Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shallown" data-source="post: 1455366" data-attributes="member: 1368">I think the 2 spells per level of 3E was for two reasons. 1 - help protect players from DM's who didn't let them get new spells hardly ever. I have heard horror stories though have never, personally, had a problem with it. 2- To take pressure off having to worry, as a GM, where spells are coming from if the campaign, for some reason, is very isolated and finding magic spells may not be "realistic".I personally like both ways. I may not introduce new spells as much but it still a part of my game. I wouldn't mind dumping that rule altogether except it allows the player some feeling of control when he can oick the spells he wants and not depend on the GM to second guess his wants or needs. Think about if the fighter wanted to use an odd but not rare weapon like a scythe. Would the dm limit his choices in feats that specialize in scythes. It is almost the same thing as limiting the wizrds choices.Its just a matter of trust and player input. You don't always have to give them what they want but at least be aware of it. I like the concept of hunting through old libraries and ruins to find fragments of lost spellsthen using the players skill sto put it altogether into a new spell. It is also a way for NPC interaction to increase becuase it should happen that PC's have spells that NPC's want as much as the other way around. later</blockquote>