Of Wizards and Spells

[Trunamer]

(For the short version, see the bottom.)

Just talked to an old gaming friend of mine, who said he's having an odd debate right now. His DM is starting a new campaign, and he wants to play a wizard...with an expanded spell list. :o

This has come up before.

See, his idea of the wizard is LIMITLESS POTENTIAL AND VERSATILITY! You know, a real master of magic like the class is described as. So whenever he decides to play a wizard, which happens semi-frequently, he asks the DM to ignore the BECAUSE TRADITION AND NICHE PROTECTION line between arcane and divine magic. Until now, his DMs always said either yes or no, and he left it at that.

But this time, his DM hasn't immediately said yes but is open to persuasion, and it's open season. Apparently the cleric player is up in arms because "Only divine gets to heal." Also the word munchkin may have been used, and my friend is pretty steamed. Basically the cleric guy's case is this:

1. Giving wizards access to all character level-appropriate spells ruins game balance and the roles that each class has had since Gygax and Arneson invented the game 40ish years ago.

2. Wizard players who want more are trying to outdo the other players.

And my friend's case is this:

1. It's about fluff, not power gaming and he's happy to give up something, say his familiar, for the potential to learn any character level-appropriate spell. (Having gamed with him for years, I'm reasonably sure this isn't an effort to pull off some crazy spell combo. EDIT: Also, the unlimited spell list isn't a problem IME. See post 13 for details.)

2. Expanding his spell list to ALL is a minor power-up at best/worst, and it's a boon to his party. Cleric's down and everyone's still hurting? He can whip out the wand of CLW to get everyone back up! He can use the great cleric buffs, but he's still got a d4 hit die and bad BAB so he's not going to outshine anyone there.

3. Screw tradition, go with what's fun and MATCHES THE FLAVOR TEXT. Magic can do anything, so a master of magic should be able to potentially do anything.

The Short Version: My friend wants all spells to be on the wizard spell list, but another (cleric) player in his group thinks it's sacrilegious and/or a power play.

So, opinions? He and his group may be reading this at some point, if some angles come up that haven't been discussed already.

[KillianHawkeye]

I agree with the Cleric. Wizards don't need this and don't deserve it.

[Segev]

Have your friend look into the Archivist and consider playing a Mystic Theurge. Archivists can potentially learn ANY divine spell, and synergize okay with Wizards (being mostly Int-based as a caster). Mystic Theurge will let him progress both classes' casting. It's probably not the strongest build (but with that much high-end spellcasting, it will not be a slouch), but if he's not going for SUPREME power, it should work nicely for him.

Fastest entry I know of is Wizard 1 w/ Precocious Apprentice + Archivist 3, which gets him into Mystic Theurge at level 5. He'll be behind on the wizard side his whole career, but it's still pretty decent.

Maybe pick up Acid Arrow as his one 2nd level arcane spell, and get the Reserve feat that gives him a 2d6 acid projectile at will as long as it's prepared. Have to be human to pull that off.

[prufock]

Spellcasters already have the "research original spell" option, see p 198 of the DMG. It just takes more time and money.

[Thanatosia]

Wizard is already the most powerful class in the game in many people's eyes. Yeah, it's way unnecisary and overpowered. As the poster above me indicated, if he really wants this with some semblence of not being just over the top imbalanced go archivist/mystic thurge, at least them he'll have to pay a little price for the limitless power by gimping his spell progression by a few levels (not even that many if he can find an aproved early access cheese), and either lowering his caster level a few notches or blow feat slots on Practiced Spellcaster.

[Thanatosia]

Spellcasters already have the "research original spell" option, see p 198 of the DMG. It just takes more time and money.
Arcane magic is generally not allowed to do Healing (or at least not very effectively - see "healing touch" spell for what the game designers think of the limitations of Arcane healing).

Even wishes require you to drop a spell level when crossing spelllists to produce effects. Arcane and Divine are supposed to support 2 different party roles primarily, and although there is a lot of overlap, you should'nt just give one full access to the other without a heavy price paid.

[nedz]

Tell him to take the Arcane Disciple feat. This gives him the spells from one domain, but only 1/day each, subject to their Wisdom.

[Vaz]

1)Research in game Arcane versions of Divine Spells
2)houserule a learning mechanism similar to the Archivist from Heroes of Horror, and allow Arcane Scrolls of Divine Spells (Wyrm Wizard/Recaster etc)
3) Use Wizard 3/Archivist 3/Wildrunner 1/Arcane Heirophant 10/Mystic Theurge 3 (Dual 8ths) - sacrifice power for versatility.
4) Use Wu Jen 5/Incantatric 10/Archmage 5 and have nsar enougj EVERY spell jn the game castable.

[Chronos]

He can also, once he gets to a high enough level, emulate divine spells using Limited Wish or Wish. And if he's not high enough level yet for that, well, then, that just means that his wizard hasn't yet quite achieved that level of Ultimate Magical Power that he's aiming for.

[Vizzerdrix]

1. It's about fluff, not power gaming and he's happy to give up something, say his familiar, for the potential to learn any level-appropriate spell.


BWAAAha ha ha ha ha ha haaa! Yeah, I'd want to trade away one of my limiting factors for greater power too.

Honestly, Wizards get more than enough fun tricks. If he wants to have everything then he should have to go through the trouble of hoop jumping like everyone else.

[JusticeZero]

Honestly, the guy should just play a freaking divine caster..
I am not hostile to the argument in theory. I actually played a wizard with just such an ability in 2e Player's Option, a necromancer with a side order of healing spells.
In practice, the dude is already playing a T1 and wants to take over the only thing that he isn't already able to dominate at.

