• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

help making Terry Goodkinds wizard/sorcere

Jaerom Darkwind said:
Keep in mind that it's not strictly true that wizards have no spellbooks. They just don't memorize spells. Things like The Book of Counted Shadows and probably Ordenic Theory contain complex rituals that you have to study in order to perform the appropriate rituals. Every spell a wizard knows had to be learned at some point. Richard doesn't do this, but that's because he's different.
Good point! And yet, I don't think these are still spell books the way the PHB decribes them.

It is more like a specialized Ritual that has been written down into a tome. Normally, magic is basically "spontaneous" in Goodkinds world - if using the D&D definition. It just "happens" much like a D&D sorcerer would cast his spells. For those books (and, presumably others) they are specicfic rituals tha require certain knowledge to carry it out; most if not all of which are within the books.

Jaerom Darkwind: Furthermore, i will have to check out your arcanist class. Sounds intersting, but i am not certain of you refernce to Netherse arcanists; care to clarify?

Cheiromancer said:
I think transformation effects would require both subtractive and additive abilities. To turn someone into a bird you have to "subtract" their human features and "add" avian ones.

I honestly don't recall how magical healing worked. Did it require additive magic to repair damaged flesh? Do you need subtractive magic to remove infections?
healing is all additive > i wouldn't go too far into specific definitions of this all. The fact is, additive magic will cure what ails ye.

Nyeshet: Thank you for taking the time to add to the mythological melting pot that is this thread. Some nice points there. Perhaps we should outline a few class features, which will help us actually build the classes. I propose starting with the Wizard, since he is the most PC-appropriate class.

---

Also, for those who mentioned using the psion build for the Goodkind Wizards; I don't think that will solve this. They are about as appropriate as standard Wizards for standing in fot TG's Wizards. Thats why the consensus has been (other than, of course, your opinions) in favour of a fresh build.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Morgoth said:
Eloi:
I'm really thinking they'd best be considered Psionic characters that seem to have a knack for making items out of the magical creatures all around them.

I don't know about this, because the magic in the books is far from like psionic, but I'm not the one to say that, 'cause I've never tried to understand psionic in DAD. So maybe. Could you come with an example of the class?

This is playing really, really fast and loose with the definition of Psionic - it appears to be the will of the Wizard that allows the manifestation of the power within to take useful, constructive forms. The particular part that makes it feel like a Psionic, to me, is the lack of spellbooks as anything other than textbooks of ritual learning. (No casting from scrolls, but loads and loads of items that provide spell-like effects.) Now, we immediately get murky, because the world is very magical, and emotions and Wizardfire and dragons hugely blur the line between the magic of the world and the internal control and direction of the power within by the Wizard. A Mage has a certain amount of power per day, growing over time with experience, growing like a Psion - or like a Sorcerer.

The DAD Magic user concept is usually built around a magical framework, with words of power, incantations, and calling upon forces that aren't the Magic user. The Psionic framework builds from the inside out, calling forth the power within the Psionic to affect the world. Right there, that seems to better describe the power Wizards control - except, as I mentioned, that we immediately begin shaping and tuning the forces of magic in the world after that "pilot light" of initial energy provided by the Wizard. (Or Psionic.. pick a title).

The kernal of ability is rare, dangerous to possess, and volatile - kind of like an apprentice misfiring a few spells.. except that without a dampening force or "heat sink" for the not-yet-disciplined energies of the aspiring Wizard, death is a real and quite scary option, and not avoidable except by finding help, or by going into serious denial (if female)..

Putting into a whole new framework is a great idea. The way I see Richard Rahl learning truths about how and when to use his magic, and how to turn his interface between his inherent psychic strength (bolstered by his bloodlines and his adknowledgement as Seeker) and the magic of the world all around him from the desperate, untrained power channeler he began as.. into a kind of virtual instrument for altering reality, that is just so totally *other* than DAD currently can handle as Magician or Psion.. well, it really, badly needs to be given a new framework.

I'm not wedded to the concept that a Goodkind Wizard needs to be psionic, or a Magic User the way we're used to them - I just want to see them presented in a way that respects the difference between the way we're used to handling magic in our games, and the way Goodkind's universe handles magic.

A question: has anyone asked Goodkind to participate in the project?
 



