
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

In the Pathfinder Module
I expect some strangeness as this is a module rather than a scenario, but is there any guidance on how to handle this in PFS? Should I pick these level 1-3 spells arbitrarily, or randomly, or not allow them to be copied at all? Should only spells from the CRB be included, or any PFS-legal spells?
Once the list of spells is known, I assume all normal PFS spell-copying rules apply.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

It's nice to know this. I've been looking to run this module for the local group. I'd say to do exactly what the scenario says and pick the spells however you like.
My method would be to fill the spellbook with spells that fit the theme of the scenario. I would use a few that are outside the core rulebook because you don't see them very often in normal scenarios.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I just dodged almost this exact thing in Carrion Hill.
But the Wizard had to cancel and so the party ran without him.
Marack's suggestion of "spells that fit the theme of the scenario" would work well, but I would also try to balance this with what was already there (the wizards spells prepared in play) Basicly, I would try to give the wizard a mix of attack/defense/utility spells - paying attention to his perfered and restricted schools. But this is a bit of work on the judges part (you knew the job was not going to be an easy one when you took it).
Hay! if you come up with a list, post it here behind a spoiler with the Module name, so the rest of us Judgeing it don't have to do it again!

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I'd base it on the books' owner's spell list, first. If there are any open slots after that, then you could roll randomly on the Sorcerer/Wizard list. I'd probably limit it to the CRB, however. Players may or may not have the book that any given non-core spell is in, so keeping it to Core means that they'll have the reference for how it works.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

In the case of the module I'm referring to, there is no 'owner's spell list' to consult.
To be honest, probably the easiest solution is to use a random spellbook generator to create a spellbook for an 11th-level wizard, and reduce that down to 6 spells at each of level 1-3. I'm just not sure of the PFS legality of then allowing those to be copied.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

As far as the PFS rules go you follow the normal rules for Pathfinder unless there is something in the Guide to Organized Play or FAQ that says otherwise. A spellbook based caster can learn any spell from any legal source through normal methods. You can't give them anything that they can not normally access. There is no game balance issue here.
Enjoy the chance to be creative within normal PFS play.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

As far as the PFS rules go you follow the normal rules for Pathfinder unless there is something in the Guide to Organized Play or FAQ that says otherwise. A spellbook based caster can learn any spell from any legal source through normal methods. You can't give them anything that they can not normally access. There is no game balance issue here.
Enjoy the chance to be creative within normal PFS play.
I would agree with Marack, given two conditions (which may seem obvious, but thought I would bring up for clarity):
1) The player has access to the spells which are chosen;
2) The GM sign and/or initial the list of spells somewhere on the chronicle for the module.
Nathan Meyers
NYC Player/GM

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
wow... my selection of spells would be very different from your selection of spells. And two different wizards are going to get VERY different lists of spells.
My wife and I both run wizards. Often together. When we do get them back together, we pool spell books again. This means what when coming up on playing a Module we should be careful to play the module at different tables - that way we'll get twice the spells... Where as in a normal Scenario, we get the same access if we play together or apart.
just food for thought...

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

nosig wrote:that way we'll get twice the spells......at twice the cost.
Seems fine to me.
This. The edge cases here are self balancing. I love it when my players with the same class split into two different tables voluntarily. The existing rules work, the GM gets a chance to use some creativity and the players get a chance to experience something different from the normal scenarios. Even with the possible metagaming (which is the sort that the players of wizards often enjoy) I don't see any negatives here.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
nosig wrote:that way we'll get twice the spells......at twice the cost.
Seems fine to me.
spells recovered during an adventure are at a discount.
For example, a 4th level spell would cost:found during adventure: 160gp to scribe vs.
not found during the adventure 700gp (scroll cost) + 160gp to scribe or 860gp total.
two characters playing the same mod at different tables and then getting back together will save 700gp per 4th level spell. One mod I know gives an average of five 4th level Judge picked spells... for a total savings of 3500gp. And this is just for the 4th level spells (there are also 3rd, 2nd, 1st levels in the same numbers...) from only one book.
This is balanced somewhat by the fact that some of the spells will be dups. (Judges both pick Phantasmal Killer for example), or pick a spell the players just don't want (add a 4th level spell to my book for only 160gp? why ever NOT?).
I guess this is kind of an insentive for players to NOT play in thier regular groups... maybe. So maybe it's balanced a little bit. But then it also kind of penilizes players who play wizards in a regular play group - as they will only ever see the same spells from any Mod.
Normally, in a campaign, a wizard is alway scrambling to add spells to thier spellbook. This methiod has the side effect of expanding spell access.
Picture a Chronicle that gave access to a random 4th level spell wand. Great access huh? Now realize that every PC who plays with the PC who got that access, also now has that access. And if the two PCs played the same adventure with different judges, they both gain access to the Wand the other PC gained. Now they each have access to TWO different 4th level spell wands. And they go looking for anyone else who played that adventure, under yet a third judge, to get access to ANOTHER 4th level spell wand.
Still think it's fine?

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Jiggy wrote:This. The edge cases here are self balancing. I love it when my players with the same class split into two different tables voluntarily. The existing rules work, the GM gets a chance to use some creativity and the players get a chance to experience something different from the normal scenarios. Even with the possible metagaming (which is the sort that the players of wizards often enjoy) I don't see any negatives here.nosig wrote:that way we'll get twice the spells......at twice the cost.
Seems fine to me.
I have a Rogue/Wizard character. I copy every spell I find (yep, 1st level wizard and I have 6 or 7 5th level spells in my book, as well as supporting lower level spells... wizards will go play down to get access to my 7th level Rogues spell book). After all, each 5th level spell they copy from my PC's book saves them over 1K in gp on a scroll of it.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I was making the assumption in my earlier posts that everyone was going to follow the rules in the guide regarding access and recording things on chronicle sheets. Moving on from that here is what I think I will use.
they contain black tentacles, enervation, fear, phantasmal killer, shadow conjuration, shadow evocation, and six spells each from levels 1–3 (chosen by the GM).
Level 1: Protection from Evil, Obscuring Mist, Unseen Servant, Chill Touch, Shadow Weapon [UM], Polypurpose Panacea [UM]
Level 2: Resist Energy, Darkness, Blur, Scare, Dust of Twilight [APG], Oppressive Boredom [UM]Level 3: Fireball, Gaseous Form, Secret Page, Vampiric Touch, Twilight Knife [APG], Howling Agony [UM]
The spells generally follow the mental progression of a shae wizard who eventually committed suicide after being trapped for a few decades. I imagine she was looking for a way to inflict her torment on others. I included secret page because I like the idea of players always wondering what they missed. I'm like that.
There are a few spells from non-core sources. Obviously, unless the player has the book they can't cast them.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I was making the assumption in my earlier posts that everyone was going to follow the rules in the guide regarding access and recording things on chronicle sheets. Moving on from that here is what I think I will use.
** spoiler omitted **
There are a few spells from non-core sources. Obviously, unless the player has the book they can't cast them.
what Mod is the Spoiler for? that way I'll try to use the same list if I run it (or mention this thread to my judge if I play), and you'll get the credit for writing up the book! Congrats!

![]() ![]() ![]() |

One thought it to select an appropriate level spellbook from the Spellbooks presented in Ultimate Magic. They are more or less grouped by theme so you could fairly easily adapt them for whatever module you are playing. Just talking about the spell lists, not the extra protections and powers from the books