| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me most attempts at removing/destroying a spellbook would be metagaming on part of the DM.I just felt the need to point something out:
The DM's job is to metagame. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the DM metagaming. If the DM doesn't metagame, then there is no game.
The problem with the spellbook protection/destruction DM-player arms race isn't so much that it's DM metagaming, but that:
1) It essentially forces the player to metagame, or punishes him if he doesn't, and
2) It essentially reduces the wizard player and the DM to be playing a separate game against each other which, really, doesn't make the game more interesting or add to roleplaying for any of the other players.
It's possible to have spellbook targetting not result in metagaming wankery and a general pissing contest; it's also possible to win the lottery. Neither of these things is much more likely than the other to occur.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me most attempts at removing/destroying a spellbook would be metagaming on part of the DM.I just felt the need to point something out:
The DM's job is to metagame. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the DM metagaming. If the DM doesn't metagame, then there is no game.
The problem with the spellbook protection/destruction DM-player arms race isn't so much that it's DM metagaming, but that:
1) It essentially forces the player to metagame, or punishes him if he doesn't, and
2) It essentially reduces the wizard player and the DM to be playing a separate game against each other which, really, doesn't make the game more interesting or add to roleplaying for any of the other players.
It's possible to have spellbook targetting not result in metagaming wankery and a general pissing contest; it's also possible to win the lottery. Neither of these things is much more likely than the other to occur.
I think all of us on the side of "Spellbook is fairgame" have said it only occurs if the player doesn't take reasonable precautions, like having a back-up spellbook or a well thought out plan for protecting it from damage/theft.
Unfortunately, both of those things cost resources some players are unwilling to spend. In which case they take their chances.
Kind of like if the party decides not to have a watch when they camp on a given night, or if they plan who is on what watch poorly. Stuff happens in dangerous places where adventurers dwell...
|
|
DM-player arms race
wizard player and the DM to be playing a separate game against each other
As soon as the game de-evolves into DM vs Players it ceases to be a role-playing game. A monster may have goals against the players and that is played out by the DM - but, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, should it be the DM against the players with monsters etc as the tool.
Meaning I agree with what you are saying. But if the situation arose that was not specifically put there to 'get the Wizard' and the players could have by 'thinking' avoided it, well, then the Spellbook is fair game.
S.
To see a book in a bag?I agree. It is the spies pulling a dues ex machina.I'm curious as to how the "you have been under observation for months" was played out. There should be sense motive rolls, perception rolls, will saves against scrying etc. It is not good dming, it is in fact, horrible dming, to say "muahahaha! the clever machinations of my npc's have bypassed your skills and defenses for months without roling!"
No if there were not any rolls or even any spies we have a chance of seeing.
No if there were not any rolls or even any spies we have a chance of seeing.
However that action of gettign people rolling is the biggest starter of player META ever imvented. You get them to make some perception checks, tehn if they don't see anything they ALL OF A SUDDEN become a million times more cautious and start trying to work out what it is they haven't seen.
Five minutes ago they were chillaxing, now they are magically alert and on guard.
How is that not 'punishing' the NPC's.
Observing a party on the move is significantly easier than the same party trying to find a tail. The Ranger and Rogue (the best party counterspies) are usually up the front and way ahead of the party, leaving the less perceptive (the ones being followed) at the rear.
You can now roll on about your mad perception Druid/Cleric, but he's probably just behind the scouts.
We tend to stay close together, and the order is usually
Cleric---->Wizard----->Rogue type----Fighter--->
It puts the squishes in the middle.
Also my druids to tend to occasionally assume animal form and go wandering around scouting when in the woods, which would be a pretty big problem for someone tailing the party close enough to visually see them.
Someone spying on the party has enough ways to go wrong that in fairness its something that has to be done in game, not simply hand waved by NPC awesome sauce.
