[3.5] Spells Known/Fixed-list Casters/Researching Original Spells

[RFLS]

This is a spinoff from a discussion in the Dread Necromancer handbook. Segev pointed out that Deophaun and I were rapidly drifting away from the point of the thread (rightfully so) and that we should create a new thread (that's what this is). So, here are the points of contention:


Is the ability to research original spells RAW, as opposed to a set of suggestions located in the PHB/DMG?
If it is RAW, is it an option available to fixed-list casters? If it is not RAW, is it an option that should be open to them, as long as it is available to other spontaneous casters and prepared casters?


Those are the main points, as far as I'm concerned. I'll link Deophaun here and he can present anything I've missed. I'd like to hear some arguments before I present my own in this thread. Post 139 on this page (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214212&page=5) is where the discussion began.

[Flickerdart]

I've never seen the spell research text outside the PHB, and there are not, to my knowledge, really any codified rules beyond "this is a thing that can happen and takes time and has a cost". Given that it's basically fiat, there's no reason a DM allowing spell research shouldn't extend it to the limited-list casters.

[RFLS]

I've never seen the spell research text outside the PHB, and there are not, to my knowledge, really any codified rules beyond "this is a thing that can happen and takes time and has a cost". Given that it's basically fiat, there's no reason a DM allowing spell research shouldn't extend it to the limited-list casters.

I'm going to assume that you're agreeing that spell research is fiat, but I'm saying so in case I'm wrong in that assumption (I do that sometimes, and it never goes well).

Given that assumption, would you agree that allowing them to add to their spells known with that option is a poor idea?

A separate question from the above, but based on the same assumption: Would you agree that fixed-list casters were not considered when the research option was presented, as they did not exist at the time?

[Deophaun]

A separate question from the above, but based on the same assumption: Would you agree that fixed-list casters were not considered when the research option was presented, as they did not exist at the time?
I don't see why this is relevant, as by your own arguments the spell research rules were known by the writers of the fixed-list classes.

[Flickerdart]

Fixed-list casters were definitely not considered when the idea of spell research was introduced, but then again loads of things that were printed in the same books have wonky interactions too.

Reviewing the SRD entry on spell research, it's just a sentence (costs and durations are given in the psionic version though). Neither section mentions whether a spell known slot is expended. It is logical that this would be the case, in which case fixed-list casters would need to use things like Extra Spell or Advanced Learning to get the researched spell on their list.

[Deophaun]

Reviewing the SRD entry on spell research, it's just a sentence (costs and durations are given in the psionic version though). Neither section mentions whether a spell known slot is expended. It is logical that this would be the case, in which case fixed-list casters would need to use things like Extra Spell or Advanced Learning to get the researched spell on their list.
Except fixed list casters have no spell known slots. They just automatically know the whole list. If that list expands (such as WotC decides to put out a Complete Warmage or something), then they get the spells without WotC needing to touch their class features.

[Flickerdart]

Except fixed list casters have no spell known slots. They just automatically know the whole list. If that list expands (such as WotC decides to put out a Complete Warmage or something), then they get the spells without WotC needing to touch their class features.
I don't see anywhere in the spell research text that suggests you add the spell to your class's spell list.

[Deophaun]

I don't see anywhere in the spell research text that suggests you add the spell to your class's spell list.
That would be a part of the parameters of the spell you research, just like the School, Range, Target, and Saving Throw.

[Flickerdart]

That would be a part of the parameters of the spell you research, just like the School, Range, Target, and Saving Throw.
Would it? I don't see why this needs to be the case, especially given that the divine spell research section mentions that only the researcher is able to use the spell.

[Deophaun]

It needs to be, else the Wizard would never be able to cast the spells he researches:

A wizard casts arcane spells which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list.
Thus, while he might be able to learn a spell (which spell research allows him to do), if it's not added to the Wizard list, he can't cast it.

Edit: I also don't see how a divine caster would be able to "share it with others" if it wasn't on his class list; there would be no way for "others" to cast it.

[Psyren]

Is the ability to research original spells RAW, as opposed to a set of suggestions located in the PHB/DMG?

Of course it's RAW. It's a rule, and it's written in a 1st-party source.

The main reason it doesn't come up in TO discussions is that it requires DM approval, so the viability of research could go either way.

As far as whether the fixed-list casters get it, they inherit all their methods of casting and learning spells from the core classes.

[Segev]

Do the rules for this state that a wizard who researches a new spell automatically gets it in his spellbook, or does he still need to scribe it in, separate from the research and development costs?

[RFLS]

Of course it's RAW. It's a rule, and it's written in a 1st-party source.

The main reason it doesn't come up in TO discussions is that it requires DM approval, so the viability of research could go either way.

As far as whether the fixed-list casters get it, they inherit all their methods of casting and learning spells from the core classes.

