Sell me on Arcana Evolved.

[GSHamster]

I've always viewed the Exotic spells as a fun tool for DMs. The cost of an Exotic spell (a feat) is simply far too high to be worthwhile for most players.

However, you can easily design an interesting villain around an Exotic spell. And since it's an NPC and probably going to end up dead, being mechanically optimum is less important than providing a memorable experience.

 

[DarkKestral]

One thing about Exotic Spells: Monte has noted several of the exotic spells (raiment is a good example, and one that he noted) are exotic not due to power, but due to casters not normally having a reason to use them. He also suggested that if you want characters to use those, it's a good idea to simply make them complex spells, if they are of the 'working mage' type as opposed to obviously there for power reasons. As far as unique/exotic spells, I see a lot of power in the exotics, and one of the benefits of a unique spell is the difficulty of countering it (unless characters have knowledge of the effects ahead of time, there's no possibility of countering except by a dispelling attempt) so it's reasonable to put some restrictions on it. I'd remove the 'only at level 1' rule, but other than that, I'll make players pay to have the chance at essentially uncounterable spells. As far as 1st level damage spells go, they are intentionally designed to suck damage-wise, since most work from range, which is itself an advantage against the more damaging attacks of the melee-users. The low-levels that require melee are considerably more powerful. (Cluatta from the Spell Treasury comes to mind.. since it gives a 2d4+1 damage boost to staff attacks at level 1 for several minutes at a time, making a low-level mage STILL capable of dishing out as much hurt as a melee-only user)

Ehren: by my reading of the AE/AU RAW.. D&D casters will always have more unique spell lists of spells known, since AE/AU casters know all spells that they have access to in their class list. This means exotic spells are the only differences. However, there's a wide variety of spells I found useful as a 3rd level runethane, even though I only had access to the runic spells and simple spells. (Empower Rune as a 2nd level spell is a GREAT spell for the runethane, since they can power up their runes without needing to use their rune slots with one version of it) I don't see any problems with the power levels of the spells, since they aren't that much weaker than their D&D counterparts.

If you are intending to make a standard D&D caster, you'll have problems, but look closely and you'll see a lot of power in the spells listed.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

One big difference - D&D casters still need to either fill up their spellbooks or choose from a slot (sorc). Magisters know all simple and complex spells - everyone else needs to spend a feat to get a single level's worth of access to complex spells.

The difference with magisters isn't having an exotic spell in their book, it's having a specific template or staff or even aspect of power. If you don't like them, well that's cool. I happen to think that they are much better than wizards, but to each their own.

 

[catsclaw227]

If someone isn't happy with the feat requirement of exotic spells, one thing that may work well (of course, this is off the top of my head without playtesting), would be to reward each caster with a single exotic spell selection every fifth level or so.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

And you are the only player of mages without barred school: Evocation of whom I've ever heard this.

That may be so, but I'm not the only player I know who doesn't use the spell (and Sleep, for that matter)- most of the ones I know are either long term players or have very strong PC concepts that MM doesn't fit into.

Part of it is a holdover from my first days as a player with a strict DM (in todays terms, he ran his games RAW). In the early days, your mage's starting spell list was generated by your DM, and typically, the only spells you could learn were those you encountered in scrolls, spellbooks, or in training with other mages.

By the time 2Ed rules relaxed this, I was so used to not playing with the spell, I never felt the need to use it- I had different tactics in mind.

 

[Staffan]

Any way you slice it, a touch spell for d4 damage and 1 point of dex damage that allows a fortitude save to completely negate flat out sucks.

AE spells are supposed to be weaker than D&D spells. It's part of the trade-off for the superior flexibility in the system.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The spell list of AE casters are more diverse than most people might think at first glance.
The primary reason for this is that some classes gain access to spells with a specific descriptor (most notably the Greenbond), and taking a feat like Elemental Mage or Psion can change the spell list greatly. They all start with a common spell base (Simple Spells), but they will branch out individually. Thanks to the feat options, the differences are often not based on the specific class, but on the specific character.

AE spells are supposed to be weaker than D&D spells. It's part of the trade-off for the superior flexibility in the system.

I think that is not the primary reason for that. I think the primary reason might be that 1st level spells shouldn't be too powerful. The flexiblity of the system (especially in regard to spell weaving) allows you to still use the spell slots effectively at later levels, unlike where in regular D&D 3.x, a low level spell slot might become useless if the spells weren't a bit overpowered to begin with (Magic Missile is on par with Melfs Acid Arrow. Mage Armor is stronger and more valuable than a lot of other defensive spells at higher level. Color Spray and Sleep are powerful at early levels, but will be unseen at later levels.)

 

[JoeGKushner]

One thing I especially like:

All spellcasters can cast healing spells. Healing is no longer the domain (and responsibility) of the divine caster. No one has to play the cleric.

But at the same time, no one really can play the cleric. The divion of spells doesn't mean all spells are there or that all spell assumptions are there. For example, there's no magic missile as it's "too good".

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

AE spells are supposed to be weaker than D&D spells. It's part of the trade-off for the superior flexibility in the system.

They actually arent noticably weaker past 1st level. Sorcerous blast is noticably superior to Fireball (since you can make it any element on the fly). The fire template gives you a cheap 2d6 kicker to many good offense spells at a measly cost of 20gp. Darkness caster inflicts 1-2 points of wisdom damage with no save whenever someone takes damage from a spell at no cost, etc.

Those spells are badly designed because they suck compared to other options within the same system, like stone blast, or blast of stone (whatever the 1st level earth spell that deals d6/level) or fireburst, which is an area of effect fire spell.

Theres a few less save or die type spells (though vitrification is basically that), but my players were MUCH happier with the trade, as theres a lot more enemies than them.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

But at the same time, no one really can play the cleric. The divion of spells doesn't mean all spells are there or that all spell assumptions are there. For example, there's no magic missile as it's "too good".

Most spells have an analogue, particularly if you use the spell treasury. What I liked about removing divine magic was it meant that ANY character class could be a "real" priest.