|
Except you can't REALLY uses hexes all day long since any creature you target with a hex can only be affected by it once. The white haired witch is the closest option for it, as they basically have an always on prehensile hair hex instead of normal hexes, but it's still not really anything like the warlock except in the broadest of strokes.
|
|
Except you can't REALLY uses hexes all day long since any creature you target with a hex can only be affected by it once.So? You still have unlimited uses. That qualifies.
Last fight of the day, you're out of spells. You target of a slumber hex makes his save. You have nothing left. The only offensive hex that doesn't have a once per day limit is Evil Eye. While that is better than nothing, it doesn't do much.
Unlimited uses is irrelevant when you have limited targets.
I don't think I'd destroy or even sunder a spell book. But stealing one for the day and leading them off to an adventure would, to me, not be as bad. A wizard can still cast spells that day, so he won't be useless, but he will still be on a time limit to get it back. I'd also give the wizard and company a chance to stop the theft. If they do, more power to them! I would never force the theft to happen no matter what. I actually had a good idea for stealing a witch's familiar that made some more sense. A pelt trader or exotic animal hunter loves the animal that she has and decides to steal it for themselves. Now they have to save the familiar, which I'd use the mental connection as a way to help find it and also set up the tension of the scene.
TOZ, you so krazy!
Everyone agree to disagree and end this silly thread. Wizards have spellbooks 'cause of old rules. Some people like; others don't. They serve a purpose in RAW, even if some don't like that purpose. They can be targeted; some GMs CHOOSE not to. Some players/GMs like that choice, others don't
Sounds to me like my kids arguing like this:
Yes it is!
No it's not!
Yes it IS!
No it's NOT!
and so on until I put them in time out.
Imbicatus, you really like arguing a lot, but when you start changing positions, you lose credibility. One can set up situations where all characters are going to be basically useless, and you can create builds to minimize the chance of a situation coming up, or maximizing your other abilities if it does happen.
You eagerly point out that fighters can take two feats to make it less harmful if their specialized weapon gets destroyed, claiming that there are certain builds that get around the weapon being destroyed problem. Yet the solutions people have for dealing with spell-books are all unacceptable. Even though wizards can seek to minimize the chance of the spell-book getting destroyed (I will not repeat the dozens of suggestions already posted in this thread), and they can build in a way to keep as many spells possible even if it does get stolen until they can get it back or get a new one: pearls of power, items of spell storing, a bonded item, the traits and feats that let you keep memorized spells, buying scrolls so you can recopy spells, etc.
All classes have a weak point that if ignored entirely (deliberately or not) will lead to their demise. To expect to be able to play a class with a weakness and do nothing to make up for it, either in character or as a player is foolish. To say a fighter is not hurt when his favored weapon gets destroyed because he can use another weapon with lesser power is true, and a wizard can cast from scrolls, etc. Until getting another spell-book.
|
|
Meh. I don't really like arguing, it's just this thread got me fired up, and I'm sort stuck in it. I've had bad experience with DMs targeting spellbooks, and nothing get me more passionate than trying to stop bad GMs who's Ego and focus on Story lead to railroading and being jerks to their players. But I think we've coverd everything here, so I'm bowing out on this one.
Agree to disagree, no more tangent on witch vs warlock, and play the game you like.
Peace, and no hard feelings.
TOZ, you so krazy!
Everyone agree to disagree and end this silly thread. Wizards have spellbooks 'cause of old rules. Some people like; others don't. They serve a purpose in RAW, even if some don't like that purpose. They can be targeted; some GMs CHOOSE not to. Some players/GMs like that choice, others don't
Sounds to me like my kids arguing like this:
Yes it is!
No it's not!
Yes it IS!
No it's NOT!
and so on until I put them in time out.
Infinity!
My flavor text for prepared spell-casting has always been, "You can only fit so many magical constructs in your head and once you use one it breaks and has to be remade." Spell-books contain the visual and mental tools to make said constructs and being able to form one from raw memory is... well, it is a feat in both mechanical and descriptive terms.
Spontaneous spell-casters have certain constructs hard-coded into their aura (spells known) and develop psychic "fuses" that burn out and have to heal back (spells per day). They have more endurance, but they aren't as flexible.
The only time I ever target a spell-book is if the NPCs want to capture the PC in question and then it is mainly confiscation. Partly because in a fight the book isn't as important as the guy with magical programs leaping out of his fingers, but mostly because my PCs tend to keep the book in their backpacks instead of out in the open.
Targeting a spell-book has never been a problem to me.
Flavor preferences aside, I don't think it's unreasonable to discuss whether the spellbook mechanic adds or subtracts from the game as a whole -- or whether it's needed, for that matter.
As stated above, I personally like it, but then again I'm an old grognard. I also personally like to listen to people who disagree -- they give me more ideas, and better ones, than the people I already agree with.
|
I hate the weight of even a few spellbooks. My wizards typically have average Strength to begin with - so, it's not like I am treating it as a dump stat - but encumbrance always becomes a factor. Now that clothes count toward total weight carried, and since I am (perhaps the only one?) pedantic enough to worry about trail rations and full waterskins, the extra weight of a few spell books is really a killer.
