attacking when the magus is doing this. Like a doppelganger with class levels.