Homebrew Concept: Prohibit Specific Spell Schools Based on Specialization

[NerdHut]

I've tried to find other threads discussing this concept, but have had no luck.

What if specialist wizards' prohibited schools were determined by their school specialization? I've always found it odd that when you specialize in a school of magic, you can pick which two are prohibited. And this is purely a matter of interpretation of a theme. I feel like it should be a matter of specialization leading a wizard to forego the study of dissimilar magic, rather than just ignore two arbitrary schools.

For this concept, you would need to determine what schools of magic are most dissimilar. Or at the very least, which are most similar, and then arrange them so that there are two schools thematically opposed to each specialist option. The existing schools of magic and specialization rules support this relatively well. There are 8 schools, but only seven can be banned. One option is to arrange the schools in a 7-pointed star with Divination in the middle. When you choose a school to specialize in, your prohibited schools would be the two on the opposite ends of the lines extending across the star. Diviners would still get to choose two schools as they see fit. That's partly to keep from redesigning things from the ground up, but I think it could lend to a theme that Diviners are a different kind of generalist.

As the game currently exists, I'm not too worried about the potential of reducing the wizard's power level. They've got some wiggle room. This homebrew would be much more about theming than hard mechanics.


https://olddungeonmaster.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/schools-of-magic.jpg?w=630

The image in the spoiler above is not an arrangement I think I would use, but it will serve well enough for getting the idea across. Using that arrangement, a Transmuter would always lose Evocation and Illusion from their spell list. A Necromancer would lose Abjuration and Conjuration. A Diviner would choose any two of the other seven.

Assuming I could develop a suitable arrangement for the schools, would this concept have merit? Like I said before, I'm not terribly concerned about power level, but would it potentially break things more than they already are? I ask because I have a lot of ideas pop into my head, and it's hit or miss whether they're worth implementing.

[Efrate]

3.0 had semi set schools for specializing.

Transmuter for example.

To become a transmuter, a wizard must select a prohibited school or schools from one of the following choices: (1) Conjuration; (2) Evocation; (2) any two of the following three schools: Abjuration, Enchantment, and Illusion; or (4) any three schools

[Manyasone]

As above post, plus paizo made something called thassilonian sin magic which floats along the same lines. Didn't second edition also use this particular rule? Away from books, can't check.
In any case, OP, this isn't new by a long shot

[JoshuaZ]

This is also a major aspect of the 3.0/3.5 version of the Dragonlance setting where mages had to be associated with one of three alignment orders white(good), red(neutral), and black(evil), and each specialized in a specific set of schools had opposed schools from the corresponding sets.

[Telok]

AD&D 2e did it that way. Without bonus spell slots or automatic access to wands and scrolls the +1 spell per day was important. There weren't also obviously worse schools of magic either.

The choice to specialize was not an easy one.

[Morty]

D&D has done that in the past and it was pretty annoying. What's the benefit of doing this, really? The schools are pretty vague and arbitrary to begin with, so trying to set up opposites seems like a lot of effort for little gain.

[HouseRules]

3.0 had semi set schools for specializing.

Transmuter for example.

To become a transmuter, a wizard must select a prohibited school or schools from one of the following choices: (1) Conjuration; (2) Evocation; (2) any two of the following three schools: Abjuration, Enchantment, and Illusion; or (4) any three schools

If we convert 3.0 Specialization and Banned Schools to numerical weight we get this:

SchoolWeight
Conjuration4
Evocation4
Transmutation4
Abjuration2
Enchantment2
Illusion2
Divination1
Necromancy1


Your the sum weight of Banned school(s) must equal or exceed your Specialization(s). Some players homebrew more than one specialization.

Note the overvalued weight of Evocation.

Edit: At face value,
Divination and Necromancy gives Tier 4.
Illusion, Enchantment, and Abjuration gives Tier 3.
Evocation gives Missing Tier (between 2 and 3, can solve any problem without breaking the game).
Conjuration and Transmutation gives Tier 2.

[ericgrau]

2e did it but balance was a concern, in that you simply couldn't access what may be an important school if you chose the wrong specialty. Your conjurers have it easy, while necromancers face a bit of pain in exchange for picking what is already a difficult specialty. But I don't think it's a big concern. Mages can still manage pretty well regardless.

Let's see, I'd put illusion and enchantment next to each other. They're famous buddies of deception. Right across from illusion I think goes conjuration: making fake things vs making real things. From there it gets a bit fuzzy, hmm:

Transmutation: alter
Abjuration: protect
Evocation: create energy from nothing
Conjuration: create or transport matter
Necromancy: Negative energy and undead
Illusion: make fakes, shadow plane
Enchantment: trick or alter the mind

Hmm, perhaps evocation opposite abjuration. As the most common direct attack across from defense and indirect traps. Evocation next to conjuration as different methods of creating that are often similar to each other. Maybe transmutation next to enchantment as different ways to alter? Necromancy creates, so it might be next to conjuration.