You can save a tiny amount by using traveling spellbooks at 1 lb. for 50 pages version 3 lbs. for 100 pages with a regular spellbook.
Would require a Greater Dispel or a Chain Dispel/Mage's Disjunction to get rid of all of them without one of the other one's going off.How do you arrive at the point that dispelling your traps dispels the spells in the book too?Not really, Blessed Book doesn't cost anything to rewrite my spells in, and I expect that if someone else gets my book, it means I'm dead.OTOH, if they take it, dispel your traps (and the spells) and then you catch them, kill them and get your book back, it's useless to you too.Let's not forget that spellbooks make decent loot.
Alternate materials and protections are important for protecting your spellbook from the elements or water damage.I have a Blessed Book that my character decided to write the most boring story ever into (think the Similarion Family trees) in mundane ink, and wrote all the spells over it in Arcane Mark. The idea I had was, if someone gets my spellbook, they will have to dispel the traps I put on it, and if they do, they also dispel all the spells in it and the book becomes worthless as it is an empty spellbook.
I get how mage's disjunction could do it (if ineptly applied) but I see absolutely no way for dispel magic or greater dispel magic to disrupt the spells in the book.
(greater) Dispel magic only works temporarily on magic items and then they are fully restored to normal function.
Not trying to be a jerk I'm really curious how you think this would happen with this spell line.
Except you can't REALLY uses hexes all day long since any creature you target with a hex can only be affected by it once.So? You still have unlimited uses. That qualifies.Last fight of the day, you're out of spells. You target of a slumber hex makes his save. You have nothing left. The only offensive hex that doesn't have a once per day limit is Evil Eye. While that is better than nothing, it doesn't do much.
Unlimited uses is irrelevant when you have limited targets.
Evil Eye... Scar... nails... water lung...
Nothing about all day long powers says they have to be immediately useful all the time in every situation.
The witch has hexes that last all day long and can generally be applied at will as needed in a huge variety of situations.
Just like the warlock (who by the way also had situational powers that sometimes simply weren't useful but could always be applied).
Also unlike the warlock the witch's powers are supernatural meaning no SR at anytime. The warlock's blasting was very reliant on SR free targets until he had Vitriolic Blast and then he had to hope the target wasn't also immune (or functionally immune) to acid.
what in the whole world is a bad GM?...-do not know, im just saying
A bad dm is one that steals the Ftrs armor non-combat; ruins/steals/etc. the Wiz's spellbook 3 times by level 7-8 (I forget exactly), desecrates the Clerics HS (no spells or reload), hits the Pally every other level with no-win choices, ...
One of the few times I was glad to be running a Sorcerer!
Edit: My current Wiz has spare spellbooks in the packs of other players' characters. The Barbarian barely notices the weight!
Although you make a good point, Dunelord, I'm taking a different lesson away from it than you do. You're saying the spellbook is a dangerous vulnerability to the wizard and should be written out of the game so the wizard can live without fear. I'm hearing any wizard worth his Intelligence score should make a duplicate the instant he can afford it, hide it with all the ingenuity he possesses, and above all, carry a scroll of 'instant summons'.
What's the point of having a 20 Intelligence but not having foresight enough to make a contingency plan?
No, the point I'm making is this is so horrible a draw back they live without fear now. No sane runner will turn a Wizard into a supped up commoner. Bookless a wizard can try to get by on scrolls, wands, potions, and what ever his school powers are. In short gutted.
A fighter/barbarian/caviler/gunslinger with their weapon of choice can do fairly well with a less powerful replacement. Paladins and Rangers have the same thing and spells to back them up.
A bard without his instrument can still cast spells.
A druid without spell components can wild shape.
A magus is okay in a fight without his spellbook or weapon as long as he has his other.
An inquisitor without his weapon has spells, without his material components has his weapon.
A monk, oracle, summoner, or rogue has no single item he needs to be useful. Almost anything they have can be easily replaced with something else of similar value.
An alchemist without his spellbook can still make bombs.
Even other item focused class aren't as limited. A gunslinger or cleric can carry a back up gun or holy symbol.
In fact the only other class even close is the witch, and the witch has a built in way to get it back without a roll or huge amounts of time.
|
|
It used to be that wizards only had one master spellbook that was way expensive, when they traveled they had to carry smaller subsets of spells and were limited in the total number available. So there used to be a point.
All of this is handwaved now and you are considered a dick GM if you attack a wizard's spellbook or do anything other than coddle it. Sort of like they took rust monsters out of the game so fighter's wouldn't lose their most critical possession for the class abilities, and monks don't take damage from attacking oozes and slimes... oh wait...
Something tells me, dunelord, that you'd hate any version of the game pre-3.0...
Just 2nd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The REAL purpose of a spellbook is so you can leave it open on a big stand, and your apprentice will use it to miscast animate object, thereby flooding your tower.
I thought that was obvious.
