Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 6870699" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya!&nbsp; I have no problem with that...but the DM better put some effort into the why's and wherefore's for his reasoning. Nothing annoys me more than a DM who just decides at the last moment...&quot;No. You can't have that spell. I just read it and don't like it. Too powerful&quot;. :fume: If you are going to add a more distinct feel to the magic in your game (general &quot;your&quot; &amp; &quot;you&quot; here), then you had better put actual thought and effort into developing why it is the way it is and not the way it is 'in the books'.For example, if I had a world where the only way to learn new spells was through study and 'reverse engineering a spell found on a scroll/book' was via ancient tomes, parchments and secrets passed down through more accomplished wizards, then there would obviously be heavily guarded 'Spells of Power' (whatever those are). Maybe I'd divide the schools up into Chantry's scattered about the world. Each wizard would need to be a member of ONE of those Chantry's. They could stay a 'generalist', but would never learn the 'really powerful stuff', but would be able to learn a little bit about all schools. Those that took the rituals, rites, and oaths to the Chantry would become &quot;Illusionists&quot;, &quot;Evokers&quot;, &quot;Necromancers&quot; and the like. Each Chantry would have a list of spells it knows. Different Chantry's (of the same School) would have slightly differing spell choices. This would open up a reason for the wizard to want to adventure and seek out lost magic for himself and his Chantry. A lot of intrigue and politicking could be had as well. Members of other spellcasting classes may be able to become &quot;Junior Members&quot;, with an even smaller selection of available spells to them (I mean, the true wizards would keep all the real good stuff for themselves...for various reasons). So a Bard could join the &quot;Chantry of Tibore&quot; that is an Illusionist School Chantry. They would have a dozen spells available to them of various levels. A Wizard (Illusionist) who was able to join would first be a Junior member, then Apprentice, then Full Member, and maybe Master Member...each step up the 'hierarchy' opening up more rare, powerful and esotric magics. Requierments for increasing in Changry rank could be unique to each Chantry...from simple &quot;Must be level X and know these Y spells&quot;, to more in-game and role-playing based where the character has to be in good standing, petition others for votes, grease the palms of those of higher rank, promise favours to others, etc (think Game of Thrones...but for Wizards).Anyway...yeah. I prefer to run my games with &quot;limited magic choice&quot; most of the time...if I have a campaign world I'm actually 'working on and creating'. If I'm just running a &quot;lets play some D&amp;D!&quot; campaign (like right now), I generally don't put that much thought into it.^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pming, post: 6870699, member: 45197"] Hiya! I have no problem with that...but the DM better put some effort into the why's and wherefore's for his reasoning. Nothing annoys me more than a DM who just decides at the last moment...[I]"No. You can't have that spell. I just read it and don't like it. Too powerful"[/I]. :fume: If you are going to add a more distinct feel to the magic in your game (general "your" & "you" here), then you had better put actual thought and effort into developing [I]why[/I] it is the way it is and not the way it is 'in the books'. For example, if I had a world where the only way to learn new spells was through study and 'reverse engineering a spell found on a scroll/book' was via ancient tomes, parchments and secrets passed down through more accomplished wizards, then there would obviously be heavily guarded 'Spells of Power' (whatever those are). Maybe I'd divide the schools up into Chantry's scattered about the world. Each wizard would need to be a member of ONE of those Chantry's. They could stay a 'generalist', but would never learn the 'really powerful stuff', but would be able to learn a little bit about all schools. Those that took the rituals, rites, and oaths to the Chantry would become "Illusionists", "Evokers", "Necromancers" and the like. Each Chantry would have a list of spells it knows. Different Chantry's (of the same School) would have slightly differing spell choices. This would open up a reason for the wizard to want to adventure and seek out lost magic for himself and his Chantry. A lot of intrigue and politicking could be had as well. Members of other spellcasting classes may be able to become "Junior Members", with an even smaller selection of available spells to them (I mean, the [I]true[/I] wizards would keep all the real good stuff for themselves...for various reasons). So a Bard could join the "Chantry of Tibore" that is an Illusionist School Chantry. They would have a dozen spells available to them of various levels. A Wizard (Illusionist) who was able to join would first be a Junior member, then Apprentice, then Full Member, and maybe Master Member...each step up the 'hierarchy' opening up more rare, powerful and esotric magics. Requierments for increasing in Changry rank could be unique to each Chantry...from simple "Must be level X and know these Y spells", to more in-game and role-playing based where the character has to be in good standing, petition others for votes, grease the palms of those of higher rank, promise favours to others, etc (think Game of Thrones...but for Wizards). Anyway...yeah. I prefer to run my games with "limited magic choice" most of the time...if I have a campaign world I'm actually 'working on and creating'. If I'm just running a "lets play some D&D!" campaign (like right now), I generally don't put [I]that[/I] much thought into it. ^_^ Paul L. Ming [/QUOTE]

Verification