[Trunamer]

Spellcasters already have the "research original spell" option, see p 198 of the DMG. It just takes more time and money.
I've never met a DM who interpreted that passage in this way.

And honestly, I don't see how that interpretation makes sense, because it implies that the sorc/wiz spell list is just 'spells that sorcs and wizards commonly know.' If this were the case, sorcs and wizards would be able to use stuff like wands of CLW, and CLW itself would sure as heck be on the spell list because...well, sorcs and wizards get hurt too! (And even careful casters have friends and family who get hurt...)

[Trunamer]

I am not hostile to the argument in theory. I actually played a wizard with just such an ability in 2e Player's Option, a necromancer with a side order of healing spells.
In practice, the dude is already playing a T1 and wants to take over the only thing that he isn't already able to dominate at.
I'll reply to this post to address it and the others like it. (Because your reaction doesn't seem so knee-jerky, and you've actually experienced something similar.)

Frankly, the first time this came up years ago, I had the same knee-jerk reaction that many here are having. What, a wizard with even more spells?! But it doesn't actually work out that way. Sure, a wizard has more options but he's still limited to whatever NPC casters the DM throws his way and the cash he has to blow on copying spell books. If a looted spell book has heal in it or whatever, it has one less other spell. If the wizard spends cash to copy geas/quest into his spell book, he has to pass up another spell.

Years ago, we had a wizard player turn out to be a douche while this house rule was in effect. He ended up using charop advice to steamroll the opposition and upstage the other PCs, and he did it with wizard spells. Because charop told him wizard spells are already cream of the crop, you can't break the game any easier with divine spells.

So I get where you're coming from, but past experience has taught me that it's not a matter of character power.

@ Justice Zero in particular: What was your 'white necromancer' experience like?

[nyjastul69]

If I were the player of the cleric character I would simply ask for all Sor/Wiz spells to be added to the Cleric list. That seems like a reasonable request in this situation.

[JusticeZero]

Honestly, it worked great!

Most of the time, no cleric was around; as a result, it was just a bit of a drain on my spell slots. It actually made me a bit less powerful as a result, simply because it was just another resource drain on my end to tie up my spells memorized.
Because I was around, nobody else felt the need to pick up any healing ability. For a bit, we did have a cleric, but they weren't a healing-focused cleric; I think they were a fire cleric or some such thing. It's been awhile. That cleric focused on other things and didn't feel like the healbot.
Thematically it worked fine as well. I used a lot of necromancy and shadow spells along with healing, and had a huge Heal skill that I would occasionally find RP use for; the character concept was an atheistic surgeon who studied cadavers to master his craft and used arcane magic.

That said, I was combining it with a fairly tight thematic component. If I was just "Gandolf clone #9545" walking into a group where they had a cleric, it might have raised hackles. Additionally, 3.5 and PF, with the various splats, gives more options to pick up that particular loose end. If the wizard suddenly goes supernova in a brilliant show of T1-ness, the healing will just add salt to the irritation.

[JusticeZero]

Additionally, 2e also partly decoupled cleric from healing already, with the Priest guide ; this was because it gave a bunch of specialty priest builds which accessed various divine magic spheres, and many did not offer Healing sphere.

[Zanos]

If I were the player of the cleric character I would simply ask for all Sor/Wiz spells to be added to the Cleric list. That seems like a reasonable request in this situation.
That's actually rather different, considering Clerics automatically know all spells on their spell list.


This is a bit too much to ask, but the buff isn't that amazingly ridiculous huge. The wizard is still limited to the same number of spells per day and actions. It is still quite a large buff, however, and it is rather appropriate for the cleric to feel miffed. In gestalt campaigns Wizard/Archivist isn't actually that good because their actions are still limited, and a wizard with cleric spells has to use his normal slots to prepare divine spells.

[holywhippet]

Have your friend look into the Archivist and consider playing a Mystic Theurge. Archivists can potentially learn ANY divine spell, and synergize okay with Wizards (being mostly Int-based as a caster). Mystic Theurge will let him progress both classes' casting. It's probably not the strongest build (but with that much high-end spellcasting, it will not be a slouch), but if he's not going for SUPREME power, it should work nicely for him.

From what I gather, the archivist could arguably lay claim to all the wizard spells as well. The rules let you work together for item creation so you can, in theory, scribe scrolls but make them divine type spells instead. There's also all the arcane spells that appear as domain spells.

The problem with having access to every spell in the game is not knowing which spells to have prepared. If your party is expecting you to provide healing you will have to limit the number of monster you explode.

[Gavinfoxx]

Archivists can already learn any spell in the game, he should play one of those.

[erikun]

A.) Your cleric does have a point. If cleric spells are the cleric's think, and knowing all spells is the wizard's thing, then the cleric will understandably be put out when the wizard is dancing around and don't the cleric's thing better than the cleric.

B.) "All spells" covers a lot more than just wizard and cleric spells. It also includes paladin spells, ranger spells, blackguard spells, etc. These may not seem like a big deal, until you start seeing spells that do the cleric's job better than the cleric (access to paladin spells) or being able to learn spells sooner, because they show up as a lower level on another spell list.

C.) The best bet for your wizard character is to play a Wizard 3/Archivist 3/Mystic Theurge, and convince the DM to extend the Mystic Theurge levels as far as necessary. Archivists can learn any divine spell and put it in their spellbook, and between that and the wizard spell list, they will have most spells they can think of. Plus, this allows the player to play their super-scriber without overshadowing the cleric at their own spellcasting; the Theurge will end up one to two spell levels behind the cleric. I'd recommend against early entry tricks, to avoid toe-stepping.