No, the point I'm making is this is so horrible a draw back they live without fear now. No sane runner will turn a Wizard into a supped up commoner. Bookless a wizard can try to get by on scrolls, wands, potions, and what ever his school powers are. In short gutted.
It's not that horrible. Recovering from a lost spellbook is not difficult at all. It is a temporary inconvenience at worst and a great development in the character's story at best.
I remember reading something along these lines years back. The Wiz summons back his book with a feat that allowed by the 'always known' feat. Mend spells restore it. Anyone remember the proper details?
So essentially, you're advocating that the wizard's spellbook get metagame plot immunity.
I think what he is saying is that currently it enjoys metagame plot immunity since it is such a huge slow down. By making it a little more resilient, and how is a huge question if you go that way, you could make wizards have to worry about it more.
The thing I think a lot of you are missing is that without a huge chunk of dumb luck or DM intervention you just won't be a PC. You'll leave the party to go on a huge sidequest.
Say you loose your spellbook and your DM decides to go about having you replace it close to RAW/RAI and make sense in character.
- Must find a way to some places that sells/rents spellbooks (used) and/or sells scrolls. If you are too low level to have teleport and/or don't have it in memory this can be several weeks. If you do have teleport it can go wrong, adding even more time the whole endeavor. If you go it alone odds of death should go up. A lot.
At this point you can pick either
A)Do the job right and role up a new PC for quite a while
- When you get to any place you only have a 75% chance of getting anyone one spell back, before you have to make rolls.
- Assuming that all of the above goes quickly, and that is a huge if, you still have to copy the spells down. That doesn't sound that bad until you stop to realize it takes 26 man hours to replace the 26 spells (20 core cantrips and the six first levels spells) for a 1st level universalist wizard with a 16 intel. I won't/have never said that a smart wizard won't have some back ups, but those can be several levels behind so this is still a lot of time.
- Try to find your party, this will probably take some divinations by this point.
B)Quick and dirty if you want to miss 1 or 2 sessions
- Do a smash and grab/beg, borrow, and steal every used spellbook (wizard or magus) and scroll on your list you can get
- Put just enough spells in your book to reach the party, using other means if practical
- muddle through with the borrowed spellbook rules copying when you get the chance.
- Both of the above assumes an almost unlimited supply of money. If like most PCs it has been converted to gear, and funny enough a lot of it was likely the now defunct spell book. The PC will either have to steal, borrow, get help from the party, sell gear, or who knows what to get the gold to get there spells replaced.
This doesn't sound that bad until you stop and think about the fact it isn't even counting games that have some time limitation. Sometimes the party just can't take off even the two days to go on a quick shopping trip, much less the weeks to wander back into town if you can't teleport/whatever. Also,it gives the DM the problem of trying to catch you up on gear.
The point I'm getting at is that if you have something like the Witch has, a system for returning it that is a big, but not crippling, draw back (the need to keep 500GP per level set aside to perform the ritual and 24 hours useable at any location) it is much easier for the runner to work in the threat of the spellbook being destroyed.
If you guys happen to enjoy some combo of being a Wizard who is a drain on the party for several sessions or huge chunks of cheese like 'oh look been long enough to be annoying and now I found a spellbook/I only loose my spellbook when it can be replaced without derailing the game/timetables change for no reason to fit in the sidequest' I'm not knocking you. I enjoy things/do things I don't think you'd like in my games, so whatever. I'm saying maybe it isn't best to lock the ruleset into that. There are lots of ways to limit a wizard without a spellbook short of the nuclear option in RAW as is; no bonus spells for high intel/school without the spellbook, concentration check to cast without it, negative to caster level/concentration checks, can't cast highest spell level, count as having a few negative levels, can't use metamagic feats, or some combination of them.
I admit I prefer the favor of the spellbook being something the wizard does/built/use to better themself, not something they need, but that is just my two cents.
@Democratus - You are right that it is temporary, but that isn't relevant. It is such a slow down to game play as to make a PC wizard who doesn't make sense to be with the party if they keep adventuring after the loss of spellbook. You can have a great story about the struggle to over come the loss of a spellbook a lot easier and a lot more fun if you have more options with it. Right now the rules don't have them.
For a sorcerer they make good kindling.
I like the RP fluff of spell books. My only problem is that currently there are TOO MANY casting classes... and frankly needing the book just feels like singling out ONE of them.
We had a wizard in the serpent skull campaign that just got frusterated.. The alchemist could pull formulas out of his spell book... but he could not get any from the alchemist.
We fought witches and clerics and met bards and nobody else in the campaign was tied to a book. Nobody left a book in the loot pile for him to get stuff out of.
In that campaign we didn't really have many options for new spells at all outside of leveling up and eventually getting teleport.
Honestly, I would have less trouble with the book... if everyone needed them. The idea that magic is complex and confusing and needs to be memorized and prepared... by ONLY the smartest of the base classes just seems wrong to me. Bards should totally have music books and clerics should have their prayer books and they should have to resort to them each morning when they prepare...
It's the whole 'Only wizards' things that I think should go away.