Homebrew spells?

[The Boz]

Do you guys play in groups that allow Mages with sufficient Knowledge (Arcana), Spellcraft and Craft (Scroll) to come up with completely new and neat spells for their spellbooks? I've recently realized that actually a fairly minor amount of DMs allow their casters to do that...

[Maho-Tsukai]

Believe it or not, it is technically possible for a wizard to do that by RAW but the reason most DMs don't allow it is because there is absolutly no crunch reguarding how it's done. It's more or less mentioned in passing that "Oh, wizards can develop new spells!" and kinda forgotten. There is literally no crunch to dictate how this process plays out, what checks to make ect...they just say that wizards can do it and leave it at that. As a result, most DMs don't allow their wizards to develop spells because they would have to make their own crunch for how it works and, lets face it, a lot of can be lazy at times and it's easier to just say "no spell development" then to spend hours tinkering and prefecting a fair and ballanced system for spell development.

[tyckspoon]

The lack of rules on it is one problem; you basically get how long it'll take, what it'll cost, and everything else is "ask your GM", who is only advised that spells should be compared to pre-existing spells to determine if they're ok. Which means that if you want to make, say, a new 2nd level spell, you better hope your GM is going to be ok with having it balanced based on Glitterdust and Web and not Phantom Trap or Arcane Lock.

The other reason it doesn't get used all that much is that after the entire run of 3.5 there's just not that much reason to. If you look through enough books you'll probably find a spell that already does what you want. Even just between the PHB and Spell Compendium you'll cover most effects.

[Maho-Tsukai]

Unless your a wizard or sorcerer and want to be good at animating the undead. Necromancy is the one area where arcanists fall short and as a result I've invoked spell development as a way to get low-level animation and desecrate-like effects on a wizard. Other then that, however, there are a lot of spells to cover your needs.

[sengmeng]

has anyone used research rules to learn a spell that is on another class's spell list?

[Bang!]

My group has always favored using the PHB + Homebrewing/modifying heavily to dumpster-diving splats. Because it's easier than digging through dozens of books for a particular effect, it's cheaper than buying all those books [and it's in the ethical clear], and it's less obnoxious than schlepping a library around to game sessions.

So yeah, we do this a lot. Especially with benign abilities that just aren't in the rules or that aren't available until higher levels (like alchemy, telekinesis or transformation into an object). And for schtick casters that just don't have enough spells to work (like an ice-themed mage who isn't satisfied with chill touch).

[The Boz]

I'm asking because one of the things that made my favorite character ever, Bozos of Bones, so fun and unique to play (played him for about two years straight, up to level 27) was the fact that he used a fair number of his own spells. This was eight years ago, and we started playing in 3.0, moving up to 3.5 mid-campaign. I was 17 at the time, DM was 19, cash was low, creativity was high...
A few of the spells were my favorites and I remember them even now. If you were a DM, would you allow these spells?
- Chainpain, level 5 Necromancy spell that can disable a number (caster level/3) of enemies and deal intense physical pain. Fortitude to resist the disable and halve the damage. Requires a 250gp worth golden chain as a material component.
- Soulfuel, level 4 Necromancy curse, castable on living targets only. The next spell used by the caster requires no material components, and inflicts 1d6 negative damage to the target of Soulfuel per each level of the spell cast, plus 1d6 damage per every 250 gold worth of material components required by the spell.
- Entropic Ray, level 6 Necromancy spell, basically Ray of Enfeeblement on steroids. If I manage to hit someone with the ray, and they fail a Fortitude save, they take 3d6+INT (never lowering the attribute under 2) attribute damage of the next attribute they use (ranged attack lowers DEX, fort. save lowers CON, wizard spells lower INT etc.).
- Necropotence, level 7 Necromancy ultrabuff. The next caster level/3 Necromancy spells deal 1d4 damage to the caster and gain Empower, Extend, Maximize effects, as well as a +4 to the CL for the DC and penetrating SR.

[Maho-Tsukai]

The research rules by RAW can be used to get spells off of another list? I was not aware that was so, though if it is I am mistaken. I have used spell development to MIMIC spells off of other lists with slight modifications to make them unique, mainly giving arcanists several different vairations of desecreate and low level animation spells.

[sengmeng]

As written, you could take a spell from a list other than yours, say "I want to research a spell that does this" and name it something else when you're done... at DM's discretion. Or, you could research "Lightning Shield" and have it be just like "Fire Shield" with a different energy type, but the archmage has something like that anyway.

[cfalcon]

Do you guys play in groups that allow Mages with sufficient Knowledge (Arcana), Spellcraft and Craft (Scroll) to come up with completely new and neat spells for their spellbooks? I've recently realized that actually a fairly minor amount of DMs allow their casters to do that...

