How many spells have you banned from your game?

[Connorsrpg]

Haven't BANNED any, but made several much harder to come by.

Have put ALL spells from ALL sources I own inc PHB into Simple, Complex & Exotic as Monte's AU did (though we had a similar system in 2e).

This allows us to modify for the campaign we wish to play. In our campaign, those find the path spells and resurection tyoe magic become exotic spells.

Mind you we use the classes from AU & PHB so there has been some house ruling regarding which classes get which spells. But the players love the flavour it brings and have embraced it.

Connors

 

[Ibram]

Banned for rules reasons: Summon Creature spells (far to much difficulty to manage), Detect Alignment (alignment system not used).
Banned for setting reasons: Raise Dead, Resurection, True Resurection (tearing someones soul from its rightful place in the aftterlife is necromancy), Gate (drasticly different planar arangements).

The list would probably be longer, but spell casters are so rare in my games that I havent had the chance to realy see other spells in action.

 

[Psion]

- You cannot teleport to a place you haven't physically been. Solves the scry-buff-teleport issue

And gives that tasty Diablo II flavor.

 

[WayneLigon]

I'm giving thought to banning Muddy Ground and Ghost Weapon the next time we play Arcana Unearthed.

 

[Psion]

I thinking banning a spell is admitting defeat.

I think going with the flow and using 3.5 spells versions of 3.0 spells that weren't broken is admitting defeat.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

I think going with the flow and using 3.5 spells versions of 3.0 spells that weren't broken is admitting defeat.

Preach on! I use 3.5 for the damage reduction rules and most of the new class rules. I also use a lot of the 3.5 spells but there are just as many that I leave as their 3.0 versions because they were fine that way. I have never liked change for the sake of change.

 

[The_Universe]

I let them all in (in theory, at least) with the understanding that what I rule during the game is final. If Shadow Evocation doesn't work like you think it should work - too bad.

Expect Commune to cryptic. Stuff like that.

 

[maddman75]

And gives that tasty Diablo II flavor.

Hey, add to that my magic item creation rules. This involves gemstones that are required to make permenant magic. This has a few effects in the game. The main one is that gold no longer converts to magic items. You need raw materials, XP, and so much gp worth of Amberlite gem to make a magical item. You can destroy an existing item to remove the gem from it to use in a different item, though 1/2 the gem is lost in waste. Mechanically, the same as selling item X at ye ole magic shoppe at 1/2 value and buying item Y. It just feels a lot more magical.

And, even more of that tasty Diablo 2 flavor. Players I've found will go nuts if there's a chance they can get their grubby paws on some of these gems.

 

[Darkness]

I think going with the flow and using 3.5 spells versions of 3.0 spells that weren't broken is admitting defeat.

Give me an updated list (the one in your link is 8 months old, so maybe you changed your mind on a few in the meantime, or found even more) and I'll consider each one very carefully.

But I'm not going to compare both PHBs spell for spell.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Two, the bad guys have only a few rounds to wreak havoc with unbalanced abilities - the PCs have an entire campaign to do that. Where's the balance there, again?

Uh, what? Only a few rounds? What kind of pushover villains are you running?

Anyway, IMO banning spells is a bad idea.

I may alter teleport to make it a biiiiiit harder to just flit around to places you've never seen before or harder to go underground, things like that. But in general, if you've studied an area for a few minutes, you can get there. Well, barring anti-teleport fields or wild magic zones in Limbo.