Other than that, just recommend an Archivist and encourage the player to think creatively (and do research) on how a particular spell can be acquired. Remember that two people can work towards creating a magic item, and only one needs to have the required feats - so an Archivist with Scribe Scroll can work with another divine caster to scribe a spell they know into a scroll, and then scribe it into the Archivist's spellbook. This could lead to an ongoing quest for the Archivist to find the people in the game world who know they spells he wants to write down - although you'd want to make sure that the player wants to play such a character.

[Chronos]

Quoth Trunamer:

I've never met a DM who interpreted that passage in this way.

And honestly, I don't see how that interpretation makes sense, because it implies that the sorc/wiz spell list is just 'spells that sorcs and wizards commonly know.' If this were the case, sorcs and wizards would be able to use stuff like wands of CLW, and CLW itself would sure as heck be on the spell list because...well, sorcs and wizards get hurt too! (And even careful casters have friends and family who get hurt...)
Remember, one possible result of spell research is "You can't find a way to make that spell work". It's not guaranteed. You can try to research a wizard version of a spell from some other class's list, and you might get exactly what you're looking for, or you might get something that's similar but different in some ways, or you might not get anything-- It's up to your DM (who probably should be giving you some hints about what's likely to be acceptable before you spend the time, gold, and XP on the research).

Now, archivists are somewhat problematic. They can certainly, by unambiguous RAW, potentially learn an enormous variety of spells, and there are some dubious tricks by which they could learn even more, or possibly even all spells period. But they're also limited, even more so than wizards, by the spells they can actually find. Prayer books are a lot less common in loot than spellbooks are, and just because you can collaborate with an adept, druid, or cleric with a particular domain to make a scroll does not necessarily mean that you'll find such a character of high enough level who's willing to cooperate with you. In principle, they could be well-balanced, but it'd take a very skilled DM to manage it.

[nyjastul69]

That's actually rather different, considering Clerics automatically know all spells on their spell list.


This is a bit too much to ask, but the buff isn't that amazingly ridiculous huge. The wizard is still limited to the same number of spells per day and actions. It is still quite a large buff, however, and it is rather appropriate for the cleric to feel miffed. In gestalt campaigns Wizard/Archivist isn't actually that good because their actions are still limited, and a wizard with cleric spells has to use his normal slots to prepare divine spells.

Drat! My bad. I forgot the sarcastic emoticon. Sorry for the confusion. :smalleek:

[Psyren]

No. Wizards are more than good enough. If he wants a wizard that can heal he should play Dragon Age.

[Silva Stormrage]

I am seconding a wizard/archivist mystic theruge. Maybe houserule it so that he can use the same spell book. If its just about fluff then that should be good for him since he can just fluff it as being a wizard.

Also this way he can get druid spells as well so even more unlimited potential.

[Gavinfoxx]

The best bet is to play an archivist 20, because with feats like alternate spell source and southern magician, an archivist can learn any arcane spell in the game, as well as any divine spell.

[Segev]

You'll have to explain to me how those feats let an Archivist gain blanket access to arcane spells. They give very narrow (one spell/level) access, as I understand it, and trying to use "well, I found somebody who knows this feat to make this wizard spell as a divine scroll for me" is not going to work in most games because the DM is well within his rights to say, "you can't find that extremely rare person."

[Gavinfoxx]

You'll have to explain to me how those feats let an Archivist gain blanket access to arcane spells. They give very narrow (one spell/level) access, as I understand it, and trying to use "well, I found somebody who knows this feat to make this wizard spell as a divine scroll for me" is not going to work in most games because the DM is well within his rights to say, "you can't find that extremely rare person."

Well the idea is an archivist is actively seeking out people with those skills, or scrolls made by people with those skills, that they will get, um, good at finding them? And there's also the fact that, by the rules, all the scrolls of any sort you could ever want are easy to find?

[ManInOrange]

If one of my players asked me this, I would tell him that I would sooner give healing abilities to the dwarven fighter.

Would I work with him to make the mystic theurge option suck less? Absolutely. Would I figure out a way for him to gain a specific set of cleric spells based on backstory? Absolutely. Would I go so far as to write up a completely new class which has access to all spells, but doesn't get bonus feats, has a prohibited school or something to penalize the obvious power gain? Absolutely.

However, if a person can tell me with a straight face that wizards don't have the kind of versatility that one would expect from a lord of magic, I would probably need a restoration spell to remove the Touch of Idiocy.

[Trunamer]

B.) "All spells" covers a lot more than just wizard and cleric spells. It also includes paladin spells, ranger spells, blackguard spells, etc. These may not seem like a big deal, until you start seeing spells that do the cleric's job better than the cleric (access to paladin spells) or being able to learn spells sooner, because they show up as a lower level on another spell list.
I thought it would be clear, but perhaps I should have specified that 'level-appropriate' means 'character level appropriate.' This is not a friend's effort to get early access to...whatever paladin spells are worth casting, or whatever.

[Segev]

Well the idea is an archivist is actively seeking out people with those skills, or scrolls made by people with those skills, that they will get, um, good at finding them? And there's also the fact that, by the rules, all the scrolls of any sort you could ever want are easy to find?

"By the rules," scrolls are as easy to find as the DM says they are. In general, it's assumed you can find scrolls of "common" spells, but "a scroll scribed by the 1 in 10,000 clerics who is 17th level and has the right trick to know precisely the spell that I want from the Wizard list as a divine spell" is going to require not just a quest, but the DM to agree that that person exists.