That gives a wheel of I,E,T,V,C,N,A. Double checking a bit now. Necromancy and illusion end up next to abjuration. Not sure if that fits, but I don't know what else fits next to abjuration. Maybe transmutation a little bit, though they could also be more like related opposites. Illusion opposite conjuration and evocation. Enchantment opposite conjuration and necromancy. Transmutation opposite abjuration and necromancy. Evocation opposite illusion and abjuration. Conjuration opposite illusion and enchantment. Necromancy opposite enchantment and transmutation. Abjuration opposite evocation and transmutation. Okish. Could be tweaked.

As for balance: Enchantment's ban is a little painful when you don't have much to attack with that doesn't deal collateral damage. Necromancy kind of likes mass buffing so it gets screwed a little if you want to miniomance. Even though you don't have to miniomance to necro well, that is a classic application. Abjuration gets hit hard, but can manage alright. Illusion gets hit hardest at all, with little direct to do. But that's thematic at least. And a consequence of putting conjuration and evocation together is that some school is going to bite it. That's why even if I juggle a bit I'm still stuck. I think this needs to be reworked still. I dunno if it's possible to accomplish all goals at once, even part way.

[King of Nowhere]

seems just neeldessly restrictive, imo. Just like most stuff of second edition, like not being able to play a non-human dual class, or an orc druid. I don't see any specific reason not to let players pick their banned schools.

[HouseRules]

seems just neeldessly restrictive, imo. Just like most stuff of second edition, like not being able to play a non-human dual class, or an orc druid. I don't see any specific reason not to let players pick their banned schools.

Wait, is half-elf dual class a house rule I've heard somewhere?

You know that thief has no level cap for all races, so if you multiclass, it is best to get thief as one of the classes, though you still get one-half xp (from the split, but one side is level capped), or one-third xp (from the split, but two sides are level capped).

[ericgrau]

D&D has done that in the past and it was pretty annoying. What's the benefit of doing this, really? The schools are pretty vague and arbitrary to begin with, so trying to set up opposites seems like a lot of effort for little gain.
Could be, it also limits player choices.

The point system HouseRules referenced seems interesting. I'd point it based on how easy/hard it is to live without a school. Problem is that changes drastically with added splatbooks and optimization. For core I'd do:


SchoolWeight
Conjuration4
Evocation4
Transmutation3
Abjuration1
Enchantment2/1
Illusion3/2
Divination1
Necromancy2

#/# = specialty/banned point value

1: Useful spells, but easy to spend a campaign without ever casting a single spell from that school. Even if it wasn't banned.
4: Lose a lot of powerful options where it's hard to find alternatives.

Necromancy falls under 1 for many people but I think they don't know about the handful of very powerful non-undead spells which other core schools can't substitute well, if at all. Whether directly or with an alternative to reach the same goal. Again, which non-core books and tricks are allowed can change things all over the place.

This does poop for theme though. Maybe give a +1/-1 thematic point bonus for banning certain schools when your specialty is a certain other school. For a 1 point school this could effectively say you can't ban certain schools with certain specialties. This way you get some thematics but still some choices. For example: illusionists can't ban enchantment, necromancers can't ban divination, transmuters can't ban abjuration. Enchanters get only 1 point for banning illusion. We don't need to specify the reverse of the other 2, because the -1 has no effect. All you need is a tip that sometimes it's a good idea to ban a school that's more than your point requirement, depending on your character concept. Hmm, nothing else jumps out at me besides those schools.

[NerdHut]

I'm getting the general sense here that there's some precedent at least, but I should approach with caution. I'll keeping working on the idea, but I'm interested to hear more opinions from whoever has them.


That gives a wheel of I,E,T,V,C,N,A.

Your wheel bears some resemblance to one of the wheels I've considered. Good to see I'm not alone in some of my logic.


seems just neeldessly restrictive, imo. Just like most stuff of second edition, like not being able to play a non-human dual class, or an orc druid. I don't see any specific reason not to let players pick their banned schools.

This was never really about something necessary for the game. It's more of an idea I'm toying with. Every time someone makes or modifies a magic system, at some point something is going to boil down to an arbitrary choice. Sometimes, it's just about saying "yeah, that seems about right" and it's fine if you disagree, but I personally like the idea of more rigid prohibited schools.

[King of Nowhere]

This was never really about something necessary for the game. It's more of an idea I'm toying with. Every time someone makes or modifies a magic system, at some point something is going to boil down to an arbitrary choice. Sometimes, it's just about saying "yeah, that seems about right" and it's fine if you disagree, but I personally like the idea of more rigid prohibited schools.
Then I'd suggest finding an in-world reason for the restriction, regardless of balance (balancing banned schools doesn't have much of an effect anyway). Many players balk if you place arbitrary restrictions on their choices, but they accept them just fine if they are justified by the setting.

Keep in mind that one problem with it is that your players are going to pick a specialization based solely on the banned schools: they will not specialize in, say, conjuration because they want conjuration spells, but because of the banned schools

[NerdHut]

Then I'd suggest finding an in-world reason for the restriction, regardless of balance (balancing banned schools doesn't have much of an effect anyway). Many players balk if you place arbitrary restrictions on their choices, but they accept them just fine if they are justified by the setting.

