[GRIM TALES] required magic tradition for spells?

[GlassJaw]

If a spell is introduced into the campaign, is it a good idea to require a certain magic tradition in order to use it or should spellcasting be more "universal"? Should spells just be spells regardless of the tradition used to cast it?

For example, the PC's find an ancient tome full of strange formulas and symbols. Some spells are contained therein but they are of the arcane tradition (Int-based).

The PC's meet a shaman who is willing to teach them some spells but he is of the divine tradition (Wis).

To take this one step further, if spells are tied to a specific tradition, is there anything that would prevent a character from learning more than one traditions?

 

[Turanil]

Not sure to understand your question.

According to GT rules, one may takes the Magical Adept talent either for Arcane or Divine magic. So if you find an arcane spell while you are a divine caster, you may indeed learn it. However, you will cast it without spell-burning-resistance and without the number of caster levels you got from several Magical Adept talents tied to divine magic.

Now suppose you make schools or traditions regarding Arcane magic. You could houserule this (maybe make it a feat): if you belong to a tradition of magic (i.e.: have learned under a mage of that tradition, etc.), you could get a houserule bonus in that all spells of that tradition you cast at a bonus +1 caster level and also maybe at a +1 spell-burning-resistance. Then, being of that tradition restrict access to spells of certain other traditions. In effect I suggest to take a look at DnD wizard specialists to work out this houserule (or new feat).

 

[GlassJaw]

Not sure to understand your question.

I think I made it more difficult than it needed to be.

According to GT rules, one may takes the Magical Adept talent either for Arcane or Divine magic. So if you find an arcane spell while you are a divine caster, you may indeed learn it. However, you will cast it without spell-burning-resistance and without the number of caster levels you got from several Magical Adept talents tied to divine magic.

This is pretty much what I was looking for. Spells still are classified as either arcane or divine. I was wondering if the spell itself was "generic" and your magic tradition just determined how you cast it.

So a spell can still be arcane or divine. Again, I think I made it more difficult.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If a spell is introduced into the campaign, is it a good idea to require a certain magic tradition in order to use it or should spellcasting be more "universal"?

Side note: Don't let what I did with Osgar confuse you. He has spells from all sorts of lists, but he'll cast them all as divine.

In a regular game, I would indeed classify spells according to their tradition-- otherwise there's no point to the Wild Adept (who suffers +1 die of spell burn for his ability to cast spells from any tradition).

Wulf