Nitpick: it's not default RAW. It's an option presented to the DM that has a set of rules attached, should you choose to use it.

And, before I get all riled up: Are you suggesting, as Deophaun seems to believe, that a fixed-list caster (Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necromancer) can research and add a spell to his class list at will?

[Psyren]

Nitpick: it's not default RAW. It's an option presented to the DM that has a set of rules attached, should you choose to use it.

"Default RAW" is a meaningless term. Are Lion Totem Barbarians RAW? How about Abrupt Jaunt Wizards? Cloistered Clerics? Of course they are. And they are mentioned in RAW optimization all the time. There are rules allowing you to use them, and those rules are written down in a 1st-party book.



And, before I get all riled up: Are you suggesting, as Deophaun seems to believe, that a fixed-list caster (Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necromancer) can research and add a spell to his class list at will?

With DM approval, absolutely. But "with DM approval" makes research useless for TO discussions, at least by the conventions typically seen around here. It's not that research is against the rules, it's that what is reasonable and what isn't is too subjective to make for much of an intellectually interesting exercise.

[Deophaun]

With DM approval, absolutely. But "with DM approval" makes research useless for TO discussions, at least by the conventions typically seen around here. It's not that research is against the rules, it's that what is reasonable and what isn't is too subjective to make for much of an intellectually interesting exercise.
And this is where I think the fixed list casters get around that: because of their Advanced Learning class features, there is already a predefined list of researchable spells. RAW, a Dread Necromancer version of Astral Projection is already a valid spell, because Advanced Learning says so. So, you can research a Dread Necromancer version of Astral Projection.

[Segev]

But Advanced Learning doesn't reference the "research new spells" rules at all. And if you read it as you say, then you're actually LIMITING them from being able to come up with wholly new spells, as opposed to what, in theory, wizards or sorcerers might.

I ask again, though: what do the rules say about a Wizard who researches a new spell under those rules? Does he get it in his spellbook "free" as part of it, or does he have to scribe it in separately?

[Psyren]

Advanced Learning is separate from true research. It's basically a "freebie," with more restrictions than true research would have.



I ask again, though: what do the rules say about a Wizard who researches a new spell under those rules? Does he get it in his spellbook "free" as part of it, or does he have to scribe it in separately?

"Once a wizard understands a new spell, she can record it into her spellbook."

The implication is that you research it first, understand it, then record it, spending the regular moneys for such a recording.

[Flickerdart]

I ask again, though: what do the rules say about a Wizard who researches a new spell under those rules? Does he get it in his spellbook "free" as part of it, or does he have to scribe it in separately?
It doesn't say anywhere that he gets it free, so logically he would need to spend extra cash to scribe it. If you started handing out extra spells known with spell research, sorcerers would get absurd.

[Deophaun]

But Advanced Learning doesn't reference the "research new spells" rules at all.
Advanced Learning says you get new spells through "study and experimentation." At the end of this "study and experimentation," you get a spell that did not exist before (In the case of a Beguiler, a Beguiler version of a Sorcerer/Wizard Enchantment or Illusion spell). It doesn't matter that it doesn't reference the research rules, because you are researching original spells through it already, and it presents you with rules telling you what original spells are possible to get through research. If you want to do further research, then the section on researching original spells gives you the details on time, gold, and requirements.

And if you read it as you say, then you're actually LIMITING them from being able to come up with wholly new spells, as opposed to what, in theory, wizards or sorcerers might.
Saying that there is a pre-approved list of spells for research is not the same as saying there is an exhaustive list of spells for research. A fixed-list class may still consult their DMs to come up with spells that have no analogue in RAW, just like any other caster.

EDIT:

And just for fun, let's look at this from a balance standpoint. Your other arcane spontaneous casters limited by spells known can already grab every spell on their list for less than half the price through a Runestaff, and they can do it about 17 times faster. (OK, I really botched this as I was thinking spell research was level ^2 *1000, when it's actually just level * 1000, so the cost advantage shifts somewhere between level 2 and level 5, depending on the runestaff. But, it's still much quicker to produce, even level 9, and you still get to choose from anything on your lists.)This is not something that's going to shatter the balance of a game when a stock Bard can already do better.

[TuggyNE]

"Default RAW" is a meaningless term. Are Lion Totem Barbarians RAW? How about Abrupt Jaunt Wizards? Cloistered Clerics? Of course they are. And they are mentioned in RAW optimization all the time. There are rules allowing you to use them, and those rules are written down in a 1st-party book.

More to the point, the rules are complete to the point where you can simply accept them, and they work with no further intervention; contrast Arcane Swordsage (which is basically a list of suggestions for homebrewing it yourself) or the UA Facing variant (which requires adjusting a whole bunch of things, not all of which are necessarily mentioned by the text, or even considered).