The point being that just asking them to roll begins a process of them THEN deciding to tighten up defenses and change what they are doing markedly, all of a sudden they go from relaxed (and making it easy for the spies) to very precise and controlled (now making it very difficult) which is META cheese. Whereas if the party tried to sneak up on bad guys who were in a camp and fairly undisciplined/relaxed, and teh minute the party began to observe them they magically hardened the defences and became much more alert and vigilant the players would be horrified.
If the party doesn't specify up front what precautions they are taking to avoid problems/surveillance, then the GM should assume the answer is 'none' and act accordingly.
The problem with the wandering Druid is that if he's spending time wandering then he isn't moving tactically if he is covering the front AND back of the party - he will need to spend time darting about. He'd be better off as a bird.
A low level party wont have this option though.
At higher levels the counter-surveillance game changes.
I think all of us on the side of "Spellbook is fairgame" have said it only occurs if the player doesn't take reasonable precautions, like having a back-up spellbook or a well thought out plan for protecting it from damage/theft.Unfortunately, both of those things cost resources some players are unwilling to spend. In which case they take their chances.
Your assumption is that the player makes the choice of whether or not to spend those resources based on his assessment of risk. In my experience that assumption is almost always wrong.
It's more likely: The guy who hasn't played wizard a dozen times doesn't know better and doesn't take those precautions, and the guy who has played wizard a dozen times does know better and does take those precautions. Further, the more times someone has played wizard, seen wizard played, or seen spellbooks targetted, the better their precautions get.
At this point, I've played it so much that if, for whatever reason, I could write down my precautions and not tell the DM what they are, I'd have 99.99% confidence my access to a spellbook wouldn't be a problem. And that's kind of stupid. It's not about how smart or brave or interesting or influential or lucky my character is, it's about how much I, as a player, have seen -- and because there's so much riding on a spellbook, there's no chance I'm going to say: Well, my last three wizards have lost 50k gold worth of spellbook to water damage, but wizard #4 isn't going to take any precautions because he doesn't know better!
And that's why it's inevitably metagamey and stupid and a distraction from everything that's fun or interesting about the game.
I think all of us on the side of "Spellbook is fairgame" have said it only occurs if the player doesn't take reasonable precautions, like having a back-up spellbook or a well thought out plan for protecting it from damage/theft.Unfortunately, both of those things cost resources some players are unwilling to spend. In which case they take their chances.
Your assumption is that the player makes the choice of whether or not to spend those resources based on his assessment of risk. In my experience that assumption is almost always wrong.
It's more likely: The guy who hasn't played wizard a dozen times doesn't know better and doesn't take those precautions, and the guy who has played wizard a dozen times does know better and does take those precautions. Further, the more times someone has played wizard, seen wizard played, or seen spellbooks targetted, the better their precautions get.
At this point, I've played it so much that if, for whatever reason, I could write down my precautions and not tell the DM what they are, I'd have 99.99% confidence my access to a spellbook wouldn't be a problem. And that's kind of stupid. It's not about how smart or brave or interesting or influential or lucky my character is, it's about how much I, as a player, have seen -- and because there's so much riding on a spellbook, there's no chance I'm going to say: Well, my last three wizards have lost 50k gold worth of spellbook to water damage, but wizard #4 isn't going to take any precautions because he doesn't know better!
And that's why it's inevitably metagamey and stupid and a distraction from everything that's fun or interesting about the game.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
|
|
I think all of us on the side of "Spellbook is fairgame" have said it only occurs if the player doesn't take reasonable precautions, like having a back-up spellbook or a well thought out plan for protecting it from damage/theft.Unfortunately, both of those things cost resources some players are unwilling to spend. In which case they take their chances.
Your assumption is that the player makes the choice of whether or not to spend those resources based on his assessment of risk. In my experience that assumption is almost always wrong.
It's more likely: The guy who hasn't played wizard a dozen times doesn't know better and doesn't take those precautions, and the guy who has played wizard a dozen times does know better and does take those precautions. Further, the more times someone has played wizard, seen wizard played, or seen spellbooks targetted, the better their precautions get.
