Cross Class Spell Research

[SpartanDH45]

What do you guys think about cross class spell research? For example, if you have a spell that exists in class A spell list but not class B, a character could just research to create the spell from class A. It is an idea I have had after seeing some of the really cool assassin only spells from the Spell Compendium.

[BowStreetRunner]

What do you guys think about cross class spell research? For example, if you have a spell that exists in class A spell list but not class B, a character could just research to create the spell from class A. It is an idea I have had after seeing some of the really cool assassin only spells from the Spell Compendium.I would automatically increase the level of any cross class spell that a player wanted to research by at least one level to reflect that they were doing something traditionally difficult for their class. Otherwise you could make other classes obsolete by taking away what makes them uniquely valuable. The number of levels would depend upon just how unusual the spell was compared to the normal repertoire of their class.

However, some things I would not grant. For instance, healing spells are the forte of divine casters. While there are a handful of arcane healing spells, they tend to accomplish this healing in different ways from how divine healing spells work - such as healing at the cost of the caster taking damage, or being limited to healing yourself only, or things like that. So if an arcane caster wanted a healing spell from the divine list, instead of just granting it at a higher spell level, I would add additional limitations to the spell to make it fall more in line with arcane casting themes. Or I would just say no, if it seemed too outlandish of a request.

[SpartanDH45]

Obviously it would all be a case by case basis. I wouldn't want any healing wizards or anything.

[unseenmage]

Obviously it would all be a case by case basis. I wouldn't want any healing wizards or anything.

Healing wizards just Plane Shift the injured to the Positive Energy plane. Of better they Greater Teleport them to a Positive Energy Plane gate or portal. :smallsmile:

[Vertharrad]

If you could just research another casters list onto your own why would you need different casters? The answer to the OP's question is no. Whitewashing stuff creates a black and white non-unique boring world, you must resist such temptations and be better than that.

[SpartanDH45]

Part of the idea was going with the concept of researching a new spell, but instead of making something entirely new, they attempt to recreate the effects of another spell in another list.

[ezekielraiden]

I'm cool with it, but I would want to handle it similar to how I like to do powerful, player-driven item crafting: Make an adventure of it. Especially if it's something outside the normal wheelhouse of a class, and double-extra-especially if it's beyond the class's normal limits.

For example: regular Summoners get Lesser and normal Create Demiplane. I can absolutely see how a player would want to be able to cast Greater Create Demiplane--it's not like they *can't* create their own (demi)plane already, and the better spell offers a handful of very nice perks. By that same token, it's a 9th level spell. Casting it is something genuinely Special for a regular Summoner, even if you account for the spell level discounts they get. So I'd break it up into a sequence of quests.

First: Develop the Tome. You are creating a great artifact--in a sense, a (somewhat? limitedly?) reusable scroll of a spell you don't actually know. This requires gathering knowledge from far-flung places, piecing it together, solving ancient riddles and consorting with transplanar powers. Perhaps a god whose favor you have curried will lend a hand; perhaps things from beyond the veil of space and time will whisper the secrets in your dreams if you will but do some "small" service for them. Etc.

Second: Craft the Tome. Now you must use the accumulated knowledge to prepare the physical receptacle of the spell. Because the spell's very nature is one that spans the planes, you, too, will have to span them. You will need a powerful alchemical ingredient extracted from somewhere dangerous or difficult-to-reach in at least twelve distinct planes. (Insert list of things here, like the blood of an inevitable and the flight feathers of an angel.) The actual crafting ritual will still be a difficult, involved affair even with such materials--acquiring further materials may ease the process, and so might calling on the aid of friendly spellcasters of similar power.

Third: Scribe the spell and conduct the ritual empowerment. The climax of the process. Undoubtedly, enemies and rivals will try to disrupt the ritual or steal the resulting artifact. The Summoner will need to rely on allies to protect them while they complete this truly epic quest. When the dust settles and the work is finished, the Grimoire of Creation is complete, and can be used once to cast Greater Create Demiplane once.

The Summoner may re-empower the Grimoire by investing spell levels into it. If he has invested at least 120 spell levels per week, with no less than 30 and no more than 60 spell levels invested on any day of empowerment, for at least four consecutive weeks, the Grimoire can be used one additional time. Only the creator's own Summoner spell slots count for this empowerment ritual. Spell slots from any other being or source are lost, as are any spell levels in excess of the 60 per day and 120 per week limits. The Grimoire can only receive spell levels if it is not fully empowered, though no spell slots are lost attempting to empower a "full" Grimoire. Empowering with more than 40 spell levels significantly drains the summoner, causing her to be fatigued and shaken for at least 24 hours, or exhausted and shaken for that same duration if she was already fatigued (no feats, spells, items, class features, racial features, traits, or any other characteristic or form of intervention short of wish or a deity's personal assistance can remove or reduce these statuses before their listed duration).

Fourth: Profit! You've just had an awesome major campaign quest and produced something truly unique and special.