An Archivist who has even half the number of wizard spells in his prayer book that a wizard of equivalent level might (not counting the ones that exist as divine natively, anyway) is going to have to find dozens of these highly unique individuals of sufficiently high level who have EXACTLY the spells he is looking for.

RAW does not guarantee that you can find any scroll you want. It just very strongly suggests that it be possible to find the scrolls "commonly" made by "common" adventurers. Air-quotes, here, not "this is what the rules say word for word" quotes. If a 9th level wizard spell scroll is awfully darned rare, but you can still find it, how much rarer must it be to find a scroll of a 9th level wizard spell scribed as arcane by a cleric who happenend to have both the feat to let him learn it divine AND the scribe scroll feat? Not common enough to be found easily, I'm sure.

Archivists are awesome, but they're not THAT awesome, per the RAW. They CAN have ANY, but won't have even close to every, spell. If you want arcane access, multiclass with wizard.

[Chronos]

Quoth Silva Stormrage:

I am seconding a wizard/archivist mystic theruge. Maybe houserule it so that he can use the same spell book.
Wouldn't even take a houserule. The book itself is just a book-- It's just the inks (and more importantly, what's written with them) that are special. You could have a wizard spell on one page, a divine spell on the next, and a recipe for really great chocolate chip cookies on the page after that, if you chose.

[Gavinfoxx]

There actually are guidelines as to what things can be found in towns of a given size, in the DMG... and scrolls are generally always available, because of those rules. There aren't rarity modifiers to pricing for scrolls, or anything else, because equipment is a reward, and this isnt an economy simulator.

[Segev]

Wouldn't even take a houserule. The book itself is just a book-- It's just the inks (and more importantly, what's written with them) that are special. You could have a wizard spell on one page, a divine spell on the next, and a recipe for really great chocolate chip cookies on the page after that, if you chose.

And a bookmark-ribbon with a magnifying glass on the end sticking out, and a few codes and notes scrawled all over other pages, and a six-fingered hand on the cover...

[Lactantius]

Well, my own character (a focused diviner) learns SOME divine spells, but with a good reason.
I want to play this diviner as a sage/loremaster, combined with the abjuration- and antimage-theme.
So, kinda "white wizard" goind good with magic and so on.
We could call this concept "divine sorcery."

The restriction are that I take up divine spells which fit the diviner/sage/abjurer theme and since we play in the FR, Mystra, Savras and Deneir play a role in this spell selection.
So, most of those divine spells are divination or abjuration spells.

Here we go:

Deneir-related: glyph of warding, greater glyph of warding,
Savras-related: augury, divination, commune, choose destiny, warp destiny, omen of peril.
Mystra-related: spell shield, holy star, holy word, spell phylactary, spellmantle.

Mechanic tools to do so are:
a) official rules: take the feat arcane disciple or take prestige class dips (rainbow servant, divine oracle, for example).
b) homebrewed: create a feat which allows god-themed spell access.
Change some of the "expanded spellbook" entries in prestige classes like the master specialist so that divine spells are okay.

Get the point?
You can allow it, but not for mere power. If the player comes up with an interesting character concept (like my example), it would be pretty okay and balanced.
As a rule-of-thumb, allow only 10-12 spell altogether.
And check out that they are spread around the different spell levels, just as if the player would have different divine spells coming from a domain.

[Silva Stormrage]

Wouldn't even take a houserule. The book itself is just a book-- It's just the inks (and more importantly, what's written with them) that are special. You could have a wizard spell on one page, a divine spell on the next, and a recipe for really great chocolate chip cookies on the page after that, if you chose.

Ah I don't really play archivists much I just had assumed the prayer book needed to be unique somehow. Still thats an even better reason to go mystic theurge. Does Boccob's blessed book specify that it needs to be used as a spell book instead of a prayerbook?

[JusticeZero]

Well, you also have things like the PF Witch, which is an arcane caster with healing spells. They seem to work fine, but they pay a bit for it; their spell selection is trimmed back from the Wizard's over the top firepower.

I would have loved to have some of those classes available when I was a teen. MUCH better design on the newer stuff. We at least completely converted the 2e Cleric to the specialty priests in the Priest's handbook, which probably kicked them down to a very high T3.

[Deophaun]

I'd say "no" simply because what the player wants can be achieved through the Mystic Theurge PrC, so he should take that instead of asking for a house rule.

That said, if there is a Cleric in the party, then the Wizard is pretty much a fool if he spends limited resources to get a copy of any of 99.9% of the Cleric's spell list. And for that other 0.1%, there's a Domain for it that's only a feat away.

Basically, the Wizard is so powerful as-is that adding the Cleric list onto it doesn't really do that much in terms of adding power. So, it's not munchikinism. However, the Cleric is right to object, because the only thing that can result from this is the Wizard stepping all over the Cleric's schtick. Game balance isn't much affected. Party balance could be.

[Ceaon]

If the wizard gets such a huge boost, all classes should get a huge boost to "match their fluff". That's only fair, especially since a wizard is not a class that suffers from inability to be useful, while other classes are.

To me, OP seems to be on the side of the wizard already. Giving wizards a huge versatility increase is a bad idea in my opinion, especially when the players and DM involved seem to be lacking somewhat in meta-game knowledge.

[erikun]

I thought it would be clear, but perhaps I should have specified that 'level-appropriate' means 'character level appropriate.' This is not a friend's effort to get early access to...whatever paladin spells are worth casting, or whatever.
Bless Weapon, Holy Sword, and Heal Mount in core - although the last one isn't likely to be useful to anyone.