At this point, I've played it so much that if, for whatever reason, I could write down my precautions and not tell the DM what they are, I'd have 99.99% confidence my access to a spellbook wouldn't be a problem. And that's kind of stupid. It's not about how smart or brave or interesting or influential or lucky my character is, it's about how much I, as a player, have seen -- and because there's so much riding on a spellbook, there's no chance I'm going to say: Well, my last three wizards have lost 50k gold worth of spellbook to water damage, but wizard #4 isn't going to take any precautions because he doesn't know better!
And that's why it's inevitably metagamey and stupid and a distraction from everything that's fun or interesting about the game.
I would agree it would be a dick move to do it without warning, kind of like ambushing a party that is sleeping without asking them "how" they are sleeping.
As a GM, I always ask what someone is doing as a precaution, and I try to do it after I've decided what the NPC is doing.
For example, if I'm planning a night attack at a time I will ask the party how they are sleeping and attack in the way I planned regardless of what they tell me.
A GM should always give a heads up that something is in play, be it a spell book or an object that may be of interest for theft. They should try to plan prior to hearing the players plan, as much as they can. I know my group does a lot of this by e-mail, so it is just between the player and the GM, as we have occasionally had inter-party theft/competition issues.
But not having it in play is like not having in play the need for fighters to don armor if they are attacked at night (unless they planned of course).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
By that logic, what fun is it when a player dies? So we should never kill players, because it's not fun.
Part of the game is the challenge. Part of the challenge of a wizard is the fact you have to keep and maintain a spellbook.
I think all of us on the side of "Spellbook is fairgame" have said it only occurs if the player doesn't take reasonable precautions, like having a back-up spellbook or a well thought out plan for protecting it from damage/theft.Unfortunately, both of those things cost resources some players are unwilling to spend. In which case they take their chances.
Your assumption is that the player makes the choice of whether or not to spend those resources based on his assessment of risk. In my experience that assumption is almost always wrong.
It's more likely: The guy who hasn't played wizard a dozen times doesn't know better and doesn't take those precautions, and the guy who has played wizard a dozen times does know better and does take those precautions. Further, the more times someone has played wizard, seen wizard played, or seen spellbooks targetted, the better their precautions get.
At this point, I've played it so much that if, for whatever reason, I could write down my precautions and not tell the DM what they are, I'd have 99.99% confidence my access to a spellbook wouldn't be a problem. And that's kind of stupid. It's not about how smart or brave or interesting or influential or lucky my character is, it's about how much I, as a player, have seen -- and because there's so much riding on a spellbook, there's no chance I'm going to say: Well, my last three wizards have lost 50k gold worth of spellbook to water damage, but wizard #4 isn't going to take any precautions because he doesn't know better!
And that's why it's inevitably metagamey and stupid and a distraction from everything that's fun or interesting about the game.
I would agree it would be a dick move to do it without warning, kind of like ambushing a party that is sleeping without asking them "how" they are sleeping.
As a GM, I always ask what someone is doing as a precaution, and I try to do it after I've decided what the NPC is doing.
For example, if...
This makes sense.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
The same could be said for ANY situation in the game that mainly focuses on one of the players.
If a player is going to get bored just because 100% of the attention is not always on you them then I recommend they go and play Choose your own Adventure or Fighting Fantasy.
most characters i play tend to be fairly paranoid to begin with.
here is an example of a character i played a long time ago.
ever dealt with a sickly little girl in a fancy dress constantly looking over her shoulder and coughing up blood when she notices something distinctive due to her paranoia that comes from her uncle being a baron?
she had a boatload of illnesses and was a baron's niece. she has the right to be paranoid. noble blood, planetouched heritage, illness, and the fact she appeared to be an easy target.
since she know she couldn't fight, she compensated by turning local hostiles into her 'marionettes' through the use of sweet words.
she was mechanically 'bard'. she just concealed her paranoia by being outgoing and social in an attempt to get on people's good sides.
The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.