Now, obviously, not all spells are going to be THIS big and dramatic. Some of them are going to be a lot more mundane, and that's fine. But any spell research outside a class's defined capabilities, and definitely any brand-new spell, should involve a meaningful effort on the player's part. Explanations of how a spell came to be, what prompted discoveries, what experimentation was necessary to determine the minimum set of spell components, etc.

That's how you let your players have what they want, and yet feel like they've earned it.

[Skevvix]

If one of my players wanted to do this I would allow it, it is RAW after all. I wouldn't impose any arbitrary restrictions, or jack around with them to punish then for creativity, just maybe make a quest line out of it.
I could also see making it non-tradable so they don't sell it off to other casters, only the one that did the research could cast it, or completion items created with it.

[liquidformat]

I would agree quest line should be the way to handle spell research that goes beyond the scope of normal class spells, heck in some campaign worlds it should be the way to handle spells that don't appear in the phb/sc. The one comment on spells that only appear on a PRC spell list such as assassin, you should be looking at minimum ECL where an assassin could cast that spell and not the spell level given on the assassin list. So a level 1 spell that only appears on the assassin list should be at least a level 3 spell for the wizard. In general I think spells that only show on the bard list or other arcane casters should be bumped up a spell level and ones from divine spell lists should be bumped up 2 spell levels just to show that they are more difficult for your class to understand and require more 'power' to simulate.

[Vertharrad]

Arbitrary? Maybe you would like to show me where in the rules it says specifically that you can research spells from a different classes spell list?

[ezekielraiden]

Arbitrary? Maybe you would like to show me where in the rules it says specifically that you can research spells from a different classes spell list?

d20 SRD, "Arcane Spells," final section (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#addingSpellstoaSorcerersorBardsRe pertoire) (emphasis added):

Adding Spells to a Sorcerer’s or Bard’s Repertoire

A sorcerer or bard gains spells each time he attains a new level in his class and never gains spells any other way. When your sorcerer or bard gains a new level, consult Table: The Bard or Table: Sorcerer Spells Known to learn how many spells from the appropriate spell list he now knows. With permission, sorcerers and bards can also select the spells they gain from new and unusual spells that they have gained some understanding of.

"New" spells could be ambiguous--it might refer exclusively to spells invented in whole cloth by the Bard or Sorcerer. "Unusual," however, is not ambiguous, because of the preceding sentence. A Sorcerer or Bard, by the default rules, can always pick from the appropriate spell list (Sorc/Wiz or Bard, respectively). Therefore, the only "unusual" spells they could potentially learn are ones not on their class's list, so the rules do specifically say that, with DM permission, it can happen. Since independent research is a DM-permission thing anyway, it is a capricious distinction to allow certain kinds of new development but not others. All DM decisions are ultimately arbitrary, but this particular form of it comes across as penalizing only one side of the equation and not the other (since Divine spellcasters can also research new spells with DM approval; see the SRD page on Divine Magic.)

[Deophaun]

Logically, it makes sense to conclude that there are limits as to what can be cross-classed, and that the game world must be close to those limits if not already at them, by virtue of the fact that sorcerers haven't adapted every spell from every other list already.

Therefore, the only "unusual" spells they could potentially learn are ones not on their class's list, so the rules do specifically say that, with DM permission, it can happen.
Being able to pick spells not on your list != being able to pick spells on another class's list. An example in game would be Sanctified spells, which appear on no class's list.

[umbergod]

Logically, it makes sense to conclude that there are limits as to what can be cross-classed, and that the game world must be close to those limits if not already at them, by virtue of the fact that sorcerers haven't adapted every spell from every other list already.

Being able to pick spells not on your list != being able to pick spells on another class's list. An example in game would be Sanctified spells, which appear on no class's list.

With prepared spellcaster feat and appropriate alignment, sanctified/corrupt spells would indeed be added to their spell lists

[SpartanDH45]

Arbitrary? Maybe you would like to show me where in the rules it says specifically that you can research spells from a different classes spell list?

Well page 198 of the DMG gives advice for allowing player created spells, and I don't see where it says you can't research spells of another class. Considering how many spells are both on arcane and divine lists it seems strange to not allow this sort of thing.

[Deophaun]

With prepared spellcaster feat and appropriate alignment, sanctified/corrupt spells would indeed be added to their spell lists
We aren't talking about "their spell lists." We're talking about their class's list. If it added it to the class's list, then any one of that class could take the spell once the first person took the feat.

[Cosi]

I would want to support people supplementing their lists with new spells. The idea of a Warmage with a couple of Assassin spells, or a Cleric with a couple of Ranger spells, or a Beguiler with some Transmutations, or whatever, is something the game should support. I'm not sure spell research is necessarily the right option for that, just because of how poorly defined it is. I think it would better to tune up options like Prestige Paladin/Ranger/Bard, Extra Spell, or maybe Arcane Disciple.