The bigger problem is a one of earlier spell levels. Break Enchantment is a 4th level Bard/4th level Paladin spell, but a 5th level Wizard spell. Dispel Evil is a 4th level Paladin spell but a 5th level Cleric spell. Remove Curse is a 3rd level Cleric/3rd level Bard/3rd level Paladin spell but a 4th level Wizard spell.

The last example is really the problem. Especially if we're talking about Clerics and Druids, there are spells on their spell lists which are either identical to Wizard spells or remarkably similar, which appear at a lower level. One good example is comparing Summon Nature's Ally IV (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonNaturesAllyIV.htm) with Summon Monster V (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterV.htm). Both can summon medium Elementals, although one is clearly a level lower than the other. Would you be comparing the appropriate level based on this? Or would you be comparing something like the Giant Crocodile (CR 4) with the Celestial Gryphon (CR 5, flight, language and intelligence) to decide?

Tricky decisions either way.

[Psyren]

The bigger problem is a one of earlier spell levels. Break Enchantment is a 4th level Bard/4th level Paladin spell, but a 5th level Wizard spell. Dispel Evil is a 4th level Paladin spell but a 5th level Cleric spell. Remove Curse is a 3rd level Cleric/3rd level Bard/3rd level Paladin spell but a 4th level Wizard spell.

The big one is Lesser Restoration - 1st-level spell for Paladins, at a level where things like fatigue and ability damage really matter.

[bekeleven]

"a scroll scribed by the 1 in 10,000 clerics who is 17th level and has the right trick to know precisely the spell that I want from the Wizard list as a divine spell" is going to require not just a quest, but the DM to agree that that person exists.
Point of interest: Any Druid spell up to 7th level can be scribed pretty easily by a Druid 13 / Master Of Many Forms 7 who shifts into Human to gain a racial bonus feat for Alternative Source Spell. Obviously, epic druids can get the last few levels.

Also, any divine spell up to 6th level can be scribed as arcane - and any arcane spell up to level 6 as divine - by an Anything 10 / chameleon 10 for the same reason.

Depending on which cheese you use to qualify, you can use MoMF to scribe arcane spells as divine for spells up to a level of [3-9].

[Segev]

So, basically, you can argue that you should be able to find arcane scrolls of any divine spell, and vice-versa, so wizards and archivists are equivalent in spell access?

[bekeleven]

So, basically, you can argue that you should be able to find arcane scrolls of any divine spell, and vice-versa, so wizards and archivists are equivalent in spell access?

God no, I wouldn't allow that in my games.

However, it is possible, by the rules, to do it very easily.

[Psyren]

You don't have to shapeshift or do anything like that. Scrolls can already contain multiple spells, and the creator determines whether the scroll as a whole is arcane or divine. So scribe a bunch of divine scrolls containing a mix of arcane and divine spells and the Archivist can record them all.

The problem however is that it can't actually prepare or cast any arcane spells until you pick up ASS or something.

[Vaz]

Geomancer Gets around that, depending on whether spellcasting parameters includes Arcane/Divine and "X spell list"

[Maginomicon]

Things like this are why I have the following house rule:


Learning Opportunities for Spells and Powers

Wizards, Archivists, Erudites, Factotums, Sha’irs, and similar classes have an aspect of learning their spells and powers over time through scrolls or something similar. Generally, during a campaign try to give each of these characters access to learn one new appropriate spell or power of each spell and power level they have access to in the interim before their next character level.

For example, at level 1, a typical Wizard has in their spellbook all wizard cantrips and the spells they gained for the level outright (three 1st-level spells plus bonus spells for a high Intelligence score which could be enhanced by the Spellcasting Prodigy feat). Unless that wizard took the Precocious Apprentice feat or has a similar effect, they only have access to 1st-level spells, and so some time before his next character level, try to give him free access to a scroll or spellbook containing a new 1st-level spell (that he then could add to his spell book). If such a spellcaster has the Precocious Apprentice feat, feel free to give him access to a 2nd-level spell as well. However, even if he is able to add the 2nd-level spell to his repertoire (through a spellbook), he can’t actually cast it until he gains the ability to cast 2nd-level spells normally as described in the Precocious Apprentice feat.

If such a character is starting the game at higher than their first character level, instead allow them to add appropriate spells or powers of each level they would normally have have had access to during their career before they joined the campaign.

To take the most generally-complicated possible example of this, a character starting with four levels in erudite should have accumulated new powers in the time between their 1st and 2nd erudite level, between their 2nd and 3rd erudite level, and between their 3rd and 4th erudite level as appropriate to the erudite class as described in the class description (obviously, each appropriate discipline power should be treated as a learning opportunity one power level higher than normal since an erudite’s maximum discipline power level is one level lower than other powers they may learn). If these erudite levels were not consecutive and/or their latest character levels, they still had access to those power levels in the intervening character levels, so each of those character levels should still give them access to new learning opportunities (unless they trigger the erudite class’s other-psionic-class exception).

However, this does not mean you should limit them to only these options. If such a character wishes to actively expand their learning opportunities beyond what you hand them, let them do so, but only within the methods of plot development such as through libraries.

Independent research should follow the same idea. In general, the more complicated the spell (either in level or in how much it differs from an existing effect), the more libraries and other research sources the character must access to complete their research. Of course, a character could research multiple items at once. For these circumstances, increase the amount of time spent at each resource location accordingly. Use “A Research Effort” (Cityscape page 10~11 sidebar), Arcane Guilds (Cityscape page 87), Scholastic Guilds (Cityscape page 92), and Dominant Churches (Cityscape page 107 assuming you have a divine character of that faith in the party) as inspiration for research sidequests.