While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
Why? Is he suddenly incapable of using skills? Firign a weapon? Using aid another? Did he suddenly forget all those scrolls, wands, and magic items he's been hoarding? Was his familiar sleeping in the spell book at the time? Did he burn all those enemy spellbooks he found?
Why? Is he suddenly incapable of using skills?While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
Sure. I guess he can tag along behind and contribute using random Knowledge skills if the Bard doesn't have them.
Firign a weapon?
I use my uh... Heavy Crossbow... once every other turn. I'm sure without pumping Dex and having a low BAB, he will be quite effective.
Using aid another?
In combat? He can just kill himself when he learns he lost his spellbook
With skills? I don't think you can aid with Knowledge skills.Did he suddenly forget all those scrolls, wands, and magic items he's been hoarding?
Scrolls? No one gives the Wizard scrolls. That's like giving him free spells.
I suppose he could use a wand. I use ... CL 3 Magic Missile wand. Again.Was his familiar sleeping in the spell book at the time?
Why is he sacrificing his familiar?
Did he burn all those enemy spellbooks he found?
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"
|
|
While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
Unless he had a back-up spellbook. Which he should have, just like a fighter has back up weapons...
|
The point being that just asking them to roll begins a process of them THEN deciding to tighten up defenses
...
If the party doesn't specify up front what precautions they are taking to avoid problems/surveillance, then the GM should assume the answer is 'none' and act accordingly.
.
If the players react to "roll a perception check" by suddenly having their characters get paranoid then they're doing a very bad job of separating player and character knowledge. If this happens, just start asking for perception checks a lot OR just roll them yourself.
And assuming that the characters only take the precautions that they explicitly tell you about is going to quickly make the game insanely boring as they start to tell you everything they do in excruciating detail.
Making players paranoid can really suck the life and joy out of the game.
What I prefer requires mature and honest players. I assume that the characters are being reasonable about things. When I need to know something specific I'll ask.
"So, how alert and careful would your character be while in the library?"
"Well, he'd take the obvious precautions. Assuming its allowed and not too strange he'd be wearing armour and have his sword. But no way that he'd be carrying his shield and his longbow".
Obviously the player knows that he is about to be ambushed in the library when I ask that question. But he is honest. His "reward" for being honest is that I let him wear the armour even though he didn't explicitly state that he was wearing armour and carrying his sword when he left the inn.
Unless he had a back-up spellbook. Which he should have, just like a fighter has back up weapons...While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?
Then why are they going on quests to get his spellbook if he has a backup?
"Well, some dumbass stole my spellbook. Good thing I have this spare, forget that guy."And except a fighter isn't completely disabled if you break his weapon. Someone else can just hand him one. I'm sure Fighters all have backup +1 magical weapons they forge themselves.
|
|
Unless he had a back-up spellbook. Which he should have, just like a fighter has back up weapons...While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?Then why are they going on quests to get his spellbook if he has a backup?
"Well, some dumbass stole my spellbook. Good thing I have this spare, forget that guy."And except a fighter isn't completely disabled if you break his weapon. Someone else can just hand him one. I'm sure Fighters all have backup +1 magical weapons they forge themselves.
Then I guess the smart decision would be to have a back up spellbook, wouldn't it?
Problem solved!
|
|
If the players react to "roll a perception check" by suddenly having their characters get paranoid then they're doing a very bad job of separating player and character knowledge. If this happens, just start asking for perception checks a lot OR just roll them yourself.
Which is why you have a GM screen and everyones sense motive, perception, diplomacy, etc...stats on note cards.
Hell sometimes I just roll dice randomly to mess with them.
Unless he had a back-up spellbook. Which he should have, just like a fighter has back up weapons...While the Wizard character's player takes a break from the game for all the quests in which his spellbook is stolen because he becomes incapable of contributing.The fun of the quest to recover the spellbook.
What fun does the rest of the party have when the wizards spellbook gets targeted and takes up valueable game time. Couldn't other players end up getting bored?Then why are they going on quests to get his spellbook if he has a backup?
