Andy Collins speaks - Spell Compendium

[Belen]

Meh.....I am not sure why they are publishing this book. I can see no real use for it. There are enough spells in the PHB that people do not use on a regular basis.

 

[MerricB]

Meh.....I am not sure why they are publishing this book. I can see no real use for it. There are enough spells in the PHB that people do not use on a regular basis.

Ah, the "I don't think it's good, so they shouldn't do it at all" dismissal.

In fact, I expect Spell Compendium to be a boon for spellcasters, especially Wizards and Clerics.

I know from my own experiences that D&D can suffer from having too many books. This is not in the sense that the books don't add good things to the game, for they surely do, but that once you start combining elements of different books into the same character, you suddenly have to have a much bigger library available when you play that character. This can be a real pain at conventions - it is enough of a problem in my home games.

My current character, a 4th level Diviner in the Dragonlance world, is sourced from four books (PHB, DLCS, CV and RoD). Already I have quadrupled the books I need to play him. Or have I?

In fact, I haven't. Feat descriptions are (in general) short. Most aren't required to be used in play, for they merely modify stats. (e.g. Weapon Focus).

However, I do need to keep CV with me, because it has the descriptions of one of my primary spells. (Master's Touch - for some reason, I'm the one who has ended up with the +1 shocking burst longsword!)

Spells, like feats, are something that most D&D books have a few of. As a result, there are many, many sources for them. A compilation of these scattered spells into one book reduces the number of reference books I actually need to travel with. (High-level wizards will benefit greatly).

Then too, some of these spells are in obscure sources (any spell printed in Dragon qualifies!), and a compilation can bring them to our attention again.

Will everyone need this book? Absolutely not!

I'm looking forward to having this book, and being able to look at the different divinations that have been created for Wizards; some that I've forgotten, and others that I've never known about.

I would say that spells, along with monsters, are the aspects of D&D that have to be most frequently referenced by the games' players. (Do you require your players to have their book open to the spell description when they cast it? I certainly do, so it is handy if I need to doublecheck something).

Of course there are PHB spells that people don't use. Why is that? Because some spells are useless in a typical D&D session. (Guards and Wards, one of my favourite flavoursome spells, is not something my PC is going to be casting in a normal session). Others are under the power curve. And, there are those spells that should exist, but don't... except in the supplements.

I can use the core books to run a satisfying game, but sometimes I want more variety than just the core books provide. So, I turn to the supplements. Having a portion of that information in a collected form where it is especially useful is something I desire.

And I wouldn't mind seeing some 3.5e updates for some forgotten 3e spells.

Cheers!

 

[beaver1024]

Why do I get the feeling that this book will be filled to the brim with unfixed, broken divine spells that will be abused throughly by clerics and druids?

 

[MerricB]

Why do I get the feeling that this book will be filled to the brim with unfixed, broken divine spells that will be abused throughly by clerics and druids?

Lots of previous experiences?

I like Complete Divine. I really do. However, I can't excuse Spikes and Brambles.

At least, every new spell is one more round the clerics aren't in melee abusing their buffing power.

 

[Staffan]

I actually would be very surprised if Polymorph gets errata. I don't think they've had enough time to look at it (as it works in 3.5e) and really come up with a satisfactory solution that has been playtested enough.

Just throw some money at Rich Burlew and steal his house rules about it.

Spells (or rather, spell groups) I really hope they have corrected versions of: Summon Undead (to account for the templated nature of undead in 3.5e rather than the basic size-based undead in 3.0) and the Orbs from Complete Arcane (Conjuration spells that are better at doing instant damage than evocation spells? Gimme a break!)

 

[Sir Brennen]

I'm glad they are not reprinting the PH spells.

I guess it's only a matter of time, though before we see a magic item compendium...

Would that be a problem? I think such a tome would prove just a useful, for all the reasons MerricB just stated. I also wouldn't mind seeing a book of Feats for the same reasons.

One other thing this compendium makes me think, that, with books like Weapons of Legacy and Magic of Incarnum, perhaps WotC is making a shift in product focus for 2006 and beyond, focusing on new, cool additions to the game no one's really done and moving away from the rather "formula" books of PrC, Feats, Spells and Items type books they have been doing (with the compendiums sort of capping that period of publications.)

 

[WizarDru]

Meh.....I am not sure why they are publishing this book. I can see no real use for it. There are enough spells in the PHB that people do not use on a regular basis.

Why does it have to have a specific use? Folks like new stuff, and a book that collects new spells from a couple dozen previous sources and updates it is interesting to some folks.

As for spells in the pHB that folks don't use on a regular basis...there's a lot of spells there that offer no opportunity to be used on a regular basis. Shatter doesn't get nearly as much use as magic missle because of the scope of the game. Invisibility gets much more use than Rope Trick, because it's more practical. How often do you really need to casts Stone-to-Mud, honestly?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Why does it have to have a specific use? Folks like new stuff, and a book that collects new spells from a couple dozen previous sources and updates it is interesting to some folks.

But it's not new. People who want new spells probably have "Complete Arcane" and are likely to have "Complete Divine" and "Magic of Faerun." How many new-to-them spells will be in this book, then? A dozen? At most?

Unless spells from "Dragon" magazine make up a much larger percentage of this book than has been officially suggested, this is a book that's either a total waste of time or simply several years too early. "Tome of Magic" this ain't.

 

[WizarDru]

But it's not new. People who want new spells probably have "Complete Arcane" and are likely to have "Complete Divine" and "Magic of Faerun." How many new-to-them spells will be in this book, then? A dozen? At most?

Unless spells from "Dragon" magazine make up a much larger percentage of this book than has been officially suggested, this is a book that's either a total waste of time or simply several years too early. "Tome of Magic" this ain't.

Andy said "a wide range"...I think that constitutes more than three books. I wouldn't be suprised if some non-WotC open stuff gets imported, such as Monte Cook's work. Even if they don't, however, there are spells all over the place. I don't have Complete Divine or Magic of Faerun, for example. Many of the spells from the Manual of Planes would be welcome; books like Ghostwalk, Savage Species and others have plenty of non-3.5 versions to offer. I wouldn't buy a book like the many Realms books...I don't use that setting and have little interest...but if Silver Coast has a bunch of new spells, then that's great. Lots of spells from the 3.0 splatbooks weren't brought over...now properly fixed versions might be coming.

I'm not saying it's a fantastic value, but I disagree that it's totally without worth.

 

[Belen]

Ah, the "I don't think it's good, so they shouldn't do it at all" dismissal.

No...it's more like. Why do I need yet more spells in my game that are not playtested? I have had a very bad experience with non-PHB spells, so I only allow core spells in my game. I get why they would produce the product and I can see why some people who enjoy it, but I see no reason for new spells period. Unless that create a usuable bard spell list for a change.