Keep in mind that one problem with it is that your players are going to pick a specialization based solely on the banned schools: they will not specialize in, say, conjuration because they want conjuration spells, but because of the banned schools

Yeah, I've been trying to think of ways it could be explained in-world. I haven't quite arrived at a good explanation beyond "because" yet, but I want to have something like that in place when and if I implement this homebrew.

And picking a specialization based on what the banned schools are just seems like an odd choice to me. If they plan to do that with this version of specialization, I don't see why they wouldn't with the original version (They could easily pick a couple of schools they wouldn't use anyway, and specialize in whatever other school they wanted). And specialization is optional, after all.

[Malphegor]

It'd be a better fit for the game if the schools were more opposed to each other to explain it in-world.

i.e. if Necromancy was inherently different internal logic to learn to a school of specifically Healing magic, and switching between them was bad for the one you're not specialised in, that'd be a nice one where you have to pick one or the other.

As is, the schools are (by design) incredibly broad and vague, and there's not much clear reason why, say, an enchanter wouldn't be able to study conjuration- is there some principle in enchantment magic that is unadvised in conjuration magic? What happens if an illusionist tries to learn abjurant magics, what is the theory behind the schools being incompatible in the same mind?

[Mr Adventurer]

http://cdn.obsidianportal.com/assets/194109/CHART.gif

How 2e did it...

[mehs]

Transmutation: alter
Abjuration: protect
Evocation: create energy from nothing
Conjuration: create or transport matter
Necromancy: Negative energy and undead
Illusion: make fakes, shadow plane
Enchantment: trick or alter the mind



Necromancy is more of manipulation of life energy both positive and negative, but arcane casters fall victim to the "healing magic is harder" trope. Healing being a conjuration subschool to me at least suggests clerics and such are taking a short cut and are just summoning some positive energy which heals the target or such rather than directly healing the target with magic (they summon stuff *to* heal for them).
Abjuration also seems centered around anti magic with all of its protection abilities being applications to one degree or another of antimagic.

[mehs]

Yeah, I've been trying to think of ways it could be explained in-world. I haven't quite arrived at a good explanation beyond "because" yet, but I want to have something like that in place when and if I implement this homebrew.

And picking a specialization based on what the banned schools are just seems like an odd choice to me. If they plan to do that with this version of specialization, I don't see why they wouldn't with the original version (They could easily pick a couple of schools they wouldn't use anyway, and specialize in whatever other school they wanted). And specialization is optional, after all.

One thing to posit is that specialization is optional for the player, but is it optional for the character?

The possible answer I can suggest as to why specialization requires prohibiting schools is the specialized wizards are essentially savants to whom the mental calculus required for arcane magic comes naturally for the specialized school, but the mental mathmatics are different for each school and the mental mathmatics for the prohibited schools are just too different that the specialized wizards completely stumbles when trying to perform them. And when the destination of the energy output of a fireball rests in you correctly and quickly performing calculations that would give a mathmatician with multiple ph.d's nightmares, stumbling is not something you can afford.

[Mr Adventurer]

That's good. You could also look at Warhammer and how it handles its Colleges of Magic - right down to High Elves being the masters of combined magic, and hence, the Elven Generalist alternate class feature...

[NerdHut]

One thing to posit is that specialization is optional for the player, but is it optional for the character?

The possible answer I can suggest as to why specialization requires prohibiting schools is the specialized wizards are essentially savants to whom the mental calculus required for arcane magic comes naturally for the specialized school, but the mental mathmatics are different for each school and the mental mathmatics for the prohibited schools are just too different that the specialized wizards completely stumbles when trying to perform them. And when the destination of the energy output of a fireball rests in you correctly and quickly performing calculations that would give a mathmatician with multiple ph.d's nightmares, stumbling is not something you can afford.

I actually quite like that option. You could make the case that the different schools of magic aren't just different themes, but different mechanisms for magic entirely. That's why Beguilers can only cast from limited schools. It also leaves room for schools having overlapping powers. In math, you can arrive at the same end result with different methods, maybe the same applies to magic.

I also like ericgrau's suggestion that we're visualizing the wrong actions for certain magical effects. Some people homebrew that Healing magic is Necromancy because it manipulates life energy. But if you're only summoning positive energy (arguably an evocation effect) then it's the same end result, but certainly not necromancy.

This may or may not help explain the rigid prohibition of schools well. But for any sort of specialization, or even delineation of spell schools these are all useful concepts.

[ericgrau]

http://cdn.obsidianportal.com/assets/194109/CHART.gif

How 2e did it...

Hmm, OP can pop out divination and call it a day? Some decisions are almost arbitrary anyway.

[Erloas]

I think if you really wanted to do something interesting with the schools the first thing you have to do is toss out the existing schools and make new ones that make sense. The schools as they are don't have any real coherency to them, well a part of a few do, but not overall.
Once there is some logic to them then you can do something with them. I would probably also do more schools with a more balanced number of spells.