"Well, some dumbass stole my spellbook. Good thing I have this spare, forget that guy."And except a fighter isn't completely disabled if you break his weapon. Someone else can just hand him one. I'm sure Fighters all have backup +1 magical weapons they forge themselves.
Then I guess the smart decision would be to have a back up spellbook, wouldn't it?
Problem solved!
Then why, exactly, is anyone going on a quest to retrieve a stolen spellbook?
I see why you are so familiar with the strawman argument.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"
Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
|
|
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
You are assuming a creative player who can think of multiple options and approaches to problems.
That is crazy talk!
If this happens, just start asking for perception checks a lot OR just roll them yourself.
aha!
Which then results in players coming to these boards complaining about 'Deus ex' and 'fiat' bcause they believe they 'never got a roll' and the GM is being arbitrary...
It all becomes circular.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
simple, the poor little furball is nothing more than slim pickings. too much effort for such a tiny meal. at least the stolen spellbook can be sold for enough coin for one to feed the thief's starving family for a month or few.
simple, the poor little furball is nothing more than slim pickings. too much effort for such a tiny meal. at least the spellbook can be sold for enough coin for one to feed thier family for a month or few.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.
It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.
Says who?
If you can buy any other magic item why can't you buy spellbooks?
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
Probably because they remember they have class features beyond their spells? Like apparently every wizard you've ever known hasn't?
|
|
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
Actually it was part of the discussion and considered just as viable a thing for a GM to do for an unprotected familiar.
I think the devs considered this when they included
"If a familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced 1 day later through a special ritual that costs 500 gp per witch level."
But what do they know, right?
When is Cartfinder coming out?
It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.Says who?
If you can buy any other magic item why can't you buy spellbooks?
But buying spellbooks overpowered the wizard and makes it a munchkinverse. Or so the theory goes.
The point being that just asking them to roll begins a process of them THEN deciding to tighten up defenses and change what they are doing markedly, all of a sudden they go from relaxed (and making it easy for the spies) to very precise and controlled (now making it very difficult) which is META cheese.
Its still less cheese than what you're proposing: which is to have the bad guys try this only if the party's defenses are slack and not try this if the party's defenses have their default settings to "paranoid". At worst you should roll behind the screen, or better yet, ask for perception rolls and if none of the rolls are high enough to spot the rogue have them spot a bronze hilted dagger with a broken blade stuck near the fireplace of their campsite. The level of detail in the red herring should throw them off.
There is simply no way for the bad guys to know what the party's procedures are without following them in the first place. Its a bit of a catch 22.
If the party doesn't specify up front what precautions they are taking to avoid problems/surveillance, then the GM should assume the answer is 'none' and act accordingly.
I don't assume that even low level adventurers are idiots. If i need to ask the answer i assume is "the same things they were last time pinky" At my table the question at nightfall is what watch order are you going in, not "are you having a watch"
The problem with the wandering Druid is that if he's spending time wandering then he isn't moving tactically
can i get a Game rules translation on what you mean by moving tactically?
if he is covering the front AND back of the party - he will need to spend time darting about. He'd be better off as a bird.
Birds are one of the animal forms he occasionally assumes.
A low level party wont have this option though.
Its doable at level 4.
At higher levels the counter-surveillance game changes.
To you're screwed when the priests daily augury comes back "the eyes of a lurking foe are upon you"
It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.simple, the poor little furball is nothing more than slim pickings. too much effort for such a tiny meal. at least the spellbook can be sold for enough coin for one to feed thier family for a month or few.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
the adventurer's pockets are a lot fuller than most. a single PC of 5th level or higher likely has more wealth than the kings of most independant city states.
what may be pocket change for an adventurer is a lifelong dream for that farm hand or a considerably risky investment for the king of said city state.
the adventurer's pockets are a lot fuller than most. a single PC of 5th level or higher likely has more wealth than the kings of most independant city states.It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.simple, the poor little furball is nothing more than slim pickings. too much effort for such a tiny meal. at least the spellbook can be sold for enough coin for one to feed thier family for a month or few.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
What other PCs in the gaming world is he selling the book to?