Eloi (and others):
Well, that is an EXCELLENT idea, but think of it this way . . . he might not like us making this character, when he could easily enough (considering how amazing he writes) contract some guys at WotC or other company to build him a d20 system/new system for it all (and thus get lots and lots of money). Despite the fact that he probably is a RPer - I just don't feel like getting into a legal battle today :P

Cool idea though; but lets make a Goodkind Wizard class ourselves.

---

Jaerom Darkwind:
Nice Arcanist class. I would have to look through it a bit more to see it they are for sure balanced > have you playtested these guys yet, and if so, are they any better than a wizard and or sorcerer of their level??
 
Last edited:

okay. A thought:
Mana. Every spellcaster gets mana points.
Sorcere 10 x cha mod x lvl
wizards 8 x int mod x lvl
druids 8 x wis mod x lvl
paladins 4 x wis mod x lvl
ranger 4 x wis mod x lvl
A spell costs 0 lvl spells cost one, the rest costs 2 x spell lvl.
Wizards gets at 6 lvl the ability to maximize spells at the double costs, which makes their spells more powerfull.

What do you think? Remember that Wizards and Sorcere still have to heal their friends, so they have to perform two jobs.
 

just a question, before we continue with this > is your entire world Goodkind-based, or just the Wizard/SoL/SoD (sisters of light and darkness) being incorperated into the design?

Because, i definitively go with all or nothing for spellcasting if you world is mainly Goodkind-based. The fact for goodkinds world is that either you can tap into your magic (by being a wizard/SoL/SoD adn associated PrC's) or you are just a commoner (who can be affected by the magic since they have a tiny little speck of it in them, although they can't manipulate it whatsoever, or they have none in them, and are completely immune to magic (and they automatically pass along this flaw when they have children).

So, having Spellcasting Rangers and Paladins doesn't make any sense. Before Richard could tap into his powers, he was a pure 'Woodsman' (Ranger) and was able to take out an entire Quad by himself. Probably at level 4 or 6 at least - and by that level he would have, by D&D's standards have had spells, adn yet, he had none whatsoever.

-----------
Also, on the subject of the nature of spellcasters, there isn't a true, distinct line between 'arcane' and 'divine' spells > its more the "nature of the beast" which defines the spells. In other words, all spellcasting come from the same source, but Wizards are different than Sisters of the Light. As a house rule, I'd disallow spellcasters to wear any armour. If wearing armour, spells automatically fail. Thoughts?

-----------
So, I'd say that only pure spellcasters should ahev spells and so, assuming PHB classes:

Bard: i see that he is missing from your list, but regardless, partial spellcaster
Cleric: replaced by SoL/SoD, full spellcaster
Druid: Full spellcaster
Paladin: CW non-spellcasting varient
Ranger: CW non-spellcasting varient
Sorcerer: SoL/SoD
Wizard: Full spellcaster

also, i haev no experience with mana systems (although by the gods do i want to impliment one) so perhaps we should just use the standard spells per day/spells known?? Just a thought for (mainly) my own sake. If not, I'll allow others to step in and help with that role.

Anywasy, thats about all i have for now. Comments/Questions/Concerns?
Druid: full spellcaster
 

Yes and No.
Yes, I want a lot of his characters in the game, like prophets, Mord-sith, even confessors.
But it isn´t his world. I´ve drawn my own, and the history isn´t the same. Mainly it is the sorceres and wizards who is getting any change, ´cause remember, fighters is still fierce in GoodkinDs world. Yes, maybe it could be a good idea to remove the spell list from paladins, but i´m not sure about druids and rangers. They get their powers directly from nature. Rangers is to weak with there spells, and I´m scared of how weak they will be without them.
The mana system is a way to make a difference between the spellcasters. You can give the wizards ability to power his spells, by using more mana. I´m open for ideas, but I can´t think of any other means of making the difference between the sorceres and wizards spells, without making TWO different spelllist.
 

Well, i don't know if you are familiar with Complete Warrior, but i referenced it in my post for the "CW [complete warrior] non-spellcasting varient." they give up spells for other abilities (like +10 speed for rangers, etc) Thats what i am getting at. Its a fair trade, since spells are limited for those characters as it is.

As i said, not sure for Wizards, i don't know mana-based magic
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top