[ezekielraiden]

Logically, it makes sense to conclude that there are limits as to what can be cross-classed,

I would say "can be," rather than "are." Considering we have spells that can literally do pretty much anything (wish, miracle, the anyspell variants), there's some notable leeway. If wish as a 9th level spell can duplicate a (non-forbidden school) divine spell of 7th level or lower, and limited wish as a 7th level spell any (non-forbidden) divine spell of 5th level or lower, it doesn't seem unreasonable to duplicate a non-forbidden *single* divine spell at level +1, or have a reduced/altered/more-specific effect at level+0.


and that the game world must be close to those limits if not already at them, by virtue of the fact that sorcerers haven't adapted every spell from every other list already.

This, on the other hand, is very^10 much a matter of taste. High-level casters are rare, and spell access is generally guarded pretty covetously--something the game is very clear about. For example, by your logic, a divine caster, e.g. Cleric, who researches a new spell should have automatically added it to the spell list of every Cleric in the world--all Clerics know all spells on the Cleric list, right? Except that that's not the case with individually-researched divine spells. Only the researcher knows how to cast it, though they may choose to share it with others (as explicitly noted in the Divine Magic page).

Since Clerics don't instantly pick up these new spells, it seems pretty clear that even if every spell had been adapted to every class list, most of them haven't been shared much, in keeping with the jealous guarding of spell knowledge D&D explicitly includes. But a lot of them have--which is why there are divine and arcane versions of many, many spells.


Being able to pick spells not on your list != being able to pick spells on another class's list. An example in game would be Sanctified spells, which appear on no class's list.

That's...kind of a tortured reading, especially since *both* the 3.0 and 3.5 PHBs predate the existence of such things (and have identical wording WRT Independent Research for Wizards, for Sorcerers/Bards, and for divine casters). Also, you're technically not "picking" spells on another class's list, since that implies (effectively) the abolishment of all spell lists and that's clearly not the effect or intent of the rules. Instead, you're researching them to duplicate their effects, as a new spell on your personal list.

You can invent new spells. New spells can be "unusual." They are not automatically shared with other casters of the same class, even for classes that normally do share their entire spell list. NPC casters jealously guard their secrets, so unusual spells are rare. Independent research of this kind requires DM approval, but nothing in the text requires or even implies that the campaign "must be close to [the maximum] limits if not already at them" with regard to what spellcasters can research.

Don't get me wrong. I think spells are already grotesquely overpowered (my preferred games are 4e and 13A). But you're inserting a lot more into these rules than they actually say, on the basis of rules that post-date the original text substantially, text that was reiterated in the .5 revision.


I would want to support people supplementing their lists with new spells. The idea of a Warmage with a couple of Assassin spells, or a Cleric with a couple of Ranger spells, or a Beguiler with some Transmutations, or whatever, is something the game should support. I'm not sure spell research is necessarily the right option for that, just because of how poorly defined it is. I think it would better to tune up options like Prestige Paladin/Ranger/Bard, Extra Spell, or maybe Arcane Disciple.

Perfectly reasonable. Spell research is, I think, intentionally left extremely open-ended so DMs can figure out how they want to do it for themselves. That's good for embracing player creativity, but bad for helping DMs avoid players riding roughshod over their games.

To clarify my above response, I'm not at all trying to assert that the DM can never say no. I'm saying that the reasoning presented for saying no appears to resort to twisted logic, and further, appears to claim that this logic is both the RAW and the RAI, and I disagree with both claims. This doesn't stop any DM ever from saying no. I, personally, am very much a fan of always trying to support genuine player enthusiasm, so unless it's clearly abusive, I'll tend to allow it...with reasonable caveats, hurdles, or exceptions. Hence my above "creating a Summoner-focused plane-creation artifact." (I might actually tweak it so that the effects of the Grimoire are considered to automatically have permanency applied to them, not sure.)

It's good for DMs to have a healthy ability to distinguish between what is perfectly acceptable, what is acceptable with tweaking, and what is not acceptable. I don't think it's possible to argue, just from the text regarding spell lists and independent research, that a (frex) Sorcerer cannot learn to cast spell resistance, even though that's (essentially) a Cleric-only spell in 3.5e, and certainly a Divine-only spell in PF. I will want more than just, "I did the research! I should get it!" I'll want a LOT more than that--how did you turn divine mysteries into intuitive magic? Did you consult with divine casters, did you take time to meditate on the powers of celestial beings, do you have a personal connection with a deity who was willing to aid you? Etc. Answering these questions to my satisfaction, particularly through actual play, will likely earn you the spell, especially since it consumes one of your spells known without increasing that count. (Though, frankly, I have soft spot for Sorcerers, so I might actually let players earn spells known beyond their normal limit, though again this would require demonstration of having worked toward it, not fiat declaration.)

[Deophaun]

That's...kind of a tortured reading
Do not complain about other's tortured reading.

There is nothing "unusual" about cure light wounds. Cure light wounds is probably the most commonly cast spell in the game world outside of cantrips. Yet your interpretation relies on it falling under the category of "unusual."


