|
|
Post by mao on Jul 17, 2021 9:31:09 GMT -5
Assuming that you use memorization, do you allow mages to cast directly out of their books? The rule I always used that casting time is the same but the spell"burns" out of the book, possibly taking near by pages with it. This was for a couple of reasons 1)I like giving mages lots of new spells and lets face it, if you have them face a lot of casters they are going to find books on them a lot.'2) you think very seriously when you do this about casting it..
Mages who do this a lot are called"Librarians"(boy did the one guy hate this)
How about you?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 17, 2021 9:47:39 GMT -5
Assuming that you use memorization, do you allow mages to cast directly out of their books? The rule I always used that casting time is the same but the spell"burns" out of the book, possibly taking near by pages with it. This was for a couple of reasons 1)I like giving mages lots of new spells and lets face it, if you have them face a lot of casters they are going to find books on them a lot.'2) you think very seriously when you do this about casting it.. Mages who do this a lot are called"Librarians"(boy did the one guy hate this) How about you? I have never done this (cast directly from the books), but if I did it would not burn the spell out of the book. Spells recorded in spell books, are a different process from scrolls and it takes much longer and is a permanent writing. On the other hand casting from a spell book is also much slower than using a scroll. Now if a mage wanted to spend the time, they could make a "scroll" book with much used spells recorded multiple times. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 17, 2021 9:53:58 GMT -5
Assuming that you use memorization, do you allow mages to cast directly out of their books? The rule I always used that casting time is the same but the spell"burns" out of the book, possibly taking near by pages with it. This was for a couple of reasons 1)I like giving mages lots of new spells and lets face it, if you have them face a lot of casters they are going to find books on them a lot.'2) you think very seriously when you do this about casting it.. Mages who do this a lot are called"Librarians"(boy did the one guy hate this) How about you? I have never done this (cast directly from the books), but if I did it would not burn the spell out of the book. Spells recorded in spell books, are a different process from scrolls and it takes much longer and is a permanent writing. On the other hand casting from a spell book is also much slower than using a scroll. Now if a mage wanted to spend the time, they could make a "scroll" book with much used spells recorded multiple times. I never understood the idea that you didn't cast the spell directly into the book to record it. Kinda doesn't make any sence w the way memorizaion works, I know I am a minority of one.  |
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Jul 19, 2021 9:01:16 GMT -5
Maybe allow casting from the book and have it go off before any other spell in that round, but 10% chance it burns out of the book and 50% chance it goes off stronger than usual in some way (since the raw magical energies are not as restrained as they are wiht a prepared casting).
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Jul 19, 2021 12:13:13 GMT -5
Spellbooks are a curious subject. If we think about to too much than we'll take it to places where we shouldn't really go or just doesn't make any sense. These things are magic and don't follow the laws of science. They do not get waterlogged or burned, they may not even be on the wizard's person but summoned by a cantrip so common that it isn't even worth writing it down.
I leave all of this up to the player, if they use traveling books or casting from a tome it is all in their realm.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 19, 2021 12:16:12 GMT -5
Spellbooks are a curious subject. If we think about to too much than we'll take it to places where we shouldn't really go or just doesn't make any sense. These things are magic and don't follow the laws of science. They do not get waterlogged or burned, they may not even be on the wizard's person but summoned by a cantrip so common that it isn't even worth writing it down.I leave all of this up to the player, if they use traveling books or casting from a tome it is all in their realm. I love that idea, that never occurred to me, but I am using it going forward as an option. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 23, 2021 18:07:55 GMT -5
moved the derailing posts upthread and now back to the thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 29, 2021 5:14:12 GMT -5
i always am making sure that mages have at least one half way decent spellbook but give out new ones also. I sort of cycle them. This idea helps this out so a mage doesn't end up w a lot of books. He quickly will cast duplicates out odt books as there is not that much down side.
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 29, 2021 8:20:48 GMT -5
Spellbooks are a curious subject. If we think about to too much than we'll take it to places where we shouldn't really go or just doesn't make any sense. These things are magic and don't follow the laws of science. They do not get waterlogged or burned, they may not even be on the wizard's person but summoned by a cantrip so common that it isn't even worth writing it down. I leave all of this up to the player, if they use traveling books or casting from a tome it is all in their realm. I find it fascinating that DMs have so many different options. In sports you really don't find this much diversity. I know it's a similar subject but it is very complex in it's own way. |
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 29, 2021 9:39:00 GMT -5
Spellbooks are a curious subject. If we think about to too much than we'll take it to places where we shouldn't really go or just doesn't make any sense. These things are magic and don't follow the laws of science. They do not get waterlogged or burned, they may not even be on the wizard's person but summoned by a cantrip so common that it isn't even worth writing it down. I leave all of this up to the player, if they use traveling books or casting from a tome it is all in their realm. I find it fascinating that DMs have so many different options. In sports you really don't find this much diversity. I know it's a similar subject but it is very complex in it's own way. That is D&D old school, infinite options. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 30, 2021 4:13:01 GMT -5
Nevin would have embraced the OSR
|
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Jul 30, 2021 20:34:11 GMT -5
One could maintain "standard" Vancian casting but have the spellbook be in the caster's head. Caster "knows" these spells but still has to prepare them in the same way. Removes possibility of losing spellbook or having it stolen (does anyone do this?), but adds the possibility of spell loss through severe injury (go into negative HP, 5% chance per negative point that one spell is "lost" from the internal spellbook).
|
|
|
|
Post by The Perilous Dreamer on Jul 30, 2021 22:39:23 GMT -5
One could maintain "standard" Vancian casting but have the spellbook be in the caster's head. Caster "knows" these spells but still has to prepare them in the same way. Removes possibility of losing spellbook or having it stolen (does anyone do this?), but adds the possibility of spell loss through severe injury (go into negative HP, 5% chance per negative point that one spell is "lost" from the internal spellbook). Given that I seldom mention spell books in a game, by default I suppose I actually do it the way you outline above as a practical matter. I think that is a great distinction between knowing and memorizing(imprinting for priming for use). |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 31, 2021 6:46:37 GMT -5
One could maintain "standard" Vancian casting but have the spellbook be in the caster's head. Caster "knows" these spells but still has to prepare them in the same way. Removes possibility of losing spellbook or having it stolen (does anyone do this?), but adds the possibility of spell loss through severe injury (go into negative HP, 5% chance per negative point that one spell is "lost" from the internal spellbook). Yup , you totally could do vancian this way, it wouldn't even put mao the purest off. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Jul 31, 2021 6:49:18 GMT -5
One could maintain "standard" Vancian casting but have the spellbook be in the caster's head. Caster "knows" these spells but still has to prepare them in the same way. Removes possibility of losing spellbook or having it stolen (does anyone do this?), but adds the possibility of spell loss through severe injury (go into negative HP, 5% chance per negative point that one spell is "lost" from the internal spellbook). Given that I seldom mention spell books in a game, by default I suppose I actually do it the way you outline above as a practical matter. I think that is a great distinction between knowing and memorizing(imprinting for priming for use). I am in to the minutia of being a wiz as a player, not the verbal or gestures or components but everything else. I love my spellbook and gaining spells , absolutely adore the small stuff with out bogging down the game. |
|
|
|
Post by Morose on Aug 6, 2021 2:35:52 GMT -5
They can only cast from the book if they have a spell slot available, most used with encounters early in the day when memorization has not been done yet. Only with scrolls can you cast without using a spell slot.
|
|
