Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Joshua Randall" data-source="post: 1592225" data-attributes="member: 7737">I believe it is a fairly common house rule to limit the number of spells on the Cleric spell list, so that Clerics don't become enormously powerful (and enormously laden down with infinitely long spell lists). I think it is also a good idea to allow a Cleric to use a spell from a supplemental source if and only if the Cleric gives up access to a Player's Handbook spell of the same level.&nbsp;Well, even if this isn't common practice, it's what I am going to do. I would like some help (1) deciding how many spells should be on the Cleric's list at each level and (2) refining this house rule so that it doesn't unduly punish players for using supplemental sources, but is also not prone to abuse.&nbsp;In the following table, PH # is a count of the spells listed at the front of the Spells chapter - which means that some spells, like Protection from Evil/Good/Chaos/Law are being counted as one rather than multiples (but I'm okay with that). The number in the Harsh column would limit the Cleric to a number of spells -- from all sources -- that is generally near or less than the number in the PH. The number in the Lenient column would relax the limit on the Cleric, allowing him more leeway to select spells from a variety of sources before he has to start giving up PH spells.&nbsp;[code][font=Courier New]Level&nbsp;&nbsp; PH #&nbsp;&nbsp; Harsh&nbsp;&nbsp; Lenient[/font][font=Courier New]=====&nbsp;&nbsp; ====&nbsp;&nbsp; =====&nbsp;&nbsp; =======[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 15[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 25&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; (25)*&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 35[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 32&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 30&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 35[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 31&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 30&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 35[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 23&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 25&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 30[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 24&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 25&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 30[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 26&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 25&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 30[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 18&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 20[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 17&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 20[/font][font=Courier New]&nbsp; 9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 15[/font]&nbsp;[font=Courier New]* could make this 30 for better symmetry[/font][font=Courier New][font=Verdana][/code][/font][/font]&nbsp;In both the Harsh and Lenient columns, I have tried for some crude symmetry, to make it easier to remember how many spells you're allowed at each level.&nbsp;First question: do you think these are reasonable numbers of spells to allow? Too many? Too few?&nbsp;Remember that Clerics can switch their spell selection every day, and that there are quite a few weak or overly specific PH spells that can be pruned without much difficulty.&nbsp;The way I would work this house rule is that at each level of spells, the player can select the indicated number (Harsh or Lenient, depending upon the type of campaign I want to run) of spells from any source that I allow. For each non-PH spell that the Cleric selects as part of his spell list, he must permanently give up access to a PH spell of the same level.&nbsp;Some refining of the above. When you give up access to a spell, you give up access to all versions of it. So, if you give up access to Protection from Good, you are also giving up access to Protection from Evil/Chaos/Law as well. That should prevent my clever munchkins -- er, I mean, my beloved players -- from giving up access to spells they were never going to cast anyway (such as Protection from Good for a cleric of Pelor).&nbsp;Also, if you give up access to a spell that is part of a chain, you are giving up access to that spell and all higher level versions of it. For example, if you give up access to Summon Monster IV, then you have also given up access to Summon Monsters V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Again, this is to prevent clerics from cherry picking which spells from a chain are the most powerful and blithely giving up access to all the other versions. I particularly want to avoid something like a PC saying, &quot;Now that I'm 7th level, I'll ditch cure light wounds.&quot; Well, he can say that, but only if he is willing to pay a very steep price; i.e., the loss of all other cure spells.