Core spell conversions to EoM:R?

[CapnZapp]

The title asks it all: are you aware of someone that has begun creating Elements of Magic Revised versions of SRD spells as signature spells?

Myself, I would think it would be VERY nifty to recreate the core base spellcasting classes using EoM mechanics.

Because then you could continue gaming as usual (using standard adventure modules etc) but with the possibility for much much greater flexibility.

All questions regarding doing something the core books don't allow can then be answered with "just take two full round actions!" (in addition to all the other advantages

I know that may not have been the original intent of the book (because then you keep the "love is a dove" poems ;-) but I would sure love being able to give the following answers to my players:

- "I want to cast a acidball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

- "I want to cast a waterball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

- "I want to cast a turnundeadball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

Instead of the complex, minmax-encouraging, cash-draining
"ok, lets dig up these half dozen splat books, and we'll see what we can find. Oh.. you need the energy substitution feat",
"ok, you probably need this and this and this and I still need to choose between blunt and cold damage", and
"Are you crazy, you can't do that"
answers the core book gives.

Probably the biggest gripe anyone could have against EoM is it's difficult to start out (even though I understand revised is much better in this regard), and it's difficult to integrate into existing modules. Not that this is EoMs fault!

As I see it EoM use much much more of the existing mechanics than any other attempt at switching D&D magic systems, so now we are soo close to getting all the advantages and none of the disadvantages!

There can't be any legal obstacles to reprinting the SRD spells but with the mechanics ripped out, can there?

If anyone has already started this process, then perhaps we could convert the spell lists of other popular rpgs to "EoM D&D"...?

Zapp

 

[CapnZapp]

And, oh, I forgot.

The real treat would be to have official conversions, that people can trust use the EoM:R rules correctly, and in a balanced way (not violating "rule 1"), updated to current errata (I understand it's still too early to try to convert illusion spells, for instance).

Then EoM:R could really be presented as an alternative magic system ready to go (somewhat akin to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed).

I see completely new replacement versions of the PHB Spells chapter as well as the DMG Magic Items chapter (the SRD versions of course).

I'm not saying this is what EoM should be. I merely think this would interest many more D&D gamers than those willing to create a completely new set of signature spells (i.e. use EoM fully). These people would then of course not be able to stay away from experimenting with the system later on...

The point is: the sooner you get up "full compatibility"* with "that d20 fantasy game" the better!

Zapp

*) I know a Fireball would need, what, 6 MPs and thus be a "3,5 level spell" to work as in the original. But that would only mean "not only are we compatible, we actually take care of balance as well". By using EoM magic point costs the overpowered staple spells would become more expensive, while the most underpowered spells would get another change.

 

[Archus]

I've put togeter a wiki page with all of the spells posted to these forums plus a few spells of my own (mostly generic ones like Magic Ball - to be made into Fireball or whatever). My plan was to clean up the spells some to remove duplication and then start adding spells from the core rules for ease of conversion.

Feel free to add or modify the spells at:
http://arcana.arcanearcade.com

 

[RangerWickett]

Lyceian Arcana, the sequel to EOM-Revised, will contain versions of the core spellcasting classes, with guidelines for using the EOM system in the core rules. Converting all the core spells would be a huge task, and unfortunately not one I'm up to.

I am looking into a simplified version of EOM, but the problem is that the core magic system isn't simple itself, so it's hard to dumb it down and still keep all the fun stuff. EOM is designed to be elegant and consistent, but I wanted to keep almost all the same options the core rules allow.

I suppose a truly simple version of the rules would just have the 11 spells, with no elemental/creature type/alignment differentiation. Flexibility balancing would be a greater issue here, perhaps, but it would make things easy if everything just did one thing.

• Abjure just grants AC and save bonuses?
• Charm only makes people friendly or scared?
• Compel only does suggestion and dominate (actually, Compel is one of the simplest spell types right now).
• Evoke just does 1d6 damage + 1d6 per MP, no elemental differences.
• Heal works similar to Evoke.
• Illusion complexity depends solely on MP, not which spell lists you use.
• Infuse grants bonuses to whatever you want, no elemental differences.
• Move only does telekinesis and flight.
• Summon is already very simple.
• Transform remains ridiculously, stupidly complicated.