Also, you're technically not "picking" spells on another class's list, since that implies (effectively) the abolishment of all spell lists and that's clearly not the effect or intent of the rules. Instead, you're researching them to duplicate their effects, as a new spell on your personal list.
And now you've just eaten your own argument: You've collapsed "unusual" and "new" into being the exact same thing.


You can invent new spells. New spells can be "unusual." They are not automatically shared with other casters of the same class, even for classes that normally do share their entire spell list. NPC casters jealously guard their secrets, so unusual spells are rare.
Now I'm confused, because you're arguing against your own words:

A Sorcerer or Bard, by the default rules, can always pick from the appropriate spell list (Sorc/Wiz or Bard, respectively). Therefore, the only "unusual" spells they could potentially learn are ones not on their class's list, so the rules do specifically say that, with DM permission, it can happen.
Either Sorcerers and Bards can always pick from the appropriate spell list, or they're restricted to a subset of usual spells. Which is it? BTW: I agree with you now. But what you're saying now is the opposite of what you said then.

So we can say old you is wrong: Since "unusual" and "new" are, by your own argument, the same things, or "unusual" are already existing Sorcerer/Bard spells that for some reason or another are off limits for Sorcerers and Bards to just pick up through normal methods, the game does not specifically say that you can research spells off other lists.


Independent research of this kind requires DM approval, but nothing in the text requires or even implies that the campaign "must be close to [the maximum] limits if not already at them" with regard to what spellcasters can research.
It's not the text that implies it: it's the state of the world itself. Most campaign settings have a long, rich history of magic. Forgotten Realms is rife with epic spellcasters in a constant (unoptimized) arms race with each other. Eberron introduces an entire class dedicated to grabbing whatever magic from any source it can. And yet, after thousands of years, when the PCs come into these settings they still have very well defined lists. That implies the setting are at the limit of what can be cross-listed.


But you're inserting a lot more into these rules than they actually say
I'm not the one here redefining words, or requiring there be words in the text that aren't.

[RoboEmperor]

What do you guys think about cross class spell research? For example, if you have a spell that exists in class A spell list but not class B, a character could just research to create the spell from class A. It is an idea I have had after seeing some of the really cool assassin only spells from the Spell Compendium.

Wyrm Wizard. Check it out. It's a prestige class in Dragon Magic that does exactly this. It should show you that cross class spell research requires class features to accomplish.

[BowStreetRunner]

Wyrm Wizard. Check it out. It's a prestige class in Dragon Magic that does exactly this. It should show you that cross class spell research requires class features to accomplish.Note that it states "You can add this spell to your arcane spellcasting class spell list as a spell of the same level; all other aspects of the spell remain unchanged."DM55 This goes back to my previous post - I would recommend normal cross-class research results either increase the spell level, change some of the details of the spell, or both. Any details changed should make the new spell strictly inferior to the old spell to reflect the fact that this is outside the area of strength of the caster's own class. The Wyrm Wizard class feature would allow cross-class research then to overcome these limits and acquire the spell unchanged.

[Darth Ultron]

It's not the text that implies it: it's the state of the world itself. Most campaign settings have a long, rich history of magic. Forgotten Realms is rife with epic spellcasters in a constant (unoptimized) arms race with each other. Eberron introduces an entire class dedicated to grabbing whatever magic from any source it can. And yet, after thousands of years, when the PCs come into these settings they still have very well defined lists. That implies the setting are at the limit of what can be cross-listed.

This simply is not true.

There is no limit on what spells can be cross listed. In no way is a class spell list some how special or unique to that class.

The spell lists simply make no sense what so ever. What is a bard type spell? What is a cleric type spell? What is a sorcerer/wizard type spell?

It's tempting to say, for example, that healing is a cleric only type spell...except bard's also get healing spells...arcane healing spells. Bards also get delay and neutralize poison, 'cleric type cure spells'.

The Ranger gets the magic fang spells...but not the magic weapon spells, very odd as the ranger does in fact use weapons. Why does the ranger not get Bull’s Strength?

Why don't clerics get ghoul touch or vampire touch? They get plenty of other negative energy touch spells. Why don't cleric's get See Invisibility? Why don't clerics get Wall of Fire or Wall of Ice? Why don't they get Heroism?

Why don't druids get Web? Why don't druids get Wall of Ice?

And then there is Sorcerer/Wizards: Why don't they get Animate Objects, Make Whole, Heat Metal, Wood Shape, Silence or Death Ward?

Sure, you might say the mythical ''balance'' is the answer, but really would the above spells do that?

The simple answer is, there is no reason. The reason why most spells are on each list is tradition, going all the way back to 0E. A 'cleric type' in a story could make a plague of insects...so that became an official D&D cleric spell. A wizard in a story could shoot a lightning bolt, so that became an official wizard spell. And so on.

The Forgotten Realms setting does also stand out that a great many spellcasters, ''over the thousands of years'' have ''crossed'' over a great many spells, copies or re-images. Of course this was much more common in 2E.

