• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

Limited Spell-Lists and Trailblazer?

Sylrae

Villager
I'm in the camp that doesn't like the all-spells for each class thing.

I know it's a flavor problem moreso than a mechanics problem, but still.
Can I get some suggestion on how to use the trailblazer system and give more limited spell access?

I want my wizards to have spell-books. in 3.5/PFRPG, I don't give them all 0-level spells either, they have to pick which ones (I usually give them like 15 or so).

You mention it is a matter of money (which isn't a limiting factor), but that's only if they can readily buy spells. Availability limits spells too. In many campaigns, characters can't readily buy just anything they want.

I tend to randomly generate shop inventory by what fits the place they're in and who they're talking to. So the scroll the wizard is looking often for won't be there unless he wants to hunt it down - If they go to a large city and go to a mages' guild they'll have better spell access, but again, they won't have complete availability for gear. Higher level spells are harder to hunt down, and many spells aren't widely known.

I like the sorcerer/bard to have a limited spell selection overall.

I'll admit: I don't like it for clerics either > I think different gods should grant different spells. This extends to paladins.

Druids might be the exception to this.. I'm not sure they should be limited the same way I see everyone else being limited. Their limit is that all the spells are nature spells instead.

Suggestions on how to implement?
 

Wulf Ratbane

Villager
I know it's a flavor problem moreso than a mechanics problem, but still.

Can I get some suggestion on how to use the trailblazer system and give more limited spell access?
It's not a rules question, it's a flavor question. So implement it according to your tastes.

It's a bit like asking me what you should name your goblin NPC.

My spreadsheet analysis suggests, "Gleebo."
 

Sylrae

Villager
Ouch! :p

as I mentioned, I think it's more of a mechanics problem when the characters can't just throw money at a limited spell selection and have it go away. I kindof see it wizards as having a limited spell list, and they just get to choose what spells make the cut. They can expand it a bit with scrolls, but as mentioned, no guarantee they'll find what they want.

Say in an extreme example, thye get three spells of each level. Any advice on how to tie the spell-gains to level gains? I'd prefer someone with more wizard levels than bard levels have a larger selection of wizard spells and a smaller selection of bard spells.

It's not a mechanics issue power-wise, but it is a versatility issue. While more versatility doesn't put them above the power curve at any given point (again power is not versatility), I want them to be less versatile than they are in your current design through multiclassing. I want them to keep a similar amount of versatility as a single classed caster.
 

GlassJaw

Explorer
as I mentioned, I think it's more of a mechanics problem when the characters can't just throw money at a limited spell selection and have it go away. I kindof see it wizards as having a limited spell list, and they just get to choose what spells make the cut. They can expand it a bit with scrolls, but as mentioned, no guarantee they'll find what they want.
But again, it isn't a balance/mechanics problem. Some classes already had access to every spell on their list (cleric, druid, wizard with enough gold) so granting this to all the classes doesn't make the system unbalanced.

If you want to limit this, then just do it. As you mentioned, you can rule that wizards can choose 3 spells every time they level. That's all the mechanics you need.

It will also limit their versatility, especially if you don't allow the players to purchase whatever scroll they want.

All of these considerations are completely justified on your part (especially if you are running a low-magic/rare-magic campaign) but they don't require complex mechanics.

As Nike says "Just Do It". :D
 

Wulf Ratbane

Villager
You need to step back and figure out what you're trying to accomplish.

It's not balance; it's not a design question.

It sounds to me like a "story" thing-- you seem to want the players to have to seek out new teachers and new spells, because that makes for an interesting motivator.

You can accomplish this by cutting down the spell lists to "Everybody knows these spells..." and taking everything else and making them, essentially, "new spells."

Except instead of having the player come up with a new spell description, and then worrying yourself about whether or not the new spell is balanced, and then going through the process of "Spell Research," your list of acceptable "new spells" is already complete: It's all the spells from the RAW that you cut.

Now if only there was some simple way of sorting out the spells that everyone should know, spells so familiar they're rote, and then figure out which spells you want to restrict, or perhaps even require the PCs to perform some ritual in order to learn them...
 

Wulf Ratbane

Villager
It's not a mechanics issue power-wise, but it is a versatility issue. While more versatility doesn't put them above the power curve at any given point (again power is not versatility), I want them to be less versatile than they are in your current design through multiclassing. I want them to keep a similar amount of versatility as a single classed caster.
Beyond a certain level (and certainly inside the sweet spot), versatility in 3e RAW is an issue of time, not money. If you present the players with a problem that can only be accomplished with Spell X, and they don't have Spell X, then you force them to... *sigh* go back to town, find someone selling the scroll, copy it into their spellbook, go back to the dungeon, etc.

You're really not adding much to the play experience by that.

I'd much rather stymie my players with a 10-20 minute delay while they swap out for the spell they want, and get on with the adventure.

What does less versatility gain you or your players? Don't you WANT them to find and implement solutions to the problems you throw at them?

Is frustration and time-wasting a major portion of heroic fantasy? I certainly recall the best portion of the Fellowship of the Ring being the boredom and frustration of just trying to get into Moria as opposed to, for example, running through halls swarming with orcs and trolls and a giant :):):):)ing balrog.
 

Advertisement

Top