Players can augment this out-of-game by providing the GM with a “wishlist” of spells/powers they want to gain access to through scrolls, wands, power stones, etc. This gives you as-GM time to look into each request and decide on your own whether they’ll be able to find it in-game. Be careful to not to make promises regarding any particular item on the wishlist, as learning opportunities should be found dynamically in-game.

[Psyren]

Don't Wizards, Archivists, Erudites etc. get free spells as they level up too? I think that houserule is assuming that all their spells come from scrolls, which isn't the case.

If they start above first level, an easy thing to do is let them put some of their WBL upon entering the campaign towards scrolls/power stones of the spells they want; they can then spend the time and make the necessary checks to record these permanently (and you can make them auto-succeed on the checks if you're so inclined.)

[Trunamer]

The bigger problem is a one of earlier spell levels. Break Enchantment is a 4th level Bard/4th level Paladin spell, but a 5th level Wizard spell. Dispel Evil is a 4th level Paladin spell but a 5th level Cleric spell. Remove Curse is a 3rd level Cleric/3rd level Bard/3rd level Paladin spell but a 4th level Wizard spell.

The big one is Lesser Restoration - 1st-level spell for Paladins, at a level where things like fatigue and ability damage really matter.
Am I being unclear, or is 'character level-appropriate' simply a difficult concept to understand?

Here's how it works: Take a spell, any spell. Use its level/s to determine the earliest character level that a PC would be able to cast it at. Add it to the sorc/wiz spell list with a spell level appropriate to that character level.

Example: Dispel evil is available earliest to a cleric, because he can cast it at 9th level. Hence, it becomes a 5th level sorc/wiz spell.

I believe our old DM wanted to enforce some level of niche protection, so he applied a spell level-tax to many spells. So dispel evil was a 6th level sorc/wiz spell, for example.

[Maginomicon]

Don't Wizards, Archivists, Erudites etc. get free spells as they level up too? I think that houserule is assuming that all their spells come from scrolls, which isn't the case.It doesn't assume that.

If they start above first level, an easy thing to do is let them put some of their WBL upon entering the campaign towards scrolls/power stones of the spells they want; they can then spend the time and make the necessary checks to record these permanently (and you can make them auto-succeed on the checks if you're so inclined.)
That's not always true. Scrolls, etc. that are bought through WBL certainly play a factor, but the WBL value doesn't account for the wealth gained from encounters over-and-above the WBL (see DMG page 54 sidebar). It thus makes sense for such a character that's created above 1st level to have been automatically adding some spells/powers for "free" over the course of their careers to that point.

[Psyren]

Am I being unclear, or is 'character level-appropriate' simply a difficult concept to understand?

I missed your little houserule, but I still support the cleric's objection. Wizards are powerful enough, they don't need more goodies thrown at them.



That's not always true. Scrolls, etc. that are found through WBL certainly play a factor, but the WBL doesn't account for the wealth gained from encounters (see DMG page 54 sidebar). It thus makes sense for such a character that's created above 1st level to have been automatically adding some spells/powers for "free" over the course of their careers to that point.

That sidebar indicates that wealth can fluctuate above or below WBL from encounter to encounter, but not on an overall basis. A character joining a campaign at later levels should come in at the indicated WBL, and if he is above or below that should be normalized over time through the next series of encounters.

[Trunamer]

If the wizard gets such a huge boost, all classes should get a huge boost to "match their fluff". That's only fair, especially since a wizard is not a class that suffers from inability to be useful, while other classes are.
I don't think anyone involved would argue against all classes getting a boost.


To me, OP seems to be on the side of the wizard already. Giving wizards a huge versatility increase is a bad idea in my opinion, especially when the players and DM involved seem to be lacking somewhat in meta-game knowledge.
Well my friend is...my friend. That and having seen the so-called "huge wizard boost" in action, I'm naturally inclined to be on his side.

[Maginomicon]

That sidebar indicates that wealth can fluctuate above or below WBL from encounter to encounter, but not on an overall basis. A character joining a campaign at later levels should come in at the indicated WBL, and if he is above or below that should be normalized over time through the next series of encounters.
You missed my clarification (edited in seconds after I posted the original). The treasure-per-character column is there partially to indicate how much more is spent on the purchase of consumables, which normally have absolutely zero impact on the character's current state but definitely impact their careers before the campaign. My house rule in that respect simply provides a GM guideline for adjudicating how many scrolls/etc. they should be granted at minimum based on character level and spell/power level availability at each level. If the player wants more than that, of course they'd need to spend the excess off of their WBL.

[Maginomicon]

I don't think anyone involved would argue against all classes getting a boost.I think he was trying to make it clear that it's a slippery-slope argument, not an actual recommendation.

Well my friend is...my friend. That and having seen the so-called "huge wizard boost" in action, I'm naturally inclined to be on his side.It should be irrelevant that you're his friend. Batman wizards are all well-and-good generally-speaking, but by giving the wizard this boost it means that the archivist class (just to give an example) ceases to have a point entirely. Any class-specific house rule that makes any other class be significantly made pointless should always be highly suspect.

[Segev]

To be fair, Archivists have better class features than do wizards.