[Deophaun]

This simply is not true.
So, if I start a campaign in FR, my 1st level Cleric of Bane can prepare any 1st level Wizard spell? Bards can just pick boreal wind as a spell known, no problem? A Dread Necromancer can spontaneously cast teleport because why not?

When you claim something is not true, you should try to actually address what was stated, as opposed to going off on design decisions that have absolutely nothing to do with the statement. Take this as an example:

Sure, you might say the mythical ''balance'' is the answer, but really would the above spells do that?
WTF said anything about balance? No one, that's who. Why is the word in quotes?

Your entire post is just a list of red herrings.

[Cosi]

The number of spells that are worth it at level + 1 is very small. I think having that as your standard is going to result in people mostly dumpster diving for things that are crazy good. For example, I would anticipate that most off-list spells researched in this situation would use Artificer-esque cheese to get spells at low levels (e.g. Trapsmith haste at +1 level is still a level early). I think the alternative of (for example) limiting research to one spell per four levels or similar would tend to produce better results. Basically give everyone access to a weaker version of the Warmage Esoteric Learning ACF. Or just buff Apprentice to let anyone swap one spell per level for any spell. There are a lot of tools for this already, and many of them are quite effective.

[sleepyphoenixx]

No spell research in my games. Or at least not to duplicate spells from other class lists.
There are already plenty of options to get spells from another class list that players can use if they want it bad enough. I'm not going to make those obsolete by letting players cherrypick spells off other lists at will.

I'm (in principle) open to the idea of custom, homebrewed spells. Assuming they're balanced and actually have a purpose other than "more power for me". You can't research a better Fireball, for example.
I've yet to see a player use it, but that's hardly surprising. Not only are our games usually not suited for longwinded research, i also don't ban much content and allow all official books as sources.
So there's already hundreds of official spells available, making it difficult to justify creating a custom spell for something that you can likely already do with an official one.

[Darth Ultron]

So, if I start a campaign in FR, my 1st level Cleric of Bane can prepare any 1st level Wizard spell? Bards can just pick boreal wind as a spell known, no problem? A Dread Necromancer can spontaneously cast teleport because why not?

Well, your just stating wacky things that ignore or break the rules.

My point is there is nothing in the rules or the settings that says what spells a character can research. So, a character can research any spell they want too. There is no rule that says something like Class X can never use this spell.




When you claim something is not true, you should try to actually address what was stated, as opposed to going off on design decisions that have absolutely nothing to do with the statement. Take this as an example:

WTF said anything about balance? No one, that's who. Why is the word in quotes?

Your entire post is just a list of red herrings.

You made the claim, with no citations, that the settings of D&D "these settings they still have very well defined lists" and ''are at the limit of what can be cross-listed."

I was addressing that both of those statements are not true. But, if either is true, please provide a book and page number for the rule.

Nowhere, in all the D&D rules is there any set and well defined rules as to what each spellcasting class spell list ''is''. So how can someone say that spell ''is'' or ''is not" right for that class? It is nothing other then a personal view point.

[Deophaun]

Nowhere, in all the D&D rules is there any set and well defined rules as to what each spellcasting class spell list ''is''.
Except for every place that lists a spell and tells you precisely what list it's on.

You're just being ridiculous. I'm not going waste any further time on you.

[BowStreetRunner]

My point is there is nothing in the rules or the settings that says what spells a character can research. So, a character can research any spell they want too. There is no rule that says something like Class X can never use this spell.The rules leave it up to the DM. The advice I have given here suggests how I, as a DM, would approach requests of this nature from my players, and my rationale for doing so. If I was your DM and you came to me with your arguments, this is what I would reply:


There is no limit on what spells can be cross listed.Sure there is. It's spelled out on page 35 of the DMG. To paraphrase: it's up to the DM, not the player. It equates to Rule 0. Theoretical optimizers like to ignore this rule, but very few players ever actually get to run a game where their DM rubber-stamps everything they desire.


Sure, you might say the mythical ''balance'' is the answer, but really would the above spells do that?The mythical balance you are talking about is the product of game design and play testing. If you don't like the outcome, feel free to argue why you feel the balance doesn't really work for your games. But that doesn't mean it isn't there. A couple decades ago I developed a software application for a company that I was working for. After all of the design meetings and exhaustive testing we performed to get the application just right, it took the end-users less than a day after its release for them to attempt to perform actions that no one ever expected and thus effectively break the system. It happens. The game designers for this game put a lot of work into achieving what they considered to be a balanced outcome. There was a ton of play-testing. Then after the game was rolled out they continued to deal for some time with player feedback and fixed problems with errata where necessary before they eventually stopped supporting the game and moved on to the next edition. So I get it - the balance doesn't work for you. But that doesn't mean it's not there. The rules for Creating New Spells do start off saying "Introducing an unbalanced spell does more damage to your game than handing out an unbalanced magic item."DMG35 Balance really is a concern.

It isn't that there is no reason, as you suggest. It's that you don't know what the reasons are so you assume there aren't any. That is simply not the same thing.

[Darth Ultron]

Except for every place that lists a spell and tells you precisely what list it's on.