And getting a witch familiar back is way better than replacing a spellbook. You at least get automatic spells and it only takes a day.
What other PCs in the gaming world is he selling the book to?the adventurer's pockets are a lot fuller than most. a single PC of 5th level or higher likely has more wealth than the kings of most independant city states.It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.simple, the poor little furball is nothing more than slim pickings. too much effort for such a tiny meal. at least the spellbook can be sold for enough coin for one to feed thier family for a month or few.
What enemy spellbooks? This isn't "Give the Wizard all the spells for free/Munchkins'R'Us"Probably the ones whom he ripped from the cold dead hands of his enemies.
I'm not even mentioning the school powers.
Point is he doesn't suddenly become a wheelchair bound cripple whose familiar has to feed his daily dinner through a straw. If he can't contribute to get it back then he doesn't deserve it back and if he wants to whine and pout about it then he doesn't need to be adventuring he needs to be knitting sweaters for AM BARBARIANS mom.
What is he going to contribute? Nothing but a body to spend healing resources on. He isn't a front-line fighter. Nor even a back-line fighter. He can't provide group support without his spells. He isn't a sorcerer - his entire ability is contained within his spellbook.
Let's go murder the Witch's little spellbook creature. Why aren't there threads about that?
not another PC, think retired high level NPC adventurer who was conservative enough to get a job and not blow all of that dragon's horde he looted. PCs aren't the only adventurers.
and witch familiars cost more than a spellbook of appropriate level.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And getting a witch familiar back is way better than replacing a spellbook. You at least get automatic spells and it only takes a day.
Wizard: Oh hello local arcane book keeper it appears some ruffians have gone and ran off with my spell book perhaps I might offer coin for a temporary replacement?
Shopkeep: Why yes good sir I'm afraid I don't have the vast stores of arcane knowledge your book undoubtedly had allow me to show you my marvelous collection of books transcribed with specific use.
Wizard: Ah I think some of these will be sufficient. I would like a Book of Harms and is that a Journeyman's Book of Thul Raven?
Shopkeep: Good eye sir! It is without it's protections but I've no doubt the spells within can help you find the ruffians.
Wizard: Indeed! So that will be 2000gp?
Shopkeep: How generous! You do me too much honor!
Wizard: It is no bother to one such as myself. Thank you kind shop keep!
Took the wizard less than an hour and earned a discount card at the bookstore. :)
And getting a witch familiar back is way better than replacing a spellbook. You at least get automatic spells and it only takes a day.
Although thats not QUITE true now is it.
"If a familiar is lost or dies, it can be replaced 1 day later through a special ritual that costs 500 gp per witch level. The ritual takes 8 hours to complete. A new familiar begins knowing all of the 0-level spells plus two spells of every level the witch is able to cast."
So please, lets not get carried away.
Unless he had a back-up spellbook. Which he should have, just like a fighter has back up weapons...
Given the number of times I hear about fighters being made useless because their weapon got sundered (or because the enemy was out of their reach and they stuck all their feats and development on a melee weapon), I think there are a lot of players out there who neglect to have their fighters carry multiple weapons.
That is not true, not does it changed the fact that metagaming took place...I understand the GM may not want to/have time to figure out how NPC X got ______ information about the party, so I understand a hand wave or two.Pertinent to this line of conversation is the fact wizards' reliance on spellbooks in most fantasy worlds would be fairly common knowledge. Even if you imagined some campaign world in which wizards were some kind of rare, monolithic figures ruling in a LE magocracy and knowledge of magic among the common people was harshly suppressed, the highest you're talking is a DC 11 Knowledge (arcana) check. Where there's a wizard, there's a spellbook nearby. That's pretty much the end of the story.