I've been trying to rewrite Transform to mesh with the Level Adjustment rules in the monster manual, but I keep hitting snags with creatures that don't have LA, like animals or other nonsentient things.

Oh, but speaking of fireball, I realized probably the best way to do fireball as a 5-MP spell is to give it a 10-ft. radius, 5d6 damage, range of touch. Charge a rock with the spell, and throw the rock so that it goes off wherever it lands.

 

[Verequus]

The title asks it all: are you aware of someone that has begun creating Elements of Magic Revised versions of SRD spells as signature spells?

Myself, I would think it would be VERY nifty to recreate the core base spellcasting classes using EoM mechanics.

Because then you could continue gaming as usual (using standard adventure modules etc) but with the possibility for much much greater flexibility.

All questions regarding doing something the core books don't allow can then be answered with "just take two full round actions!" (in addition to all the other advantages

I know that may not have been the original intent of the book (because then you keep the "love is a dove" poems ;-) but I would sure love being able to give the following answers to my players:

- "I want to cast a acidball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

- "I want to cast a waterball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

- "I want to cast a turnundeadball instead of fireball!"
- "Ok, just take two full round actions!"

I don't understand one thing - are you using simply EoM-spells, which are prepared in advance like the core spells, without MPs and spell lists? In this case, firstly you should not only give 2 MP more than the spell level suggests, because EoM-Spells are weaker than their counterparts, because power is traded for flexibility, which you are taking away, and secondly, you should let them up their EoM-spells easily if they use an higher level slot. If this lets EoM-spells be still too weak, give them free extra damage for their higher caster levels and toss in a certain ratio range and area enhancements. This should model core spells more closely, but those ideas are untested.

Another thing, what I don't understand - are you giving your players free access to spell lists, which they can use for building their spells? That would be unbalancing. Lyceian Arcana has classes, which model the core spellcaster more closely, like the Arcanist. Those could ease the transition for you.

Instead of the complex, minmax-encouraging, cash-draining
"ok, lets dig up these half dozen splat books, and we'll see what we can find. Oh.. you need the energy substitution feat",
"ok, you probably need this and this and this and I still need to choose between blunt and cold damage", and
"Are you crazy, you can't do that"
answers the core book gives.

Probably the biggest gripe anyone could have against EoM is it's difficult to start out (even though I understand revised is much better in this regard), and it's difficult to integrate into existing modules. Not that this is EoMs fault!

The starting out problem will be remedied through the incorporating of cantrips and 1 MP spells into EoMR 1.5. And for the integrating of EoMR into existing modules - just pretend, that everything functions the same - following the rules of EoMR - and convert only mechanics, which are handled different, like Antimagic. EoMR is balanced with existing mechanics, so this approach shouldn't be less a problem than the other way around.

As I see it EoM use much much more of the existing mechanics than any other attempt at switching D&D magic systems, so now we are soo close to getting all the advantages and none of the disadvantages!

There can't be any legal obstacles to reprinting the SRD spells but with the mechanics ripped out, can there?

If anyone has already started this process, then perhaps we could convert the spell lists of other popular rpgs to "EoM D&D"...?

Zapp

The SRD spells can be used in any fashion, as long you include a correct OGL.

And, oh, I forgot.

The real treat would be to have official conversions, that people can trust use the EoM:R rules correctly, and in a balanced way (not violating "rule 1"), updated to current errata (I understand it's still too early to try to convert illusion spells, for instance).

Then EoM:R could really be presented as an alternative magic system ready to go (somewhat akin to Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed).

I see completely new replacement versions of the PHB Spells chapter as well as the DMG Magic Items chapter (the SRD versions of course).

I'm not saying this is what EoM should be. I merely think this would interest many more D&D gamers than those willing to create a completely new set of signature spells (i.e. use EoM fully). These people would then of course not be able to stay away from experimenting with the system later on...

The point is: the sooner you get up "full compatibility"* with "that d20 fantasy game" the better!

Zapp

*) I know a Fireball would need, what, 6 MPs and thus be a "3,5 level spell" to work as in the original. But that would only mean "not only are we compatible, we actually take care of balance as well". By using EoM magic point costs the overpowered staple spells would become more expensive, while the most underpowered spells would get another change.