You're just being ridiculous. I'm not going waste any further time on you.

Sure, you can read the lists? Not sure what your point is?

Still, you can research any spell. Period.




Sure there is.

Yes, Rule Zero. I'm a big rule zero user myself.



The mythical balance you are talking about is the product of game design and play testing. If you don't like the outcome, feel free to argue why you feel the balance doesn't really work for your games. But that doesn't mean it isn't there.

I'm not talking about the ''mythical playtesting'', I'm just talking about the rules. There is no set, firm rule that says you can't research or 'have' any spell in the game.

And, the so called 'playtesting' of D&D is more of a joke. Sure ''they'' sat down and played a game for a couple minutes and then said ''wow, best game 4ever".

Either they just asked a bunch of ''yes people" that just automatically agreed with them or they utterly did not listen to a single thing they were told. How else can you explain all the wacky stuff? Oh, they just made 300 mistakes...oops?



A couple decades ago I developed a software application for a company that I was working for. After all of the design meetings and exhaustive testing we performed to get the application just right, it took the end-users less than a day after its release for them to attempt to perform actions that no one ever expected and thus effectively break the system. It happens.

It does, but it should not.

Typically, too many ''test'' things on only a very small amount of a single type of person..often the ones that think just like them. And you get exactly like you described.

But, ''suddenly'' when you 'test' something on many, many, many types of people you get lots of different things. Amazing how that works.



The rules for Creating New Spells do start off saying "Introducing an unbalanced spell does more damage to your game than handing out an unbalanced magic item."DMG35 Balance really is a concern.

It isn't that there is no reason, as you suggest. It's that you don't know what the reasons are so you assume there aren't any. That is simply not the same thing.

I guess it could be said there are ''secret reasons'' that they kept hidden. So, we will never know....

And, I don't believe in the 'balance'. The 'mythical balance' would say that 'the wise game designers' though that wizards and sorcerer should not have healing for ''balance''....and yet they are fine with EVERY character in a game having at least two Healing Belts and only doing 15 minute days.

[CharonsHelper]

In Pathfinder there is the Ring of Spell Knowledge (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/rings/ring-of-spell-knowledge/).

It lets spontaneous casters add a spell to their "Spells Known" list. It lets them add spells on other lists, but they count as 1 caster level higher in every way. (I remember considering making a PFS natural weapon dragon disciple, and I wanted a way to cast Barkskin on myself since my amulet slot would be taken by an AoMF.)

But of note - it ONLY allowed arcane spells for arcane casters (I believe that there is also a divine version). But a sorcerer could get Cure spells due to the bard list, or Barkskin from the summoner list. I'd suggest a similar ruling for the research.

So - that might be a decent baseline? Jack up the cost of research beyond the ring's though since you're basically making it slotless instead of using up a ring slot.

[BowStreetRunner]

Typically, too many ''test'' things on only a very small amount of a single type of person..often the ones that think just like them. And you get exactly like you described.

But, ''suddenly'' when you 'test' something on many, many, many types of people you get lots of different things. Amazing how that works.Actually, it isn't amazing because it doesn't work at all. No one carries out a 100% user test because it isn't practical and it's a waste of time and resources. There is such a thing as good enough. And there will always be people who are unhappy with the result. TSR & WOTC were always both businesses looking to make money, and that was 100% their bottom line.

Cross Class Spell Research should always take into account game balance as perceived by the DM. Some DMs are going to be bad at accomplishing that goal. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be a goal. Anarchy isn't a viable method of running an RPG. Just throwing away the rules and the attempted game balance and everything else because you don't think they did a good job so &*@$ it, isn't a valid approach. Most of the people in this thread have been trying to offer constructive ideas on how to manage such requests - either from the point of view of the DM or the player they are trying to suggest ways to make this work. Advocating that the floodgates should just be opened and every caster class should have access to all spells isn't really productive or useful advice. Do you really, honestly believe that would actually make anyone's game better? Seriously???

[Darth Ultron]

Advocating that the floodgates should just be opened and every caster class should have access to all spells isn't really productive or useful advice. Do you really, honestly believe that would actually make anyone's game better? Seriously???

Yes.

And many people agree, just take the facts:

1.Most people ignore and homebrew away ANY cross class penalties.
2.Most gamers love to Gestalt characters, and always do it.

So, in otherwords, you can make a Cleric/Wizard....with full casting access to the two huge lists. Druid/Cleric, Wizard/Ranger, Cleric/Bard, Wizard/Ranger/Assassin etc.

So any spell, you'd say is 'special' and on a list...can be taken and used.

So if you can gestalt and get another class list...is the idea of just having one spell list really such a radical idea?

[RoboEmperor]

Yes.

And many people agree, just take the facts:

1.Most people ignore and homebrew away ANY cross class penalties.
2.Most gamers love to Gestalt characters, and always do it.

So, in otherwords, you can make a Cleric/Wizard....with full casting access to the two huge lists. Druid/Cleric, Wizard/Ranger, Cleric/Bard, Wizard/Ranger/Assassin etc.