You don't need a bunch of special stuff, and there's pretty great guidelines in the DMG for it. The 3.0 DMG I think had a chart about the power level in dice, and to look for other spells with the effects- I thought that made it into 3.5 but I'm not sure.

Researching new spells is expensive and time consuming, but it's very gratifying to the player. However, be sure to sharply limit what your PCs can pull off with this- for instance, this will sometimes be used to craft a perfect key, essentially (a dragonslaying spell in a campaign with a lot of dragons, etc.).

[ericgrau]

Quite a lot of homebrew spells: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120075

Basically the PC makes a spell and the DM says "yes" or "no" and gives it a spell level. In a sense it's simple because the PC does most of the work and wants to do the work anyway. OTOH the DM may have to set up guidelines on what's allowed if conflicts become common, since by RAW if the DM says "no" then the PC still wastes some of the time and money. But I think most of the time PCs won't try to be abusive and they'll probably know what's reasonable.

[Kantolin]

I'm exceptionally proud of my fighter that created a spell. ^_^

(Hey, it's a spellcraft check - a fighter can, with effort, have a spellcraft check. And the resulting spell was 'Wizard 3', so there were no silly imbalances like the fighter being able to cast his spell, but he made it a point to give a copy of it to every nonevil wizard he ran into :P )

That stated, it has never come up out of that one circumstance.

[NichG]

I actively encourage this in my games (and >9th level spells researched in this vein are the replacement for the epic spell system), but I've found that players don't do it that often.

I think the one thing that really needs to be pinned down before you allow this is how you handle people trying to research spells to duplicate effects on other classes spell lists. It's dangerous territory since if you aren't restrictive about it, it can lead to a cleric and wizard and druid being totally interchangeable, so you need to have a pretty firm idea on what types of effects are appropriate to the various kinds of magic.

Healing is for clerics and druids is a major one - I'd be leery of letting a wizard research an arcane healing spell (bards aside), as the prime example I can think of on the wizard spell list is Synostodweomer, which is 7th level and generally sucks.

There are others however: would you let a Paladin research a variant of Lion's Pounce from the Druid/Ranger spell list? Things like that...

[Ravens_cry]

I love it. It is one of my favourite parts of the game in fact as it provides both an in-character and out-of-character joy. Yes, I would allow it in my games and I often ask for it when I play a scholarly type.

[The Boz]

I think the one thing that really needs to be pinned down before you allow this is how you handle people trying to research spells to duplicate effects on other classes spell lists. It's dangerous territory since if you aren't restrictive about it, it can lead to a cleric and wizard and druid being totally interchangeable, so you need to have a pretty firm idea on what types of effects are appropriate to the various kinds of magic.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I hate it when a spell duplicates the effects of a different school, let alone a whole class.


There are others however: would you let a Paladin research a variant of Lion's Pounce from the Druid/Ranger spell list? Things like that...

I would let a Paladin research whatever the hell he wanted to. :p

[Strife Warzeal]

I'm exceptionally proud of my fighter that created a spell. ^_^

(Hey, it's a spellcraft check - a fighter can, with effort, have a spellcraft check. And the resulting spell was 'Wizard 3', so there were no silly imbalances like the fighter being able to cast his spell, but he made it a point to give a copy of it to every nonevil wizard he ran into :P )

That stated, it has never come up out of that one circumstance.

That begs the question: What was the spell, and what did it do?

[Sunblast]

Or, you could research "Lightning Shield" and have it be just like "Fire Shield" with a different energy type, but the archmage has something like that anyway.
I've been trying to do a bit of this myself.

I've got a druid that is storm themed and needs lots of electricity spells to power his Storm Bolt reserve feat. Unfortunately, druids don't get electricity spells at every spell level, so I've been hitting up 3rd party splat books and even looking for homebrew electricity spells. Coming up with spells that just have alternate energy types can help the process a lot. I just got done doing this with Wall of Magma and got Mercurial Barrier. :smallbiggrin:

I'm exceptionally proud of my fighter that created a spell. ^_^

(Hey, it's a spellcraft check - a fighter can, with effort, have a spellcraft check. And the resulting spell was 'Wizard 3', so there were no silly imbalances like the fighter being able to cast his spell, but he made it a point to give a copy of it to every nonevil wizard he ran into :P )

That stated, it has never come up out of that one circumstance.
Now, that's a very interesting character concept! I've seen a Mystran fighter before who was unusually well-educated in spellcraft, magical theory, etc., but designing his own spell...

That begs the question: What was the spell, and what did it do?
Seconded. Please do share!

