Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 8377385" data-attributes="member: 86653">Wizards might learn about some spells, but they clearly don't learn all the spells. And there's no reason to assume the student wizard would get to pick which spells they learn. Their teacher would likely decide what the young wizard actually learned. Why assume a perfectly stocked wizard school and/or library with spells easily available? It's a conceit that makes no sense in the fantasy world, it only exists to make it easier as a game.Roughly, not exactly. And only the spells they know. But you generally get a table full of gamers who know most of the spells by heart and tend to be quite vocal about which spells are good and which are trash...which impacts caster players. There's a heap of metagaming around.Basics, yes. Perfect details of exactly how the mechanics of the game work and perfect knowledge of any and all edge cases, certainly not.I never suggested otherwise. That's all any of these threads are. How we want it to work and not how everyone's table runs.Or just ignore the book and have the GM make a call in the moment and save 5 minutes every time a question comes up.Some editions certainly tried to cover everything. Besides, we already have rules that cover everything. The GM and the players at the table. What the books have are guidelines. The table can decide just fine without a book. It's not holy writ.As general ideas for what they do, yes. But not so detailed that the character knows the game mechanics of the spell. Like those edge cases where players use the game mechanics to get a bit extra. Nah.I'm talking about in the fiction of the game world, not what the game companies have published. It is 1152 pages long.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="overgeeked, post: 8377385, member: 86653"] Wizards might [I]learn about[/I] some spells, but they clearly don't [I]learn[/I] all the spells. And there's no reason to assume the student wizard would get to pick which spells they learn. Their teacher would likely decide what the young wizard actually learned. Why assume a perfectly stocked wizard school and/or library with spells easily available? It's a conceit that makes no sense in the fantasy world, it only exists to make it easier as a game. Roughly, not exactly. And only the spells they know. But you generally get a table full of gamers who know most of the spells by heart and tend to be quite vocal about which spells are good and which are trash...which impacts caster players. There's a heap of metagaming around. Basics, yes. Perfect details of exactly how the mechanics of the game work and perfect knowledge of any and all edge cases, certainly not. I never suggested otherwise. That's all any of these threads are. How we want it to work and not how everyone's table runs. Or just ignore the book and have the GM make a call in the moment and save 5 minutes every time a question comes up. Some editions certainly tried to cover everything. Besides, we already have rules that cover everything. The GM and the players at the table. What the books have are guidelines. The table can decide just fine without a book. It's not holy writ. As general ideas for what they do, yes. But not so detailed that the character knows the game mechanics of the spell. Like those edge cases where players use the game mechanics to get a bit extra. Nah. I'm talking about in the fiction of the game world, not what the game companies have published. It is 1152 pages long. [/QUOTE]

Verification