You are overlooking, that an EoM-spell is frozen regarding its behaviour, because you are assumed to remake the spells, if you want to have more power. Thus the question is: How do we represent this change? I've created a compact format, which allowed to scale a Fireball in damage, area, range, delayed, firetrap, etc. - and this for every element at once. But I suggest to create a department for all spells, which function in general the same - so we can have all the variety spelled out.

Also this is intertwined with the topic, how many MPs can be spend for a converted spell? The official guidelines ensure, that such a spell is weaker on regard. And if we try to mimick the effect, which is the minimum one for the spell, then - see above paragraph.

 

[CapnZapp]

Lyceian Arcana, the sequel to EOM-Revised, will contain versions of the core spellcasting classes, with guidelines for using the EOM system in the core rules. Converting all the core spells would be a huge task, and unfortunately not one I'm up to.

Ideally, you'd not have to - you should only have to give your (semi)-official nod to the works of Archus and others

Archus, by the way, how about having a separate list for converted core spells? While new spells are great (and probably the best use of EoM) it would IMHO still be nice to being able to concentrate only on the EoM SRD spells. Perhaps you can add the ability to mark a spell as "core", and then filter on that.

I am looking into a simplified version of EOM, but the problem is that the core magic system isn't simple itself, so it's hard to dumb it down and still keep all the fun stuff. EOM is designed to be elegant and consistent, but I wanted to keep almost all the same options the core rules allow.

And you'd be right to do so. IMHO, that's what makes EoM:R stand out from every other attempt at alternate spell systems! (And I have looked at quite a few...)

If you want to create a EoM Simplified, of course go ahead - but don't let it replace the current system! For me, as long as the overall system is simple enough, I don't mind complexities for individual spell lists. But the real value of EoM is its ability to "explain" the core spells. And if you can't recreate a Fireball with only 5 MP, well, then that's just proof Fireball is an overpowered spell. (Not that this is shocking news to anyone).

Oh, but speaking of fireball, I realized probably the best way to do fireball as a 5-MP spell is to give it a 10-ft. radius, 5d6 damage, range of touch. Charge a rock with the spell, and throw the rock so that it goes off wherever it lands.

That's an intriguing idea. I haven't made up my mind what would best serve the customer that just want replacement core spells, though.

And this idea comes perhaps too close to the "does arrows stick?" question. (In D&D arrows shot at a monster with tough hide can't be allowed to stick when they miss due to natural armor, because then you can enchant the arrows and circumvent both the monster's AC and SR.)

In the fireball case it's no biggie, because the core spell targets an area anyway. But ray spells should not be allowed to ignore AC in this way.

 

[CapnZapp]

RuleMaster, that was quite a lot. Perhaps I should start by adding I am by no means an expert on EoM. Just starting out.

My idea was simply to have EoM versions of core classes in a world where the only signature spells possible would be the EoM versions of SRD spells.

This would ideally then mean a campaign with great core compatability, but with the (no small) addition of being able to customize your spells much more greatly and freely than using core mechanisms. This customizing could be taken to the extent that you're looking at completely new spells, of course.

The balancing factor would be the slightly lesser firepower-per-MP, as well as the 2r casting time for most customizations.

And with more experience of how EoM actually plays, I probably would allow players persuade me into allowing signature versions of their new spell creations, opening up the full power of EoM while still starting out with close to zero learning curve.

I think I will refrain from answering your specific questions at this time, RM, cluttering up the thread. Instead please tell me which q's you believe I didn't clear up, and I will do my best to explain

Regards,
Zapp

 

[Verequus]

RuleMaster, that was quite a lot. Perhaps I should start by adding I am by no means an expert on EoM. Just starting out.

My idea was simply to have EoM versions of core classes in a world where the only signature spells possible would be the EoM versions of SRD spells.

This would ideally then mean a campaign with great core compatability, but with the (no small) addition of being able to customize your spells much more greatly and freely than using core mechanisms. This customizing could be taken to the extent that you're looking at completely new spells, of course.

The balancing factor would be the slightly lesser firepower-per-MP, as well as the 2r casting time for most customizations.