[Diarmuid]

I really like the system, but as I also prefer games starting at 1st level, I find the time involved to generally be severely limiting. Most games I've played dont allow for months at a time off as the town/country/world/etc continues to come under threat.

That being said, our group has done it occassionally but it's a very fine line between "cool and new" and "overpowered to the point of overshadowing someone else". Thankfully the group is generally low-mid op and it hasnt been an issue.

[myancey]

I made a spell called Mass Indigestion. As a DM, I'll occasionally have the party come across it if they're investigating magical crime sites..taverns and such. I don't have the specifics with me, but it makes people nauseated for a number of rounds-and they basically crap themselves on a failed save.

Makes for a funny magical crime scene anyway...

[FreakyCheeseMan]

I'd be both interested and leery of players creating spells.

One of my problems with it is that it gives casters a whole lot more to do, that the rest of the party can't participate in- and, frankly, casters *already* have a lot to do. I'd either insist on it being handled by email between play sections, or also try to include some similar content-creation for other classes- custom feats, or something.

[ubergeek63]

I'd be both interested and leery of players creating spells.

One of my problems with it is that it gives casters a whole lot more to do, that the rest of the party can't participate in- and, frankly, casters *already* have a lot to do. I'd either insist on it being handled by email between play sections, or also try to include some similar content-creation for other classes- custom feats, or something.

I want to do both with my Dracolexi .... as a bookworm by nature I can justify digging for more draconic, but i would really like to develop more useful power word spells.

was thinking of making a wand of power word pain, as a dracolexi wand it has a base price of 225gp since it is class specific and a only a cantrip! If i could maximize it in draconic it would be 24HP of damage over 4 rounds if the opponent had under 100HP...if under 50HP left it would be 96HP over 16 rounds if memory serves... from a cantrip!

then it occurred to me that power word distract that is normally a 4th level spell wouled only be 3rd level and could be extended for free to allow a wand for ~6Kgp to cause an opponent to be flat footed for 2 rounds!

and then there is the feat thing ... to allow me to apply more than one draconic word to a spell...;)

[Gamer Girl]

Do you guys play in groups that allow Mages with sufficient Knowledge (Arcana), Spellcraft and Craft (Scroll) to come up with completely new and neat spells for their spellbooks? I've recently realized that actually a fairly minor amount of DMs allow their casters to do that...

Of course I love custom spells and have made many, many spells...plus all the ones various players have made.

A lot of DM's ban custom spells as most players just want to cheat. I've seen so many spells like:

Ball of fire-it's exactly like Fireball except it's a conjuration so no SR
Telekinetic choke--You close the foes wind pipe and they die, no save
Damage Teleport--You teleport away before you take any damage

And way too many crazy anime spells too.

And the ever popular 'my 1st level Zap spell does 1d6 damage...but if I 'hold' it that is +1d6 a round and if I take damage to a dump stat that is +5d6 and if I melt copper that's +2d6 and then the bolt has an infinite range and no save and no sr and auto hits'.

[FreakyCheeseMan]

*Nods* I imagine most players would go for as much abuse as they could get away with.

On the other hand... if you're not looking to break the game, how many spells are there that you need but don't have?

[NichG]

I think the best way to avoid abusive spells is to split the creation of the mechanics between player and GM through a process of refinement:

1. Player says 'I'm researching a spell, I'd like it to do X kinds of things', where X is vague aspects of the function and key points - for example, 'I want a lightning version of fireball' or even 'I want a no-SR version of fireball' would be fine, but 'I want a 1st level spell that does 1d6 untyped damage' is too specific.

2. The DM says either 'No, that isn't feasible', or 'Yes, and I'm going to set the minimum spell level at Y'. The 'no' could be for something broken, or just something not appropriate to the caster type (i.e. 'I'd like a healing spell for my wizard').

3. The player either says 'okay, I'll take it at level Y' or 'lets change things to make the level lower/higher' (in which case repeat).

4. The DM says 'okay, here are the specific mechanics, is this okay?'

And so on... This way, the DM is responsible for determining the spell level, casting time, and the detailed mechanics, and the player can basically say 'I'm okay with this' or 'Nevermind'. That helps avoid issues like the player trying to trick the DM with some mechanic that would interact explosively with something they can do. And if what they ask for is too powerful for the spell level they ask for it, the DM can choose a spell level commensurate with that power.

[bloodtide]

On the other hand... if you're not looking to break the game, how many spells are there that you need but don't have?


Well, billions.

First, almost all the D&D spells are combat and adventuring spells. You won't find much of anything else in most books. So if you do a lot of non-combat role-playing, you will need more spells.