[Psyren]

You missed my clarification (edited in seconds after I posted the original). The treasure-per-character column is there partially to indicate how much more is spent on the purchase of consumables, which normally have absolutely zero impact on the character's current state but definitely impact their careers before the campaign. My house rule in that respect simply provides a GM guideline for adjudicating how many scrolls/etc. they should be granted at minimum based on character level and spell/power level availability at each level. If the player wants more than that, of course they'd need to spend the excess off of their WBL.

I wouldn't consider those to be consumables though. The scrolls are there not to be one-shots but to actually increase the character's complement.

It would be functionally no different than starting off with a spellbook/prayerbook that contains the additional spells.

Basically, I don't see a reason for giving them even more free spells than they get from leveling. Let them spend wealth if they want more, and deduct it from their equipment budget as needed, just as they would in a normal campaign.


To be fair, Archivists have better class features than do wizards.

In that they have class features :smalltongue:

But even that isn't strictly true thanks to ACFs. Abrupt Jaunt is more useful - in a general sense - than Dread Secret for instance.

And come to think of it, if you optimize your familiar it can pretty much stomp the Archivist too.

[Segev]

I wouldn't consider those to be consumables though. The scrolls are there not to be one-shots but to actually increase the character's complement.

It would be functionally no different than starting off with a spellbook/prayerbook that contains the additional spells.

Basically, I don't see a reason for giving them even more free spells than they get from leveling. Let them spend wealth if they want more, and deduct it from their equipment budget as needed, just as they would in a normal campaign.

No, the scrolls are consumables. The actual price to be taken out of WBL is the cost to scribe it into the spellbook; that is the permanent improvement cost. The scroll cost is consumed. Technically, it's "optional," if the wizard can find a fellow who has the spell or can find another's spellbook.

[Psyren]

No, the scrolls are consumables. The actual price to be taken out of WBL is the cost to scribe it into the spellbook; that is the permanent improvement cost. The scroll cost is consumed. Technically, it's "optional," if the wizard can find a fellow who has the spell or can find another's spellbook.

Again though, you could simply start with a second spellbook/prayerbook and skip the consumable restriction entirely if your DM is being a stickler about it, and save your consumable budget for other things like wands and potions. Which makes it not truly be a "consumable" in my mind.

[Segev]

Again though, you could simply start with a second spellbook/prayerbook and skip the consumable restriction entirely if your DM is being a stickler about it, and save your consumable budget for other things like wands and potions. Which makes it not truly be a "consumable" in my mind.

I don't follow.

"You can start with a second spellbook" in what sense? You still have to pay for it out of your WBL if you're generating your higher-than-1st-level PC with it already owned.

Or are we talking again about the tricks for manipulating arcane versions of divine spells and vice-versa?

[Trunamer]

I think he was trying to make it clear that it's a slippery-slope argument, not an actual recommendation.
*scratches head*

A slippery slope to what? More options? More fun? Rules that match the flavor text? lol, I thought this is what 3e is supposed to be about, but I guess not.


It should be irrelevant that you're his friend. Batman wizards are all well-and-good generally-speaking, but by giving the wizard this boost it means that the archivist class (just to give an example) ceases to have a point entirely. Any class-specific house rule that makes any other class be significantly made pointless should always be highly suspect.
I think it's funny how people who have never actually seen a true 'master of magic' wizard are concerned about stepping on the cleric's toes. Meanwhile, clerics step all over the fighter's toes with all those sweet buffs. Isn't "Clerics are better fighters than fighters" a common meme around here?

btw, remind me what the point of the archivist is to begin with? Other than having a 'creepy' tone, and being handicapped by a prayer book?

[Psyren]

I don't follow.

"You can start with a second spellbook" in what sense? You still have to pay for it out of your WBL if you're generating your higher-than-1st-level PC with it already owned.

Right, that's what I mean - they should spend WBL on additional spells beyond the 2 free ones per level. Magino's rule looks like they are getting additional spells for free.

[Tvtyrant]

Make them choose between banning conjuration and transmutation. They lose about as much as they gain.

[Maginomicon]

*scratches head*

A slippery slope to what? More options? More fun? Rules that match the flavor text? lol, I thought this is what 3e is supposed to be about, but I guess not.


I think it's funny how people who have never actually seen a true 'master of magic' wizard are concerned about stepping on the cleric's toes. Meanwhile, clerics step all over the fighter's toes with all those sweet buffs. Isn't "Clerics are better fighters than fighters" a common meme around here?

btw, remind me what the point of the archivist is to begin with? Other than having a 'creepy' tone, and being handicapped by a prayer book?
First and foremost, beware, you're starting to sound a lot like a lost cause. Gandalf is commonly understood to only have all the power of a 5th-level wizard (at least, by 2e standards). Look it up.

As for the archivist, he was meant largely to be a divine-flavored wizard. Making the wizard steal the archivist's schtick would make the archivist understandably upset.

Furthermore, an archivist is no more "handicapped" by a prayerbook than a wizard is "handicapped" by a spellbook. Also make note of my cost comments below.

Right, that's what I mean - they should spend WBL on additional spells beyond the 2 free ones per level. Magino's rule looks like they are getting additional spells for free.
You shouldn't have your WBL penalized if you spend your fluid afforded-consumables budget on permanent improvements. (improvements which, by the by, can potentially be stolen)

The consumables cost per spell is 100gp x spell level for materials, plus 50gp x spell level if you're copying from someone else's spellbook (there's no costs for spells gained automatically) or the cost of the scroll if copying from a scroll. That's well within the bounds of reason for the consumables budget implied in the meager quantities I describe in my house rule: One spell per spell level per character level.