Ah, so I was right. I am sorry, but this won't function balancing-wise - I've given my advice for this situation above. If you are a beginner, then you shouldn't try to change the system - it looks to me, that you haven't understood all the changes to the core system and why they have been made this way. With this premise I doubt, that you can successfully transfer the rules back... :\

And with more experience of how EoM actually plays, I probably would allow players persuade me into allowing signature versions of their new spell creations, opening up the full power of EoM while still starting out with close to zero learning curve.

I think I will refrain from answering your specific questions at this time, RM, cluttering up the thread. Instead please tell me which q's you believe I didn't clear up, and I will do my best to explain

Regards,
Zapp

You are the DM, right? How good do you know the standard core rules? If you aren't familiar with these, then EoMR could be too much for your own good, because it isn't written with new players in mind. Another question: Why aren't you switching the system entirely at once?

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, the brevity of my answer seems to have been misleading.

Ah, so I was right. I am sorry, but this won't function balancing-wise - I've given my advice for this situation above.

You mean
"...are you using simply EoM-spells, which are prepared in advance like the core spells, without MPs and spell lists? In this case, firstly you should not only give 2 MP more than the spell level suggests, because EoM-Spells are weaker than their counterparts, because power is traded for flexibility, which you are taking away, and secondly, you should let them up their EoM-spells easily if they use an higher level slot."?

If you are a beginner, then you shouldn't try to change the system - it looks to me, that you haven't understood all the changes to the core system and why they have been made this way.

I am a EoM beginner, but consider myself rather knowledgeable of standard D&D 3E.

You are the DM, right? How good do you know the standard core rules? If you aren't familiar with these, then EoMR could be too much for your own good, because it isn't written with new players in mind. Another question: Why aren't you switching the system entirely at once?

My idea was not with a particular campaign of mine in mind.

My idea was to make EoM more easily available to the average gamer and DM, by offering to replace the spell system with something that is functionally almost identical, but with real rules & real mechanisms behind it. Of course this is to be in addition of the great and flexible system you've already cooked up.

Myself, I was always thinking of classes-with-spellpoints, never the straight classes out of the PHB. But your summary of how to beef the power of the EoM spells definitely has a place in any "behind the curtain" discussion.

In order not to have to create spells from scratch for each and every PC (not to mention the pregenerated NPCs of commercial adventure modules), I thought it would be great to have a catalog of premade signature spells. And what range of spells would be better to create than the core spells? This would mean that existing NPCs are ready to go. Simply note down their MP totals (which depend only on their level) and start to use their spells!

Then, when players and DMs alike are starting to get used to the inevitable changes that do occur, they will be ready to unleash the full power of EoM. This is the part that's most complex. Creating the spells in the first place, sure; but my concerns go to the poor DM who need to learn to say "no". Rule 1 that is.

At least, that's the idea.

So sorry about any confusion.

What do you think? Is it possible to come close to the core spells, and how close? Which kinds of spells should we begin experimenting with - that is, which spells present the most difficulties (as regards to mimicing core spells)? I already know save-or-die spells and high-damage multiple-target spells are out, and am OK with not reproducing spells like Slay Living and Horrid Wilting. (In fact, this is purely a plus in my book).

 

[Archus]

Archus, by the way, how about having a separate list for converted core spells? While new spells are great (and probably the best use of EoM) it would IMHO still be nice to being able to concentrate only on the EoM SRD spells. Perhaps you can add the ability to mark a spell as "core", and then filter on that.

I split the spells into new spells and d20 conversions. Since I didn't want to rename a bunch of pages the new spells are {{Spells}} and the d20 spells are {{D20Spells}} and there is a page {{AllSpells}} that links to to two of them and has instructions.

Right now I'm trying to prep for some Finance exams, which will swiftly be followed by an Ethics and another Finance exam. I probably won't get to the pages much until Dec 18.

My plan is as follows:
* The D20Spells page will have the closest approximations to d20 spells as possible.

* d20 spell names will be reserved for that page.

* Duplicate spells will be consolidated. For example there is a generic spell called Magic Touch that does an (Evoke [Element|Alignment] 0/Gen 0) for 1d6 touch damage. There is also a Void Touch spell that does essentially the same thing. The Void Touch spell will be removed and a "Possible Names" or something like that section will be added to Magic Touch that includes Void Touch.

* d20 conversions will be linked to the generic versions. For example Fireball is just a form of Magic Ball.

--Archus