Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sniperfox47" data-source="post: 6292088" data-attributes="member: 6776026">If the target-agnostic spells are being removed as spell lists than my first question is pointless. I'll just make a comment with regards to the second one.The reason I was asking was specifically from the aspect of finding or buying someone else's spellbook to cast spells out of. For example, a human wizard's apprentice/loremasterII/mageII would have 8 magic and 10 intellect. If I understand the system as it stands, it could be highly worth it for them to contact a cleric and get a spellpage of lesser revivify (a Heal Life or Animal IV spell can can revive a touched person who's been dead for less than 10 minutes), and one of moderate revivify (Heal Life or Animal VIII spell for if they've been dead less than a day). Even if they may scoff at the religious notations on the spellpages, and likely wouldn't learn the spell lists on their own, a mage would be hard pressed to deny the spell's effectiveness.So correct me if I'm wrong but then can anyone with a high enough intellect (A.K.A. not dumb as a post) and enough knowledge to conceptualize a spell write it into a spellbook, even if they couldn't normally memorize/cast it? With the human mage above for example, could he write those spells himself if he got a book that explained how heal spells work, even though he may not have the ability to cast a heal spell list?&nbsp;Additionally, if you're casting it from a spellbook, rather than via the magic attribute would it still have the 20mp hard-cap then?I could see playing a &quot;spellbook wizard&quot; with a low amount of magic ability, who gains versatility from her intellect and book-smarts, rather than her magic potential, as an interesting idea. It seems like a primary loremaster would even be a good fit for such a caster. It would, however, benefit from more structured rules on spellbooks, as opposed to simplifying them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sniperfox47, post: 6292088, member: 6776026"] If the target-agnostic spells are being removed as spell lists than my first question is pointless. I'll just make a comment with regards to the second one. The reason I was asking was specifically from the aspect of finding or buying someone else's spellbook to cast spells out of. For example, a human wizard's apprentice/loremasterII/mageII would have 8 magic and 10 intellect. If I understand the system as it stands, it could be highly worth it for them to contact a cleric and get a spellpage of lesser revivify (a Heal Life or Animal IV spell can can revive a touched person who's been dead for less than 10 minutes), and one of moderate revivify (Heal Life or Animal VIII spell for if they've been dead less than a day). Even if they may scoff at the religious notations on the spellpages, and likely wouldn't learn the spell lists on their own, a mage would be hard pressed to deny the spell's effectiveness. So correct me if I'm wrong but then can anyone with a high enough intellect (A.K.A. not dumb as a post) and enough knowledge to conceptualize a spell write it into a spellbook, even if they couldn't normally memorize/cast it? With the human mage above for example, could he write those spells himself if he got a book that explained how heal spells work, even though he may not have the ability to cast a heal spell list? Additionally, if you're casting it from a spellbook, rather than via the magic attribute would it still have the 20mp hard-cap then? I could see playing a "spellbook wizard" with a low amount of magic ability, who gains versatility from her intellect and book-smarts, rather than her magic potential, as an interesting idea. It seems like a primary loremaster would even be a good fit for such a caster. It would, however, benefit from more structured rules on spellbooks, as opposed to simplifying them. [/QUOTE]

Verification