So any spell, you'd say is 'special' and on a list...can be taken and used.

So if you can gestalt and get another class list...is the idea of just having one spell list really such a radical idea?

Where are you getting your statistics? Everyone I know, both DM and players, hate Gestalt and loathe homebrew. If I'm forced to play in a gestalt game I will still play a single classed character.

Why are you even using classes? Have everyone character gain access to everything from level 1. So a level 1 character has the spellcasting of a 1st level cleric, wizard, druid, psion, etc. and the combat features of a level 1 barbarian, fighter, marshal, etc.

Specialization and restrictions encourage teamwork and uniqueness which makes the game more fun. 3.5 gives you enough resources for you to pull off a few shticks but not enough to do everything unless you specifically cheese for it. If you're the type that likes being a god and able to do everything at the same time then you're the minority, not the "most"

[BowStreetRunner]

...just take the facts:

1.Most people ignore and homebrew away ANY cross class penalties.
2.Most gamers love to Gestalt characters, and always do it.

You made the claim, with no citations...It is nothing other then a personal view point.
I'm just going to leave these here next to one another.

[Segev]

The Sorcerer class is perhaps the best one to try to justify cross-class spell research for, since it actually does have a line that says it can learn spells it specifically researches. One (very solid) way to interpret that is to mean that it can do research the same way wizards can to make up new spells, but another is to suggest that sorcerers, under tightly-controlled-by-the-DM circumstances, might not be limited to their class list for their Sorcerer spells known.

[Darth Ultron]

Specialization and restrictions encourage teamwork and uniqueness which makes the game more fun. 3.5 gives you enough resources for you to pull off a few shticks but not enough to do everything unless you specifically cheese for it. If you're the type that likes being a god and able to do everything at the same time then you're the minority, not the "most"

It does? And just where are your statistics on this? Odd, you don't feel the need to give 'statistics' , but do ask for them.

But if they made the spell list to some how ''encourage teamwork and uniqueness", then they did the worst job ever. They could have asked an average five year old to do a better job.

[CharonsHelper]

Why is this thread falling into a Darth Ultron tangent? :smalleek:

[umbergod]

We aren't talking about "their spell lists." We're talking about their class's list. If it added it to the class's list, then any one of that class could take the spell once the first person took the feat.

So a lawful good/evil wozard doesnt automatically gain access to sanctified/corrupt spells, as per the rules around those spells?

[Deophaun]

So a lawful good/evil wozard doesnt automatically gain access to sanctified/corrupt spells, as per the rules around those spells?
They gain access to the spells, but the spells are never on the wizard list.

[umbergod]

They gain access to the spells, but the spells are never on the wizard list.

Access to the spell, meaning ability to cast it without relying on UMD. Meaning its on their spell list, which is part of their class. So yeah, it does get added to the "wizard list" of every wizard of appropriate alignment, assuming their dm utilizes corrupt/sanctified spells

[Deophaun]

Access to the spell, meaning ability to cast it without relying on UMD. Meaning its on their spell list, which is part of their class.
No. Your class list is the base of your spell list. It is not the whole of your spell list. Other things, such as feats or class abilities, can extend your spell list beyond your class list. Because, if it's part of your class list, then everyone with access to the class list can cast it.

[Vaern]

I'd say it's fine for a character to research a spell from another class's list if that spell reasonably fits with your own class or specific character concept thematically. For example, if a cross-class sorcerer/rogue is built around using his spellpower to enhance his rogue skills, it would be reasonable for him to be able to dip into the assassin spell list and pick up Sticky Fingers or something.
If it's just some generic wizard who picks up a scroll of Cursed Blade, on the other hand, I would rule against him being able to add it to his spellbook.

Something kind of sort of similar came up when I became a Sublime Chord. They gain bard and sorc/wiz spells from 4th to 9th level, but bard spells only go up to 6th level. I pointed out that bards learn the whole Cure chain up to that point and asked my DM if I could learn Heal as a "bard 7" spell since it fits in with the class's existing spell list. He said he'd allow it, but only if my character went through the lengthy and expensive process of personally researching a new spell to add it to his spell list.

[daremetoidareyo]

If we can all stand back for a moment, and observe how this highly modular game that was developed using rough sets of interlocking mechanisms operated by the algorithm of RAW, has glitches that produce a real world preponderance of server space entirely devoted to those parts of where the virtual reality engine of d&d fails. And at the site of these malfunctions, battles of will rage in the court of reason as spectators gather around for the opportunity to have a relatable snide comment as they watch Titans made up of the primordial ingredients of ego and rectitude struggle in text based combat for memetic dominance.

It's like poor implementation of d&d 3.5 so many years ago has created this difficult to observe emotional echo where the break downs in the rules interpretation engine has created this beacon for emotional gremlins to affect real people to act on their behalf. So let that be a warning to you, game designers of today and tomorrow! We want seemless transition and adjudication or your failures will be colonized by gremlins and we'll argue so much that server space will be used a lot. But if we measure that server space content in computational effort and manpower hours, those glitches are hurting the productivity of society.