[Psyren]

You shouldn't have your WBL penalized if you spend your fluid afforded-consumables budget on permanent improvements. (improvements which, by the by, can potentially be stolen)

All gear can be "potentially stolen." Spellbooks, expensive components, wondrous items, even slotted items like rings or headbands. So why should there be special treatment here? (And in the Erudite's case, or an Eidetic Wizard for that matter, you can't steal anything because it's all in his head.)

I get that it's your houserule and so you feel compelled to defend it, I just don't think it's necessary. Prepared casters get enough benefits without needing free spells beyond those already baked into their class.

[Tvtyrant]

All gear can be "potentially stolen." Spellbooks, expensive components, wondrous items, even slotted items like rings or headbands. So why should there be special treatment here? (And in the Erudite's case, or an Eidetic Wizard for that matter, you can't steal anything because it's all in his head.)

I get that it's your houserule and so you feel compelled to defend it, I just don't think it's necessary. Prepared casters get enough benefits without needing free spells beyond those already baked into their class.

On the other hand in an all caster campaign it might work well for fluff reasons. It would be thematically cool to have a series of feats so that the wizard and archivist can cast from other spelllists, indicating their mastery of all magic.

[Maginomicon]

I get that it's your houserule and so you feel compelled to defend it, I just don't think it's necessary. Prepared casters get enough benefits without needing free spells beyond those already baked into their class.Let's take the most absurd example of this logic so we can see how flawed it is.

A sha'ir has a "known spells" list. These are the spells which he knows intimately, and thus has a better chance to fetch them. He also has an "unknown spells" list, which consists of spells he's heard of but doesn't know intimately. That's right, a sha'ir learns spells just by hearing that they exist. There's no spellbook, and no costs for entering them into his repertoire. When he learns the name of a spell (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15202614&postcount=34), he learns the spell, period.

By your logic, a sha'ir should enter a higher-than-1st-level campaign hearing about no spells other than the ones on his "known" list. That is, he'd have no spells whatsoever on his "unknown spells" list.

That's ridiculous.

Please take this to PM if you want to argue about this further. It's derailing the topic.

[Psyren]

That's right, a sha'ir learns spells just by hearing that they exist.

This is actually wrong. A Sha'ir needs to have (a) seen a spell used and (b) identify it with a Spellcraft check for it to be in his "unknown spells" repertoire. Simply hearing about it (from a friend of a friend etc.) isn't enough.



By your logic, a sha'ir should enter a higher-than-1st-level campaign hearing about no spells other than the ones on his "known" list. That is, he'd have no spells whatsoever on his "unknown spells" list.

They can certainly write having made a bunch of Spellcraft checks in the past into their backstory, and the DM can certainly allow it if they choose. But because there is actually a mechanical process for them to do so, this is an area the DM will have to apply liberal salt to (and certainly, some spells will be unlikely for a Sha'ir to have witnessed in person depending on his level.)



Please take this to PM if you want to argue about this further. It's derailing the topic.

This strikes me as a bit petty - By responding to me publicly you appear to be "getting the last word in." If you really want to take it to PM, just respond via PM instead of delivering your answer in the thread and then telling me to not to do so.

And if your houserules are off-topic, why did you bring them up to begin with?

[Trunamer]

First and foremost, beware, you're starting to sound a lot like a lost cause. Gandalf is commonly understood to only have all the power of a 5th-level wizard (at least, by 2e standards). Look it up.
Yeah, this thread became lost to my friend's cause after the first page of fairly consistent bad reactions. And then again, when it became about WBL, archivists, and sha'ir. Glad I'm not actually involved in this mess. So by all means, continue your little debate with psyren. No PMs necessary.

I know about the "Gandalf was a 5th level wizard" meme, and I don't know what it has to do with anything. No, I don't care. Not my mess.


As for the archivist, he was meant largely to be a divine-flavored wizard. Making the wizard steal the archivist's schtick would make the archivist understandably upset.
Well then, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Presumably, if some player gets in a huff because the poor archivist's toes hurt, the DM will apply the same house rule to that class. As you say, the archivist is essentially a divine wizard with class features instead of bonus feats.

[JusticeZero]

Honestly, I increasingly think that the best way to deal with balance for casters is to ban the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid completely. There are newer and better balanced classes that can be used instead. For PF, use Witches, Oracles, Inquisitors etc. Instead. The power levels are much more reasonable for a mixed group. The originals were not designed well, because they had no idea how powerful they could be; they had nothing to compare against.

[Psyren]

So by all means, continue your little debate with psyren. No PMs necessary.

The PM discussion already took place, so there's no need to rehash anything here.


Honestly, I increasingly think that the best way to deal with balance for casters is to ban the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid completely. There are newer and better balanced classes that can be used instead. For PF, use Witches, Oracles, Inquisitors etc. Instead. The power levels are much more reasonable for a mixed group. The originals were not designed well, because they had no idea how powerful they could be; they had nothing to compare against.

Note that Witches are T1 as well, so be careful using them.

One possible "T3 Wizard" could be a Staff Magus, maybe with a couple of utility spells transferred to their list (either for free or via the Spell Blending arcana, or both.) A Hex Staff Magus could be a witch.

[Segev]

For the OP, I stand by my suggestion that his friend look into Wizard/Archivist multiclass into Mystic Theurge. If he can cap it off on the far end all the way to 20, he can reach 9th level casting in both.

[JusticeZero]

How badly do they snap games over their knee as a rule? I see the high flexibility and high powered magic, but do they have as many broken combos? I would hope that the more obscene godliness is lessened in spell availability at least.