Clerics and Spell Acquisition

[Chimera]

Nice idea Pbartender.

In my games, I have extensive house rules to cover a No Spell Books and Very Few Material Components environment. As opposed to the "yes we have spell books and components but we never bother to think about them or deal with them in actual game play" that I've come across in most games I've played in.

On the original subject...

I'm thinking that I will limit the spells available to a Cleric based on his or her sect. For example, The Goddess (aka Helas), being a minor goddess of healing, nature and mid-wifery, probably won't be granting any cause wounds spells. The Goddess of Peace (whose clerics are pacifists) are unlikely to be granted Magic Weapon or damaging spells.

Likewise I can't see a cleric of a Good god granted Curse Water or a cleric of an Evil god granted Bless Water. The Goddess of the Night isn't likely to grant Light or Searing Light just as the Sun God isn't likely to be granting Darkness.

Etcetera.

 

[Timeboxer]

Hmm. This is me speaking both as a player whose GM has mentioned this idea, and as a GM who's comfortable with the core way of doing things.

I'm not convinced that clerics have too many spells to choose from mostly because... well, the first reason off the top of my head which I'm likely wrong about is that it seems like, in general, I think they're probably going to spend most of their highest-level spells on curing, which means that effectively it ends up with them casting non-cure spells at a level lower, which they'd probably have collected most of by that point anyway. And beyond that, their spell choices are limited in the sense that they're being placed, already prepared, in their minds by their deities, presumably, so it's easy for the deity to just not grant you a spell.

But the main thing that bugs me about it, I think, is that part of the advantage of the cleric is that by the RAW you can pretty much access all your spells (with some limitations), whereas for a wizard the GM might say, "Hmm, yeah, you never get to learn any different spells ever other than the two free ones you get each level." Controlling spell access is something that I'm not all that wild about as a GM or a player, unless we're talking broken spells, mostly because I encourage people to use all sorts of different spells and be creative. This method makes it much easier to control cleric spell access, and you have the whole deific restriction thing on top of that.

And even if it's for stylistic purposes or something, even in a low-magic world the whole wizards-learn-precious-few-spells-but-clerics-can-cast-through-divine-connection thing makes sense to me. And the clerics pretty much get shafted if they don't have their prayerbook. (You spontaneously cast cures from a prepared spell, but if you can't prepare any spells...) So. But if you can take all that into account somehow, it's not horribly objectionable to me.

Though admittedly I may have different problems than you do, because my issue has been getting my casters to actually cast any spells at all. (Player of Bard: "...oh, yeah, I have spells!" Player of Cleric and Druid: "I hate casting. I attack!")

A perfect crystal with one hundred facets, each of which is equivalent to a page in a spellbook; the spellcaster gazes into the appropriate facets to gain the knowledge stored within.

You can easily steal the spellshard from Eberron for that, I note.

 

[Pbartender]

Controlling spell access is something that I'm not all that wild about as a GM or a player, unless we're talking broken spells, mostly because I encourage people to use all sorts of different spells and be creative. This method makes it much easier to control cleric spell access, and you have the whole deific restriction thing on top of that.

For the record, the reason I implemented the rule was to limit access to a few specific spells and spell combinations that I wanted to reserve as rare and powerful magic. It has the additional bonus of encouraging players to creatively use all of those forgotten, but useful, spells that no one ever thinks to learn or prepare.

And the clerics pretty much get shafted if they don't have their prayerbook.

*Shrug* So do wizards, if they don't have their spellbook. That's what Spell Mastery is for. Make it available to any non-spontaneous spellcaster.

 

[Liquidsabre]

*Shrug* So do wizards, if they don't have their spellbook. That's what Spell Mastery is for. Make it available to any non-spontaneous spellcaster.

Heh, so I guess there must be a Prayer Mastery feat in there somewhere eh? That's kinda neat.

 

[The Spectrum Rider]

IMC all spellcasters have to learn all their spells (except domain spells). There's a Spellcasting Check (based on caster level, key ability mod, and spell level). There's an XP cost (based on spell level). There's apenalty to failure (the spell is harder and more expensive to learn if you try it again).

There's also a number of "free attempts" (no XP cost) to learn spells, each class level, depending on your level and whether you're a spontaneous or non-spontaneous spellcaster.

The free attempts give people enough spells that they don't feel unduly taxed by the XP cost. The whole system gives me (as DM) a clean way to limit which spells I permit in the campaign (inclduing PHB and non-standard spells), give clerics access to particular spells based on their religion, and so on. And in gneneral it helps differentiate divine spellcasters, since they'll wind up choosing different sets of spells to learn.

There's still no actual, physical spell books for non-wizard characters. But the player has to keep a list of what spells his character knows.

So far it's worked out pretty well. But this is all a matter for House Rules.

The Spectrum Rider

 

[MichaelH]

I have NEVER liked the fact that clerics have access to the complete cleric spell list while wizards and sorcerers are limited to the ones they either have written in spellbooks or added to their repertoire and stored in their memory. Has anyone houseruled that clerics have to keep "prayerbooks" and acquire new spells like wizards do? If so, did this work out in your campaigns? I'm really leaning toward this, and am curious to know how your players reacted to it and how well it functioned.

Have you seen the Favored Soul class in Complete Divine? It's a divine spellcaster that works like a sorcerer, with a few special abilities gained every few levels. It might be helpful.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

Have you seen the Favored Soul class in Complete Divine? It's a divine spellcaster that works like a sorcerer, with a few special abilities gained every few levels. It might be helpful.

I've not seen the version from TCD, but do have the version from The Miniatures Handbook. Do they differ?

 

[Nail]

I have NEVER liked the fact that clerics have access to the complete cleric spell list while wizards and sorcerers are limited to the ones they either have written in spellbooks...

Well, quite obviously, YMMV.

I've not had the conceptual problem you have. (Not that there's anything wrong with that...) Clerics gain their spells from God. Why not have access to all of the God's miracles?

Besides, being the "party cleric" essentially translates into "saving the party's bacon should things turn south". That means the cleric should be wise enough to have a broad spell list, and a broad selection of spells memorized. There are lots of "save me!" spells, other than cure, that all clerics need. Take that away from them, and your PCs will die quicker. The same thing cannot be said for the other spell-casters.

Leave the cleric spell mechanic as is. It works!

 

[Felix]

Sorcerers get a whole lot of spells pery day... but don't know that many spells, and can only cast them all in a 24 hour period.

Wizards don't get too many spells slots, nor do they know all their spells, but they can cast their whole array multiple times per day [with the cast-8 hour rest-cast gambit].

Clerics [& Druids] get a middling amount of spells per day, and they know all their spells, but they can only cast their battery once per 24 hours.

They all have their advantages and disadvantages. I'm with Nail; I'd leave 'em be.

 

[Piratecat]

I use a system I discovered somewhere on these boards. For every non-core spell a cleric or druid wants access to, he has to give up a core spell, so that the total number of spells available to him does not increase.

Wheeee - that might have been me you yoinked it from!

Of course, it might not have as well. . . but it's the system that Sagiro and I both use as well.