Second, you get very, very few of each type of spells. If you want a sailing ship spellcaster, there are few sailing spells. If you want to be a gnome with funny illusion spells, there are only a few. If you want to be a fire worshiping cult member and do anything except burn and kill, there are few spells.

Third, as long as your not doing a 15 minuet day for your spellcasters, they will need to be active for around 10 hours of game time. You will quickly find that the published spells don't cover tons and tons of things a spellcaster might want to do in a day. The most obvious is simply lower level versions of existing spells.

Fourth, it's always fun to have strange new spells. I for one hate when the adventures get to the 101st layer of the Abyss and some demons just cast Burning Hands....boring. My demons have 'acid slime spray'....

Fifth, it's better for fluff. The clerics and divine casters get cut very short here. No matter what god you follow, you get the same bland spell list. So a cleric of a war god, death god, peace god and farming god, all have exactly the same spells. It's so bad, in fact, that you can just forget the whole 'god' thing as every cleric is a cookie cut out. But custom spells change this.

[FreakyCheeseMan]

Well, billions.

First, almost all the D&D spells are combat and adventuring spells. You won't find much of anything else in most books. So if you do a lot of non-combat role-playing, you will need more spells.

There are quite a few spells that are non-combat or adventuring. Charm person, fabricate, teleport, plant growth, genesis, speak with animals, scrying, divination, unseen helper... I could go on, but you get my drift.



Second, you get very, very few of each type of spells. If you want a sailing ship spellcaster, there are few sailing spells. If you want to be a gnome with funny illusion spells, there are only a few. If you want to be a fire worshiping cult member and do anything except burn and kill, there are few spells.

Not quite sure what you're going for here, though I guess I could see something (I don't know of any spells that can make a ship sail underwater, for instance... but I could be wrong about that.) However, A: the vast majority of characters aren't that specialized, and B: a lot of the spells that do exist are versatile enough to fill multiple roles. There may only be a few illusion spells, but you can do hundreds of things with each.


Third, as long as your not doing a 15 minuet day for your spellcasters, they will need to be active for around 10 hours of game time. You will quickly find that the published spells don't cover tons and tons of things a spellcaster might want to do in a day. The most obvious is simply lower level versions of existing spells.

By "Lower levels of existing spells" do you mean "Lower level, with a longer casting time?" That makes a certain degree of sense, I suppose, but I'm not coming up with specifics. Examples?

And, there are a lot of things a caster can do in his downtime- the problem is the rest of the party won't want to sit around and watch. For example, me and the DM of my current game mapped out what my Archivist has been doing for the last week- the list includes everyrthing from fabricating poisons from the local plant life to sending charmed animals to spy on nearby enemies. Add in item-crafting and spell-copying stuffs, and casters are plenty busy.


Fourth, it's always fun to have strange new spells. I for one hate when the adventures get to the 101st layer of the Abyss and some demons just cast Burning Hands....boring. My demons have 'acid slime spray'....

Fifth, it's better for fluff. The clerics and divine casters get cut very short here. No matter what god you follow, you get the same bland spell list. So a cleric of a war god, death god, peace god and farming god, all have exactly the same spells. It's so bad, in fact, that you can just forget the whole 'god' thing as every cleric is a cookie cut out. But custom spells change this.

I'd group these two together under the heading of "Fluff", not that there's anything wrong with that... though I would say that, for the cleric examples, Domain spells are supposed to change that.

However, as I understood the argument in general, we're not discussing having general homebrew spells (i.e., added by the DM), but spells actually created by players, in-character, during the game.

That being said... if a player was willing to pay gold and XP costs to research a new spell, I probably would happily let him do so, even if the spell was more powerful than average, just cause it would make that character more unique/interesting. So... yeah, it is good for fluff.

[NichG]

Not quite sure what you're going for here, though I guess I could see something (I don't know of any spells that can make a ship sail underwater, for instance... but I could be wrong about that.) However, A: the vast majority of characters aren't that specialized, and B: a lot of the spells that do exist are versatile enough to fill multiple roles. There may only be a few illusion spells, but you can do hundreds of things with each.


There actually is a spell to make a ship sail underwater in Stormwrack. It's called 'Submerge Ship'.

[bloodtide]

However, as I understood the argument in general, we're not discussing having general homebrew spells (i.e., added by the DM), but spells actually created by players, in-character, during the game.


If you play a non-combat game, you will quickly find most spells to not be of much use day-to-day.

A simple things like, turning an object invisible. Or weaponmorph, to change the shape of a weapon. Or summon spider.

[Sunblast]

There actually is a spell to make a ship sail underwater in Stormwrack. It's called 'Submerge Ship'.

It's from Spell Compendium, actually. :smallwink: I love the picture that went with it.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/spellcomp_gallery/92286.jpg