Now, for a given wizard how they keep it, what protections it has, if it's their only spellbook, or even if that's their primary or just the one they use while adventuring is going to take some legwork on the antagonists' part. If that antagonist is the leader of the thieves' guild, he probably already knows, has a plan to steal it and is just waiting for the right time or the right reason. If that antagonist is Burpfart the chieftain of the local troglodyte tribe, he's not going to have idea one save "smash squishy elf-man book" if he gets that far in his cunning plan. If that antagonist is the BBEG's antipaladin second-in-command, stealing the spellbook is probably secondary to her plan of capturing the wizard, restraining and gagging him, then tearing the spellbook apart page-by-page before the wizard's very eyes.
I should totally do that last one in a game sometime now that I've thought about it. Normally I'm happy with the BBEG's kidnapping and/or whacking the PC's love interests or family, torturing PC's to near-death, or just being general genocidal lunatics, but that is just evil beyond any moral event horizon I normally cross in a game.
Knowing wizards use spellbooks is not metagaming, but there are other classes that cast arcane spells. That and how you plan to get that spellbook would most likely be where the metagaming part.
edit:I see you covered the "how" part.
I don't see why the wizard doesn't just keep his spellbook in the fighter's bag. No one ever steals rifles through the fighter's stuff. Also spellbooks are heavy, so it's a load off the wizard's back. The wizard should keep a journal written in another language as a decoy though.Because an enemy who has observed the party for months would know where it was and steal it from inside the fighter's pack. Granted, why said enemy shouldn't also steal the fighter's stuff is beyond me, but obviously some DMs play that way.
A sword is a lot easier to replace than a spellbook, and does not hurt nearly as much, but it probably requires the same effort that taking the book does.
To see a book in a bag?I agree. It is the spies pulling a dues ex machina.I'm curious as to how the "you have been under observation for months" was played out. There should be sense motive rolls, perception rolls, will saves against scrying etc. It is not good dming, it is in fact, horrible dming, to say "muahahaha! the clever machinations of my npc's have bypassed your skills and defenses for months without roling!"
A book does not make it a spellbook.
|
|
It must be worth vast sums - I mean, you can't actually buy spellbooks normally in the campaign.Says who?
If you can buy any other magic item why can't you buy spellbooks?
If you could buy them, they would be listed in the book with prices.
You know, like this
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/spellbooks
|
|
A sword is a lot easier to replace than a spellbook, and does not hurt nearly as much, but it probably requires the same effort that taking the book does.I don't see why the wizard doesn't just keep his spellbook in the fighter's bag. No one ever steals rifles through the fighter's stuff. Also spellbooks are heavy, so it's a load off the wizard's back. The wizard should keep a journal written in another language as a decoy though.Because an enemy who has observed the party for months would know where it was and steal it from inside the fighter's pack. Granted, why said enemy shouldn't also steal the fighter's stuff is beyond me, but obviously some DMs play that way.
a) Not really, look at the cost of enhanced weapons vs the cost of basic spellbooks
b) Which is why Wizards need to invest in protection and/or back up spellbooks.
Would you argue fighters shouldn't have to carry back up weapons?
If you could buy them, they would be listed in the book with prices.
Try here.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magic.html#selling-a-spellbook
Selling a Spellbook
Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of purchasing and inscribing the spells within.
If someone is buying, then someone is selling.
|
|
If you could buy them, they would be listed in the book with prices.Try here.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magic.html#selling-a-spellbook
Selling a Spellbook
Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of purchasing and inscribing the spells within.
If someone is buying, then someone is selling.
Bingo. Even better link.
I thought you were arguing for the other side?
I thought you were arguing for the other side?
I'm secure enough in the evidence and rationale for my position that i'm not frightened by evidence.
The fact is that 99% of the time PC's get these books by prying them out of the wizards cold dead fingers. Bothering an adventuring party for cash seems like hunting bears with a spear for a living. Trying to get the wizards spellbook while he's alive seems to be like trying to shave bears for a living.