[Segev]

No. Your class list is the base of your spell list. It is not the whole of your spell list. Other things, such as feats or class abilities, can extend your spell list beyond your class list. Because, if it's part of your class list, then everyone with access to the class list can cast it.

Eh, not necessarily. Just because it's part of your class list doesn't mean it's part of your class's generic list. Bob the Wizard might have a feat or class feature that adds barkskin to his class list (and thus lets him scribe it from a scroll into his spellbook as a known spell), but that wouldn't make it part of the Wizard class list. Just part of the list of spells Bob can use wands and staves and read scrolls of without UMD.

[Skevvix]

Eh, not necessarily. Just because it's part of your class list doesn't mean it's part of your class's generic list. Bob the Wizard might have a feat or class feature that adds barkskin to his class list (and thus lets him scribe it from a scroll into his spellbook as a known spell), but that wouldn't make it part of the Wizard class list. Just part of the list of spells Bob can use wands and staves and read scrolls of without UMD.

That's what Deophaun was saying, at least that's how I took it.

[Vertharrad]

Generally spellcasting classes have their own class spell list that tell them what spells they can pick from(in the case of wizards, sorcerers, bards, etc.) or that they know(in the case of clerics, druids, etc.). Specific cases to counter that are feats, ACF's, PrC's, etc. Research is done when you are either coming up with a new spell or don't otherwise have access to that spell. Which by the way; book wise(at least PHB wise) only wizards get to research, other classes get their spells other ways. Sorcerers and bards learn their spells through experience and perserverance hence why I think their rule in this case is ambiguous(but still doesn't specifically state they can choose from off their list). Do I think that a 18+ lvl psycho pyro "archmage" has the right to "research" a 8th lvl druid only spell into his spellbook? No. There are other ways to get that; and if those ways don't work or give the option for that, then s/he wasn't meant to do that(or have that).

If anyone thinks otherwise then you don't want unique and different casters. Get rid of every other caster because they're going to be replaced by the wizard that just researches any spell s/he wants...

I can't nor do I want to come to your game and tell you how to DM it. That's your responsibility, just don't tell me that RAW supports what you want to houserule. Can I be made responsible when a company whose job it is to make money off of RPG's doesn't adequately support the very rules they made? Or errata them? No. That is why rule 0 was made for DM's to make that deliberation.

If you want to allow them to do that it's all fine with me as long as you know what your doing. Others have already given good ideas. Personally the quest thing sounds okay as long as it isn't too easy.

[Crichton]

Which by the way; book wise(at least PHB wise) only wizards get to research, .



Well, not only Wizards

Divine Casters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/divineSpells.htm#divineIndependentResearch) of all types and Psionic Classes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicPowersOverview.htm#independentResearch) of all types can also research new spells/powers.


The rules for psionic power research are actually much more clearly spelled out, with time and xp costs specifically laid out for you.

[Vertharrad]

Divine casters especially the ones in the PHB know their spells, the only exception being splatbook divine casters and/or splatbook spells for those lists. Psionic classes may just be another edge case like the sorcerer and bard. That doesn't mean that DM's shouldn't use their own deliberation. RAW support just works upto the point that the dm put's his/her foot down, then your well within your rights to walk out if you want to. And don't forget psionics isn't allowed at every table which makes it even more an edge case than sorcerer and bard.

[BowStreetRunner]

Divine casters especially the ones in the PHB know their spells, the only exception being splatbook divine casters and/or splatbook spells for those lists. Psionic classes may just be another edge case like the sorcerer and bard. That doesn't mean that DM's shouldn't use their own deliberation. RAW support just works upto the point that the dm put's his/her foot down, then your well within your rights to walk out if you want to. And don't forget psionics isn't allowed at every table which makes it even more an edge case than sorcerer and bard.You do realize that Drysdan posted the links to the Independent Research rules for Divine casters and Psion Classes right in his post, right?
Well, not only Wizards

Divine Casters (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/divineSpells.htm#divineIndependentResearch) of all types and Psionic Classes (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicPowersOverview.htm#independentResearch) of all types can also research new spells/powers.


The rules for psionic power research are actually much more clearly spelled out, with time and xp costs specifically laid out for you.

[Vaern]

I can't find it in the SRD, but the DMG's section on creating original spells states, quite unambiguously:
"A spellcaster of any kind can create new spells. The research to do this requires access to a well-stocked library, usually in a large city or metropolis. Research requires an expenditure of 1,000 gp per week and takes one week per level of the spell."
It also goes on to say that independent research does not allow classes like bards and sorcerers to exceed their maximum limit of spells known - so yes, sorcerers and bards are perfectly capable of doing spell research.
So if your pyro sorcerer sees Fire Storm of the druid list and thinks, "Wow, that would be dandy for this whole fire theme I've got going on," there's nothing but the DM's opinion on the matter preventing him from creating his own arcane version of the same spell to add to his list the next time he levels up.