&nbsp;Next. When a new source of spells is introduced into the campaign, each player may peruse these new spells and swap some into his clerical spell list freely -- although he is still limited to the total number of spells from the table above, of course. Also, he may only replace non-PH spells in this free manner. This is to allow the entry of new spells without punishing clerics for whatever choices they have made up to that time. (If he wants to add a spell from a new source, he can permanently eliminate yet another PH spell from his list, too.)&nbsp;So... what do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Workable? Abuseable in some way I have not anticipated? Let me have it!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Joshua Randall, post: 1592225, member: 7737"] I believe it is a fairly common house rule to limit the number of spells on the Cleric spell list, so that Clerics don't become enormously powerful (and enormously laden down with infinitely long spell lists). I think it is also a good idea to allow a Cleric to use a spell from a supplemental source if and only if the Cleric gives up access to a [i]Player's Handbook[/i] spell of the same level. Well, even if this isn't common practice, it's what I am going to do. I would like some help (1) deciding how many spells should be on the Cleric's list at each level and (2) refining this house rule so that it doesn't unduly punish players for using supplemental sources, but is also not prone to abuse. In the following table, [b]PH #[/b] is a count of the spells listed at the front of the Spells chapter - which means that some spells, like Protection from Evil/Good/Chaos/Law are being counted as one rather than multiples (but I'm okay with that). The number in the [b]Harsh[/b] column would limit the Cleric to a number of spells -- from all sources -- that is generally near or less than the number in the PH. The number in the [b]Lenient[/b] column would relax the limit on the Cleric, allowing him more leeway to select spells from a variety of sources before he has to start giving up PH spells. [code] [font=Courier New]Level PH # Harsh Lenient[/font] [font=Courier New]===== ==== ===== =======[/font] [font=Courier New] 0 12 10 15[/font] [font=Courier New] 1 25 (25)* 35[/font] [font=Courier New] 2 32 30 35[/font] [font=Courier New] 3 31 30 35[/font] [font=Courier New] 4 23 25 30[/font] [font=Courier New] 5 24 25 30[/font] [font=Courier New] 6 26 25 30[/font] [font=Courier New] 7 18 15 20[/font] [font=Courier New] 8 17 15 20[/font] [font=Courier New] 9 11 10 15[/font] [font=Courier New]* could make this 30 for better symmetry[/font] [font=Courier New][font=Verdana][/code][/font][/font] In both the Harsh and Lenient columns, I have tried for some crude symmetry, to make it easier to remember how many spells you're allowed at each level. First question: do you think these are reasonable numbers of spells to allow? Too many? Too few? Remember that Clerics can switch their spell selection every day, and that there are quite a few weak or overly specific PH spells that can be pruned without much difficulty. The way I would work this house rule is that at each level of spells, the player can select the indicated number (Harsh or Lenient, depending upon the type of campaign I want to run) of spells from any source that I allow. For each non-PH spell that the Cleric selects as part of his spell list, he must [u]permanently[/u] give up access to a PH spell of the same level. Some refining of the above. When you give up access to a spell, you give up access to all versions of it. So, if you give up access to Protection from Good, you are also giving up access to Protection from Evil/Chaos/Law as well. That should prevent my clever munchkins -- er, I mean, my beloved players -- from giving up access to spells they were never going to cast anyway (such as Protection from Good for a cleric of Pelor). Also, if you give up access to a spell that is part of a chain, you are giving up access to that spell and all higher level versions of it. For example, if you give up access to Summon Monster IV, then you have also given up access to Summon Monsters V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX. Again, this is to prevent clerics from cherry picking which spells from a chain are the most powerful and blithely giving up access to all the other versions. I particularly want to avoid something like a PC saying, "Now that I'm 7th level, I'll ditch [i]cure light wounds[/i]." Well, he can say that, but only if he is willing to pay a very steep price; i.e., the loss of all other cure spells. Next. When a new source of spells is introduced into the campaign, each player may peruse these new spells and swap some into his clerical spell list freely -- although he is still limited to the total number of spells from the table above, of course. Also, he may only replace non-PH spells in this free manner. This is to allow the entry of new spells without punishing clerics for whatever choices they have made up to that time. (If he wants to add a spell from a new source, he can permanently eliminate yet another PH spell from his list, too.) So... what do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Workable? Abuseable in some way I have not anticipated? Let me have it! [/QUOTE]

Verification